Mako,
Go back to my #14 post and read the 1st line. You are the only one here to give an analytical statement that can be used in order to make a logical justification. Not just that is the way WE say it is and you have to accept it or you are stupid. I never saw or remember seeing this factor mentioned in this posting or any posting about round nose bullets.
Thanks for that relevant info. that I never looked up before trying to question and justify my argument line. Nor had I ever read in any of the reloading manuals that I have and it is ssseveral. Even Venturino, in his "Shooting Lever guns of the Old West" book used only the default statement (page 135) --"As stressed in many places in this book, only a flatnose bullet should be used with any tubular magazine lever action. The .38 Special has mild recoil, but a roundnose bullet, especially a hard cast one, could set off a primer in the magazine". All this with no real reasoning or justification for the statement. Even his blanket statement (and many others peoples) was wrong and the 30WCF cartridge is my proof. When he gets to talking about the 30-30WCF page 219, he writes -- "Every bullet manufacturer has a proper .30-30 bullets with either round or soft nose". A total contradiction to his statement in the 38 Special section.
Mako I will still go with your quantifiable info.
Thank you very much.
RoyceP,
You need to go back into my posting and reread, especial the statements where I say I do use only the original Winchester designed bullets for 44/40, 38/40, 32/20, 45/60, 40/60 in Winchester molds, just because I can and like to. I even load the 30-30, 44Mag & 56/50 with flat nose bullet for image. I recently bought a 357 rifle for fun and Yes I did work up a Lyman 358311 with flat nose added; a Lyman 358665 bullet; and a Lee 358-125 bullet. Mainly because I like the looks and functions. Because of Mako's info I will now put a flat nose on the Cramer 358-158-10B molded bullet and work up a similar loading. And the reason is only because of Mako's response.
What I cannot, nor would not just take, is an arbitrary, You Must for everything (when history shows something else existed, see above), without having a Why like Mako provided. I am not a Stupid follower with 30+ years of safe reloading and shooting. What I cannot accept is just telling a new shooter or reloader you just have to without telling them the Why's or Wherefores.
Thanks
editted while Abilene was posting. Just added the Venturino book info.