I would think a longer bullet would help, as well as weight toward the rear of the bullet. So heavy hollow point bullets may tend to be more accurate?

just my opinion and loading for decades it has a lot to do with the type dies you use.
I think it is a hit or miss with getting bullets to center as they are pressed into the case.
I changed to hornady dies decades ago for the bullet guide feature.
I think that helps and anytime you can center the bullet tip ,the truer its flight path will be.

Yes, HP are more accurate than RN for the reason you mentioned. But there are a lot of factors that come into play. With barrel fit being high on the list. Any play in lock up decreases the accuracy as well as consistent lockup when it comes to simi-autos. And just like in rifle bullet/powder/primer all play there part, it's just harder to separate out due to the short barrel.

In a revolver, FIT is essential. Meaning the diameter difference between the throat, the area in front of the cylinder....Versus the actual bore diameter.

Same with the slug. A concentric slug, .001" over bore diameter seems to work nicely. Helps with stopping leading too.

Same with having the hardness of the slug coincide with the expected chamber pressure/velocity. So the slug can upset, or obturate to fill the bore, sealing the hot powder gases behind it.

Frankly I haven't found any lead slug design to be compellingly more accurate over another. Talking Keith style SWC's, versus round nose, and the various different combination between the two.

BUT in the .38 Spcl at 750 fps or less, 148 gr hollow base wadcutters , sure seem to be THE most accurate combo available. I've never explored a similar design, hollowbase WC in anything else though. Wonder how they would work in a .44 Special?

Sorry for the rambling...I guess a concentric, properly sized slug of consistent weight, with a length matching ones twist rate...is THE answer.

JHP or JSP offer a more uniform base, part of why I feel they are more accurate. I have bullet molds with HP pins & tested both HP & solid version, little if any accuracy improvement.
So quality bullets that are concentric & properly sized to fit your barrel. Good jacketed then good cast lead, FMJ with open base & then plated last for pure accuracy.

Sorry of the slight drift, but I was wondering how you guys measure your accuracy?

What I mean is this. There are so many variables to handgun shooting, that I can never determine if a load is accurate or not. Draw, align sights, press trigger, etc. I'm sometimes all over the place, but I know it has to be me. I don't shoot handguns with enough frequency to eliminate my shortcomings, so I never get so far as worrying about the ammo's accuracy.

Are you working up loads and then bench resting the handgun, or using some type of protocol to determine accuracy of your loads? Perhaps you guys are just so much better that you have mastered all those skills that make my handgun shooting subpar, so now your ammo accuracy matters.

Perhaps I should just own up to how poor of a handgun shooter I am. I have a whole story about a deer with a broken leg, just sitting there staring at me as I missed 6 shots trying to put it down from about 40 yards with a .357 GP100. I'm pretty sure it wasn't the Buffalo Bore ammo.

I find solace knowing that I could probably hit a bear if it was chewing on my leg. Maybe.

For pure accuracy testing, nothing beats a ransom rest. Short of that, bench resting off sandbags is almost as accurate for a few shots.
I test service pistol at 50ft, i strive for sub 1.5" groups of five. Revolvers go to 25yds, sub 2" groups are the goal. Hunting rigs are shot at 50y with irons, 100y with scope. If i can get sub 4" groups at either, i'm ready to hunt. On really good days though, i can still shoot 2" groups at 25y offhand with a caoable gun & load. "Aim small miss small".

I work up a load for each pistol and test from a homemade bench rest. The rest is a very simple thing made from two short boards joined at 90 degrees. The vertical board has a "V" cut into the top of it to support the pistol frame. A sandbag would work just as well, but I did not have a sandbag, but do have a woodshop.

For hand gun I use sand bags of some kind of rest to stabilize/minimize all movement. Normally support the barrel and my wrists, shooting 2 hands. I shoot at 15 yrds for screening then move to 25 yrds to confirm it groups. Then depending on the handgun (optics) I will shoot at 50 yrds. I'm looking for 2" groups or less in all cases. For rifles I use a lead sled at 100 yrds if it has optics. If not I'm forced to get someone with better eye site that can see the sites. Something these old eyes can not do clearly any more.

quote:

For pure accuracy testing, nothing beats a ransom rest. Short of that, bench resting off sandbags is almost as accurate for a few shots.
I test service pistol at 50ft, i strive for sub 1.5" groups of five. Revolvers go to 25yds, sub 2" groups are the goal. Hunting rigs are shot at 50y with irons, 100y with scope. If i can get sub 4" groups at either, i'm ready to hunt

Pretty hard to argue with this good advise from Fred...Kudos to you senor! Rod

I don't have a whole lot more to contribute than those that have spoken already, other than I've had the best accuracy out of Hornady XTP and HAP bullets in my own hand loads across multiple centerfire pistol calibers.

Depends on the handgun. My single shot handguns like the Remington XP-100 or Contender chambered in bottle neck rounds like the same style bullets their longer barrel stocked rifle counter parts do.

“Normal” handgun rounds are a bit different but I always have good luck with JHP/JSP bullets.

Pistols with optics are pretty good test beds as are pistol caliber carbines. I can’t put 10 rounds inside 2.5” at 100 yards with a Glock 26 but it’s pretty easy with a good load, off the bench with a 9mm rifle.