Author Topic: Wadcutters for self-defense (Read 4110 times)

michbob · « **on:** October 14, 2004, 01:39:06 PM »

OK, here's a thought question for ya: How would a wadcutter-style bullet be for self-defense?

1) You start out with a full caliber bullet, nice and flat in front, as is popular with cast hunting bullets.

2) Wadcutters are noted for accuracy.

3) No hollow point to clog up.

I've seen the effect of wadcutters on small game, it's...messy. I wonder what the effects would be in a self-defense situation. Especially if they were pushed to higher velocities than is usual with the design.

Thoughts? Comments?

Michbob.

gwhilikerz · « **Reply #1 on:** October 14, 2004, 04:13:12 PM »

MichBob I can give you my opinion for what its worth. I like wadcutter bullets because of their accuracy. that flat surface will make a larger hole than a round nose. The rn tends to slide thru the skin and flesh making a hole that closes up behind the slug (my observations and opinion only). The wadcutter hits with the full impact of that flat surface.
I believe in trying to cover as many bases as possible with my defense guns. That is why I load one wadcutter in my revolver for the first accurate (I hope) shot, then back it up with +p loads. I pray to God that I never have to find out if I am right about this.

rockbilly · « **Reply #2 on:** October 14, 2004, 07:07:31 PM »

Years ago we use to load 158gr wadcutters in .38/357 for shooting pigs. The bullets we used were hollow base, my friend found a method of attaching a gas check to the normal business end and then loading them upside down. It was like a big hollow point, and did massive amounts of damage to a pig. I quit using them because it wasted too much meat. I have often though about them for self or home defense. If they worked on a man like the did on a pig that would be the answer. They were accurate, and expanded to almost a .50 cal size when they hit.

Course those pigs were not wearing a jacket, so I can't say what they might do to a man with clothes on, but if ya caught him in your bed room in his birthday suit you could sure put a hurting on his naked butt.

twodollarpistol · « **Reply #3 on:** October 15, 2004, 12:32:03 AM »

Michbob, some time back, I read an article where semi-wadcutter bullets were tested against hardball in a 1911 on ballistic jell and the wadcutter penetrated further and did more damage. Larger wound channel. Go figure. The author was in favor of using these semi-wadcutters at standard velocity for self defense. With a hard alloy and gas checks they can even be loaded hotter. I use them in a 2" .38 that I sometimes carry. They are very accurate in my gun. I have shot full wadcutters for target but I would think the lighter weight of the hollow base wadcutter would reduce penetration. These are made for punching holes in paper. Not for self defense. A few years ago I picked up some custom reloads at a gun show that were loaded as Rockbilly described. Hollow base up. Looked awesome and was marketed as self defense loads. Never got them to shoot straight out of anything I tried them in further than about 5 feet. That light weight hollow base just couldnt stay ahead of the heaver solid nose and they would begin to tumble almost immediately trying to swap ends. This in itself would not be so bad if it would just go in a straight line. Just wont do it. Try throwing the cap off of a can of spray paint. Same configuration as a hollow base wadcutter. Ill bet you cant throw it far or accurate. They are not made to fly in reverse. J M H O but I would stick to a bullet configuration that was designed for self defense and leave the paper punchers at the range.

Mikey · « **Reply #4 on:** October 15, 2004, 02:44:46 AM »

Michbob - years ago when we were serving as personal bodyguards for the UnderSecretary of State for Latin American Affairs we found that the only loads available to us at the time were handloads wadcutters. They were preferred over the fmj 38 spls. We used to load those wadcutters base up and over either 6.5 of Unique or 12 of 2400 and get better than 1200'/sec. I can tell you from personal experience that the loads worked very well. The effect of a flat nosed bullet at that velocity is quite noticeable.

The only problem you have to contend with is leading in your barrel if your slugs are soft. Now, if I could just find a 200 gn wadcutter for the 38/357, that might be a really impressive defense load. HTH. Mikey.

Dusty Miller · « **Reply #5 on:** October 15, 2004, 09:23:34 AM »

I've heard this theory pretty well trashed in the past but that was before the advent of LBT molds that produced flat nosed cast bullets. Those bullets have quite a reputation for stopping game and it is far from clear to me why the same thing wouldn't apply in a self-defense round. After all, a .45" hole that PENETRATES to the vitals ain't nuth'n to sniff at.

Patriot_1776 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 15, 2004, 01:03:40 PM »

Quote

I've heard this theory pretty well trashed in the past but that was before the advent of LBT molds that produced flat nosed cast bullets. Those bullets have quite a reputation for stopping game and it is far from clear to me why the same thing wouldn't apply in a self-defense round. After all, a .45" hole that PENETRATES to the vitals ain't nuth'n to sniff at.

I had the same idea in mind. Although, I don't know whether it would expand like a swaged bullet; but my thing would be more like a 200gr. cast SWC. With something like that, going fast w/a really small beveled base and a large driving nose, it would no doubt tumble readily once it got into the soft tissue. Also, there is the 45cal. 255gr. cast SWCs that would produce some pretty effective results too. :shock: Hope I never have to use such force upon anyone; provided they don't necessitate its use by armed or violent intrusion + threatened bodily injury to my family or myself. Patriot

michbob · « **Reply #7 on:** October 17, 2004, 08:42:39 AM »

I was mostly talking about revolver rounds, but hey, why not.

I've personally tried the reversed wadcutter bit to a limited extent, and never saw any EVIDENT tumbling out to about 25 yards. Still, I'm more inclined to test out right-way around wadcutters. With wadcutters weighing about 148 gr. in .38, they aren't overly light bullets. I believe I'll try boosting the FPS's to see if I get lots of leading. More later.

Michbob

Savage · « **Reply #8 on:** October 18, 2004, 04:19:26 AM »

Back in the 70s, I loaded a few hundred inverted hollow base wadcutters for use in my 38 snubbies. Tumbling was evident beyond 15yds or so out of all my snubbies. I did some wetpack testing with rather disappointing results. What I got was a deformed, not an expanded bullet, with very limited penetration. The wadcutters penetrated better, and did more damage to the wetpack when correctly loaded in the case. I still like wadcutters in the 2" barrel revolvers, at least it cuts a full caliber hole.
Savage

Mohawk · « **Reply #9 on:** October 19, 2004, 07:50:54 PM »

I still carry a 158gr. SWC .38 loaded to 800fps for duty in my model 19 Smith. I wouldn't mind carrying the full wadcutters but they are too expensive and I'm cheap. I learned a long time ago to NOT listen to persons promoting bullets when it comes to what I choose to carry. I know over half the planet probably disagrees with me but I think the whole hollow-point thing with pistol bullets are hype. Trying to make a pistol bullet make rifle bullet damage is a joke. They may do a little more damage(I've seen them do less) than a semi-wadcutter but will this save your life. I don't trust it to save mine. Put a projectile through the aorta, vena cava, heart(works sometimes), or any other major atery and you'll do well. I just think it is funny how some of our world's ballistic experts try to scare people into using their design of bullets. I still remember the report where the guy was missing exactly half his brain due a shotgun blast and could still recite the alphabet. And how a 98gr. .32 Long RN bullet punctured an artery of another bad guy and it was lights out. In short, wadcutters are fine.

rockbilly · « **Reply #10 on:** October 22, 2004, 04:28:47 PM »

In my post above I said wadcutters, what my friend was loading was a 158gr SWC. If I remember correctly, it was over 3 gr of BE powder. I know they had a gas check on the inverted end. I shot them in a model 27 S&W, 4 inch barrel, and I don't remember having problems with them tumbling. In louisiana, we used dogs to hunt pigs, most shots were probably 25-30 yards maximum.

I'm sure there are better loads today, but the late 50s, early 60s you didn't have a lot of choice in bullets. We had access to all the once fired military brass we wanted and this was likely the cheapest load we could produce. Just didn't have the money to invest in anything better.

Dusty Miller · « **Reply #11 on:** October 24, 2004, 06:35:54 PM »

I think anybody with any sense would opt for penetration over expansion. If you get the penetration then any expansion you get is just frosting on the cake. Your best bet for getting BOTH is to push a heavy bullet at relatively high velocity. I think that's the case for using the 44 mag. as a defense gun. However, there ain't no guarantees out there, except for the undeniable fact that MURPHY is going to show us just when you don't need him most!

rockbilly · « **Reply #12 on:** October 28, 2004, 03:04:36 PM »

I know what you are talking about Dusty.....Old Murphy has shown up and urinated in my mess kit more times than I care to remember.

papajohn428 · « **Reply #13 on:** October 28, 2004, 11:51:15 PM »

Given the advances in bullet designs of the last twenty years, I'll add this: You COULD use a wadcutter bullet for defense, but why, when there are so many better choices? I tried the inverted wadcutter idea twenty years ago, it was excellent in wetpack at high velocity, but leading became a problem pretty quick. Speer's new 135-Gold Dot bullet is available as a component bullet, which eliminates the leading problem. If you feel okay carrying handloads for defense, go for it. Not me! There are a lot of good choices in defensive ammo, but there is still no magic bullet. Placement still counts more than caliber, bullet design or velocity!

Papajohn

Savage · « **Reply #14 on:** October 29, 2004, 02:42:26 AM »

Weight + velocity= penetration. Expansion is meaningless without penetration. As good as the modern bullet designs are, they are not 100% reliable 100% of the time.
Savage

Patriot_1776 · « **Reply #15 on:** October 29, 2004, 07:08:35 AM »

Quote

Weight + velocity= penetration. Expansion is meaningless without penetration.

That is true, but apply that to any situation, and the 454 Casull is probably the best choice. But there is always the problem of over-penetration. That is why so much research goes to a bullet that offers both, sufficient penetration, and sufficient expansion. Niether is good without the other, you might say. So my preference for a home/self defense round would be the 45ACP combined with a 230gr. Gold Dot. That would offer excellent penetraton because of the weight (and moderate speed) + bullet design, and good expansion, because of the huge nose cavity. I also like that combo, because I wouldn't want a round that is supersonic; that is what would hurt your hearing more than a sub-sonic round. But if the perp is wearing smuggled body armor, then you'd better be a fast and accurate shooter. Several rounds pelting him would definitely knock him sensless, and possibly off his feet, giving you an advantage. I suppose the better thing to do, is with an 8-rd magazine load four HPs, and four FMJs just in case. Or having someone with a shotgun for backup would be helpful.

Quote

As good as the modern bullet designs are, they are not 100% reliable 100% of the time.

Sad as it sounds, there is no magic bullet that would offer 100% of everything. But they can come mighty close. That is the purpose of ballistics testing, to find a proper combination of those properties, and make them as reliable as possible. The only thing the shooter is able to control, is time of ignition and the general direction of the bullet. Once it is fired, its all up to bullet design, integrity, and consistency to do the rest. Unless.....? Patriot

Savage · « **Reply #16 on:** October 29, 2004, 02:03:27 PM »

Bottom line:
Use what you have confidence in. Just remember two holes are better than one. In a shooting, you'd best be concerned with the rounds that miss than the pass thrus.
Savage

Doc TH · « **Reply #17 on:** October 29, 2004, 05:37:30 PM »

Jim Cirillo, who worked the NYPD stakeout squad wrote that he experimented with bullet designs to try to improve terminal ballistics in .38 spcl. (against NYPD reg's I believe). He said he consistently got better penetration and "stopping" when he used a sharp-edged slug, kind of like a Schwarzenneger version of a wadcutter. Of course, this may simply be personal opinion, BS, etc. But probably as reliable as the Marshall-Sanow "stopping power" statistics, which in my opinion are even purer BS.

Mohawk · « **Reply #18 on:** October 31, 2004, 04:35:49 AM »

Very well put, Doc TH. Very well put.

Vern Humphrey · « **Reply #19 on:** December 01, 2004, 06:32:50 AM »

My first tour in Vietnam, as an adviser, I carried a Colt Model 357, 6" barrel. I brought handloads with me -- hollowbase wadcutters loaded as hot as I dared. I served two customers, and neither one asked for his money back.

In my Colt Detective Special, I like a solid wadcutter, loaded to +P standards (just over 13 grains of H4227 with the 148 grain wadcutter.) It shoots well enough -- as well as I can shoot a snubby -- and I want penetration, not expansion. I figure you give up enough with a snubbie, and if you opt for expansion, you're liable to either not get it, or not get the penetration.

DWARREN123 · « **Reply #20 on:** December 02, 2004, 03:22:32 AM »

For self defense I alternate the types of rounds, one is bound to hurt.

Mikey · « **Reply #21 on:** December 02, 2004, 03:32:43 AM »

Hey Vern - sounds like you and I got mixed up in the same types of activities back then. I recall the Python with azz-end up wadcutters to be popular back then- and much more effective than those 130 gn ball 38 military loads.

If your Detective Special (and I like that particular model Colt revolver) shoots your +P wadcutters well, you should try the 200 gn swc over 3.8 of WW231 - it shoots at the same pressure level as the wadcutter loads and less than the 158 gn rn loads, but hits like a concrete block. And, they are accurate. Tested some in a buddy's Diamondback which grouped one hole at 25 yds. Had a old timer there who said he had never seen a snub-nose shoot that accurately - guess he didn't get around much (lol). HTH. Mikey.

Mohawk · « **Reply #22 on:** December 05, 2004, 11:31:06 AM »

Hey Mikey, my partner carried a Colt SAA in .45 Colt during the war with inverted wadcutters. Said they were like hitting them with an iron pot-bellied stove lid.

Vern Humphrey · « **Reply #23 on:** December 05, 2004, 12:17:13 PM »

Quote from: Mikey

Hey Vern - sounds like you and I got mixed up in the same types of activities back then. I recall the Python with azz-end up wadcutters to be popular back then- and much more effective than those 130 gn ball 38 military loads.

If your Detective Special (and I like that particular model Colt revolver) shoots your +P wadcutters well, you should try the 200 gn swc over 3.8 of WW231 - it shoots at the same pressure level as the wadcutter loads and less than the 158 gn rn loads, but hits like a concrete block. And, they are accurate. Tested some in a buddy's Diamondback which grouped one hole at 25 yds. Had a old timer there who said he had never seen a snub-nose shoot that accurately - guess he didn't get around much (lol). HTH. Mikey.

I have no quarrel with the reversed hollowpoint -- I guess I hadn't read the right experts, and didn't know it shouldn't work. :grin:

My Detective Special shoots very well -- there's a rock about a foot square, about 100 yards from my porch, with lead splashes all over it.