TargetTalk

I have several molds for 9mm that cast big enough for 38sp.
Has anyone tried a load that shoots a 125gr SWC deep seated instead of the usual 148?

I never tried it, but would assume that if you flush seated the projectile, it should feed. Why do you want to do this? Might be some pressure issues to consider with the amount of case capacity reduced by doing this.

Bob

Three reasons.

Less lead used. My "lifetime" supply of wheel weights might not outlive me now.
I have a six cavity mold.
Maybe less recoil.

I can't imagine a 125gr producing more pressure than a 148gr seated to the same depth. Just thought that I can't be the first one to think about trying it out.

I think it would depend on the seating depth as if seated deeper, the case capacity would be reduced. Would you plan to crimp the open end? I could see that might reduce accuracy.

Bob

I think I would give the open end just enough taper to feed. The overall length of the SWC I have is less than a 148 WC, so powder space will actually be more. The only downside I see is the 1/4" extra bullet jump. In the next month as time frees up, I will be trying
this.

WA1500 Shooters use deep seated 100gr SWC projectiles in revolvers very effectively, the only issue I can think of is there would be no recoil saving as you need the same recoil to operate the action.

Brent, where are you located? I have several 5 gallon buckets of wheel weights I will never use. I’m in Western New York.

chukeeee wrote: ↑Sun Dec 20, 2020 12:11 pm Brent, where are you located? I have several 5 gallon buckets of wheel weights I will never use. I’m in Western New York.

What a great offer! Unfortunately I live in MN.
Those are worth quite a bit now that most WW are made of zinc.

Back in the day, I used to use SWCs loaded backward and seated flush in my .44 mag for grouse and rabbits. It took more powder space for very light loads, and identified those loads easily.

I had a S&W 52 and it had a .355 bore, but I still used .358 HBWCs. I would try your bullets seated backwards.

When I used a 52-2 back in the 80’s that had a barrel that would build up a lot of leading, I would load jacketed hp bullets backwards to scrape the lead out before cleaning the gun. It worked pretty well, never tried them for group size

Holy smokes! I probably won't be doing much with my 52. I only have 2 magazines and my quest to buy two more is pretty bleak. They were $25 ten years ago, now they are $175 -$325!

Two mags are sufficient for any target work you might do. Probably OK for casually strolling through the "peaceful demonstrators" in your neighborhood as well

I believe that the “peaceful demonstrators” deserve nothing less than 45acp, preferably from a 1911, ya know, a nice American gun

For those interested, I did load some Lee 9mm 125 in my S&W 52-2.
They shot 4-5 inch groups at 50 yards for 10 shot groups. There were other factory HBWC that actually did worse. I haven't given up on the concept, and will try other 125-135 in the future.

chukeeee wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:45 am I believe that the “peaceful demonstrators” deserve nothing less than 45acp, preferably from a 1911, ya know, a nice American gun

Nah, I think smaller is better when "knee-capping."

Been reading this thread for amusement.

It takes a special kind of person to work so hard at making a machine do what it was not designed to do. And an equally special group of people to drive a thread into a completely different discussion even further off the target (pun intended).

"I like this ship (group)! You know, It's exciting!" - Scotty

It also takes a special kind of person to accept that trying anything new is a waste of time. I am sure there were people who thought indoor plumbing was a waste of time too. The bullet jump from case to rifling isn't any greater that out of a revolver. Who decided that the 38 special had to only use wad cutter bullets? Why has the 32ACP taken over from the 38 S&W Long WC round?

You do know that there are no HBWC to be had anywhere, right?

First read the quote at the bottom and get some perspective.
We're all pretty "special" here.

As for the specifics, just make a chamber cast of a Model 52 barrel, slug the barrel for the bore diameter and check out the rifling twist.

The chamber dimensions generally run on the generous side, the bore dimensions run on the tight side and the rifling is a little slow. That generally leads up to the need for a long, swaged lead bullet and also the propensity of the Model 52 barrel to lead up. In other words the machine design is a little stacked up against anything other than a HBWC. Many have bemoaned the effort of even getting cast DEWC to work well, although some succeed. And by work, I mean really good groups at 50 yards. (I would suggest that if SWC is all you can get, then get a DEWC mold and melt down what you have and cast some of those to use. It might be an easier route with much better accuracy.)

Keep on trying, you might be the person that does it. And ain't that "special" enough?

My recommendation is to get a new Clark Model 52 barrel with a 1/10 twist and see how that works out. I haven't checked out their bore dimensions yet. They may be closer to .357, which will help with the use of cast or other bullets. Or wait until KKM finally decides to make theirs. Although I expect the KKM barrel to be on the tight bore side since they generally run their barrels that way.

Many of us have learned from the past to control our own inventory as much as possible. Reloading supplies have an extremely long shelf life, so the only real cost is space.

CR
HM, DP#1232, DR#9, D22#76, P100X15, MayleighX2
Orton, Wyman, Oglethorpe, Elihu Root, & Gold Cup Trophies

That sure became a better post from its original.

I have have personally had the opposite problem with leading. A fast twist, like a 1-9 seems to be more prone to leading in my experience. A 1-14 twist would be my preference if I could pick one.

I do have some HBWC that are a no name that do not have grease grooves but heavily graphite coated. They were not the best. I also tried some swaged DEWC that were the winner so far. I also cast some Lyman 358495 that were not so hot, A few did not stay on a repair center, but shoot great out of a revolver with the same twist. The Lee 125 9mm FP mold actually does have some promise. I will be trying it with different powders, and charges, and break out a chronograph when it warms up. Getting 5" groups off a bench at 50 yards may not be the best, but my free pistol testing shows my eyes can only shoot 1-1/4 to 2" groups anyway with iron sights. I am not using a dot.

Rebarreling probably won't be in my future. That is an awful lot of money to have Clark fit a barrel to try and see if it works better. I am mainly a free pistol and air pistol shooter that might want to dabble in bullseye this summer. I haven't shot Bullseye in decades, and probably won't get overly aggressive at it if I do. If I could hold 8 ring or better between gun and shooter at 50 yards, I won't leave in total shame. The short line is mostly on me, not my ammo.

It isn't that I don't have Lots of components, it is just that I dabble in about everything for a year or two before I get bored, which means I don't always have enough of the Right components for current situations. I may have to do some trading of a half ton of other things to try more bullets.
With the recent happenings, there is some pretty slim pickings to be had, and I think it won't get better any time soon. If I can't get one of the 52s to shoot, I have other things to use for center fire, and custom H&G molds to make them sing. With the lack of 52 magazines, maybe those are just going to remain safe queens anyway. The Pardini 32s of both varieties intrigue me, but that looks like another start of lots of experimentation with headaches too.