Author Topic: WLN v LFN  (Read 1787 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gjn

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 59
WLN v LFN
« on: December 23, 2008, 06:24:58 AM »
In 41 caliber and above with weights that run towards the heavier end of the spectrum and will be used primarily for hunting deer on up what are the advantages and disadvantages of one over the other? Shots wouldn't be over 100 yards,use would be limited to revolvers and gas checks will be used. Thank you.

Offline fowler

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 128
Re: WLN v LFN
« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2008, 02:49:31 PM »
In my never humble opinion the LFN has a definite edge in accuracy and that edge only gets more apparent the longer the ranges get. I have some WFN molds that give me very good accuracy and several that I have seriously struggled with but I have never ad a LFN that didn't shoot very well. The WFN may give a bit more "slap" to a deer but it would be hard to prove they really kill any better.

I have a pile of LBT molds and I plan to keep buying more as they are the best, easiest casting molds I have ever tried but they will all be LFN designs in the future.

Offline gjn

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 59
Re: WLN v LFN
« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2008, 04:08:06 PM »
I appreciate the response. Do you prefer weights towards the upper end for each caliber or more in the middle? Also do you find either design maintains its accuracy over a wider velocity range? I really like the large metplate on the WFN's but accuracy is always the first consideration. I have a few LBT molds and am looking to get more. I'm very happy with them and the performance on game with the few animals I have shot has been very impressive.

Offline Veral

  • GBO Sponsor
  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1675
    • Lead Bullet Technology
Re: WLN v LFN
« Reply #3 on: December 23, 2008, 04:23:40 PM »
  The advantage of the WLN over an LFN is that the WLN allows maximum powder room, which gives maximum possible power, while the wide meplat delivers that power quite a bit more severely than the LFN.   The WLN is ONLY for heavier bullet weights. The WFN has the same meplat size as the WLN, but the nose must be shorter to avoid having excessive unlubricated bearing surface outside the case, which makes it most suitible for medium to light weight bullets.  Be aware when I speak of bullet weights I'm speaking of the offerings in the LBT catalog, not standard jacketed bullet weights.

  For 41 caliber I don't like to sell the LFN for game, because of the small meplat, but as caliber goes up the difference in impact between the LFN and WLN/WFN gets narrower.  Mr Fowler didn't state anything about calibers he has used, and doesn't see a great difference in killing power between the LFN and the wider meplat bullets, but I would estimate that 95% of my customers would argue that, as I would.
 
  If the middle weight WFN's are used, and if the bullets are properly fitted to the revolver per my recommendations, I don't believe many people can see a difference in accuracy between LFN and WFN out to 100 yards, but at longer range the LFN will be more precise due to its better flight form.  If heavy weights are compared, LFN vs WLN the LFN will definately be most accurate at the longer ranges especially.  However most revolvers WHEN PROPERLY SET UP AND FITTED PER MY SPECIFICATIONS, AND IF THE CASTER DOES A GOOD JOB OF VISUAL BULLET INSPECTION, will put most of the bullet weights and profiles I sell into 2 inches at 100 yards.  (Notice I leaned hard on visual inspection.  Weight sorting is not needed or benificial if all bullets look real good.)

  Ross Seyfried wrote up an artical for Guns and Ammo sometime in the 90's on revolver accuracy. In it he used a 45 colt Ruger Bisley loaded with my 325 gr WFN, gas checked, to 1450 fps as I recall.  He was able to print groups that could be covered completely with a standard size postage stamp, at 100 yards.  He fitted the gun and bullets exactly to my specs. 

  What I'm saying here is, get a bullet that kills the best, do your homework, and it will make you happy in the accuracy department, and on game.

  As for bullet weights.  ----  When I developed the line of LBT bullets there was quite a rage for maximum power and weight, and there was really nothing available in heavy weights that performed well and at safe pressures.  I spent a lot of months developing the most efficient power getting bullets ever, and have over the years since, decided that most people are far better off using the middle weight bullets, and at that, not driving them too fast, as too much power causes too much recoil for most shooters, which hurts their accuracy potential so badly that the power is worthless.  When making a determination as to what speed to drive them, use my Displacement Velocity formula and stay over 100 and under 130.
Veral Smith

Offline gjn

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 59
Re: WLN v LFN
« Reply #4 on: December 23, 2008, 05:21:33 PM »
If one is to stick with the middle weight bullets for a particular caliber as you suggest I assume the WFN is better for lighter loads and the WLN allows more powder space for heavier loads? Can heavier WLN designs be shot accurately at lower velocitys? Also as I understand it your DV formula is calculated by multiplying the square inches of flat frontal area by velocity in feet per second and dividing by circumference in inches of the flat frontal are. Is there a source for finding that information for your various bullet designs? Thank you for your help.

Offline Veral

  • GBO Sponsor
  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1675
    • Lead Bullet Technology
Re: WLN v LFN
« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2008, 05:22:41 PM »
  In mid weight bullets the WFN is going to be most flexible so far as usable velocities, from very low to very high.  I do my best to discourage customers who want mid weight WLN's, because of the reasons I stated earlier.

  The DV formula again.  Measure the meplate diameter in thousandths of an inch.  Divide that diameter by 4, and punch the result into your caluclator memory.  To find DV at different velocities, punch memory return times the velocity of interest.  Repeat with any velocity of interest and you'll know the best working range for that particular bullet, whether it be an LBT design or one from any other manufacture.

  Meplat diameter of the LBT designs are .090 less than body diameter for the WLN, FN and WFN,  .125 smaller for the LFN and LCFN.  Example: a .430 LFN has a meplat of .305  a .310 LFN rifle bullet a meplat of .185.
 
Veral Smith

Offline chg

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: WLN v LFN
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2009, 02:49:18 AM »
Excellent explaination of your molds.  This covered most all my questions on the various designs.  Thank you!

Offline Boxhead

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 264
Re: WLN v LFN
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2009, 02:47:40 PM »
My shooting out to 100 yards agrees with Mr. Smith's view on accuracy. There are folks that like to play out well beyond 100 yards, me included, but for hunting situations with an open sighted revolver I see no accuracy disadvantage with the WFN.