Author Topic: The good ole' SWC bullet....How does it fare with you? (Read 1374 times)

Mohawk · « **on:** October 28, 2004, 05:46:51 AM »

Hated by some, love by more. Though not a big animal I learned why the ole' SWC could do when placed properly on game. Self defense is different(most bad guys run off after being hit with anything). But animals being much tougher, I must say I was impressed with the bullet. Though it was in .38 Spl, 158gr. at 800fps, the effect on my recent armadillo convinced me that a round nose bullet IT IS NOT! The entrance hole was a near perfect .358" and the exit was a little larger. Bled all over the place. I guess Elmer Keith really knew what he was doing. My wife thought I had used a hollow-point. I would like to hear about ya'lls experiences on game with a SWC and compare notes.

palgeno · « **Reply #1 on:** October 28, 2004, 06:52:04 AM »

Gave them a try pig hunting---.44 mag 240 gr Oregon Trails lead swc---velocity 1400fps----took two at about 50 yds----worked well. Thought I'd try the OT 200gr lswc in .45 super (at 1250 fps) for close shots on pigs hunting with dogs. Worked well on the pigs and using the 1911 made for fast shots without hitting a dog---always bad form to hit the dog instead of the pig! Lead swc's work well if hard enough--- and penetrare well. I haven't tried jacked swc's. pg

S.S. · « **Reply #2 on:** October 28, 2004, 07:28:56 AM »

If they were good enough for Elmer Kieth, They are good enough for
me!! :grin: I use them in all of my handguns for hunting.
158 gr. in my .357. (cast relatively hard.)
205 gr. in my .44 spl.
205 and 310 gr. in my .44 mag.
250 gr. in my .45 colt.

Lone Star · « **Reply #3 on:** October 28, 2004, 02:05:51 PM »

If the Model T was good enough for Henry Ford it is good enough for me!

The above is a joke, and the few deer I've taken with SWCs in my .45LCs did die - but modern jacketed bullets are generally superior to lead unless extreme penetration is required. Remember that when Elmer designed his SWCs ( the 1920s) there were no jacketed handgun bullets, and most of what existed were round nosed. We know how poorly they perform on game, and Elmer's SWCs worked much better. It wasn't until the mid-1980s that we first got some decent jacketed handgun bullets, and they keep getting better and better. Elmer didn't live long enogh to give modern jacketed bullets a fair try. I suspect that had he done so he'd support their use....in calibers over .357" anyway.

Elmer had a lot of opinions - some good and some not so good. Older shooters remember that he condemned the .30-06 as a poor game cartridge for decades and decades.....guess he was a bit wrong on that one! :wink:

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #4 on:** October 28, 2004, 11:46:59 PM »

guess in my opinion penetration is allways good. In hunting anyway. Ill take a good hard cast keith for hunting any time over a jacketed bullet. I personally witnessed pour performance out of jacketed bullets on both black bear and hogs and have never lost an animal i put a cast bullet into in the right spot. I do thank the jacketed bullet manuafactures though. Without them id spend way to much time cleaning lead out of the target guns that i use soft lead in.

WD45 · « **Reply #5 on:** October 29, 2004, 01:15:50 AM »

I'll add just a little to the pot....
I like cast SWC bullets ... They have killed everything that I have hit with them , rather well. Never had one fail even hitting heavy bone. Dont have to worry about jacket seperation. And one of the best reasons... I can make them myself :grin: Jacketed bullets have been around longer than you think although not the quality of today. The military has been shooting them for decades.

Mikey · « **Reply #6 on:** October 29, 2004, 02:47:07 AM »

Mohawk My Man - yep, those swcs will definately do the job for you. Used some 295 gn Keith style swcs over a healthy charge of H110 for backup on Russian Boar recently and the finishing shot completely disfigured the skull, passing through completely. The same for the Elk I took - the finishing shot was more than powerful enough to have broght her down all by itself. Just as you said, nice square hole going in, slightly larger hole going out and lots of misplaced furniture in the middle. As you know, my favorite bullet in the 357 amd 38 is the 200 gn Keith style swc. Both do a great job. Mikey.

Mohawk · « **Reply #7 on:** October 29, 2004, 08:52:53 AM »

Don't get me wrong, I think JHP bullets have a place. I don't know where that place is but I'm sure there is one. I used to use the old 158gr. Lead Hollow Point +P for .38 loads but never really noticed any significant difference in performance when compared to standard pressure SWC. Oddly enough, I've lost more critters with the LHP, eventhough they would do a little more damage, and even less sometimes. Not to mention more strain on your K-frame. I remember my dad choosing them for deer over several different JHP bullet while hunting and looking at me like I was crazy for offering the HP's. I didn't say anything, because #1. He's dad! #2. He's seen these SWC's be used when it "hit the fan" in the highway patrol and that I do trust.

Lone Star · « **Reply #8 on:** October 29, 2004, 05:04:29 PM »

Quote

Jacketed bullets have been around longer than you think although not the quality of today. The military has been shooting them for decades

I certainly know how long "jacketed" handgun bullets have been around (the US military started using them prior to the introduction of the M1911), but we were talking expanding bullets here.....which the military hasn't used as general issue in its handguns. :roll: I remember the "Jugular" bullets of the 50s and 60s....and the early SuperVels....

Quote

He's seen these SWC's be used when it "hit the fan" in the highway patrol and that I do trust.

Same argument that was used when the sainted name of Keith was invoked in a previous post. Modern jacketed bullets are superior for combat use - or do you think that most law enforcement departments still use lead bullets in their revolvers today?

Of course lead bullets kill, to say otherwise is gross ignorance. But if you can get complete penetration with a jacketed bullet, along with expansion, where is the superiority of SWC bullets? Oh yeah, you can save a few pennys over jacketed, but for game what is a few dollars saved when superior performance can be achieved? You'll spend $800 for that special revolver, then shoot cheap ammo in it? Shooters are a conservative lot, and that's good to a point, but why be passed by with new technology? I've read too many old shooting journals from the turn of the 19/20 centuries, where the old experienced shooters discounted smokeless powder, thinking it was just a passing fad..... :wink:

Do not get me wrong, I've shot thousands of cast bullets each year in my various firearms for over thirty years, but I know a better thing when I see it. I am willing to learn about new technology. Some is just hype, but bullet tecdhnology - rifle and handgun - is better today than in years past. Spend you money as you wish, I'll use mine to improve my game performance.

Mohawk · « **Reply #9 on:** October 30, 2004, 05:07:46 AM »

I'm not sure where you got the impression my dad was telling "war stories" when you mention "sainted by Keith". Please tell me how many times JHP's saved your life then I'll let you know how many times lead bullets saved mine. I've been shot at twice since Jan. 1, 2003. How many times have you been shot at? How many friends have you lost because JHP's were NOT superior? Ever seen what a swaged SWC does when it hits a sternum at magnum velocities? How do you know what I've seen? Yes, my profile has been updated, I don't just write novels. You can buy a book telling you how great JHP's are and how they are the greatest thing for around $50. Or, you can give someone else the $50 and he can buy some lead bullets and learn where the bad guys arteries are. Any bet who is gonna win the fight? Oh, and I still carry a SWC for duty.

Lone Star · « **Reply #10 on:** October 30, 2004, 02:52:27 PM »

You had better read what I write more carefully before you go off half cocked - I said "the sainted name of Keith", not "sainted by Keith". And I never said anything about "war stories" now did I? One would think that a novelist would pay more attention to the written word....

Unfortunately you just misunderstood my comments. In no way was I impuning your father - how could I, I know nothing about him. The reference to Keith went back to my previous post where Keith was giving his opinion from his (dated) point of view - modern bullets were not included in his experience. Stating what happened years ago is not telling "war stories" - but it does not include anything other than his own very limited experiences. Statistically useless, but interesting none the less.

BTW, I've been shot at very many times, and my life was saved many times by little 55-grain jacketed bullets tumbling inside little yellow bodies.....but even though it saved my life, I don't carry an M-16 with M193 ball anymore. This thread was about hunting game with SWC bullets, why even bring up killing people? Sheesh!

leverfan · « **Reply #11 on:** October 30, 2004, 06:39:03 PM »

Heck, I almost hate to go back to the original topic, but here goes. For general trail-gun duty, especially in revolvers chambered smaller than the 41, I'll take a SWC with a nice, wide nose, or maybe an LBT. I've cast more 429-421 bullets than any other, and they've done what I wanted, so how could other bullets do any better?

The Speer bullets with plated on jackets are pretty nice, though, and I like their 300 grain .430" flat nose. With that much meplat and weight, who cares if it expands or not? Shot placement will be the deciding factor. Elk are a factor when I choose hunting bullets, so I'll take penetration every time.

Mohawk · « **Reply #12 on:** October 31, 2004, 03:58:29 AM »

Lone Star, please read WD45's post again. He never said he was not using expanding jacketed bullets. The part about jacket separations should have been a good clue that he meant expanding bullets since the topic is hangun bullets. Jokingly meaning the military may be using JHP's in secret(wink, wink)-please note smiley at the end of his post. If I can't use deductive logic than you can't either. Fair is fair in love and editing.

Whether it be mine, yours, my dad's, or Keith's, a person's experiences are not arguments. They are events. And my dad has experience with both types of loads and prefers the SWC's. If you have faith in JHP's then fine. I have experiences not to.

Lone Star · « **Reply #13 on:** October 31, 2004, 05:13:47 AM »

Quote

Fair is fair in love and editing.

Pax Texicana :wink:

S.S. · « **Reply #14 on:** November 01, 2004, 08:09:34 AM »

I just have never seen a Jacketed bullet that really did anything
so impressive as to make me use them over unjacketed.
(At handgun velocity that is).
I am one of those stubborn folks that has to be convinced I guess.
I do not fall victom to GUN WRITERS that are just saying what the
gun/ammo companies pay them to say.
I simply have to go by my own experiences.
And my experience leads me to semi-wadcutters over jacketed.
I will have that opinion until I have one let me down.
Every one here knows what opinions are like and every body has one.
No need to argue, Just use what you are comfortable and proficient with!
I seriously doubt that a Whitetail would note much difference between
a 240 gr. SWC or a 240 gr. JSP .44 mag bullet as they passed through him.