Yes, I also believe that's a bit much for one poll. :D But I'm feeling lazy toward a 3rd separate poll. Anyways, it is what it is, LOL. In the end I decided to add a separate bullet type section for Woods Defense. For hunting, in regard to bullet types, just vote as you see fit between both game animal sizes (being that we can all vote a total of 6 times, two votes could be used for that section).
The idea behind this poll is what you like loaded in your 10mm for Hunting and/or Woods Defense, as the individual prefers to vote. Every voter is allowed up to 6 total votes. No single item can be voted for more than once. Votes by each individual can be adjusted for future time accuracy as your mind may change over time, and this poll has no expiration date.
Sorry if I missed a bullet type or weight you prefer. Certainly feel free to note them below in a post.
Even with this poll being overly extensive for a single poll I think it will work out fairly well. Kind of multiple polls all rolled into one, but also only having to look in one place for all of it. :o
I am pretty straightforward.
I load this
(http://fellingfamily.net/images/MM_205_FRN.jpg)
205 gr WFN, cast of Isotope lead (95/2/3 Pb/Sn/Sb) water dropped and lubed with felix lube. It goes in new Starline brass over 12.5 grains of AA#9 with a CCI 300 primer. This should be good for 1200 fps. I bought a Chrony a few weekends ago and hope to test that soon.
I have purchased some longshot, and will be working on getting this bullet to 1300+ fps out of my 5" 1911 and 4.75" Witness Match.
I don't hunt. I do hike and camp some in the Rockies. This is my last ditch bear repellant.
I mostly carry the Hornady 200XTP's...however these work well too...
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/IMG_0386.jpg)
I like a 200 gr WFNGC hardcast for walking around in the Idaho wilderness near where I live - handloaded to a little over 1200 fps from my G20. 200 grain XTPs are a distant second with 180 grain XTPs as a good do-it-all offering.
Quote from: Taterhead on June 29 2012 11:30:12 PM MDT
I like a 200 gr WFNGC hardcast for walking around in the Idaho wilderness near where I live - handloaded to a little over 1200 fps from my G20. 200 grain XTPs are a distant second with 180 grain XTPs as a good do-it-all offering.
Tater,
Why the dislike of the 200 XTP?
I see your in Idaho so bears are a likely sighting. I know a hard cast will out penetrate the XTP 10 times outta 9 but is that your only reason?
I use allot of WFN hard cast slugs from my 45 Colt in 300&325 gr. but haven't found one for the 10mm that looks to reliably feed.
CW
Quote from: cwlongshot on July 02 2012 05:53:32 AM MDT
Quote from: Taterhead on June 29 2012 11:30:12 PM MDT
I like a 200 gr WFNGC hardcast for walking around in the Idaho wilderness near where I live - handloaded to a little over 1200 fps from my G20. 200 grain XTPs are a distant second with 180 grain XTPs as a good do-it-all offering.
Tater,
Why the dislike of the 200 XTP?
I see your in Idaho so bears are a likely sighting. I know a hard cast will out penetrate the XTP 10 times outta 9 but is that your only reason?
I use allot of WFN hard cast slugs from my 45 Colt in 300&325 gr. but haven't found one for the 10mm that looks to reliably feed.
CW
Hi CW,
I do not dislike the XTPs. I actually like them. But I really like what I see when I shoot stuff with the wide flat nosed hardcast bullets. They put a big deep hole in things. The XTPs work well too, and they usually mushroom. After shooting various odds and ends side-by-side, the WFNGC seems to have a nastier impact plus penetration that doesn't stop.
Feeding can certainly be an issue in an autoloader with that wide flat nose. I have not had a single issue though in my G20 chamber.
Quote from: Taterhead on July 02 2012 10:19:24 PM MDT
Quote from: cwlongshot on July 02 2012 05:53:32 AM MDT
Quote from: Taterhead on June 29 2012 11:30:12 PM MDT
I like a 200 gr WFNGC hardcast for walking around in the Idaho wilderness near where I live - handloaded to a little over 1200 fps from my G20. 200 grain XTPs are a distant second with 180 grain XTPs as a good do-it-all offering.
Tater,
Why the dislike of the 200 XTP?
I see your in Idaho so bears are a likely sighting. I know a hard cast will out penetrate the XTP 10 times outta 9 but is that your only reason?
I use allot of WFN hard cast slugs from my 45 Colt in 300&325 gr. but haven't found one for the 10mm that looks to reliably feed.
CW
Hi CW,
I do not dislike the XTPs. I actually like them. But I really like what I see when I shoot stuff with the wide flat nosed hardcast bullets. They put a big deep hole in things. The XTPs work well too, and they usually mushroom. After shooting various odds and ends side-by-side, the WFNGC seems to have a nastier impact plus penetration that doesn't stop.
Feeding can certainly be an issue in an autoloader with that wide flat nose. I have not had a single issue though in my G20 chamber.
That's good to hear!! As I said I also like a WFN but was worried about reliable feeding. I have not had the G20 that long and only got the KKM barrel in May. I would like to try some WFN bullets.
Do you cast your own? If so what mold? If buying them, what are you using?
Thanks for the comments!
CW
It sounds like a custom mold from Mountain Molds.
Quote from: cwlongshot on July 03 2012 05:53:50 AM MDT
Quote from: Taterhead on July 02 2012 10:19:24 PM MDT
Quote from: cwlongshot on July 02 2012 05:53:32 AM MDT
Quote from: Taterhead on June 29 2012 11:30:12 PM MDT
I like a 200 gr WFNGC hardcast for walking around in the Idaho wilderness near where I live - handloaded to a little over 1200 fps from my G20. 200 grain XTPs are a distant second with 180 grain XTPs as a good do-it-all offering.
Tater,
Why the dislike of the 200 XTP?
I see your in Idaho so bears are a likely sighting. I know a hard cast will out penetrate the XTP 10 times outta 9 but is that your only reason?
I use allot of WFN hard cast slugs from my 45 Colt in 300&325 gr. but haven't found one for the 10mm that looks to reliably feed.
CW
Hi CW,
I do not dislike the XTPs. I actually like them. But I really like what I see when I shoot stuff with the wide flat nosed hardcast bullets. They put a big deep hole in things. The XTPs work well too, and they usually mushroom. After shooting various odds and ends side-by-side, the WFNGC seems to have a nastier impact plus penetration that doesn't stop.
Feeding can certainly be an issue in an autoloader with that wide flat nose. I have not had a single issue though in my G20 chamber.
That's good to hear!! As I said I also like a WFN but was worried about reliable feeding. I have not had the G20 that long and only got the KKM barrel in May. I would like to try some WFN bullets.
Do you cast your own? If so what mold? If buying them, what are you using?
Thanks for the comments!
CW
I have been loading the Double Tap 200 gr WFNGC component. Some folks have reported feeding issues in KKM barrels with that profile. I have considered switching to the Beartooth bullut because it is said to be of better quality. Mike McNett said in an email to me that the DT bullet is close to identical to the Beartooth. It has been easier to order through DT so I have not made the switch.
Quote
Hi CW,
I do not dislike the XTPs. I actually like them. But I really like what I see when I shoot stuff with the wide flat nosed hardcast bullets. They put a big deep hole in things. The XTPs work well too, and they usually mushroom. After shooting various odds and ends side-by-side, the WFNGC seems to have a nastier impact plus penetration that doesn't stop.
Feeding can certainly be an issue in an autoloader with that wide flat nose. I have not had a single issue though in my G20 chamber.
This.
Quote from: Taterhead on July 03 2012 07:23:37 PM MDT
Quote from: cwlongshot on July 03 2012 05:53:50 AM MDT
Quote from: Taterhead on July 02 2012 10:19:24 PM MDT
Quote from: cwlongshot on July 02 2012 05:53:32 AM MDT
Quote from: Taterhead on June 29 2012 11:30:12 PM MDT
I like a 200 gr WFNGC hardcast for walking around in the Idaho wilderness near where I live - handloaded to a little over 1200 fps from my G20. 200 grain XTPs are a distant second with 180 grain XTPs as a good do-it-all offering.
Tater,
Why the dislike of the 200 XTP?
I see your in Idaho so bears are a likely sighting. I know a hard cast will out penetrate the XTP 10 times outta 9 but is that your only reason?
I use allot of WFN hard cast slugs from my 45 Colt in 300&325 gr. but haven't found one for the 10mm that looks to reliably feed.
CW
Hi CW,
I do not dislike the XTPs. I actually like them. But I really like what I see when I shoot stuff with the wide flat nosed hardcast bullets. They put a big deep hole in things. The XTPs work well too, and they usually mushroom. After shooting various odds and ends side-by-side, the WFNGC seems to have a nastier impact plus penetration that doesn't stop.
Feeding can certainly be an issue in an autoloader with that wide flat nose. I have not had a single issue though in my G20 chamber.
That's good to hear!! As I said I also like a WFN but was worried about reliable feeding. I have not had the G20 that long and only got the KKM barrel in May. I would like to try some WFN bullets.
Do you cast your own? If so what mold? If buying them, what are you using?
Thanks for the comments!
CW
I have been loading the Double Tap 200 gr WFNGC component. Some folks have reported feeding issues in KKM barrels with that profile. I have considered switching to the Beartooth bullut because it is said to be of better quality. Mike McNett said in an email to me that the DT bullet is close to identical to the Beartooth. It has been easier to order through DT so I have not made the switch.
Tel me more about these bullets... Do you have contact info or a link \to them?
CW
Relatively wide variance in likeability the way I'm seeing the results so far. It will be interesting to see how things change with a lot more votes.
Quote from: cwlongshot on July 06 2012 06:09:52 PM MDT
Quote from: Taterhead on July 03 2012 07:23:37 PM MDT
Quote from: cwlongshot on July 03 2012 05:53:50 AM MDT
Quote from: Taterhead on July 02 2012 10:19:24 PM MDT
Quote from: cwlongshot on July 02 2012 05:53:32 AM MDT
Quote from: Taterhead on June 29 2012 11:30:12 PM MDT
I like a 200 gr WFNGC hardcast for walking around in the Idaho wilderness near where I live - handloaded to a little over 1200 fps from my G20. 200 grain XTPs are a distant second with 180 grain XTPs as a good do-it-all offering.
Tater,
Why the dislike of the 200 XTP?
I see your in Idaho so bears are a likely sighting. I know a hard cast will out penetrate the XTP 10 times outta 9 but is that your only reason?
I use allot of WFN hard cast slugs from my 45 Colt in 300&325 gr. but haven't found one for the 10mm that looks to reliably feed.
CW
Hi CW,
I do not dislike the XTPs. I actually like them. But I really like what I see when I shoot stuff with the wide flat nosed hardcast bullets. They put a big deep hole in things. The XTPs work well too, and they usually mushroom. After shooting various odds and ends side-by-side, the WFNGC seems to have a nastier impact plus penetration that doesn't stop.
Feeding can certainly be an issue in an autoloader with that wide flat nose. I have not had a single issue though in my G20 chamber.
That's good to hear!! As I said I also like a WFN but was worried about reliable feeding. I have not had the G20 that long and only got the KKM barrel in May. I would like to try some WFN bullets.
Do you cast your own? If so what mold? If buying them, what are you using?
Thanks for the comments!
CW
I have been loading the Double Tap 200 gr WFNGC component. Some folks have reported feeding issues in KKM barrels with that profile. I have considered switching to the Beartooth bullut because it is said to be of better quality. Mike McNett said in an email to me that the DT bullet is close to identical to the Beartooth. It has been easier to order through DT so I have not made the switch.
Tel me more about these bullets... Do you have contact info or a link \to them?
CW
Here you go CW, a link to the website:
http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=77&products_id=269&osCsid=p8vu1ancr590f52rr20knngab3
Double Tap used to load the Beartooth version before "insourcing" bullet casting. They are very close to this bullet:
http://beartoothbullets.com/bulletselect/index.htm
Navigate to the 40 cal bullet via the list on the left-hand side of the screen.
Hope that helps.
Any chance some of the newer members would be interested in adding to the poll results?
for practice, i load a cast 175 Gr Lee TL bullet, same as i run in 40.
The 180 XTP is my carry load, and the 200 gr XTP is my woods/survival/SHTF/EOTWAWKI load. I'd be fine with the 200 XTP for about anything, though it migh be overkill for urban carry. god thing i'm not an urbanite.
I'd REALLY like to get a quality steel mold, multi cavity, for a 200 gr 10mm bullet for both a general purpose/practice load for all the mixed brass i have. 1-2K of that loaded up with a charge of blue dot would make me happy.
Quote from: Maine1 on March 14 2013 01:21:08 AM MDT
I'd REALLY like to get a quality steel mold, multi cavity, for a 200 gr 10mm bullet for both a general purpose/practice load for all the mixed brass i have. 1-2K of that loaded up with a charge of blue dot would make me happy.
http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=40-200C-D.png
You can get this in a 2 or 3 cavity iron mold from Accurate. If you switch to aluminum, they offer a 5 cavity mold.
Quote from: sqlbullet on March 14 2013 07:36:40 AM MDT
Quote from: Maine1 on March 14 2013 01:21:08 AM MDT
I'd REALLY like to get a quality steel mold, multi cavity, for a 200 gr 10mm bullet for both a general purpose/practice load for all the mixed brass i have. 1-2K of that loaded up with a charge of blue dot would make me happy.
http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=40-200C-D.png
You can get this in a 2 or 3 cavity iron mold from Accurate. If you switch to aluminum, they offer a 5 cavity mold.
I lucked into a older Lyman 200g TC mold. It works well but what I really want a WFNGC bullet. I have some on order with Doubletap to try. Generally speaking, bullet molds are costly new. I was hoping to find used. IF I get a WFN ill put my Lyman up for sale.
I don't "need" a GC bullet, but its nice to leave my options open and I have yet to see any negatives with one. (Short of the costs and labor while sizing to instal them)
CW
Here is a picture of the bullets I have moulds for.
1) Lee 170 TC - 40SW
2) Accurate # 190B- LFNGC : 190 gr- SOLD this 1
3) Accurate # 200C - LFNPB : 200 gr- go to bullet for my 10's
4) MM - 215 gr WFNGC- STI 10 loves this one. I am going to shoot this in my new Kimber Target II this weekend.
Sean
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x150/475480/10MMboolits003.jpg)
I would be happy with any of the three on the right. The one on the left is nearly identical to my 200g TC Lyman bullet. I do espically like that 215g all the way to the right!!
Works just fine, on paper... ;)
Nice bullets 475/480! Thanks for the picture!!! ;)
CW
The second from the right is the accurate mold I would suggest. No gas check needed. if you get leading in your 10mm with this bullet, check you fit and alloy/lube and 99% of the time you can correct it.
Sean was kind enough to send me a few of these in exchange for some lead. Compared to my Mountain MOld 205 grain their is very little different. Mine has more of a crimp groove than a lube groove up top, and weighs a smidge more, but same lenght, same metplat and same ogive. I got mine in trade from a guy who used it for 38-40, hence the crimp groove.
The gas check is to protect the base of the bullet and its important and delicate bottom edge.
It's ability or inability to do anything to/for leading is a side effect.
To move the bullet faster, more and hotter powders are needed, these powders melt the bullets base to a point accuracy suffers. That's why I prefer a gas check
Also just because a mold is cut for a gas check dosent necessitate ones use. I have shot many a GC bullet at low plinking velocities with good accuracy and zero negative effect. I do t expect thy would do as well as a plain base as velocity increases.
CW
I cast lots of 240 gr 44 slugs for friends who load and fire them with and without gas checks.
For my needs I can't tell the difference in accuracy in my hands between gas checked and non-gas checked 10mm. Not saying there isn't one, just that it is pearls before swine in my handgun shooting. I honestly think that is true for the vast majority of shooting, hence my statement regarding to it's application in leading.
In my rifles I do see a difference in accuracy and as a result I gas check all my .311 (30-06, 30 carbine, 308, 300 win mag) and .27X (6.5 Carcano, 6.8SPC, 270 Win) rifle bullets.
Quote from: cwlongshot on March 15 2013 09:23:33 AM MDTTo move the bullet faster, more and hotter powders are needed, these powders melt the bullets base to a point accuracy suffers. That's why I prefer a gas check
CW
I don't believe any common handgun load (souped up or not) is capable of melting a bullets base before said bullet leaves the barrel. Is there any proof that that occurs?
Quote from: REDLINE on March 15 2013 12:34:56 PM MDT
Quote from: cwlongshot on March 15 2013 09:23:33 AM MDTTo move the bullet faster, more and hotter powders are needed, these powders melt the bullets base to a point accuracy suffers. That's why I prefer a gas check
CW
I don't believe any common handgun load (souped up or not) is capable of melting a bullets base before said bullet leaves the barrel. Is there any proof that that occurs?
Leading, among other evidence is the proof. This is also the reason many indoor shooting ranges prohibit cast lead bullets. Lead vapor/smoke is caused by the burned/melted bullet base and bearing surface (bypass gas). I've recovered many magnum-grade bullets, including 10mm, and the bullet bases show obvious "melting", consistent with hotter powders and heavier charges. Many will have the powder residue granules embedded in the base, as well as craters, as evidence of melting.
Interesting. It seems weird to me that lead could begin to melt in a few milliseconds or less unless temperature was at an insane level. I guess if it only takes a hair over 620 degrees F to melt lead, it isn't so much of a stretch, especially if the gun is already warmed up from steady shooting.
There can be erosion of alloy bullet base from extreme pressures if the fit is poor, powder gases & friction does also induce heat but the bullet is a good heat sink. Rifling type and condition can affect the bullet bore seal and with respect to revolvers cylinder throats will impact things also. Most of what you see as smoke is lube being burned or blown pass the bullet bore seal!
Most lead in the air contamination is from primers which contain lead compounds in their mixture and decomposition during firing process.
Yes, gas checks can help the erosion problem for bullets being driven faster by higher pressure applications, proper fit of plain base bullets will also provide a better seal. You need to find a balance of proper fit, powders, pressure and velocity for them to work optimally for your barrel and rifling or cylinder (truing cone size can be problematic) and barrel.
Lead and lead alloy projectiles have been used for many years with great results in rifle, pistol shotgun and canons.
If I remember correctly . Veral Smith's book on bullet casting SHOWED many instances of pressure/gases burning the base of plain base bullets.
Sean
Shotshell wads melt at 250 degrees F. Never noticed any melting on them despite being exposed for a much longer time in 18" + barrels.
I haven't done extensive testing, but in my experience I don't have leading if the bullets fit. This makes me think any melting is by plasma cutting from gas blow by when bullets don't fit. Shotgun wads are very soft and malleable, and fully seal the bore, hence no plasma cutting.
Makes me wonder what all the variables are for melting lead based bullets during firing, and to what extents.