-
Lets talk about wadcutters...
In the spectrum of ammo, from personal defense to target, where do these fit in? We'll use .38 for an example. Is the wadcutter a good personal defense round? Does it possess more "stopping" power due to the flat nose? Who uses these, and for what? I've seen them on various ammo websites, and was curious what their primary purpose is.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Wadcutters are typically used for competition as it cuts the paper cleanly on entry for scoring.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
They are for cutting holes in paper for target. That flat front end with a relatively sharp edge makes nice gradable holes for scoring and measuring purposes.
They also do the same thing on flesh, nice round holes, but a HP is better suited.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
they're target loads, usually loaded to a lower velocity.
Not typically what someone would use for self defense.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mauser
they're target loads, usually loaded to a lower velocity.
Not typically what someone would use for self defense.
UNLESS....they are hollow-based wadcutters and you load them upside down....;):D J/K, of course...
Seriously, they are for target shooting as said previously for reasons stated previously.....
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Leftloose
UNLESS....they are hollow-based wadcutters and you load them upside down....;):D
I've heard of people doing that but I've never tried it. Sounds like something to experiment with and check expansion and penetration.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Thanks for all the info. I now have a better understanding of why wadcutters exist.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
wadcutters = target rounds. they do punch the absolutly cleanest holes in paper and their shape helps keep them stable when they leave the barrel.
I have, in my younger days, played around with the "reverse hollow based wadcutter" loads. The problem is the end of the cone has very little lead so you don't get even expansion. It's more effective you stick something in the hollow base like a small steel ball, or mercury, or a primer :)
All fun, but not practical, and possibly not legal everywhere either.
Mike
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Back in the 60-70's, before JHP technology had advanced much and relaiable JHP's became readily available, it was loaded and carried, but other than speculation, you never heard much about it. Especially, you never heard of real-world use and results.
SuperVel and Zero started making JHP's and half-jacket HP's and the market rapidly caught up with demand so hollow-based wadcutters loaded reversed over a stiff load of Bullseye became a thing of legend more than reality.
FDlash
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Put a BB in the reverse hollow based wadcutter and fill it by melting candle over the BB. It makes them open real nice. :D
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mauser
I've heard of people doing that but I've never tried it. Sounds like something to experiment with and check expansion and penetration.
Did it a long time ago with Hornady HBWC, the rounds are unstable, inaccurate and pretty much explode on impact...there was only 30-50% weight retension, depending on what you filled the cavity with....
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mjporreca
wadcutters = target rounds. they do punch the absolutly cleanest holes in paper and their shape helps keep them stable when they leave the barrel.
I have, in my younger days, played around with the "reverse hollow based wadcutter" loads. The problem is the end of the cone has very little lead so you don't get even expansion. It's more effective you stick something in the hollow base like a small steel ball, or mercury, or a primer :)
All fun, but not practical, and possibly not legal everywhere either.
Mike
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Flash
Back in the 60-70's, before JHP technology had advanced much and relaiable JHP's became readily available, it was loaded and carried, but other than speculation, you never heard much about it. Especially, you never heard of real-world use and results.
SuperVel and Zero started making JHP's and half-jacket HP's and the market rapidly caught up with demand so hollow-based wadcutters loaded reversed over a stiff load of Bullseye became a thing of legend more than reality.
FDlash
Kinda like filing an "X" in the nose of RN .45's.......
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WVBob
Put a BB in the reverse hollow based wadcutter and fill it by melting candle over the BB. It makes them open real nice. :D
I did all of the above back when I first started reloading...did a couple thousand HBWC's properly and then started loading them upside down and filling the cavity with different materials...it was fun, because it was new and different and "dangerous"..... but I'd still rather carry a good JHP personally.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WVBob
Put a BB in the reverse hollow based wadcutter and fill it by melting candle over the BB. It makes them open real nice. :D
The hydraulics of the wax may have as much to do with expansion as the BB, maybe more.
Flash
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Drill a 1/4" hole fill with water and cap with a .25 gas check. Fun to play with as it will turn them into something like a varmint round. Lyman at one time made a .30 flat nose for the 30/30 like this.
Seriously just games to play, no way would I trust this or think of carrying it.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Anybody know what temp a bullet reaches as it moves down the barrel and to a target at or near supersonic velocity? I had thought it gets pretty hot.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Philadelphia
Anybody know what temp a bullet reaches as it moves down the barrel and to a target at or near supersonic velocity? I had thought it gets pretty hot.
Why don't you ask an easy question?
Bullets get most of their heat from the burning powder gasses. I know that.
Heat gain from the friction of the bullet moving in the air is probably minor - but I'm guessing here.
As for what temp? I have seen cast lead alloy bullets (recovered) where flame-cutting at the heel, and general melting of the surface of the base was apparent. And often a good amount of melting is evident. Those alloys melt, commonly "around" 700 degrees Farenheit. So considering the body of the bullet being a good heat-sink, and the brief time that they are exposed to the heat, the heat has to be truly significant.
Pressures in the case are in the 20,000-40,000 range in firing, so temperature has to be really, really UP. But I have no idea what it would be. What is the equation for confined gasses? Two pounds of pressure rise equals 1 degree? Or is it the other way around?
That's a good question. Hard, but good.
Flash
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Flash
Why don't you ask an easy question?
Bullets get most of their heat from the burning powder gasses. I know that.
Heat gain from the friction of the bullet moving in the air is probably minor - but I'm guessing here.
As for what temp? I have seen cast lead alloy bullets (recovered) where flame-cutting at the heel, and general melting of the surface of the base was apparent. And often a good amount of melting is evident. Those alloys melt, commonly "around" 700 degrees Farenheit. So considering the body of the bullet being a good heat-sink, and the brief time that they are exposed to the heat, the heat has to be truly significant.
Pressures in the case are in the 20,000-40,000 range in firing, so temperature has to be really, really UP. But I have no idea what it would be. What is the equation for confined gasses? Two pounds of pressure rise equals 1 degree? Or is it the other way around?
That's a good question. Hard, but good.
Flash
I was wondering because I know a fired bullet gets hot (but I don't know how hot) and I'd think that would rule out the wax and water ideas.
Supersonic air will make what it touches get very hot. I am pretty sure of that (but it's been a long time -- hard to remember).
It is a tough question.
Oh crap, might as well see if somebody knows . . .
Sure enough, rifle bullet gets over 500 degrees. Here is the Edison version (they measured it): http://www.rangerats.org/bullet.html
A better version where they explain more of what was measured and show some heating of the tip (seems most of the heat is from the powder and also bore friction):
http://www.goinfrared.com/media/2004...ards_FINAL.pdf
Here is the Einstein version (they seem to have figured it out but I don't understand any of it): http://www.fchart.com/htexamples/sol...mple_4.9-3.pdf
I don't think anything that melts, boils or vaporizes at around 400 degrees or so would last long on a bullet.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Philadelphia
I was wondering because I know a fired bullet gets hot (but I don't know how hot) and I'd think that would rule out the wax and water ideas.
Supersonic air will make what it touches get very hot. I am pretty sure of that (but it's been a long time -- hard to remember).
It is a tough question.
Oh crap, might as well see if somebody knows . . .
Sure enough, rifle bullet gets over 500 degrees. Here is the Edison version (they measured it):
http://www.rangerats.org/bullet.html
A better version where they explain more of what was measured and show some heating of the tip (seems most of the heat is from the powder and also bore friction):
http://www.goinfrared.com/media/2004...ards_FINAL.pdf
Here is the Einstein version (they seem to have figured it out but I don't understand any of it):
http://www.fchart.com/htexamples/sol...mple_4.9-3.pdf
I don't think anything that melts, boils or vaporizes at around 400 degrees or so would last long on a bullet.
Rep sent. Your Google-Fu is awesome, and those are interesting sites. Thanks.
Now as for melting and vaporizing, I have recovered cast bulets (lots of them) with the grease still intact in the grooves, even a few from the 30-30, around 2000 fps. I'm thinking that the heat expressed here in these experiments is largely on the surfacem and that the internal temperatures of these fired bullets doesn't get to those extreme temps.
And now you HAVE got me thinking. What about a gas-checked 38 cal gelatin capsule filled with water and frozen??? That is going to be a project for early this spring. I just gotta know! Maybe a bullet made entirely of dry-ice? Of course, it would be low in weight, but let's see. I'm going to have to try this. Would it fire better out of a frozen revolver? (I've got a stainless Taurus that is begging to participate here. He has already stepped forward out of ranks two paces and held up his hand.). Oh, the possibilities are endless.....
Flash
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
I just finished reading Cirillo's book....."Guns, Bullets and Gunfights"......IHO a jacked up wad cutter type was a much better defensive round than most conical shapes even JHP for CQB with a pistol. His experience showed much larger entry wound especially if the bullet profile had a split face like some he designed....didn't mushroom but butterflied open.......nasty.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
xXxplosive
I just finished reading Cirillo's book....."Guns, Bullets and Gunfights"......IHO a jacked up wad cutter type was a much better defensive round than most conical shapes even JHP for CQB with a pistol. His experience showed much larger entry wound especially if the bullet profile had a split face like some he designed....didn't mushroom but butterflied open.......nasty.
i read the same article, and thought it was a fascinating iea. what he described was basically a type of dum-dum bullet. i carry JHP's in my 1911 and my .38 snubbie; i've been discussing with another member the idea of putting a steel ball bearing in the cavity, to aid in feeding, penetration, and expansion, much like a Pow'r'Ball, but with steel, not polymer. as far as we know, it's perfectly legal to alter bullets in this fashion, so i plan on trying it out on some ammo, and testing it.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
You may get some interesting and erratic results from doing a Mr. Wizard project with home made bullets. However, the guys over at Hornady have really done their homework with the critical defense loads. I have seen the videos and they perform very very well. I have also tested them at the range for accuracy and reliability and I can say, right on. Practically speaking it is easier and possibly more reliable to use something like the critical defense loads that operate on a similar principal.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Flash
Now as for melting and vaporizing, I have recovered cast bulets (lots of them) with the grease still intact in the grooves, even a few from the 30-30, around 2000 fps. I'm thinking that the heat expressed here in these experiments is largely on the surfacem and that the internal temperatures of these fired bullets doesn't get to those extreme temps.
That has to be I think. If it hit such a high temp "inside" the bullet rather than just surface heating, the lead would soften likely too much.
It was long ago now but I'm sure I recall touching recovered just fired bullets and they were hot -- very hot.
Maybe a little temp sensor somehow small enough inside the bullet with a sufficiently fast response to temp. changes -- such as in a tiny cavity in the bullet something of a definite shape that would melt to change its shape or substances that change color in response to known temperature bands. Then you'd know if ice, water or wax could work (I don't think so but who knows?).
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
upside down hollow based wadcutters of typical target grade hardness can be pushed thru a forcing cone at up to 800-900 FPS without losing their skirt in the cone. losing skirt in cone is bad ju-ju on the next shot. cracked forcing cone, bulged barrel, cracked frame, the possibilities are limitless. that being said, 3 grains bullseye gives such reverse loaded wadcutters about 750-800 FPS in most revolvers. this load will make an armadillo into a purse in no time flat, in my experience.
solid wadcutters, cast hard (14-18 BHN) can be pushed up to 1500 FPS with no issues, and cut cleanly thru everything and anything short of ballistic armour rated for that velocity. they shatter small bones, punch thru hip bones, skulls, scapulas, etc, and don't glance off on hits from perpendicular to within 30 degrees of parallel like jacketed bullets. semi-wadcutters do nearly as well, and are faster coming off a speedloader.
where it gets really interesting is in the loading of multi-projectile ammo. short wadcutters of about 60 grains can be loaded under a 125 grain jacketed or cast bullet. in some cases interior wall profile allows loading of 3 such wadcutters (without the 125, of course). all 3 will print within a playing card at 7 yards, and will penetrate well enough, giving multiple hits for greater tissue and nervous damage in the moment of impact. powder charge for such 180 grain combinations would be something on the order of 5 grains unique for a mildly +p load.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
I just finished reading Cirillo's book....."Guns, Bullets and Gunfights"......IHO a jacked up wad cutter type was a much better defensive round than most conical shapes even JHP for CQB with a pistol. His experience showed much larger entry wound especially if the bullet profile had a split face like some he designed....didn't mushroom but butterflied open.......nasty.
I knew Jim and in his quest for the magic bullet most of his designs took a wadcutter shape. There is nothing wrong with the wadcutter bullet for SD it's just that factories load them mild. Factories used to load a standard velocity wadcutter that was a bit faster. I've tried the reverse wadcutter stuff and it really doesn't work that well.
I carry wadcutters in 38 spl J frame revolvers because:
1. You really don't get a lot more out of a +P except extra wear on the gun.
2. The bullet is already in an efficient shape. Any hollowpoint has to expand a bit before it gets to the same shape as a wadcutter. If the hollowpoint doesn't expand it turns into a wadcutter shape.
3. A wadcutter (due to it's weight) gives about 14"+ in ballistic gel so there's adequate penetration.
4. The low recoil and muzzle flash allow for quick recovery and followup shots.
5. A factory wadcutter from a 2" barrel starts to get unstable at about 50 yards and starts to wobble. There is still enough accuracy at 100 yards to hit an 18" steel plate shooting standing DA.
6. At 25 yds I can easily shoot 3-4" groups (standing DA) with wadcutters with any 2' revolver I own. I can do the same with a +P or +P+ but not as fast (see #4).
Remember it's all about shot placement when you see people proud of the 8" groups they shoot at 7 yds.
5.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
The wadcutter design seems intrieging to me as well. After reading Jims book and all about his quest for the perfect defensive round, it seems this design makes sense. Obviously, ammo companies don't believe this type of design would sell.....not flamboyant enough looking I guess.
In Cirillo's tests some of those rounds in his pics opened up to 1" in Dia. That's gotta create some wound channel and deliver overwhelming upset to the target area struck. Isn't this what everyone is striving for in a CQB defensive round...? One which stays within the target, reduces the chances of innocents being injured and delivering a lethal blow..........
So what's the deal.....?
Anyone remember the "Scorpion Load" by Federal I believe.........Wadcutter design with a hollow cavity and post in the middle....had some back in the late '70's.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
xXxplosive
The wadcutter design seems intrieging to me as well. .
.
.
So what's the deal.....?
Anyone remember the "Scorpion Load" by Federal I believe.........Wadcutter design with a hollow cavity and post in the middle....had some back in the late '70's.
Well, there is all this current thinking about penetration of clothing, cause in winter. some people wear multiple layers of clothing, well heck, in summer, too. Haybe even a leather jacket.
Current fad in testing is penetration of two layers of denim before hitting the gelatin block. Then, see what penetration you get. Now, if you could be assured that any potential assailant was only wearing two layers of denim . . .
As for the "post in the middle" thingie, look at certain variations of the HydraShok.
Flash
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Flash
Current fad in testing is penetration of two layers of denim before hitting the gelatin block.
The current non-fad in testing is the FBI protocol, which uses “four layers of clothing: one layer of cotton T-shirt material (48 threads per inch); one layer of cotton shirt material (80 threads per inch); a 10 ounce down comforter in a cambric shell cover (232 threads per inch); and one layer of 13 ounce cotton denim (50 threads per inch).” They throw in a bunch of other intermediate barrier tests, too.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JCWohlschlag
The current non-fad in testing is the
FBI protocol, which uses “four layers of clothing: one layer of cotton T-shirt material (48 threads per inch); one layer of cotton shirt material (80 threads per inch); a 10 ounce down comforter in a cambric shell cover (232 threads per inch); and one layer of 13 ounce cotton denim (50 threads per inch).” They throw in a bunch of other intermediate barrier tests, too.
JC, you are, no doubt, spot-on in regards to real TESTING, a'la FBI. They do it in a truly scientific manner, heck they even chronograph the loads.
The "current fad" to which I was referring is repesented by that ever-popular source of entertainment and truly definitive high-tech "testing", MythBusters :rolleyes: . . . and to some extent, the much-viewed Box-O-Truth.
Do I get a pass on it?
Flash
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Flash
JC, you are, no doubt, spot-on in regards to real TESTING, a'la FBI. They do it in a truly scientific manner, heck they even chronograph the loads.
The "current fad" to which I was referring is repesented by that ever-popular source of entertainment and truly definitive high-tech "testing", MythBusters :rolleyes: . . . and to some extent, the much-viewed Box-O-Truth.
Do I get a pass on it?
Flash
Yep. I’ve seen plenty of the non-official ballistic testing as well, like the two-layer denim tests, four-layer denim tests, water jugs, etc. (“Frag nasty”, anyone? What does it mean?) I was just pointing out that there is an actual official protocol that can be followed, albeit far less loadings have been tested and have results available through the FBI protocol. While the non-official tests may not be fully accredited and all that, at least they do offer some information as long as the source is credible.
I was just injecting information for those who may not know.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Obviously, ammo companies don't believe this type of design would sell.....not flamboyant enough looking I guess.
Yeah, I guess it's not sexy looking enough. It's kind of like when the FBI adpoted the 10mm. It was the same time DoD was adpoting the M9. The 45ACP did the best in their tests but they couldn't go to Capitol Hill asking for money to buy guns in a caliber that the DoD was abandoning.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
justashooter
solid wadcutters, cast hard (14-18 BHN) can be pushed up to 1500 FPS with no issues, and cut cleanly thru everything and anything short of ballistic armour rated for that velocity. they shatter small bones, punch thru hip bones, skulls, scapulas, etc, and don't glance off on hits from perpendicular to within 30 degrees of parallel like jacketed bullets. semi-wadcutters do nearly as well, and are faster coming off a speedloader.
...I have not personally tested any of this (and have no references to back it up) - especially with the speedloader thing (flush-set .38 Special / .357 Magnum wadcutters are just terrible for use with speedloaders, in my personal experience) - but I am inclined to agree with all of the above.
From an 'engineering' perspective, wadcutters should be outstanding projectiles.
Still, (even plated or jacketed) straight (double ended - not hollow base, flipped or otherwise) wadcutters vs. JHP of the same weight/density/hardness/materials - my "bet" would be on the JHP (for larger Permanent Wound Channel / transfer of kinetic energy).
Hard wadcutters (say, 18 BHN - or copper plated / jacketed) loaded out to max pressures should work just phenomenally as a "handgun" hunting round - doing everything that a bullet really needs to do for hunting.
They make 'nice round holes' in paper - logically, they would make 'nice round holes' in, well - "everything else".
Same-same for SemiWadCutters - which, I would imagine, would fly "straighter" for longer distances. If you were going for speed, distance, stability and penetration (in lieu of a Spire Point Bullet), I'd say that a SemiWadCutter is the way to go for a handgun. ;) :)
.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Please:
Don't confuse any of the comments that I just made to regard anything at all having to do with "Factory Loaded Ammunition".
I was referring only to handloaded bullets (projectiles - "heads"), what just I mentioned above has nothing at all to do with "Factory" ammo.
.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
I'm thinking that equating what a wadcutter does to paper with what a wadcutter will do to flesh is a leap of logic at best. I'm thinking paper is a whole different medium than flesh and will react significantly differently. I think a big part of the accuracy of a wadcutter comes from the fact that it is barrel shaped and as such it's shoulder is the full length of the projectile....this allows maximum contact with the barrel lands and imparts better stability that a more rounded nose projectile. I would think that as a defensive round, a wadcutter would only be slightly better than hardball and that slight advantage would come from the flat front reducing penetration and also less chance of ricochet in the event of a missed shot.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Leftloose
I'm thinking that equating what a wadcutter does to paper with what a wadcutter will do to flesh is a leap of logic at best. I'm thinking paper is a whole different medium than flesh and will react significantly differently. I think a big part of the accuracy of a wadcutter comes from the fact that it is barrel shaped and as such it's shoulder is the full length of the projectile....this allows maximum contact with the barrel lands and imparts better stability that a more rounded nose projectile. I would think that as a defensive round, a wadcutter would only be slightly better than hardball and that slight advantage would come from the flat front reducing penetration and also less chance of ricochet in the event of a missed shot.
I guess there is more than one 'opinion' on the topic then. ;)
Here's another 'opinion' (well, sort of):
Quote:
Where a rounded profile will shove vitals aside or glance off bone, the edge of a wadcutter or semi-wadcutter will slice or dig in. When I was shooting bowling pins, a popular bullet with revolver shooters was the "lead pencil": a 230-grain .358-diameter full wadcutter. It did not glance off of bowling pins.
From an article entitled Wicked Wadcutters in Handguns Magazine:
http://www.handgunsmag.com/ammunitio...utters_200901/
I couldn't find the author or the date - but (honestly), I didn't look real, real hard. ;)
.
Added: Actually, I don't think the wadcutter would so much as "slice", but would more so "CRUSH" through soft tissue.
.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Ok................now make a groove in the wadcutter face as Cirillo did and the effects of it butterflying open during penetration.......again he didn't want the mushrooming effect.......what a nasty large wound this would create.....ie. his pics in the book.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
xXxplosive
Ok................now make a groove in the wadcutter face as Cirillo did and the effects of it butterflying open during penetration.......again he didn't want the mushrooming effect.......what a nasty large wound this would create.....ie. his pics in the book.
Can you post that pic??
Thanks
Flash
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
From the same article, Bruce...
"Are wadcutter bullets good for defense? If the most robust hollowpoints are "too much" in recoil, a wadcutter is certainly better than a lead roundnose."
The reality is that article is mostly talking about 2" snubnose revolvers and the lack of enough velocity due to the short barrel to allow modern JHP bullets to expand properly thus making them no better than round-nose hardball. Also, that JHP's with enough pressure to create the needed velocity might be uncomfortable to shoot from a lighweight snubbie. In such an instance, wadcutters may be a reasonable alternative. In my opinion, with the numbers cited in the article, the penetration of the wadcutters was exessive, to say the least. And that is contrary to what I thought would be the case.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
just as an observation, i've seen how JHPs in .38 act when passing through glass/hard objects. i shot a TV once, using a factory load Hornady, i forget the weight. the range was about 20 feet or so. the jacket fully separated from the lead core, and had fragmented a bit. the core itself had flattened out to a disc about 3/4" across; i almost didn't realize it was the core, because it had flattened out so much. it looked almost like a coin.
while i know a TV isn't a person, i'm wondering how that same round would have reacted if it had been organic tissue coverd in heavy fabric.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Leftloose
From the same article, Bruce...
"Are wadcutter bullets good for defense? If the most robust hollowpoints are "too much" in recoil, a wadcutter is certainly better than a lead roundnose."
Okay, so that guy (the author's) opinion includes a counterpoint to yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Leftloose
The reality is that article is mostly talking about 2" snubnose revolvers and the lack of enough velocity due to the short barrel to allow modern JHP bullets to expand properly thus making them no better than round-nose hardball. Also, that JHP's with enough pressure to create the needed velocity might be uncomfortable to shoot from a lighweight snubbie. In such an instance, wadcutters may be a reasonable alternative. In my opinion, with the numbers cited in the article, the penetration of the wadcutters was exessive, to say the least. And that is contrary to what I thought would be the case.
As far as JHPs go - my original post expressed that, in my opinion, you will 'do more damage' regarding a "self defense" situation (doing more 'shock', creating a larger wound cavity) with a JHP (and I meant one that expands properly, anyway) over a wadcutter any day.
For Self Defense use - absolutely, I would recomend a JHP (of a design, or traveling at such a velocity, that you can reliably get it to expand) over a wadcutter or semiwadcutter.
As the article suggests (and other have suggested) - people tend to 'dismiss' wadcutters (and semiwadcutters) because (for the most part) they are almost exclusively considered as being used in "target" ammunition these days.
The Keith-style Bullet (developed by Elmer Keith) are the only bullets I consider to be "SemiWadcutters". Lots of people have taken lots of deer (including Mr. Keith himself) with the .357 Magnum Keith-style SemiWadCutter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elmer_Keith
:: On a side note: For my, personal use 'target' handloads, I load 148gr. Copper Plated Double Sided Wadcutters out to be 'roughly' the same pressure as the 145gr. Winchester SilverTips (also my own handloads) that I carry for self defense. These are certainly not "mild" 'plinking'/target loads (as you would find 'factory' .38 Special Wadcutters to be) by any stretch of the imagination! At the well above supersonic speeds that I get them to, I'd be very confident they would pop ('crush') a nice round hole straight through a sternum, or ribs, or a skull. ;)
But - you will notice (as I mentioned) that I don't carry wadcutters for Self Defense; I carry hollow points (Winchester SilverTips) for Self Defense. :)
.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jahwarrior72
just as an observation, i've seen how JHPs in .38 act when passing through glass/hard objects. i shot a TV once, using a factory load Hornady, i forget the weight. the range was about 20 feet or so. the jacket fully separated from the lead core, and had fragmented a bit. the core itself had flattened out to a disc about 3/4" across; i almost didn't realize it was the core, because it had flattened out so much. it looked almost like a coin.
while i know a TV isn't a person, i'm wondering how that same round would have reacted if it had been organic tissue coverd in heavy fabric.
http://hipowers-handguns.blogspot.co...l-defense.html
http://brasstard.com/?p=140
Then you have the 'FBI' data:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/ammo_data/38special.htm
...and there's a TON of junk (and it pretty much is mostly 'junk') on youtube - just search for ".38 Special" and "watermelon" or "water bottle" or "groundhog" (no, seriously - "groundhog") or 'whatever'.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJcbKVesjc4
.
-
Re: Lets talk about wadcutters...
Same-same for SemiWadCutters - which, I would imagine, would fly "straighter" for longer distances. If you were going for speed, distance, stability and penetration (in lieu of a Spire Point Bullet), I'd say that a SemiWadCutter is the way to go for a handgun
A semi-wad has a much better ballistic coefficient than a wadcutter and certainly will do the job (read Elmer Keith). But accuracy with a wadcutter out to 50 yards and more is excellent (watch any PPC shooter). The two problems with wadcutters are factory velocities are low velocity and any of them are not easy to use with speedloaders. I carry factory wadcutters in the gun and RP 158 SWC (std velocity) in speedloader, speedstrip, or 2x2 pouch for a mucheasier reload.
Neither is a great penetrator on hard objects and will just dent the side of a mailbox out of a 2" but so will a 125 gr +P load.
Hollow points are good if they expand and we all know the circumstances they won't. Low velocities out out short barrel guns are one of them. If it's a hollowoint you want in a 2" I'd go with the FBI load but I'm still feel okay anout carrying wadcutters evn if the factory rounds are anemic.