Which wadcutter is supreme?

[Glock17JHP]

Recoil with this load is very light... remember it is only 148 grains, and only 710 FPS. My wife is pretty recoil sensitive, and she loves this load to the exclusion of all other decent loads. Her revolver is a 3 inch S&W Model 64, and she is VERY accurate with this load/handgun combination. The lead seems hard enough, not sure exactly how hard. The leading edges are sharp, and still are visually sharp after firing into water. If you email me, I can send a picture of a pulled unfired bullet, and a recovered 'fired into water' bullet. My only criticism is the cost, which is around $28.00 to $32.00 per box of 50 (and everyone seems to be OUT OF STOCK right now). She uses Sellier & Bellot's generic version for practice ($15.00 per box of 50 at Cabela's... IN STOCK NOW), and loads the Winchesters back in it at home. I know others who just buy the Sellier & Bellot version for both uses, though.

[SGT D USMC]

I read about a 38 spl load several years ago that tested to be very effective. It was a 200 gr lead and was a round nose, It may have even been a 38 S&W. it had a volicity of only about 700 fps. The test showed that it tumbled very soon. I think that this load was used in the 1930's or so by the police in Singapore. My buddy tested it in a 4" 38 at water jugs and was impressed, however he was more impressed when he shot a water jug with a +p lite weight jacketed HP.

So there, no real facts at all but if some wants to experment with a long 200 gr lead 38 bullet at low volicity I would be curious of the outcome.



he went into younder villiage and never returned.

[Glock17JHP]

RN .38 Special (and other calibers) have the tendancy to tumble, but they are still not as effective as a 148 grain HBWC. The permanent cavity is sub caliber due to the RN bullet nose shape. In addition to not being as effective, the 200 grain bullet will obviously have more recoil, and that is a minus... especially as you go toward a lighter, smaller .38 (like a 'snubbie').

Shooting water jugs can be a lot of fun, I do that a lot. Hwever, trying to judge the effectiveness of a load by the 'splash' or general 'explosive appearance' of the water jugs when they are hit is very misleading. People are not water jugs. Water jugs can help gauge penetration depths, althoughwater penetration will be much greater than the equivilent gelatin or tissue penetration... in other words, it is not a 1 to 1 ratio.

[SGT D USMC]

LOCK17JHP, I will not allow myself to be placed in the position of defending 200 gr round nose 38 bullets. and I don't claim water jugs to be a good test of bullet performance. I was stating that the 200 gr 38 round nose @ low volicity was found by the singapore police to be a very efficent stopper in the days before modern fast light jacketed bullets. I was stating that it was found to tumble much sooner than other 38 loads, Purhaps due to fleet yawl of the long bullet. This assumption was reached by historial fact not water jugs.

As to recoil, How much in felt recoil would a 200 gr bullet @ 700fps produce compared to a 148 gr At 800 fps or more.

Also I understand the postive features of the wadcutter with there flat nose and sharp cutting edge. I shot a elk with a 44 mag. with a smiwadcutter keith bullet, and allthough it was not a full wadcutter it has a flat nose and avery nice large cutting ring. It was a shoulder shot at about 30 yds and dropped the elk ( A large cow) in its tracks, as well as I had ever done with a rifle.

Back to the comparson of the 200 round nose to the 148 wadcutter. You mentioned the round nose sliding through flesh with little disruption. I think that does not apply if in fact the 200 tumbles much sooner than a shorter lighter round nose 38.I think that a tumbling 200 rn is better than a cutting wad cutter.

My choice would be the highest volicity 125 gr modern hollow point that would give an exceptable level of recoil.

he went into younder village and never returned

[tpd223]

The 200gr .38 special loading, called the "Super Police" back in the day, was neither super nor a good police load.

In actual shootings that I am aware of the bullet had a tendency to bounce off of hard objects, like car glass and foreheads, due to very low velocity and the RNL bullet construction.

I'd call it a failed experiment.

[DocGKR]

"fleet yaw" has refers to the variations of yaw angle a bullet has in flight, induced by barrel to barrel idiosyncrasies in rifles; it does not refer to handgun bullets yawing in tissue.

The 200 gr LRN sucked...

[tpd223]

I consider the 200gr .38 loading the original "less-lethal" round.

[SGT D USMC]

In refering to "fleet yawl" It is my understanding that the angle of Yawl while traveling thru the air would have an effect on the tumbling once striking the target. Once again I don"t like to be in the position of defending the terminal effect of 200 gr rnd nose low volicity bullets. However none of you have addressed the tumbling qualities of that bullet. It apperas to be much different than 158 gr rnd I'm going to the desert for a week I will do more research when I return.


he went into younder village and never returned

[SGT D USMC]

I found that the 200gr bullet that I was refering to was the british 38/200 it was replaced by a lighter fmj round prior to wwll due to the 38/200 being lead. The british 38/200 was a longer nosed bullet than the 38/200 super police round and the volicity was less than 700 fps. The only statement that I want to make about this bullet (british 38/200) Is that I defy you to reserch this round without finding frequent refrences to its tumbling on impact. And that is the reason that I stated that it should be considered when looking for a lead defense load.


he went into younder village and never returned

[tpd223]

References I have read in the past indicate that this bullet also wasn't thought very highly of when it came to anti-personnel duties.

These bullets don't "tumble" so much as do a 180 at some point in their travel, with the size and speed of the bullet not a whole lot is accomplished in my opinion.

I strongly believe that the advantages to the .380/200 were theoretical at best, and an attempt to replicate the results of the .455 round with a lighter, smaller revolver.