Cast or jacketed?

[Goat]

I have shot both through the years but always used cast to play and jacketed to hunt. I know that this will probably open a can of worms but here goes. Which one works "best" on game the size of whitetail deer and why? I am not really interested in speculation but in actual experience in the field. I plan to hunt this coming season with two Marlin pistol caliber carbines. One is a 357Mag and the other a 41 Mag. I am thinking about a 180gr cast for the 357 and a 250gr or 265gr for the 41. If I hunt with jacketed I will use a handloaded 158gr soft point for the 357 and a 210gr xtp in the 41. I do not cast my own and really have no desire to do so. Good cast (like Beartooth or Cast Performance )now cost as much or more than jacketed so why should I use cast? Are there other sources for good hunting grade cast bullets that I should consider? Hope that I am not asking too many questions for one post.
Thanks, Goat

[HEAD0001]

In the 44 magnum and the 45-70 I have had better luck with cast bullets, rather than jacketed. However I also normally cast a heavier bullet than the jacketed bullets that I have used in the 45-70. But in the 44 magnum I use a 240 grain bullet in jacketed and cast. I have never seemed to get drop dead shots with jacketed pistol bullets, but I seem to get better drop dead performance with cast bullets. I know this answer is not scientiflc, it has just been my experiences.

Over the past few years I have spent more time hunting and shooting my 44 magnum and 45-70 with cast bullets. And I really enjoy shooting the bullets I have made. And it is a lot cheaper to shoot. Tom.

[Tycer]

A hard cast 357 wide flat nose bullet will cut a 3/4" hole clean through with little damage. The hole will be open and if you hit artery, blood pressure will drop very, very rapidly. Have not had one go more than 30 yds with a good shot.

After 36+ inches exited through ham:

[Don McDowell]

In the cartridges you listed the Keith type swc cast bullets are darn hard to beat.
These folks cast excellent bullets at a very reasonable price. www.montanabulletworks.com

[TedH]

There are several of us here that have used the 180 gr. 357 cast bullet on deer with great effect. I have been using my own cast bullets in a variety of calibers for deer hunting for the last several years with no complaints. Have not had one run out of my sight after being hit. Not saying cast is better than jacketed, but I do get more satisfaction using bullets in the field that I cast myself and the performance in game is certainly there too.

This one dropped where he stood with one 180 gr. 357 cast bullet through the shoulder.

[Charles]

There is no answer to you qustion, "which is best". A dead deer is a dead deer and both types of bullets will kill deer grave yard dead. Cast bullet require more attention to be paid to bullet placement, but that is the way it should be which ever type of bullet you use. I killed deer with cast bullet for over 50 years and they work just fine for average deer hunting. They are not the ticket for the 400 yard cross canyon shot that comes up every once in a while.

[Don McDowell]

. They are not the ticket for the 400 yard cross canyon shot that comes up every once in a while.

I'm not sure anybody is going to go out and use the 357 or th 41 (cartridges in question on this thread) for those types of shots

[tman]

180GRN.cast bullets in a.357s&wmagnum have always worked well for me. the penetration and effectiveness on game is greater than it's paper ballistics;or the opions of knowledgeable gunmagazine writers would have you believe. it's an up close proposition,though, and SHOT PLACEMENT is the key.

[Charles]

Don... I was limiting my thinking to short range pistol cartridge carbines. I was thinking of cast vs. jacketed in general. Plenty of folks with 30-06 and others rounds longer range rounds hunt with cast...I know I do.

[Old Savage]

I like both. I'll use whatever works for what I am doing.

[marlinman93]

. They are not the ticket for the 400 yard cross canyon shot that comes up every once in a while.

I'm not sure anybody is going to go out and use the 357 or th 41 (cartridges in question on this thread) for those types of shots

At that kind of range there's no problem, either one wont work!

I've taken a number of mulies with cast bullets, but don't own any of those modern calibers mentioned. Mine have been with old BP calibers, but probably very close to the same velocities many guys can push the .357, .41 and .44 to! My .38-55 loads use a 245-255 gr. bullet, at about 1400 fps, and they have worked well out to just over 100 yds. so far. I sight them in for 150, but haven't taken that kind of shot yet.

[BigSky56]

Goat
A jacketed bullets performance cant touch a HCGC bullet unless its a flat nose solid ,I use BTB in my rifles and pistols a HCGC 45 at 900 fps will shoot clear thru behind a mulie shoulders and I cant keep a HCGC from a rifle in elk. Do your own test load up a jacketed and a HCGC same weight and velocity and shoot into a piece of fire wood length wise you will see that the jacket opens up
and veers from its intended path and the HC will stay on course and penetrate further, they are worth the price you pay. danny

[Bis]

What do you guys think the efective range is of a 357 using 158 grain cast bullets on white tails and feral hogs out of a Marlin 1894. I have been using mine for paper but want to try it on some live game.

[86er]

As a professional hunter I get to see a lot of different animals shot with a lot of different bullets. If you hit a deer with a cast bullet in 357, 41, 44 or 45 at carbine velocity BEHIND the shoulder you will likely get a pass through but odds are the deer will run a ways too. Now if you shoot right up the front leg, about 1/2 up into the body you will break at least one shoulder and more than half the time the deer will crumble. I've shot deer with Old Ironsights, 2ndovc and others using cast. One was a 357, one a 45-70, another a 300gr 45 Colt. The bullets went through all of them. The deer with the 45-70 stood there for at least a minute. The deer with the 45 Colt spun around in a circle for nearly a minute. These are just a few recent events with forum members involved. I have switched to shoulder shots with good luck as most of the deer go down quickly. There is something to be said about the pride you feel in taking game with a bullet you made. In your case that is not an issue. On the other hand, a premium jacketed bullet is more effective at dropping a deer quicker with a lung shot and just as likely to knock it right down with a shoulder shot. I personally prefer premium jacketed bullets when I am going to take whatever shot I am offered that is fair and ethical. There is a huge difference between hunting bullets and "handgun bullets" in those calibers you mention. With a Nosler Partition, Federal Hydra-Shok, Swift A- Frame , Kodiak and others I would feel well better equiped overall than with a cast bullet. On the other hand, I will take a cast bullet any day over a Silvertip, Nosler Sporting Bullet, Remington Hollow Point and the like especially in a light or medium for caliber weight. Frankly, we shoot 300-400 animals a year with clients - most are deer sized. I see maybe 10-15% cast bullets used not including hardcast handgun bullets fired from muzzleloading rifles. It's still a lot of animals to observe and make comparisons.

[Don McDowell]

What do you guys think the efective range is of a 357 using 158 grain cast bullets on white tails and feral hogs out of a Marlin 1894. I have been using mine for paper but want to try it on some live game.

Bis if you've got those pretty well wound up, and depending on how far you can keep them in a group, but 100-150 yds, and maybe a bit further shouldn't be any real problem.

[Old Savage]

86er, thank you for a professional point of view on this.

[Old Savage]

400 yard cross canyon shots are not sporting.

[Bis]

Don McDowell- Thanks for the reply. With open sights and old eyes, 100 yards is about as far as I would push it. I just didn't know if the 357 had enough power to drop a pig or deer.

[shdwlkr]

I am one that has used jacketed for almost for ever in my centerfires but of late I am starting to use cast and have been well pleased with my results and will most likely go for more lead bullets that I can make of my own until lead is not available then I will put the rifles in the safe and lock it and forget how to open it. There was a reason for some calibers using lead as they have been here for a hundred years and if they worked for that long why would you think it won't work now?

[Mike Rintoul]

In our extensive testing, a lot of it on game animals, the difference between cast and jacketed when the weight and velocity is the same is the predictability. Cast bullets, whether soft or hard, are less predictable than premium jacketed bullets when the circumstances are otherwise the same. We've collected 3 or 4 dozen Kodiak bullets in .308, .458 and .510 diameter and they are all very similar in appearance, overall expansion diameter and penetration. In one example with hardcast, we shot a cape buffalo 4 times. One bullet broke in half and both halves were found inside the animal. One penetrated through and through on a path less than 6 inches from the first bullet that broke. A third bullet smeared its front down to about 1/2 its original length, yet it stayed on course and penetrated pretty far. The last exited quartering away after penetrating at least 35 inches of buffalo. One thing that is often misquoted or misapplied is that hardcast bullets are NOT solids. Lead is either malliable or brittle. Therefore to perform properly it always has to have a point where it gives under resistance, usually in the form of smearing. To make them hard enough not to deform under minor resistance requires the introduction of another substance or substances, usually antimony and others. So a hardcast lead bullet is not monolithic. A heavy, wide monolithic bullet like a Nosler Banded Solid or a brass encapsuling bullet like a Punch are not subject to smear, deformation or bending due to the high tensile integrity of the design. Now, a jacketed bullet incorporates varying features of the lead bullet with another material, gilding metal, copper, etc and design features. A monolithic expanding bullet has only design features to make it work. Either way, a scientific process is artificially created by the bullet design, causing controlled expansion and weight retention. Since multiple controls can be placed on the expanding bullet by minipulating the jacket, core and design methodologies the action is highly repeatable and controllable. In terms of dangerous game, hardcast bullets only role should be for brain shots under exacting conditions. Outside of that, the unpredictability and inability to control the bullet performance creates too much of a risk in dangerous conditions. A good set-up for a body shot on dangerous game is well served with a premium expanding bullet (the wound channel is 3X the expanded diameter), followed by solid bullets. Hardcast bullets will create a wound channel 3X the bullet diameter with a good, wide flat metplat. However, the cast bullet is volatile because the metplat and frontal shape is constantly changing as it encounters resistance.Moving away from dangerous game, we are still left with the wound channel 3x expanded diameter or 3X bullet diameter for cast, with ever changing characteristics of the bullet. With deer sized game, the hardcast may not encounter enough resistance to drastically change its profile or it may (likely) exit before it has changed enough to effect performance. The expanding bullet may not reach its final expanded diameter before exiting or coming to a stop due to resistance. On deer sized game it is a good idea to use a light to medium weight expanding bullet for soft tissue shots and a medium to heavy bullet for hard body shots (head, shoulder, spine). With hardcast bullets on deer sized game it is better to use a heavy bullet with a wide profile so it retains that profile all the way through, keeping the 3X cutting diameter whether you are shooting a hard body shot or a soft tissue shot. I agree with a previous post that states a medium weight expanding bullet that is shot into the soft tissue heart/lungs will usually produce a more dramatic result than a cast bullet placed in the same place. That is not to say one is better than the other. When the game is dangerous, expensive or the conditions are competely unpredictable a premium (emphasis) expanding bullets performance is more repetitive than any cast bullet can be. I am a cast bullet fan. I primarily shot cast in Africa with my 500 Linebaugh. After shooting very large heavy game, particularly a 3500 pound giraffe with over 1 inch thick skin, I got a real eye opening lesson on cast bullets. I was surprised at the amount of deformation, change of course and less penetration that I expected based on Linebaugh Tests, etc. Putting a few jacketed rounds into the same animals proved the predictable repeatability of the premium bullets (Northfork, Kodiak, Some Hawks, Barnes Copper, Nosler Partion). It also proved you have to pick your bullet and bullet weight carefully when danger and or expense is a high factor in your hunt. For deer sized game I am still comfortable with a heavy cast bullet to the shoulder. One type of bullet is not better than the other. Whether cast or jacketed they can each have advantages over the other based on the bullet characteristics applied to a certain situation or opportunity. If you used one type exclusively you would probably be satisfied overall but to put the odds in your favor it is wise to be adaptable and use the best one for the job at hand.

[shdwlkr]

mike
I don't question your information but how do you explain all the game that fell to lead bullets a hundred years ago if lead isn't always a good choice? They didn't have the rifle steel we do today , didn't have the lead casting abilities we do now, didn't have the powder, brass, primers we do today and yet they killed everything even elephants with those poor quality lead bullets.
Or are you one of those that feels game has gotten tougher over the last hundred years. I surely hope not as that is stuff, now hunting them has changed as the number hunting has gone up and maybe on the way down again.
I am not looking to pick an argument more looking for more data and information as it just seems strange to me that we can't do better with lead then what was done a hundred years ago.

[RKrodle]

Great information form a man who makes Hard Cast bullets, and loads Premium ammunition. Thanks Mike.


Mike's ammo is used all over the world by many hunters on many heads of game. I believe his components and loaded ammo is second to none. Mike is a walking ballistics lab, I had many conversations over the phone, and in person with Mike and have never failed to walk away more knowledgeable.

[Mike Rintoul]

The lead bullets will work and the technology applied to lead bullet casting combined with modern powders far surpasses the technology and techniques of even a few decades ago. Jacketed bullets were invented to overcome some of the shortcomings of lead. Expanding bullet technology continues to grow and is so good you can get the same repeatable performance from a wide range of impact velocities. The information I provided is so readers can take the information and assess what is important to them when deciding on a bullet. If you take a historical perspective you could say we killed elephants with spears and arrows so plain lead bullets are light years ahead of those implements. What we have always tried to do is get optimum performance out of whatever we use to inflict terminal damage on an animal. Getting the best possible performance is being ethical, safe, and efficient by stacking the odds in your favor. Frankly, hardcast is not always the best choice. A cast bullet can be a better choice than an expanding bullet with certain attributes. Under different circumstances, an expanding bullet can be a better choice than a hardcast. This is like saying one caliber is better than another. Within certain parameters, each caliber has the potential to cleanly kill game. However, one of them is likely to be able to do it under more adverse conditions, or statistically, with more predictable results. There too, you have to decide what is important to you and why and choose accordingly.

[shdwlkr]

Mike
My reason for asking is that the largest game I will most likely hunt is elk and would like to use cast but here in my state we also have to be careful of large cats that like to follow a hunter and was looking for a good lead bullet to do both jobs. I have a 45-70 that handles 425 grain lead just fine and a .375 winchester that likes 270 grain lead and was thinking of hunting with one of these. Don't see any elephants or brown bears crossing my sights ever so I am looking to make a smart decision with good information

[86er]

As a PH I will tell you that you won't find me or my brethren walking in on a lion or leopard with a cast bullet or even a solid. A good expanding bullet will stop a soft skinned animal under a wider spectrum of conditions by creating a large expanded diameter and either a large exit hole of a dump of energy if it doesn't expand. The risk with a cast bullet on a cat is that it can only create a wound channel in proportion to its original diameter and it will probably exit sooner than later. I'd have to think about what bullet to use on a 120 something pound leopard but on a 400 pound lion I already have my ideas. In the case of using a cast bullet on mountain lion, and likely in defense, I'll admit it is a lot of bullet for a small cat. However, I think the odds of a quick stop are more favorable with an expanding bullet or a soft lead bullet that will flatten out fairly quickly. To have the best bullet for an elk and think it will also be ideal for a mt. lion is naive. You have to compromise somewhere. I'd personally load for elk and reload to a different bullet on the way out with the sole purpose of lion defense in mind. While hunting elk, if a lion became a threat I'd just use whatever I had and make sure I apply my skills carefully to end the situation.

I think the response to Mike RIntoul's post was disrespectful, slighting and offensive. The man makes hardcast bullets, designs jacketed bullets for various makers and makes ammunition with premium components, especially bullets. The information was just about equal on the side of cast and expanding as far as I can tell. The truth about what happens may not be the most beneficial thing for bullet sales overall, but integrity of the honest opinion and observation is worth more than whether a guy buys your bullets or another one. If you - whoever is reading this - have as much hand's on experience as Mike RIntoul in observing game shot with various bullets, or if you send your pet loads out to PH's for extensive testing and offer honest reports of the results, I want to know what you think and if it differs from Mike's accounts. I will tell you right now there is a custom ammo maker that uses inexpensive components that often do not work as advertised and he refuses to change a thing. He told me "marketing" is strong enough to sell the ammo. That is disgusting when it could cost someone a lot of money, heartache or their life. (PM me and I'm glad to tell you who/what that is). I appreciate a company run by a guy like Mike that stands by his stuff, offers honest information about the use and refused to continue to offer a product that does not work as it was intended. If anyone reads Mike's two posts, and cannot learn something and use the information to make a good decision I would like to know why - and I don't think I'll get many takers on that. I have shot over 500 animals myself, 100 or so with a 45-70 with just about every bullet you can think of and I have taken a few thousand head of game with my clients in over 20 years. I can't find anything to disagree with in Mike's information except he's " a cast bullet fan" and I am not

Mike - thank you for the honest information you offer. I personally aplogize for the comments of my fellow forum members that are in poor taste and I hope you will continue to input your valuable information for us all.

[RKrodle]

Mike - thank you for the honest information you offer. I personally aplogize for the comments of my fellow forum members that are in poor taste and I hope you will continue to input your valuable information for us all.

AMEN!

[TedH]

Thanks Mike, lot's of good stuff there.

[Don McDowell]

So are any of you fellers so busy beating on hairy chests going to take a shot at answering the question Goat first asked when he started this thread (hint, it doesn't have anything to do with dangerous game or cartridges considered adequate for same. )

[Griff]

Mike - thank you for the honest information you offer. I personally aplogize for the comments of my fellow forum members that are in poor taste and I hope you will continue to input your valuable information for us all.

AMEN!

Joe, you probably don't need to apologize, as what's obvious, is plainly read, but I share your desire to have Mike's expertise and experience, as am I to have your's.

I'll preface my comments with the admission that I have neiither Joe's nor Mike's experience, but... I believe that I can learn from others, sometimes in spite of my own preconceived notions. And what I've learned in my nearly 40 years of learning the shooting sports and hunting is this: throughout the history of the firarm lead projectiles have killled game & man. But each step in the evolutionarry chain from patched round balls to conicals, self-contained carridges, giled bullets and sabots, the process is driven by a desire to improve, (& maybe make a littlr money), the effeciency with which game & man can be killed. Each step on that path of improvement that is still with us was at one time the epitome of advancement. As far which is better for taking game, lead or copper gilded lead, we need look no further back than the middle third of the 20th century. For those that could afford to shoot what they wanted, lead was pretty much regulated to the target pit.

Far be it for me to say that lead ain't adequate to do the job, but I can think of no instance where one is avail that a jacketed bullet will not do the job better. Cost and other factors may lead one to eschew the jacket, but it will be a compromise. There may be an exception or two, but you will have look long and hard to find it, Although I've said it more'n once, "Smokeless is just a passing fad...", the same could be said of jacketed bullets, but it would be just a big a joke!

[colo native]

400 yard cross canyon shots are not sporting.

Being from the flat lands and hunting on your on land a 400 yd shot is only for the master shooter...... I have seen and heard of so called sportsman making shots of this didstance, but when walked off, the distance is always some what shorter, just wish I had had a good range finder in the 50's thru the 80's....


almost forgot, yes I've taked game in Colo with cast pills, most 30cal, and a few mulies with 25-20, and 32-20.

[Goat]

Thank you Mike, for your honest and insightful reply. I appreciate all of the replies that I have received on the question of cast Vs. jacketed bullets for hunting deer with pistol caliber carbines. I forgot that I have taken one animal with a cast bullet. I shot a 175lb. hog at about 20 yards using a 454 Casull with 260gr. hard cast bullets. It was a raking shot on a quartering away animal. My shot placement was too far forward on that angle and entered the left shoulder and exited the right side of the neck. A second shot at 50 yards was through the lungs. The hog collapsed but took a couple of minutes to expire. I realise that shot placement was off and this is only one example. I believe that a jacketed bullet would have done more damage in this case since the hole was roughly twice the diameter of the bullet and there was very little damage to the surrounding tissue. Is this what one should expect ? The other animals I have taken with jacketed bullets all show lots of damage to surrounding tissue. Even those shot with muzzle-loaders and the 45/70 and the 35 Remington. I think that I will likely try cast for hunting hogs and deer BUT will also continue to use jacketed bullets that have proved themselves over and over through the years.

[86er]

Hey Goat - He's a real application of this info. I am going hog hunting tomorrow. The shots will be less than 50 yards and likely come at last light. The best combination of power, follow up shots and low light sighting that I have ready to go is a 45 Colt rifle. I am going to use 300 grain hardcast bullets that fly at around 1750 fps. Why? I have not found a jacketed .452 bullet that will consistently exit a hog under these circumstances. I want an exit hole to facilitate an easier job of tracking in the darkness to quickly recover the game. I think my odds of causing an exit hole are better with the 300 gr cast in this caliber and given velocity than with any jacketed bullet I can think of. (If I were using the same rifle for deer I would load it with a 250 or 300 gr A-Frame instead.)

[Old Savage]

I like reading about the experiences of these fellows who have a lot of it. I have never shot an animal with a cast bullet but find the whole issue interesting. Before I read the rest of the posts my thought was that there is more of a variance in the cast than with the best jacketed in what I have read and seen pictures of.

[shdwlkr]

old savage
I like lead but you have to pay attention to what you are shooting with them and what range and what caliber. Now jacketed will help some but no bullet is a do all one size fits all. I shoot both but will say that it is hard to find the right mix if you don't have those who are out there shooting at critters all the time. Mike and 86er are great sources of knowledge and I would go with what they said more times then not. Why they are more interested in successful hunts then marginal hunts.
Now if you have linotype bullets they are just not good on large game as they tend to come apart and look like buckshot in game and only succeed in making the guide mad and not want to guide you again. Now if your guide says no to what you want to shoot and with such and such a bullet listen to them they hunt more then we do and you should have done your homework and found a good guide in the first place. His knowledge is part of what you are paying him for.

[Bogie35]

This is a great thread!
Lots of good info. I've never shot cast. I always assumed that, because of its simpler design, cast would yield more predictable performance.
Now I know that the opposite is true.

Although I have zero experience, I've always heard great things about jacketed (or "semi-jacketed") hollow point bullets with some exposed lead at the tip.

Thanks for the info!
bogie

[kooz]

Well, I have to disagree with some of what I have read here for sure. Your original question was about .357 and .41 mag calibers, so I think we are safe in assuming you are not going after water buffalo and coastal grizzley or any other dangerous game. If you are talking about blackbear/deer size critters and smaller you would be well and probabley better served by a properly cast bullet. It has been my experience that hard cast bullets are just that, to hard, if you use cast bullets in the pistol calibers mentioned in your original post, then I would say stick with a BHN no harder than about 16(air dried WW's) these will give excellent performance and will not shatter or break up when they impact game. Also as far as being able to take a shot from any angle, your way better off trying this with a properly cast bullet than any hollow or soft point bullet. Properly cast bullets will drive strait thru the size game we are talking about here. It is true that a fast stepping jacketed bullet will do tremendous damage to a deers heart/lung area on the broadside shot and put them down fast, but take that same bullet and try a quartering shot where bone and heavy muscle like a ham is encountered and you can forget it ! you will prababley end up with a deer whose butt cheek is blown off and the bullet never made it to the vitals. Properly cast bullets will sail strait thru deer from any angle like they are a pile of dry leaves. If you leave this thread thinking that jacketed bullet performance on deer size animals is more predictable than properly cast bullets, than you are on the wrong track, but this is just my opinion of course. Good luck with your upcoming hunt.

[Don McDowell]

The only jacketed bullets that I've found to even come close to the dependable performance of a cast swc design in "handgun" cartridges is the Speer half jackets.
The experience I've had with the other jacketed, including the Hornady xtp, they fail to open up any, fly right thru just as would a fmj. The swc design of the cast bullets offer more of a two pronged cutting edge with the meplat of the nose and the driving band, causing a larger wound channel than the somewhat streamlined shape of the jacketed bullets.
I think also that using "hardcast" bullets is more similar to shooting fmj's. I cast my bullets from 9lb of wheelweight, and 1lb of pure lead. I like a bit of expansion if possible. From the amount of deer, antelope and elk I've shot and seen shot it always seems preferrable for the bullet to stop on the farside of the animal, and not exit. If a bullet exits most of any advantage gained from fpe is lost. 2 holes almost always result in the animal leaving the spot of the hit. Entrance and no exit the majority of the time will result in the drt (dead right there).