Author Topic: OWC verses WFN (Read 1631 times)

hunterwarrior · « **on:** October 06, 2004, 01:20:43 PM »

I'm loading for a Freedom Arms 97 in 45 LC with a 5 1/2" barrel. In what situation would I choose the OWC over the WFN?

Veral · « **Reply #1 on:** October 10, 2004, 09:44:28 AM »

The main purposes of designing the OWC was to make it possible to obtain accuracy at longer ranges than with full wadcutters. It is accurate out to about 100 yards when driven at normal WC speeds, so it give more dramatic results on pests and varmints with mild loads out to the range limit for most shooters with their sights on small targets.

Use the WFN whenever you want power, super killing performance on large animals, and long range performance. The LFN will range out farther and kill very well with full loads.

In 45 caliber, which you are interested in, the WFN in 280 to 325 grain weight, loafing along at 1200 fps, will drop most large game in their tracks with chest hits, and the loads will be pleasant to shoot, especially with the lighter weights. Of coarse if it will drop a moose it will probably do at least as well for a mouse!!

hunterwarrior · « **Reply #2 on:** October 10, 2004, 09:55:19 AM »

Quote from: Veral

Use the WFN whenever you want power, super killing performance on large animals, and long range performance. The LFN will range out farther and kill very well with full loads.

So if the OWC are driven at full power, they will have less killing power than the same weight WFN bullet? I was thinking with the OWC's larger meplat it would have more stopping power on big game.

Thanks HW

hunterwarrior · « **Reply #3 on:** October 10, 2004, 10:00:57 AM »

Quote from: Veral

In 45 caliber, which you are interested in, the WFN in 280 to 325 grain weight, loafing along at 1200 fps, will drop most large game in their tracks with chest hits, and the loads will be pleasant to shoot, especially with the lighter weights. Of coarse if it will drop a moose it will probably do at least as well for a mouse!!

With the short cylinder of the FA model 97, their is not enough room for the real heavy weights. What is your heaviest WFN in .45 cal that will fit this gun?

Veral · « **Reply #4 on:** October 10, 2004, 04:16:02 PM »

If you study my displacement velocity as described in my book you'll see that the WFN in 45 caliber gives maximum killing punch at about 1400 fps. With speeds over this it makes a larger hole but doesn't kill as quickly.

I think I have done more to increase the desire for extreme heavy weight revolver bullets than anyone else, and they are VERY accurate and powerful. However, the truth is, maxim power and weight is excessive from the larger magnums, which includes the 45 Colt with heavy loads.

I've not heard of anyone having problems with weights to 340 gr in the FA revolvers, but I've been out of circulation for a while too you know. If you are using Casull brass, nose length to order is .4 and any weight up to 400 gr shoots well. If using Colt brass in the 454 length cylinders, ask for a .5 nose and the same applies.

If the Mod 97 has a shorter cylinder and is for 45 colt brass only, measure from end of case to end of cylinder and I'll cut to suit. If this length is .4 or longer you will get excellent results with a 300 gr. Heavier would bog down on velocity in Colt brass with this nose length.

As you can see I'm trying answer you specifically while giving information that will work for any revolver where the shooter isn't certain of optimum nose length.

hunterwarrior · « **Reply #5 on:** October 10, 2004, 05:07:47 PM »

Quote from: Veral

If the Mod 97 has a shorter cylinder and is for 45 colt brass only, measure from end of case to end of cylinder and I'll cut to suit. If this length is .4 or longer you will get excellent results with a 300 gr. Heavier would bog down on velocity in Colt brass with this nose length.

Thanks Veral

Nose length is really short for the FA 97 in 45 LC.

1.275 case length
1.585 over all length

.310 nose length

Need maximum weight, but no so much as to kill velocity because of decreased case volume. How to figure best bullet weight/case volume ratio?

hunterwarrior · « **Reply #6 on:** October 11, 2004, 09:40:30 AM »

Freedom Arms says 1.600 is MAXIMUM overall lengthin a 45 LC model 97. This would give a nose length of .325.

Veral · « **Reply #7 on:** October 17, 2004, 08:28:23 AM »

I think I would use a 280 gr WFN bullet and ask for a .35 nose, which is a bit less to allow some space for possible bullet pull when firing a cylinderfull.

The 45 colt case is roomy, so a 300 gr can be pushed out at good speeds also, even with the short nose, and would be a better choice than the 280 if you expect to take on Moose and the largest bears. For elk and smaller game, the 280gr WFN will make you real happy.

hunterwarrior · « **Reply #8 on:** October 17, 2004, 08:12:26 PM »

Quote from: Veral

I think I would use a 280 gr WFN bullet and ask for a .35 nose, which is a bit less to allow some space for possible bullet pull when firing a cylinderfull.

.35 is way too long. Do you mean .305?

Veral · « **Reply #9 on:** October 24, 2004, 09:11:51 AM »

Sorry. I read your specs but lost it when I was writing the answer.

I cut the crimp to nose length whereever a customer specifies, minus a few thousandths. i.e. Actual nose length will run about .025 less than what I specify in my catalog. In your case, ask for a .300 nose and it will be a tad shorter, which will allow for minor bullet pull.

I find it strange that you are the first customer to tell me about this short cylindered gun! Since I hadn't heard about it before, it didn't exist in my mind till someone pounds it in with a 2X4!

When orders are placed for short nosed bullets, I never question the customer, but if long and I forsee a problem I hit the brakes and don't cut the mold till I've made contact with the customer.