zhunter Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 OK, I have my Dillon 650 on the way! I am going to shoot/load 230 jacketed bullets, as I don't want the extra cleaning and my girlfriend is going to shoot too, so I don't want her to have to deal with the smoke factor. What are the advantages of SWC as opposed to RN? Assuming the gun will feed both equally well I am going to use: W231 Winchester brass CCI primers I hope that this thread is not redundant. I did a search, but did not find the answers I was looking for. Thanks in advance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hopalong Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 zhunter, Either should work well... The biggest thing is how well your gun(s) like them. On the Semi wad cutters make sure the shoulder of the bullet is outside of the case, on .45 ACP it is just slightly out if you go with Factory Length. I myself use both, the Semi wad cutters really cut a nice pretty hole though. Hope that helps. Hopalong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted January 1, 2005 Author Share Posted January 1, 2005 So, SWC are mainly for the larger holes then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 Cleaner holes, less measuring to see if you made the "A" hit. (Or no-shoot.) the differences realy come down to two things: whcih do you like, and which does the gun like? Some guns cannot stand fmj/swc bullets. Others won't shoot fmj/rn very accurately. And some shooters have definite preferences about recoil feel. Trhy tem both and see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted January 1, 2005 Author Share Posted January 1, 2005 OK, I can see for scoring it would be a lot better, nothing to ralely decide, and there is a nice round hole, not so much of a tear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted January 1, 2005 Author Share Posted January 1, 2005 What is a good OAL for a 230 gr SWC? I might try some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grumpy_m Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 Zhunter, Hopalong is correct in not stating an exact OAL for the SWC as it will depend on the configuration of the bullet. What is important is to have the shoulder of the bullet exposed above the case. Some of the plated SWC's have a more rounded shoulder than a cast SWC so make sure you are actually crimping the case on the 'flat' portion of the bullet. If the SWC is inserted too far in, you may not get a good crimp and you can experience the bullet being pushed in when it is being chambered (not good). On the other end if it is too far out it may not chamber properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Run n Gun Posted January 1, 2005 Share Posted January 1, 2005 What is a good OAL for a 230 gr SWC? I might try some. H&G #68 profile, 200 grain, (VERY common, Laser-Cast etc) make your OAL 1.250" to start and then you can play with it to see what works best. Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 2, 2005 Share Posted January 2, 2005 The classic OAL for a 230-gr. RN or 200-gr. LSWC is 1.250" with a deviation of .01" being acceptable. Basically, anywhere between 1.240" and 1.260" and you're golden. Though myself I do shoot (pun intended) for 1.250" exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmccrock Posted January 2, 2005 Share Posted January 2, 2005 zhunter, Have you shot SWC from the gun? If not, my suggestion would be to shoot some before trying to load them. Like you said, "Assuming the gun will feed both equally well". It was easier for me to get RN to run in my 1911-type guns. Almost any length from 1.240-1.260. The SWC were more picky, to the point that I run RN only. I may try SWC again one day. The only one I got to work before was the Remington 185gr match (jacketed SWC). Those are spendy. The guns have had much work done since then, so it may be worth a shot (pardon the expression). Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Whether or not a gun will feed LSWCs well is very much a matter of the individual gun. Personally I put about 15,000 rounds of Laser-Cast 200-gr. LSWCs through my Wilson .45 without a single problem. YMMV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 When I was talking with Bill Wilson, about ammo for the 1911, concerning the Oregon Trails 200 lswc, while writing my book (is that a name-dropping record?) he remarked that in his opinion, the lead H&G 68 bullet was actually more reliable in feeding than 230 hardball. Still the gun decides. You go with what it likes and shoots accurately, or you find a gunsmith who can correct it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFD Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 I've heard the #68 was supposed to feed as well or better than a RN bullet (I eard it from the same source), but it isn't true for my Kimber L-10 gun or any of the 4 other 1911s I've used in this division. I'm not ignoring the possibility that my CMC 8 and 10 round mags may be the problem, but RN feeds perfectly and that's what I'm looking for. I haven't found that not having a nice clean hole causes any problems. My SWC experiments always ended up the same. The gun would function perfectly in practice, no matter how many rounds were fired, but at a match I'd have at least one FTF. Some of the oldsters at the club advised me to stop screwing around with SWCs and stick to RN bullets unless I like feeding problems. I took their advice and the Kimber has been running for a couple of years now without a bobble with my cast 220 grain LRN bullets. The gun will also run well with the Rainier 230 JHP, but it was a minor pain to get the OAL right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Which is strange, for during the years 1977 to the late 1980's, the 200 lswc H&G 68 was The bullet used by competitors. I know from personal experience, having put several literal tons of such bullets downrange through a slew of 1911s. And everyone else then did, too. But JFD proves my point: you go with what the gun likes, or you find a gunsmith who can correct its tastes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmccrock Posted January 3, 2005 Share Posted January 3, 2005 Is there an H&G 68 profile in jacketed? Like the starter of this thread, I prefer jacketed (or in my case, plated). Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD45 Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I'm in the process of switching my Square Deal over to load 230gr.cast RN. While loading a test batch on the single-stage I was surprised at how difficult they were to seat straight(even after I installed the correct seater punch). I have been loading 200gr.SWCs so long I can seat them straight with my eyes closed. I'll soon see if they are easier on the Dillon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFD Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I remember reading articles from the same period detailing competitor's loads and invariably they were shooting the 200 SWC. It's still mildly irritating that this very accurate bullet has never really liked my 1911s, or my mags. At any rate, it's so much easier to concentrate on shooting when the gun runs 100% and still hits where I'm aiming. Patrick Sweeney is so correct that you need to go with what the gun wants or have a gunsmith change it's mind. During the period when I was fighting malfunctions, any progress in my performance was accidental. Malfunctions are the last thing any shooter needs, especially someone new to USPSA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Run n Gun Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 When I was talking with Bill Wilson, about ammo for the 1911, concerning the Oregon Trails 200 lswc, while writing my book (is that a name-dropping record?) he remarked that in his opinion, the lead H&G 68 bullet was actually more reliable in feeding than 230 hardball.Still the gun decides. You go with what it likes and shoots accurately, or you find a gunsmith who can correct it. I had a long conversation with John Paul (JP) in which he said the same thing. Like you, I’ve sent thousands and thousands of them down range completely without incident in MY Kimber. Imccrock, I don’t know, but I DO know that West Coasts 200 plated SWC is NOT the same. I went through a thousand of them trying many many tricks to get them to run… and failed. If you find one, please let me know. Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
45 ACP Posted January 5, 2005 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Is there an H&G 68 profile in jacketed? Like the starter of this thread, I prefer jacketed (or in my case, plated).Lee Berry's Mfg. 200gr plated SWC in .45 ACP are H&G 68 profile. I know their website doesn't tell you this, but I assure you it is the case. The printed literature does indicate "H&G cone nose style" profile. They feed and work GREAT in my 1911s.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Run n Gun Posted January 5, 2005 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Berry's Mfg. 200gr plated SWC in .45 ACP are H&G 68 profile. I know their website doesn't tell you this, but I assure you it is the case. The printed literature does indicate "H&G cone nose style" profile.They feed and work GREAT in my 1911s.... Cool! Thanks, I'll give 'em a try!! Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now