[Yondering]

Originally Posted by dm1906

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]

Originally Posted by Meathead9

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]

Originally Posted by Yondering

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]

Originally Posted by dm1906

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]

Originally Posted by highxj

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. 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]

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]

Exactly this!

Originally Posted by Taterhead

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/cat...mc421pvvj6or96

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.