Question about projectile weights (158gn vs. 125gn)

[Nahiossi]

Background: I am slowly gathering all my bits and pieces so that I can start shooting with my local SASS club in the New Year. Both my single action pistols are Uberti Cattlemen; one with a 5½ inch barrel and the other with a 4¾ but both in .357/38 special. Besides some practice on paper targets at 10-25 yards, I have not shot these pistols on steel yet.

 

I am currently using 158gn Round Nose projectiles (made by Hawkesbury River Bullet Company) with AS30N (known as Clays in the USA) and a small pistol primer in a 38 special case but am interested in what benefits from a SASS perspective there could be if I was to move to something like a 125gn projectile?

 

I have some exeperience reloading 38 special and 38 Super for Service Pistol matches but am very new to single action and would benefit from the collective knowledge on the Wire!

[Shorty Jack Hammer]

I don't have the answer to your question but you should edit out the powder grains for your OP, not allowed to post loading recipes here. Someone will have the answer though, or at least an opinion

[Nahiossi]

I don't have the answer to your question but you should edit out the powder grains for your OP, not allowed to post loading recipes here. Someone will have the answer though, or at least an opinion

 

Thanks for the heads up! I have removed the problematic parts.

[Gold Canyon Kid #43974]

Lighter bullet less recoil. Vast majority of CAS shooters use 125 or 105 g bullets in pistols. Also, the 158 g RNFP bullets do not feed as well in rifles as truncated cones like many of the 125 and 105 g bullets are.

[Blastmaster]

Benefit would be the lighter bullet would be less expensive to purchase

 

The lighter bullet would have less recoil using the same amount of powder, thus potentially lower stage time.

 

A lighter bullet would impact the target a bit lower than a heavier bullet at equivalent distance, could be important using fixed sight pistols, where you can not adjust vertical alignment other than filing front sight.

 

You have two different pistol barrel lengths, which means they will shoot (bullet impact on target) a bit different, no matter what you do, other than reload different for each pistol. Go ahead and try it, it probably will not be significant at the close SASS ranges most clubs shoot at..

 

Good luck

[Tracker Jack Daniels,58780]

As stated above the 125's will have less recoil, and if you ever decide to cast your own bullets, you get more bullets per pound of lead. However, if you shoot a '92 rifle, you may not be able to seat the 125's out long enough to feed reliably. At that point you will need to have two different loadings to make and keep track of.

 

I ran into this with my '92. It only like the RN bullets at 1.580 overall length. So to avoid two different loads I just shoot 158gr RN in everything.

 

Just my .02

[Edward R S Canby, SASS#59971]

Sidebar: check your rifle owners manual for bullet recommendations. It may specify flat point projectives over pointed or round nose designs. I use 160 grain RNFP projectiles for reliable feeding and to reduce the risk of primer ignition in the magazine tube. (I will get feedback that this is a non-issue that can be ignored.)

[Sedalia Dave]

125 grain bullets are less expensive, require small powder charges and will have less recoil.

 

As stated above if you are going to shoot a 92 you will want to switch to a LTC design for better feeding. I have 3 92,s that all reliably feed 38 specials loaded with 125 gr LTC bullets seated out si that they are crimped about 1/2 way between the crimp groove and the lube groove. However some 92 style actions will require heavier bullets and different OALs. Some even require .357 cases to feed reliably.

 

Others will say otherwise but I personally will not shoot RN bullets in tubular magazines. The RNFP or LTC designs however are fine.

 

Welcome to the fun.

[Dapper Dynamite Dick]

Between my wife and I, for Cowboy Action we have 9 guns in .38 Special. My choice on standardizing with the 158 grain RNFP was done as this was the only projectile that fed through ALL my guns flawlessly. Adjusting overall length didn't work out. I tried 130 grain for pistol and 158 grain for rifle but it was just getting silly with the amount of time spent keeping thing straight.

 

I know where I am in the pecking order of competition, so my emphasis has been on getting flawless performance out of the guns we use rather than anything else

[Houston CAS]

We started with 125 gn but have been using 105 gn recently because my wife likes the lighter recoil. I might switch myself back to 125 gn for my rifle though.

[Nahiossi]

Thanks everyone for your replies!

 

To sum up the feedback so far -

 

Benefits of a lighter projectile:

• Less recoil meaning reduced time to reacquire your sight picture leading to possible faster stage times
• Saving money when purchasing or handcasting (more projectiles for the same amount of lead)
• reduced powder load (saving more money)
• Lower point of impact which may help with the sight picture with fixed sights
• Improved feeding characteristics for rifles due to projectile shape

Cons of a lighter projectile:

• Possible feeding issues when using them in some rifles e.g the projectile may not be long enough to be seated properly and still meet the rifles OAL requirements. This means that you may end up having to source two different projectile weights anyways just ot ensure rifle reliability and end up with separate loads for your rilfe and pistols

My rifle is a Uberti 1866 yellowboy and and the previous owner had recommended that the OAL for catridges should be around 1.450 inches as shorter than this will cause issues. He did not mention anything regarding the shape of the projectiles themselves. Being that I have used all the 158gn projectiles, I will order some 125gn and see how they go. Worse case is that I will end up having to go back to 158 if there are OAL issues and relegate the 125s for pistol practice.

[Sedalia Dave]

Thanks everyone for your replies!

 

To sum up the feedback so far -

 

Benefits of a lighter projectile:

• Less recoil meaning reduced time to reacquire your sight picture leading to possible faster stage times
• Saving money when purchasing or handcasting (more projectiles for the same amount of lead)
• reduced powder load (saving more money)
• Lower point of impact which may help with the sight picture with fixed sights
• Improved feeding characteristics for rifles due to projectile shape

Cons of a lighter projectile:

• Possible feeding issues when using them in some rifles e.g the projectile may not be long enough to be seated properly and still meet the rifles OAL requirements. This means that you may end up having to source two different projectile weights anyways just ot ensure rifle reliability and end up with separate loads for your rilfe and pistols

My rifle is a Uberti 1866 yellowboy and and the previous owner had recommended that the OAL for catridges should be around 1.450 inches as shorter than this will cause issues. He did not mention anything regarding the shape of the projectiles themselves. Being that I have used all the 158gn projectiles, I will order some 125gn and see how they go. Worse case is that I will end up having to go back to 158 if there are OAL issues and relegate the 125s for pistol practice.

Your 1866 will feed the 125 gr LTC no problem. Others with more experience can chime in on how to determine the the best OAL for your rifle.

[Charlie Whiskers]

A 158 grain RNFP and a 125 grain TCFP are virtually identical in OAL. If your rifle will feed a 158 RNFP it'll feed a 125 TCFP. A 158 RN is a tad longer than both. Not really recommended for magazine tube rifles. "COULD" set off a chain reaction in the mag tube from recoil. Anyway that's the theory. If it's happened I can't say I've heard anyone in here say it has...just it could.

The benefit of the 125 as stated is less recoil, less cost by about $3-5 per 500 round box, and less powder used. I used 158's for several years and finally went to the 125's. Definite difference in recoil and less time off target.

[Tracker Jack Daniels,58780]

I have to disagree with you Charlie Whiskers, I have 3 model '92s two in 38/357 and one 44-40. Only the 44-40 will feed a truncated cone bullet. It will even fuss with one once in a while. The two in 38/357 will cause nothing but heartache if you try to feed them truncated cone bullets.

 

All three will feed 158gr RN or RNFP flawlessly. I have learned that it is best to feed a '92 what it likes and leave everything else alone.

 

This is just what I have learned with my rifles, and am by no means an expert. Just feel that everyone should be aware that there is a possibility that their rifle may be fussy about what ammunition it is fed.

[Nahiossi]

I assume LTC means Lead Truncated Cone? If thats the case, then it is probably the same as the flat point projectiles from HRBC (see the first one pictured below).

I would prefer to err on the side of safety and use a flat point to ensure that there is never a chance of a magazine tube chain reaction.

[Blastmaster]

Hawkesbury River Bullet Company- Australia manufacturer)

 

Hawkesburg makes the 125g FP & 130g RNFP (pictured below).... either one would be fine, but I would lean more toward the 125g FP because it might feed easier in rifle... no difference in pistols. The 105g has that shoulder on the bullet that could be problematic with feeding in rifle. Not all 105's have that shoulder (step).

 

The pictures shows they are coated,,,, I don't know if they sell plain cast lead bullets.

 

Yer good to go.

 

====================

 

105g

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hawkesbury River Bullet Company

 

125g FP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

130g RNFP

 

 

[Nahiossi]

The pictures shows they are coated,,,, I don't know if they sell plain cast lead bullets.

 

I don't think they make anything that isn't coated, as seen on their website -

 

 

The next stage in the operation involves bullet coating (lubricating). This is a proprietary step which produces the three dry coating marketed by HRBC. – Blackhawkes, Copperhawkes and Silverhawkes. Coating is a 3-stage process using proprietary phenolic. Hy-Tek resin coating. Each projectile receives three coats of a specified lubricant resin followed by oven curing after each coating pass. The resultant coating is uniform, and while providing the necessary lubricant when fired, it also offers some advantages that may not immediately come to mind. The hard coating provides some positives for occupational health concerns relating to lead. The coating helps to limit lead absorption by contact when handling during reloading, and also helps to minimise the production of lead vapour, particularly on indoor, enclosed firing ranges.

 

Blackhawkes is the name given to the company’s original signature product using a well proven Supercoat system. These projectiles are the backbone of the HRBC product line.

Copperhawkes use a special Hy-Tek super slippery performance coating containing copper as the name implies, and are designed for higher velocities.

Silverhawkes are coated with a clear coating and are manufactured to fill the needs of those shooting the nostalgic western action matches, where the look of yesteryear is part of the deal, and velocities are moderate.

 

The Shooters Handbook states, "Revolver and rife ammuntion may not be jacketed, semi-jacketed, plated. gas checked , or copper washed. It must all be lead. Molydisulfide coated bullets or equivalent are acceptable". (page 11). My reading is that any of these three coatings would be suitable for CAS with the Silverhawkes being the most aesthetic option.

 

Really do appreciate all the help!

[Blastmaster]

I don't think they make anything that isn't coated, as seen on their website -

 

 

 

The Shooters Handbook states, "Revolver and rife ammuntion may not be jacketed, semi-jacketed, plated. gas checked , or copper washed. It must all be lead. Molydisulfide coated bullets or equivalent are acceptable". (page 11). My reading is that any of these three coatings would be suitable for CAS with the Silverhawkes being the most aesthetic option.

 

Really do appreciate all the help!

All three coatings are legal for SASS but you will spend more than necessary for the coating. I was more interested in showing you the bullet shape so you could research further for an Australia supplier. BTW, polymer coating is legal too.

[Charlie Whiskers]

Nahiossi....

 

What the Hawkesbury company calls a 125 gr FP, most of the bullet companies I use call those a TCFP (truncated flat point).

 

 

Tracker Jack...

 

I had a Rossi 92 and it was very picky what it would feed. It would feed a 158 RNFP 38spl IF I ran it slow. If I tried running it fast, it would kick out about 3-4 live rounds on each 10 round run. I switched to 357 brass and it would feed both the same 158 OR a 125 TCFP as fast as I could run it with no problems. My 73's in 38/357 will run either bullet with zero problems loaded in 38 brass. My 73 in 44-40 runs a 200 grain RNFP and that's all I've ever tried running in that.

[Painted Mohawk SASS 77785]

Howdy Nahiossi

Noticed you are an Aussie..Hawkesbury River charge like wounded bulls , there are a few cowboy shooters that cast bullets for sale..in NSW you have Sodbuster & Mister Long Colt, look them up on the CASS website..there either straight lead or coated & much better price.

I cast myself & the most popular seller is the 125 RNFP although a lot say the 130 conical is a smooth feeder in the rifle, can't comment myself as I'm a .45 fan !

Not many favour the 158grain,some carry for 'stubbourn knockdowns.

Hope we catch up someday, my wife & I travel to a lot of Cowboy shoots so we will keep an eye out.

Like your alias..

Regards 'Painted Mohawk & Lady McGinty

[Abe E.S. Corpus SASS #87667]

The fixed sight revolvers may shoot close to point of aim with the 158 grain bullets but the lighter bullets will print low. If you find this to be the case your choices are to use the heavier bullets for the revolvers, file your front sights to "dial in", or just compensate by figuring out how low your loads print and simply holding over.

 

New shooters often tend to shoot low anyway. The real answer, of course, is to improve the technique but a heavier bullet might actually improve a new shooter's score if a lighter bullet causes them to shoot under the pistol targets. I watched a new shooter on Sunday and all of his pistol hits were very close to the bottoms of the targets.

[Orient Express]

I shoot up at Blacktown, Sydney. I buy 130gn TC from Wild Bill who shoots down at Bowral PC. He casts projies for CASS/SASS and the 130gn work in both my Ruger NVM and Uberti 1873. I think he also sells them at the local matches. Hawkesbury River BC is damn expensive. I've tried RNFP (125gn) but find the TC have a little longer OAL so feed better in my Uberti. 130gn are fine for knockdowns with my AS30N load. I load half-way up the recommended ADI load range.

 

Last I heard Sodbuster stopped casting commercial quantities as lead is getting expensive. You can also try Top Score Projectiles. Horsley Park Gunshop sell them. Abelas in Campbelltown sell them as well as Westcasting but they are a little exxy.

[Cyrus Cassidy #45437]

It's all fun, and both the bullets you listed will work fine. Everyone has differing opinions on topics like this, so expect conflicting advice. Try them both and develop your own opinion. I tend to prefer the lighter bullets for SASS purposes. Lighter bullets = less perceived recoil = faster subsequent shots. The opposing opinion is that knockdown targets are supposed to be calibrated to fall with a standard 158 grain .38 Special load, so the lighter bullets might not get them to fall. I've never had a problem, though.

[Anvil Al #59168]

I would sell 100,000 or more of 110s for every 1,000 I would sell of 158s if that tells your anything

about what SASS shooters like.

And around 70,000 125s for every 1,000 158s.

[Rio Brazos Kid]

Bullets heavier than 125 grain are really not needed for CAS shooting. Loaded properly to 675 to 700 FPS, will perform quite well on any CAS target I have ever encountered. This is from a Revolver. From a rifle, velocity will increase a good bit, and accuracy will be quite sufficient. This allows using the same ammo in both Revolvers and the Rifle, providing the OAL of that ammo will feed properly from your rifle. The Pistols really aren't sensitive to OAL, and will shoot any style bullet.

 

Personally, I use 125's in 38 Spl. cases for the pistols, and 158's in 38 Spl Cases, (Set out to 357 OAL), for the Rifle, to achieve flawless feeding in the Marlin Rifle. Been doing this for about 6 years with absolute success.

 

This of course requires a different re-load for Rifle and Pistol, but I don't find that a problem at the loading bench, and the two loads are easily identified by length, and because I load one in Nickel brass, and the other in Brass brass. There's no mixing them up at the loading table. Works just fine for me.

 

RBK

[Blastmaster]

I would sell 100,000 or more of 110s for every 1,000 I would sell of 158s if that tells your anything

about what SASS shooters like.

And around 70,000 125s for every 1,000 158s.

Yer saying, & seems reasonable

 

58% shoot 110's g

41% shoot 125's

1% shoot 158's

[John Boy]

am interested in what benefits from a SASS perspective there could be if I was to move to something like a 125gn projectile?

 

Good loading data comparisons ( powders and charges) between 158 & 125gr 38 Spl ...

http://reloadammo.com/38loads.htm

[Griff]

Feeding in rifles is a relative thing. In Marlin 1894s it's a timing issue of the carrier. Changes to the carrier are required to ensure it rises quickly enough, and shorter cartridge lengths can stop the next cartridge in the magazine from entering the receiver. In 1892 Winchesters it's the positioning and length of the slots in the feed guides that determine when the case rim can rise into line with the chamber. The distance between the guides is also a factor in that a wider gap may allow a nose to jump up too quickly resulting in a stove-pipe. Tension on the carrier ball can also affect feeding. With the toggle link action of the 1860, '66 & '73 it's the ramp on the front of the carrier that determines the minimum OAL one can load to, while the mortise the carrier sits in determines the longest OAL. Many folks don't know that Uberti has used different ramp lengths on their toggle links over the years. I have 3, all in 45Colt, but covering production from the mid 1980s to 2014. They have different lengths of ramps on the carrier. The nose of the cartridge on the carrier MUST extend to or slight past the top of the ramp on the carrier in order to make sure the ramp can push the next cartridge back into the magazine as it is raised by the lever.

 

Secondly, bullet shape can play a factor. With angled feeding, as in the 1894 & 1892s, these were all designed with bottle-neck cartridge in mind. With the straight walled cases of the 38/357 or 45 Colt bullet very wide meplats can inhibit feeding as the nose of the bullet may get hung up on the chamber roof before the rim can rise enough to finish pushing the cartridge into the chamber. As a well-known 1892 gunsmith & tuner extraordinaire sez, think of these as lever operated semi-automatics, which are known for their sometimes finicky digestive tracts as to bullet shape and OAL. The toggle-links are generally less finicky. However, semi-wadcutters or wadcutters are generally problematic. The rim of the cartridge holds the rear of the cartridge up at an angle, this can put the sharp corner of a SWC or WC in direct contact with the sometimes sharp corner of the chamber mouth. And if, as in the case of my 1986 production 1873, it has a long ramp on the carrier, it allows a SWC to drop a bit more from the horizontal and puts the flat nose of the bullet solidly into the back of the barrel. Whereas either a round or truncated cone simple rises back up as it enters the chamber and feeds like popcorn thru a goose!

 

Lastly, enjoy your new guns and newest hobby. Be they from Germany, NZ, Canada, US or even a bunch of convict Aussies, cowboy action shooters are the best of folks you'll ever compete with, some of the most sportsmanlike conduct you'll encounter will be with cowboy action shooters.

[Ventura Slim, SASS #35690]

The good news is if it goes in the revolver okay its already case checked and good to go so you can feed it your reloads that your rifle does not like. Figure out what works best in rifle and then you can use it in the pistolas. I had feeding issues with Round Nose in my 1894 rifle so now only buy Truncated Cone (what seems the top choice at local ranges).

 

A heavier bullet takes less powder than a lighter bullet. Recoil=momentum=mass times velocity so you need a chrono to do the math. I load the same light load for both pistol and rifle, but I tend to carry to a match some heavier loads (which are at the low end of published) just in case there is plate rack.

 

I bought some 180gr 38sp by mistake and they do not work well at all. I found that 158s shot better (papered them) for me and normally load those, but have some 125s and use the some powder because I am lazy and then I get less recoil too.

 

I want to go to the polymer coated lead ones now to keep my lead exposure low.

[Painted Mohawk SASS 77785]

Feeding in rifles is a relative thing. In Marlin 1894s it's a timing issue of the carrier. Changes to the carrier are required to ensure it rises quickly enough, and shorter cartridge lengths can stop the next cartridge in the magazine from entering the receiver. In 1892 Winchesters it's the positioning and length of the slots in the feed guides that determine when the case rim can rise into line with the chamber. The distance between the guides is also a factor in that a wider gap may allow a nose to jump up too quickly resulting in a stove-pipe. Tension on the carrier ball can also affect feeding. With the toggle link action of the 1860, '66 & '73 it's the ramp on the front of the carrier that determines the minimum OAL one can load to, while the mortise the carrier sits in determines the longest OAL. Many folks don't know that Uberti has used different ramp lengths on their toggle links over the years. I have 3, all in 45Colt, but covering production from the mid 1980s to 2014. They have different lengths of ramps on the carrier. The nose of the cartridge on the carrier MUST extend to or slight past the top of the ramp on the carrier in order to make sure the ramp can push the next cartridge back into the magazine as it is raised by the lever.

 

Secondly, bullet shape can play a factor. With angled feeding, as in the 1894 & 1892s, these were all designed with bottle-neck cartridge in mind. With the straight walled cases of the 38/357 or 45 Colt bullet very wide meplats can inhibit feeding as the nose of the bullet may get hung up on the chamber roof before the rim can rise enough to finish pushing the cartridge into the chamber. As a well-known 1892 gunsmith & tuner extraordinaire sez, think of these as lever operated semi-automatics, which are known for their sometimes finicky digestive tracts as to bullet shape and OAL. The toggle-links are generally less finicky. However, semi-wadcutters or wadcutters are generally problematic. The rim of the cartridge holds the rear of the cartridge up at an angle, this can put the sharp corner of a SWC or WC in direct contact with the sometimes sharp corner of the chamber mouth. And if, as in the case of my 1986 production 1873, it has a long ramp on the carrier, it allows a SWC to drop a bit more from the horizontal and puts the flat nose of the bullet solidly into the back of the barrel. Whereas either a round or truncated cone simple rises back up as it enters the chamber and feeds like popcorn thru a goose!

 

Lastly, enjoy your new guns and newest hobby. Be they from Germany, NZ, Canada, US or even a bunch of convict Aussies, cowboy action shooters are the best of folks you'll ever compete with, some of the most sportsmanlike conduct you'll encounter will be with cowboy action shooters.

 

Feeding in rifles is a relative thing. In Marlin 1894s it's a timing issue of the carrier. Changes to the carrier are required to ensure it rises quickly enough, and shorter cartridge lengths can stop the next cartridge in the magazine from entering the receiver. In 1892 Winchesters it's the positioning and length of the slots in the feed guides that determine when the case rim can rise into line with the chamber. The distance between the guides is also a factor in that a wider gap may allow a nose to jump up too quickly resulting in a stove-pipe. Tension on the carrier ball can also affect feeding. With the toggle link action of the 1860, '66 & '73 it's the ramp on the front of the carrier that determines the minimum OAL one can load to, while the mortise the carrier sits in determines the longest OAL. Many folks don't know that Uberti has used different ramp lengths on their toggle links over the years. I have 3, all in 45Colt, but covering production from the mid 1980s to 2014. They have different lengths of ramps on the carrier. The nose of the cartridge on the carrier MUST extend to or slight past the top of the ramp on the carrier in order to make sure the ramp can push the next cartridge back into the magazine as it is raised by the lever.

 

Secondly, bullet shape can play a factor. With angled feeding, as in the 1894 & 1892s, these were all designed with bottle-neck cartridge in mind. With the straight walled cases of the 38/357 or 45 Colt bullet very wide meplats can inhibit feeding as the nose of the bullet may get hung up on the chamber roof before the rim can rise enough to finish pushing the cartridge into the chamber. As a well-known 1892 gunsmith & tuner extraordinaire sez, think of these as lever operated semi-automatics, which are known for their sometimes finicky digestive tracts as to bullet shape and OAL. The toggle-links are generally less finicky. However, semi-wadcutters or wadcutters are generally problematic. The rim of the cartridge holds the rear of the cartridge up at an angle, this can put the sharp corner of a SWC or WC in direct contact with the sometimes sharp corner of the chamber mouth. And if, as in the case of my 1986 production 1873, it has a long ramp on the carrier, it allows a SWC to drop a bit more from the horizontal and puts the flat nose of the bullet solidly into the back of the barrel. Whereas either a round or truncated cone simple rises back up as it enters the chamber and feeds like popcorn thru a goose!

 

Lastly, enjoy your new guns and newest hobby. Be they from Germany, NZ, Canada, US or even a bunch of convict Aussies, cowboy action shooters are the best of folks you'll ever compete with, some of the most sportsmanlike conduct you'll encounter will be with cowboy action shooters.

Hey Griff..Ya' last paragraph made me laugh