Semi wadcutter vs wide flat nose

coldbeer · August 5, 2014, 11:37 AM

Do the sharp shoulders of a semi wadcutter act as a meplat and cut a caliber size hole in game like they do in paper or is a flat nose with a wide meplat like the lbt bullets more effective? I've done some research and found conflicting answers.

mete · August 5, 2014, 11:53 AM

I haven't dealt with the large meplat type .The SWC ,especially the old Speer Jswchp always seemed to cut a full caliber hole through flesh. You should get a copy of Elmer Keith's book "Sixguns" it has detailed descriptions of the Keith bullet. BTW many of the "Keith" bullets on the market are not true Keith bullets.

coldbeer · August 5, 2014, 12:34 PM

I don't cast but I bought a couple hundred .358 swc's from Beartooth bullets. I love these bullets, they're advertised as weighing 173grs but are actually closer to 170grs and they take up less case capacity than most 158 grain swc's when seated to the crimp groove. My revolvers also love these bullets and I'm thinking of getting more of them. I want to make them my 1 357 bullet for everything from target to hunting to plinking. I've read enough about them to know they're decent hunting bullets, but I'm just curious if the sharp shoulder acts like a wide meplat. They make big holes in paper but what about in game? There are conflicting opinions out there from what I have read.

Jack O'Conner · August 5, 2014, 07:32 PM

My own experience is limited to shooting semi-wad cutters into porcupines with my 44 Special. The striking power is noticeably more impressive than hitting them with round nose bullets.

I've seen photos of wild goats which were shot in New Zealand by a 45-70 hunter. He shot several dozen goats using different bullets. He even loaded some bullets backwards and fired them base first into the animals. As I recall, these flat tip bullets made consistent wide holes despite lack of high velocity or much "mushrooming". Some hollow tip bullets actually tumbled after impact.

Elmer Keith often wrote about flat tip bullets for his beloved 44MAG revolvers. He probably experimented more than any other writer about this subject. I suggest tap into this knowledge by reading his books (free) through the inter-library loan program.

Jack

Sarge · August 5, 2014, 08:56 PM

some interesting work here

http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/b...s/methods.html

coldbeer · August 6, 2014, 11:17 AM

Very interesting thanks Sarge

Unlicensed Dremel · August 7, 2014, 11:41 AM

Well, first, I believe that meplat just refers to the diameter of the nose. So a WC>SWC>"flat-nosed" jacketed, in terms of size of meplat.

But I think the key here is that expansion is far more important than the initial size of the cut entering game. If there were no expansion, then sure a hardcast SWC would be slightly more likely to nick and thus take out a large artery or vein at the edges than a "flat-nosed". But the flat-nose will have expanded more than a hardcast SWC, but expanded less than a soft-cast SWC.

So I think the bottom line is, getting a large degree of expansion while retaining adequate penetration is far more important than initial shape of the bullet. Which is itself a function of *matching* MV to the bullet. That's not to say that the shape isn't important. It is. And the meplat size is important. The wider the better, all other things being equal. But not because it pokes through wider all way; rather, it's because the large meplat *initiates* the rapid expansion and ultimately large expansion.

So if you're talking about a really low velocity such as sub-1500 fps, then a soft SWC is going to expand more than a flatnosed jacketed bullet, and even a "semi-hard" lead SWC will expand more. But if you're talking about higher velocity, then it should be "roughly the same" but with the jacketed bullet having advantage of less lead fouling. Because once you get the velocity high enough, they'll both expand to the maximum, which will be the same amount, roughly.

I suppose if all other things are equal, and it's a given that "significant expansion" will occur from either, then the SWC (if not too hard) has the edge on terminal performance, simply because the slightly-wider meplat initiates expansion faster and results in ultimately greater expansion. But then again, if your vels are *really* high, and/or if the game is super tough and large, then jacketed bullet would have the preference because the jacket will help hold the bullet together, and in that scenario, LESS expansion is better, not more.

Bottom line, my guess is, it depends upon velocity:
Under 1500 fps=> the SWC
1500-2000 fps=> the SWC on most game, still (but matching hardness to game toughness)
2000 and up=> the flat nose, due to both lead fouling issue, and better penetration but "still-good-enough" expansion.

Sarge · August 7, 2014, 10:08 PM

Neither the SWC or LBT is intended to expand and they are usually cast hard enough to insure that they won't. They don't need to. Their purpose is to knock a full caliber or slightly larger hole in a straight line through 3-4 feet of critter, regardless of what they encounter. I've shot some game with them and they work.

Art Eatman · August 8, 2014, 11:08 AM

Just guessing, but the meplat of whatever size would aid in penetration of bone. Odds are, SWC would do okay as a hunting bullet. Everything I've ever read speaks of "hard cast" for lead hunting bullets.

Ross Seyfried wrote extensively about his hunting successes with hard cast bullets, although he apparently always used those with large meplats. Off the cuff, I don't see why a hard cast SWC wouldn't do as well.

Bezoar · August 8, 2014, 12:09 PM

the extent ive seen is this.

semi wadcutter and wadcutter BEATS LRN or FMJ all day long in wound creation in a game animal.
However a real 150 grain fmj milspec load in a 30-06 is mighty effective.

Alot of literature indicates that when a swc hits a critter, the shoulder disintegrates into the animal as it passed through, so the actual meplat on the front is actually making the wound channel.

and look at the bear tooth website, i dont believe they make much distinction between regular flat nose lead bullets and a true semi wadcutter in their wound calculator.

reloader28 · August 9, 2014, 08:46 AM

They both work fine and the difference is very slight.

The internet myth is that the SWC makes a bigger hole.
This is only true if the meplat is bigger or if your only shooting paper.
At least with the testing I've done.
Unless you make a softer expanding bullet, it ALL matters on the size of the meplat.

The meplat, (the flat of a flat nose) makes a kind of bubble in front of it that does some very impressive damage in critters. Because of that bubble the muscle and tissue is moved away from the tiny little shoulder of the SWC and it doesn't really do anything anymore.

I'm no expert by any means, but I do make my own bullets and test them a little before I hunt with them as every hunter should.
This is what I've came up with.

mete · August 9, 2014, 06:38 PM

BTW, for those wanting a copy of Keith's "Sixguns" - they are expensive but if you have a Nook electronic reader , Sixguns is in their collection !! There's a wealth of info in that book don't pass it up because it's "old stuff" !

August 5, 2014, 11:37 AM	#1
coldbeer Junior member Join Date: February 21, 2012 Location: Woodhaven MI Posts: 477	Semi wadcutter vs wide flat nose Do the sharp shoulders of a semi wadcutter act as a meplat and cut a caliber size hole in game like they do in paper or is a flat nose with a wide meplat like the lbt bullets more effective? I've done some research and found conflicting answers.

August 5, 2014, 11:53 AM	#2
mete Senior Member Join Date: June 14, 2004 Location: NY State Posts: 6,575	I haven't dealt with the large meplat type .The SWC ,especially the old Speer Jswchp always seemed to cut a full caliber hole through flesh. You should get a copy of Elmer Keith's book "Sixguns" it has detailed descriptions of the Keith bullet. BTW many of the "Keith" bullets on the market are not true Keith bullets. __________________ And Watson , bring your revolver !

August 5, 2014, 07:32 PM	#4
Jack O'Conner Senior Member Join Date: July 11, 2005 Location: Manatee County, Florida Posts: 1,976	My own experience is limited to shooting semi-wad cutters into porcupines with my 44 Special. The striking power is noticeably more impressive than hitting them with round nose bullets. I've seen photos of wild goats which were shot in New Zealand by a 45-70 hunter. He shot several dozen goats using different bullets. He even loaded some bullets backwards and fired them base first into the animals. As I recall, these flat tip bullets made consistent wide holes despite lack of high velocity or much "mushrooming". Some hollow tip bullets actually tumbled after impact. Elmer Keith often wrote about flat tip bullets for his beloved 44MAG revolvers. He probably experimented more than any other writer about this subject. I suggest tap into this knowledge by reading his books (free) through the inter-library loan program. Jack __________________ Fire up the grill! Deer hunting IS NOT catch and release.

August 5, 2014, 08:56 PM	#5
Sarge Senior Member Join Date: May 12, 2002 Location: MO Posts: 5,457	some interesting work here http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/b...s/methods.html __________________ People were smarter before the Internet, or imbeciles were harder to notice.

August 7, 2014, 10:08 PM	#8
Sarge Senior Member Join Date: May 12, 2002 Location: MO Posts: 5,457	Neither the SWC or LBT is intended to expand and they are usually cast hard enough to insure that they won't. They don't need to. Their purpose is to knock a full caliber or slightly larger hole in a straight line through 3-4 feet of critter, regardless of what they encounter. I've shot some game with them and they work. __________________ People were smarter before the Internet, or imbeciles were harder to notice.

August 5, 2014, 12:34 PM	#3
coldbeer Junior member Join Date: February 21, 2012 Location: Woodhaven MI Posts: 477	I don't cast but I bought a couple hundred .358 swc's from Beartooth bullets. I love these bullets, they're advertised as weighing 173grs but are actually closer to 170grs and they take up less case capacity than most 158 grain swc's when seated to the crimp groove. My revolvers also love these bullets and I'm thinking of getting more of them. I want to make them my 1 357 bullet for everything from target to hunting to plinking. I've read enough about them to know they're decent hunting bullets, but I'm just curious if the sharp shoulder acts like a wide meplat. They make big holes in paper but what about in game? There are conflicting opinions out there from what I have read.

August 6, 2014, 11:17 AM	#6
coldbeer Junior member Join Date: February 21, 2012 Location: Woodhaven MI Posts: 477	Very interesting thanks Sarge

August 7, 2014, 11:41 AM	#7
Unlicensed Dremel Junior member Join Date: February 13, 2014 Location: Flathead Valley, MT Posts: 2,187	Well, first, I believe that meplat just refers to the diameter of the nose. So a WC>SWC>"flat-nosed" jacketed, in terms of size of meplat. But I think the key here is that expansion is far more important than the initial size of the cut entering game. If there were no expansion, then sure a hardcast SWC would be slightly more likely to nick and thus take out a large artery or vein at the edges than a "flat-nosed". But the flat-nose will have expanded more than a hardcast SWC, but expanded less than a soft-cast SWC. So I think the bottom line is, getting a large degree of expansion while retaining adequate penetration is far more important than initial shape of the bullet. Which is itself a function of matching MV to the bullet. That's not to say that the shape isn't important. It is. And the meplat size is important. The wider the better, all other things being equal. But not because it pokes through wider all way; rather, it's because the large meplat initiates the rapid expansion and ultimately large expansion. So if you're talking about a really low velocity such as sub-1500 fps, then a soft SWC is going to expand more than a flatnosed jacketed bullet, and even a "semi-hard" lead SWC will expand more. But if you're talking about higher velocity, then it should be "roughly the same" but with the jacketed bullet having advantage of less lead fouling. Because once you get the velocity high enough, they'll both expand to the maximum, which will be the same amount, roughly. I suppose if all other things are equal, and it's a given that "significant expansion" will occur from either, then the SWC (if not too hard) has the edge on terminal performance, simply because the slightly-wider meplat initiates expansion faster and results in ultimately greater expansion. But then again, if your vels are really high, and/or if the game is super tough and large, then jacketed bullet would have the preference because the jacket will help hold the bullet together, and in that scenario, LESS expansion is better, not more. Bottom line, my guess is, it depends upon velocity: Under 1500 fps=> the SWC 1500-2000 fps=> the SWC on most game, still (but matching hardness to game toughness) 2000 and up=> the flat nose, due to both lead fouling issue, and better penetration but "still-good-enough" expansion.

August 8, 2014, 11:08 AM	#9
Art Eatman Staff in Memoriam Join Date: November 13, 1998 Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA Posts: 24,798	Just guessing, but the meplat of whatever size would aid in penetration of bone. Odds are, SWC would do okay as a hunting bullet. Everything I've ever read speaks of "hard cast" for lead hunting bullets. Ross Seyfried wrote extensively about his hunting successes with hard cast bullets, although he apparently always used those with large meplats. Off the cuff, I don't see why a hard cast SWC wouldn't do as well.

August 8, 2014, 12:09 PM	#10
Bezoar Junior member Join Date: October 19, 2004 Location: michigan Posts: 578	the extent ive seen is this. semi wadcutter and wadcutter BEATS LRN or FMJ all day long in wound creation in a game animal. However a real 150 grain fmj milspec load in a 30-06 is mighty effective. Alot of literature indicates that when a swc hits a critter, the shoulder disintegrates into the animal as it passed through, so the actual meplat on the front is actually making the wound channel. and look at the bear tooth website, i dont believe they make much distinction between regular flat nose lead bullets and a true semi wadcutter in their wound calculator.

August 9, 2014, 08:46 AM	#11
reloader28 Senior Member Join Date: October 13, 2009 Location: nw wyoming Posts: 1,061	They both work fine and the difference is very slight. The internet myth is that the SWC makes a bigger hole. This is only true if the meplat is bigger or if your only shooting paper. At least with the testing I've done. Unless you make a softer expanding bullet, it ALL matters on the size of the meplat. The meplat, (the flat of a flat nose) makes a kind of bubble in front of it that does some very impressive damage in critters. Because of that bubble the muscle and tissue is moved away from the tiny little shoulder of the SWC and it doesn't really do anything anymore. I'm no expert by any means, but I do make my own bullets and test them a little before I hunt with them as every hunter should. This is what I've came up with.

August 9, 2014, 06:38 PM	#12
mete Senior Member Join Date: June 14, 2004 Location: NY State Posts: 6,575	BTW, for those wanting a copy of Keith's "Sixguns" - they are expensive but if you have a Nook electronic reader , Sixguns is in their collection !! There's a wealth of info in that book don't pass it up because it's "old stuff" ! __________________ And Watson , bring your revolver !