Shooters Forum banner
1 - 1 of 17 Posts

· Beartooth Regular
1,178 Posts
Veral designed what was called an OWC or Ogival wadcutter for just the purpose you guys are talking about. The bullet had a slight rounding of the forward meplat. The mold I have in 357 has a meplat of about 32 caliber and weighs 175 grs. The 430 caliber mold I have, meplat diameter runs about 40 caliber with a weight of 280 grs.

The slight ogive offers a measure of form stability for flight and easier loading into revolver cylinders as this is really a wheelgun bullet. Some fixed chamber guns won't allow chambering. They are quite versatile because they are loaded at either lower velocity for close range work or loaded up to full horsepower for longer range.

Jim Gates used some samples I sent him a while back to hunt wild hogs with and he said they worked very well.

These bullets have a normal crimp groove and seat out like a SWC bullet.

You can cast a regular solid base wadcutter out of a harder alloy and seat it out some and crimp into one of the crimp grooves for more powder space. At one time, Lyman and others made a wadcutter like this to be seated out of the case with a regular crimp groove. They are scarce now.

Marshall was supposed to be ordering a couple molds in this design a while back for 45, 44 and 358. I'm not sure if he got the molds yet though.

With the OWC design, Meplat diameter typically runs about .030" less than nominal bullet diameter no matter what the bullet diameter is. This design tends to help the smaller calibers more than the larger calibers as a function of meplat diameter. Jim found performance of the 430 OWC similar to the WFN design with a slightly bigger wound channel. In a 358, I would expect the design to offer greater performance gain.

Veral listed standard weights for the OWC's as 230 grs. in 44 cal., 150 grs. in 358 and I think 250 grs. in the 45 cal. (IIRC). They could also be had in a gas checked version which is what both mine are.

1 - 1 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.