200 vs 220 hardcast [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : 200 vs 220 hardcast


ctious
06-04-2012, 21:08
I am still torn on the two. Please guys let me know what way to go.

Rimrock for 220 gr

Or

Bluetooth 200 gr.

For the money the 220s are the way to go. Has anyone shot anything with them?

Yondering
06-04-2012, 21:44
That truncated cone 220gr bullet design takes up a lot of case capacity, in a bullet weight where case capacity is already at a premium.

I'd go for the 200gr personally, out of those two bullets.

Meathead9
06-04-2012, 22:18
I like the Bear Tooth 200gr WFNGC's. I have 2 nice loads for that bullet, one @ 1250fps & one @ 1360fps (6" G20LS).

ctious
06-04-2012, 22:33
Just came across freindswoodsbullets they look nice the price is great. Hardness of 18. What u guys think? They have a 180 that looks good and the 220. Wish they had a 200.

Jitterbug
06-05-2012, 05:33
200 grain Beartooth is my poison.

Yondering
06-05-2012, 09:11
Just came across freindswoodsbullets they look nice the price is great. Hardness of 18. What u guys think? They have a 180 that looks good and the 220. Wish they had a 200.

Again, that 220 (and the 180) is a TC design. It's not a hunting bullet either; look at the small meplat and rounded nose. That's a plinking/target bullet. If that's what you're looking for, it won't much matter which bullet you choose.

ctious
06-05-2012, 11:04
Again, that 220 (and the 180) is a TC design. It's not a hunting bullet either; look at the small meplat and rounded nose. That's a plinking/target bullet. If that's what you're looking for, it won't much matter which bullet you choose.

Site says flat point.

ctious
06-05-2012, 11:35
Called beartooth. They are 3 weeks behind. That sucks.

dm1906
06-05-2012, 12:41
Site says flat point.

(Rimrock bullets)
The points are flat, but the picture is a TC (which is a "FP", technically). They also use the exact same stock photo for both weights of their "FP's". If they are both of the same design, the 220 will be about 23% longer. That's a lot of case capacity gone. This causes several issues. Larger bullets, while they have their purpose, shoot a much less flat trajectory (shorter accuracy range), are capable of less energy (exponential loss of case capacity, coupled with mass), narrows your powder choices, and handicaps versatility.

As far as "economic picture" is concerned, comparing the 180 to the 220, you'll have to calculate the additional cost for the heavier bullet, with about a 25% reduction of the powder charge (SWAG). The bullet cost difference is $16/500, which will be significantly more costly than the powder offset. Essentially, free powder for a more powerful, flatter shooting, longer accuracy round, switching from the 220 to 180, with fewer seating and chamber fitment issues. YMMV

Yondering is correct. These are target rounds. Only effective for punching small holes, no matter the target.

ctious
06-05-2012, 12:55
I should just start casting my own. Cost is more than I pay for xtps.

How cheap can u get a mold for? also a sizer and lube. I have a pot already.

dm1906
06-05-2012, 13:04
Also, looking at the Beartooth bullet, it's a RNFPGC, expensive, and not a bullet designed for 10mm. That's all I found in 10mm on their sight. As stated in their description, it's designed for the .38-40, which is very different than a 10mm. They only share a bore diameter. I load 38-40, which is essentially a .44 mag size cartridge (which I use to make 38-40), necked down to 10mm. Really cool with very powerful potential, but hardly interchangeable. The Beartooth bullet may have stability issues at much slower velocities, shorter barrels, and rifling/twist rate designs. Also, the "Nose to crimp" length (.280") won't fit in a Glock magazine without compromising the shoulder.

LASTRESORT20
06-05-2012, 13:07
That truncated cone 220gr bullet design takes up a lot of case capacity, in a bullet weight where case capacity is already at a premium.

I'd go for the 200gr personally, out of those two bullets.


This ^^^

dm1906
06-05-2012, 13:22
I should just start casting my own. Cost is more than I pay for xtps.

How cheap can u get a mold for? also a sizer and lube. I have a pot already.

Lee molds and sizers are less than $20 each per caliber (Midway, Cabela's, etc.). Suggesting lube types and methods is like opening a Ford vs. Chevy discussion. Lubri-sizers are a significant initial purchase for a system, then for caliber/type parts. Not practical or cost effective, unless you will be doing a LOT of bullets. The easiest and least expensive (by far) is the Lee sizer and LLA (Lee Liquid Alox, tumble lube) system. There are ways to make this work very well, as long as you don't follow the instructions. If you go the LLA route, be sure to get "TL" molds. If you don't go with LLA or the lubri-sizer route, you'll be limited to "pan" and/or "cookie cutter" methods. I have a lubri-sizer, but tend to use other methods a lot more often, including all I mentioned above. I cast a couple thousand rounds a month, in about a dozen calibers/weights.

Meathead9
06-05-2012, 22:28
Also, looking at the Beartooth bullet, it's a RNFPGC, expensive, and not a bullet designed for 10mm. That's all I found in 10mm on their sight. As stated in their description, it's designed for the .38-40, which is very different than a 10mm. They only share a bore diameter. I load 38-40, which is essentially a .44 mag size cartridge (which I use to make 38-40), necked down to 10mm. Really cool with very powerful potential, but hardly interchangeable. The Beartooth bullet may have stability issues at much slower velocities, shorter barrels, and rifling/twist rate designs. Also, the "Nose to crimp" length (.280") won't fit in a Glock magazine without compromising the shoulder.

The Bear Tooth 200gr 10mm bullet is a WFNGC, with a meplat width of .31. Double Tap's 10mm 200gr WFNGC appears to be identical, only difference being meplat width (.32). I have loaded DT's 200gr WFNGC @ 1.250-1.260 with no feeding problems, and no signs of instability.

dm1906
06-05-2012, 23:02
The Bear Tooth 200gr 10mm bullet is a WFNGC, with a meplat width of .31. Double Tap's 10mm 200gr WFNGC appears to be identical, only difference being meplat width (.32). I have loaded DT's 200gr WFNGC @ 1.250-1.260 with no feeding problems, and no signs of instability.

Just repeated what they had on the sight about the bullet. I haven't used them myself. Unless they have others not listed, what I saw, and what they described, won't work well at all with a 10mm auto. The problem I mentioned about length had nothing to do with feeding, but with actually fitting into the mag. With a N-C length of .280", the best you could do would be about 1.265, with a MINIMUM length case (.985"), the MAX length I was able to reliably feed in and out of several G20 mags. Never had a problem with any chambering, once staged in the mag. This means the bullets are being seated even deeper than the designer recommends, or engineered. I dunno. Still, a lot of case capacity loss, and more lead to push out (read: exponential pressure increase with diminishing results). Add to that, a GC isn't required nor desired at the velocities we are discussing, and ESPECIALLY in a hammer-forged bore.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE big, heavy bullets. Some just aren't meant to be with some calibers. I settled on 180 gr. 10mm bullets, of just about every design, because 200+ gr. bullets means giving up 100-200 ft/lb KE at similar pressures. If you're OK with that, more power to ya.

Yondering
06-05-2012, 23:32
Called beartooth. They are 3 weeks behind. That sucks.

PM sent, I might be able to help.

Meathead9
06-05-2012, 23:44
Just repeated what they had on the sight about the bullet. I haven't used them myself. Unless they have others not listed, what I saw, and what they described, won't work well at all with a 10mm auto. The problem I mentioned about length had nothing to do with feeding, but with actually fitting into the mag. With a N-C length of .280", the best you could do would be about 1.265, with a MINIMUM length case (.985"), the MAX length I was able to reliably feed in and out of several G20 mags. Never had a problem with any chambering, once staged in the mag. This means the bullets are being seated even deeper than the designer recommends, or engineered. I dunno. Still, a lot of case capacity loss, and more lead to push out (read: exponential pressure increase with diminishing results). Add to that, a GC isn't required nor desired at the velocities we are discussing, and ESPECIALLY in a hammer-forged bore.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE big, heavy bullets. Some just aren't meant to be with some calibers. I settled on 180 gr. 10mm bullets, of just about every design, because 200+ gr. bullets means giving up 100-200 ft/lb KE at similar pressures. If you're OK with that, more power to ya.

The 200gr WFNGC is about the same length as the 180gr XTP, so if theyre seated at the same OAL, they should have the same amount of available case volume. I have gotten them to average as high as 1416fps (not a safe load), but have since settled at 1360fps. Double Tap's factory loaded 200gr WFNGC has an OAL from 1.243-1.245. Also, the gas check may not be necessary @ pistol velocities, but I don't see how it could hurt. No exposed lead at the base for reduced smoke, and a more uniform base should aid in accuracy & consistency. I'm not trying to argue, so please don't take it that way, I'm just really interested in this discussion.

dm1906
06-06-2012, 01:09
The 200gr WFNGC is about the same length as the 180gr XTP, so if theyre seated at the same OAL, they should have the same amount of available case volume. I have gotten them to average as high as 1416fps (not a safe load), but have since settled at 1360fps. Double Tap's factory loaded 200gr WFNGC has an OAL from 1.243-1.245. Also, the gas check may not be necessary @ pistol velocities, but I don't see how it could hurt. No exposed lead at the base for reduced smoke, and a more uniform base should aid in accuracy & consistency. I'm not trying to argue, so please don't take it that way, I'm just really interested in this discussion.

No worries. I don't care to argue, either. Discussion is good, even if we don't agree.

1.245" is too short for that long bullet. Why they've done that, doesn't make sense. Intentionally giving up case capacity, when it's needed most, makes no sense. I'd have to see a comparison of the 200 gr. WFNGC next to a 180 gr. XTP to believe they are the same length. The XTP's are pure lead, and although with a copper jacket, as stout as it is, would surely be significantly shorter than a hard lead alloy bullet (~85% lead, at best) of 20 more grains. The HP cavity isn't that much, and doesn't make the difference of the mass loss of the jacket. I dunno. I'm not from Missouri (although I was just talking with a friend from there), but you'll have to show me. I've seen a lot, but I haven't seen it all. Cramming so many objectives into a single cartridge is proving very challenging. Some of the results I'm getting are stellar, but is requiring a lot of custom component work. Very expensive and time consuming. Not that I'm complaining, I haven't had this much fun with developing a round in years!

highxj
06-06-2012, 08:21
I don't have any XTPs, but if it makes any difference the DT 200 WFN is within a few thou of being the same length as the Gold Dot 180.

Also, the nose to crimp groove length as listed on BT's site for the 10mm bullet has no significance whatsoever when loaded in an auto cartridge.

Meathead9
06-06-2012, 08:32
I just found the thread where we collectively came up with a list of 10mm bullet length data. I said they were about the same length, but I may have exaggerated a little (.640 vs .624). Here's the list of bullet lengths copied from that thread:

________________________________________________________

10mm Bullet Lengths------------------

Barnes 125gr HP pure copper bullet .624”
Barnes 140gr HP pure copper bullet .682"
Barnes 155gr HP pure copper bullet .732"

Bear Creek 180gr LTC - 0.628"

DoubleTap 200gr WFNGC - 0.640"
DoubleTap 230gr LeadCast gaschecked .725”

Hornady 155 XTP .555 “
Hornady 180 XTP .624 “
Hornady 180 HAP .624 “
Hornady 180 FMJ .615”
Hornady 200 XTP .685 “
Hornady 200 HAP .680”
Hornady 200 FMJ .660”

IMI Bullets ?

Magtech BU40A 180gr JHP------ 0.63” http://www.magtechammunition.com/sitepages/pid103.php
Magtech BU40B 180gr FMJ-Flat- 0.61”
Magtech BU40C 160gr LSWC ---- 0.62”
Magtech BU40E 155gr JHP GOLD- 0.55”
Magtech BU40SC 130gr SCHP---- 0.63" Solid Copper Hollow Point

Montana Gold 155 FMJ .524 https://www.montanagoldbullet.com/pricelist.html
Montana Gold 155 JHP .555
Montana Gold 165 FMJ .546
Montana Gold 165 CMJ .550
Montana Gold 165 JHP .580
Montana Gold 180 FMJ 0.565
Montana Gold 180 CMJ 0.586
Montana Gold 180 JHP: 0.618"
Montana Gold 200 CMJ 0.650

Nosler 135 JHP .494 Inch
Nosler 150 JHP .535 “
Nosler 180 JHP .620"
Nosler 200 JHP .674" “

Power Bond 165 FP Power Bond- Jacked or Plated ? http://powerbondbullets.com/products.html
Power Bond 165 HP
Power Bond 180 FP 0.585"
Power Bond 180 HP

Precision Delta Solid 165gr Jacketed or Plated? http://www.precisiondelta.com/
Precision Delta Solid 180gr .595 "
Precision Delta Solid 200gr

PRVI 180gr FMJ - 0.594"

Ranier 135gr RN .478 Plated Bullets http://www.rainierballistics.com/mainframe.htm
Ranier 155 FP .541
Ranier 165 FP .565
Ranier 16 5RNFP .567
Ranier 180 FP .597
Ranier 180 RNFP .604
Ranier 180 HP .620

Remington 155gr JHP
Remington 165gr JHP .574

Sierra 135 JHP .501"
Sierra 150 JHP .? ? ?
Sierra 165 JHP .587"
Sierra 180 JHP .634"

Speer #4399 155gr TMJ .530"
Speer #4410 165gr TMJ .555"
Speer #4402 180gr TMJ .600"

Speer #4400 155gr GDHP .546"
Speer #4397 165gr GDHP .580"
Speer #4406 180gr GDHP .630"
Speer #4401 180gr GDHP Short Barrel.630" ( slower velocity for expansion)

Winchester 155gr Silvertip HP

XTREME 155gr RNFP .512 inch http://xtremebullets.com/better.htm
XTREME 165gr RNFP
XTREME 180gr RNFP
XTREME 200gr RNFP
XTREME 220gr RNFP


Zero 180gr JHP - 0.614" http://www.rozedist.com/

CAST BULLETS
Bullet - Total Length (Length Inside case)
==================================
Aardvark 155 SWC - .585" (.332")
Mihec 160 HP - .555" (.315")
Mihec 220 WFN - .708" (.425")
Lee 175 TC - .585" (.365")

Lyman 156gr Devastator .584"
Lyman 175gr TCBB .609"
RCBS 175gr TCSWC .616"

XTREME 155gr SWC ( semi wad cutter)
XTREME 180gr FP Flat Point
XTREME 200gr FP Flat Point

.

SDGlock23
06-06-2012, 11:14
I have some SNS Casting 220gr 10mm/.40cal bullets (cast), they're .737" long.

dm1906
06-06-2012, 14:52
I don't have any XTPs, but if it makes any difference the DT 200 WFN is within a few thou of being the same length as the Gold Dot 180.

A few thou shorter and 20 grains lighter = big difference. 16 thou is a little more than a "few".

Also, the nose to crimp groove length as listed on BT's site for the 10mm bullet has no significance whatsoever when loaded in an auto cartridge.1/2 right. Makes little difference when seating a little longer in most cases. Big difference seating shorter. If the case mouth covers the crimp groove (remember, this bullet is designed for a roll crimp on a shouldered case), you are giving away significant surface area friction, RIGHT where a taper crimp applies the most. This also presents a condition that may allow the case mouth to completely cover the forward land, which is often very narrow (certainly in this case), preventing an opportunity for sufficient crimp friction at all. This can, and often does, result in more frequent recoil setbacks. If the slightest setback occurs, and the case mouth passes the forward land, the next recoil event will see the bullet base resting on the charge stack. KB! Seen it happen, many more times than once. This is why we DO NOT carry for SD or LE, any rounds that have been in a fired weapon, or have been chambered then removed. Ammo rotation is policy for a reason, and this policy with ammo used as it was designed. Step outside the design, and all bets are off. I realize many people are doing it, and perhaps some off-brand "factory" loaders, but that doesn't make it right. When we leave the science behind, all we have left is guesswork and dumb luck. I'd rather be lucky than good, but I wasn't allowed that option.

dm1906
06-06-2012, 14:57
I have some SNS Casting 220gr 10mm/.40cal bullets (cast), they're .737" long.

Wow! That's a long bullet. It should come with its own bi-pod.

Taterhead
06-06-2012, 18:29
Just repeated what they had on the sight about the bullet. I haven't used them myself. Unless they have others not listed, what I saw, and what they described, won't work well at all with a 10mm auto. The problem I mentioned about length had nothing to do with feeding, but with actually fitting into the mag. With a N-C length of .280", the best you could do would be about 1.265, with a MINIMUM length case (.985"), the MAX length I was able to reliably feed in and out of several G20 mags. Never had a problem with any chambering, once staged in the mag. This means the bullets are being seated even deeper than the designer recommends, or engineered. I dunno. Still, a lot of case capacity loss, and more lead to push out (read: exponential pressure increase with diminishing results). Add to that, a GC isn't required nor desired at the velocities we are discussing, and ESPECIALLY in a hammer-forged bore.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE big, heavy bullets. Some just aren't meant to be with some calibers. I settled on 180 gr. 10mm bullets, of just about every design, because 200+ gr. bullets means giving up 100-200 ft/lb KE at similar pressures. If you're OK with that, more power to ya.

You obviously bring credibility to the discussion of cast bullets. However, in this instance, I am going to disagree with you on a few points. We have had a bit of back-and-forth on other topics, but I don't mean anything personal by it. So I hope it isn't interpreted that way.

My remarks are based upon my own experience of loading and shooting this bullet profile. Your comments that they will not work well with 10mm auto is simply not true - unless you have a match chamber that will not feed the profile reliably. The 10mm auto was developed with a 200 grain bullet.

First, the 200 grain Beartooth WFNGC (and the Double Tap clone of the same) is a very popular bullet for 10mm auto. For a good reason. It is a very effective bullet that can be driven to higher speeds than jacketed bullets of the same weight. Double Tap ammo previously loaded the Beartooth in 10mm. They have since insourced casting of that bullet as a virtual clone of the Beartooth. They presently load it in 10mm Auto and .40 S&W. The 10mm 200 gr WFNGC hardcast round is one of DT's top 3 best sellers.

I load the Double Tap variant for my G20 and it cycles and runs great seated out to 1.26" (or shorter). The BT bullet is said to be of better quality, but DT is easier to order from. No feeding or magazine issues at all. Groups, while not XTP tight, are respectable - even out of my hammer forged barrel. It is a short bullet (much closer to a 180 XTP than a 200 XTP) with little bearing surface. Accordingly, they can be pushed all day long in excess of 1200 fps from my 4.6" barrel.

These things have a wicked terminal effect. It is one of my favorite 10mm auto bullets. It is admittedly expensive, so not a plinker. It is my walking around load for the Idaho wilderness.

Secondly, Meathead was correct. Taper crimping in a straight-wall pistol case has very little to do with preventing bullet setback. If you do not have proper neck tension, crimping won't help in this regard. Applying crimp to a straight-wall case only re-sizes the bullet to a smaller diameter. It does not increase significantly the amount of case grip on the bullet. I do not "crimp" 10mm or .40 S&W other than to iron out the bell. These .401" bullets have a ton of neck tension in a properly sized case. I have pulled a few dozen, and they have a big time grip. There is no worry about bullet setback, I can assure you.

http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=77&products_id=269&osCsid=6hqdreu0c2p5mc421pvvj6or96

If you are just getting into loading for the 10mm auto, this bullet is seriously worth a look.

EDIT: To answer the OP's question: if you are looking for an SD bullet for woods carry, the 200 gr WFNGC is the one you want.

Yondering
06-06-2012, 18:30
The problem I mentioned about length had nothing to do with feeding, but with actually fitting into the mag. With a N-C length of .280", the best you could do would be about 1.265, with a MINIMUM length case (.985"),

You're using the nose to crimp groove length to determine OAL, but that is incorrect for a taper crimped auto cartridge. You can easily seat them deeper than that, with none of the issues you're talking about above. I don't see the problem?:dunno:

Edit: +1 to Taterhead's comments above. All right on the money.

Yondering
06-06-2012, 18:36
The XTP's are pure lead, and although with a copper jacket, as stout as it is, would surely be significantly shorter than a hard lead alloy bullet (~85% lead, at best) of 20 more grains. The HP cavity isn't that much, and doesn't make the difference of the mass loss of the jacket.

No, not even close. Wheel weight alloy is about 97% lead. Common (92/6/2, really hard) commercial casting alloy is 92%.

A gas check bullet is longer than a plain base bullet of the same design and weight, so that's a consideration.

I have a 220gr 10mm bullet of my own design that is shorter than the 200gr XTP.

Yondering
06-06-2012, 18:53
I just found the thread where we collectively came up with a list of 10mm bullet length data. I said they were about the same length, but I may have exaggerated a little (.640 vs .624). Here's the list of bullet lengths copied from that thread:

...

CAST BULLETS
Bullet - Total Length (Length Inside case)
==================================
Aardvark 155 SWC - .585" (.332")
Mihec 160 HP - .555" (.315")
Mihec 220 WFN - .708" (.425")
Lee 175 TC - .585" (.365")
MM (Yondering) 220 WFN - .673" (.400")

Lyman 156gr Devastator .584"
Lyman 175gr TCBB .609"
RCBS 175gr TCSWC .616"

XTREME 155gr SWC ( semi wad cutter)
XTREME 180gr FP Flat Point
XTREME 200gr FP Flat Point



I don't remember where that thread is, but I should add the one in bold above.

dm1906
06-07-2012, 00:17
No, not even close. Wheel weight alloy is about 97% lead. Common (92/6/2, really hard) commercial casting alloy is 92%.

A gas check bullet is longer than a plain base bullet of the same design and weight, so that's a consideration.

I have a 220gr 10mm bullet of my own design that is shorter than the 200gr XTP.

Actually took the alloy formulation from their site. 85/10/5, IIRC. I don't recall what their "soft" alloy was. I'll verify, but I'm certain that's what it was. 92/6/2 is relatively soft, at 15 BHN (air cooled). Hard begins at 18. 20-22 is very hard. 96%, 96/4, is 12. Wheel weights vary from 70% to 95%, but brand to brand have been very consistent. Some have significant contaminants not friendly with bullet casting, and can be a real PITA clearing the pot. Unless I have a run of a specific brand of known alloy weights, I usually cast off and purify, to be alloyed later (slow process to get it to an acceptable %). Wheel weight lead is too hard for some of the bullets/balls/miniés I cast, so purification of "cheap" lead is the norm. Under 96% is too hard for most BP projectiles. If wheel weights were, in fact, 97%, they would work for most BP's. Not even close. Not even. (BP KB!'s are NOT fun) I've used a LOT of wheel weights, but my supply is drying up, and the sources are getting less and less. They're getting scarce, with environmental movements forcing the use of non-lead weights. I also used to recover from batteries, but decided it wasn't worth the effort (disposal), or the risks. I spend a lot of time prospecting my range, and get a lot of recovered bullets from commercial range bullet traps. I haven't had to "buy" lead, and am not looking forward to it. Near 4 decades and I've dodged that bullet, so far.

I've followed your new heavy bullet thread. Very well done. Different than what I would have, but very well done, indeed.

highxj
06-07-2012, 11:35
A few thou shorter and 20 grains lighter = big difference. 16 thou is a little more than a "few".



The chart listed shows the difference as .010" in length, not .016". At any rate, the samples I measured showed the the 200 gr. DT bullet as a mere .005" longer than the 180 Gold Dot. Obviously there is going to be some variation among samples.

The similar length and resulting combustion chamber size despite the added 20 grains of weight is exactly the point being made here...that the heavy WFN style cast bullets are very short for their weight.

Seating the bullet so that the crimp groove is inside the case neck could theoretically reduce the surface area gripping the bullet enough to cause setback issues, at least on paper I suppose. It's just not something I have experienced nor expect to happen given the substantial seating effort. Having said that, if someone were to make a nice 200 WFN without the crimp groove, I'd choose that one, just because...

dm1906
06-07-2012, 15:19
The chart listed shows the difference as .010" in length, not .016". At any rate, the samples I measured showed the the 200 gr. DT bullet as a mere .005" longer than the 180 Gold Dot. Obviously there is going to be some variation among samples.

The similar length and resulting combustion chamber size despite the added 20 grains of weight is exactly the point being made here...that the heavy WFN style cast bullets are very short for their weight.

Seating the bullet so that the crimp groove is inside the case neck could theoretically reduce the surface area gripping the bullet enough to cause setback issues, at least on paper I suppose. It's just not something I have experienced nor expect to happen given the substantial seating effort. Having said that, if someone were to make a nice 200 WFN without the crimp groove, I'd choose that one, just because...

I agree with the latter. The former is misplaced, however. The difference discussed, in reference to the .016", was the 180 XTP vs. the 200 WFNGC. .624" vs. 640", respectively. It was suggested earlier that they were about the same length. These numbers are published, not guessed. As I said before, I've not used the 200 bullet, and was specifically basing my analysis on published information, facts not in question. The discussion was specific and limited to these samples. Also, I do not readily believe DT used this exact bullet design. Perhaps the design has changed over the years, or DT had a custom version delivered for proprietary use. The information may be incorrect, or I/we are not discussing the same samples. No surprises with any of the above.

In regards to a nice 200 WFN, Yondering did something similar with a 220. Check out his thread (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1420459). It would be simple to have a custom bullet mold made similarly in 200. It would be as simple as selecting the bullet that most meets your specification, use it as a template and modify as needed.

highxj
06-07-2012, 16:42
I think I confused the issue a bit by bringing in the 180 gold dot bullet. I was just attempting to illustrate that a heavy flat nose cast bullet can indeed be 'about' the same length as a significantly lighter jacketed HP.

I used to cast and heat treat my own stuff out of necessity for the 454, 500 Linebaugh, and other wheelguns using many different moulds (primarily LBT) back in the latter '80's. Got out of it when lots of custom makers began offering what I wanted. I don't plan to get back into it any time soon...

That 220 does look interesting, but at this point I'm pretty satisfied with the DT (or Beartooth) 200 WFN for something commercially available. I think it will give me all I need here in SE Wyoming. Cheers.

nickE10mm
06-10-2012, 07:55
Exactly this!

You obviously bring credibility to the discussion of cast bullets. However, in this instance, I am going to disagree with you on a few points. We have had a bit of back-and-forth on other topics, but I don't mean anything personal by it. So I hope it isn't interpreted that way.

My remarks are based upon my own experience of loading and shooting this bullet profile. Your comments that they will not work well with 10mm auto is simply not true - unless you have a match chamber that will not feed the profile reliably. The 10mm auto was developed with a 200 grain bullet.

First, the 200 grain Beartooth WFNGC (and the Double Tap clone of the same) is a very popular bullet for 10mm auto. For a good reason. It is a very effective bullet that can be driven to higher speeds than jacketed bullets of the same weight. Double Tap ammo previously loaded the Beartooth in 10mm. They have since insourced casting of that bullet as a virtual clone of the Beartooth. They presently load it in 10mm Auto and .40 S&W. The 10mm 200 gr WFNGC hardcast round is one of DT's top 3 best sellers.

I load the Double Tap variant for my G20 and it cycles and runs great seated out to 1.26" (or shorter). The BT bullet is said to be of better quality, but DT is easier to order from. No feeding or magazine issues at all. Groups, while not XTP tight, are respectable - even out of my hammer forged barrel. It is a short bullet (much closer to a 180 XTP than a 200 XTP) with little bearing surface. Accordingly, they can be pushed all day long in excess of 1200 fps from my 4.6" barrel.

These things have a wicked terminal effect. It is one of my favorite 10mm auto bullets. It is admittedly expensive, so not a plinker. It is my walking around load for the Idaho wilderness.

Secondly, Meathead was correct. Taper crimping in a straight-wall pistol case has very little to do with preventing bullet setback. If you do not have proper neck tension, crimping won't help in this regard. Applying crimp to a straight-wall case only re-sizes the bullet to a smaller diameter. It does not increase significantly the amount of case grip on the bullet. I do not "crimp" 10mm or .40 S&W other than to iron out the bell. These .401" bullets have a ton of neck tension in a properly sized case. I have pulled a few dozen, and they have a big time grip. There is no worry about bullet setback, I can assure you.

http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=77&products_id=269&osCsid=6hqdreu0c2p5mc421pvvj6or96

If you are just getting into loading for the 10mm auto, this bullet is seriously worth a look.

EDIT: To answer the OP's question: if you are looking for an SD bullet for woods carry, the 200 gr WFNGC is the one you want.