[Byron]

I have a S&W J Frame 38+P. I have found the PMC 132 grain FMJ very accurate. In CC would it seem that penetration at ranges up to 7 yards be more important than less penetration with a hollow point. Comments please on the FMJ from a 2" J Frame.

[Jim March]

158+P lead hollowpoints will penetrate plenty, and will usually expand too.

[Johnny Guest]

My round of choice for defense with the .38 Spl is the 158 LSWCHP+P, either Remington or Win. The 130 FMJ is a great practice load for the small, light, revolvers, but it is hardly a "social" proposition.

The 158 lead HP has enough weight to go deep, even while in the process of expanding. The lightweight JHP bullets, if they expand at all, are pretty lightly constructed to expand in spite of the jacket, and must be driven fairly fast. This sometimes leads to early expansion which may prevent adequate penertation. This becomes a vicious cycle--gotta be jacketed so it can be driven fast, gotta go fast to expand at all, etc. The old fashioned, dead soft lead HP will expand at modest velocity, though it does start leading the barrel after a few rounds. I don't mind cleaning THAT much. :p

Best,
Johnny

[dfariswheel]

The full-jackets ammo you are using is totally unsuited for civilian defense purposes. The problem with full-jacketed ammo is that it's like being stabbed with an ice pick: You may well die, but until shock and blood loss catches up to you, you may not even realize you've been hit. This is known as "failure to stop".

You run a very high possibility of shooting an assailant, who continues to attack even though he may be fatally injured.

Defense ammo underwent a great Sea Change about 15 years or so ago.
Before that, the choices were penetration OR expansion, but not both.

After episodes like the infamous Miami Shootout, the FBI and the ammo companies developed new types of ammo that do BOTH.

The new standards demanded ammo that penetrated deeply enough to insure involvement of the internal organs, but it also had to expand reliably.
Before this, the ammo was either of the old Super-Vel idea of a very light-weight bullet driven at high velocity, or heavy, soft bullets driven at lower velocities.

The new ammo has higher velocities, coupled with totally new design bullets, that use new methods of bonding the bullet jacket to the lead core.

In older jacketed bullets, the lead core was swaged (squeezed) into a jacket. The new ammo uses new methods that lock the jacket to the core, but still "weaken" the jacket so it will expand even at pistol velocities. This new type ammo penetrates deeply, but still expand radically.

Almost any of the newer types of Premium defense ammo from any of the American ammo companies will preform very well.

Two of the most popular (with good reason, they WORK) are the .38 +P lead, semi-wadcutter, hollow point, and the .38 +P 125 grain jacketed hollow point.

Back years ago the standard police round was the .38 Special round nose lead . This was widely known as the "Widow maker" for the numerous failures to stop felons.
The police unions finally forced the departments to adopt the +P lead hollow point, and the problems stopped.

The lead hollow point is particularly effective in the 2" snubs.
Depending on where you live, this is known as the "St. Louis, Chicago, LA, New Orleans, FBI, Federal, or Dallas" load, for the departments that used it. It is also sometimes known as the .38 SPLAT, for the sound it makes when it hits flesh.

Pick any of the modern high-quality defense ammo, and it'll preform well.

[Johnny Guest]

The original Winchester-Western product code for this load was "38MS," which many of us figured meant "manstopper." I wondered if this was their way of paying homage to the old British .455 Manstopper load - - It was a dead soft lead cylinder with a tremendously wide and deep holllow crater up front. Weight was around 265 gr. and was supposed to leave the muzzle of their old break-tops at around 700 fps.

I've never been able to get any of this vintage ammo to try out, but it fascinated me in years past. Like many, I loaded some 148 gr. hollow base wadcutter (HBWC) bullets in .38 Special cases, with entirely too much Unique powder. Testing them in plumbers's sealing compound (remember Duxaseal?:p ) and modelling clay showed that the skirt fragmented and broke off unless velocity was kept well down. Also, accuracy was rather mediocre.

Years later, my Eder Son did similar stuff with the same type bullets loaded into .38 S&W cases. His findings were similar, but his starting velocities were somewhat slower.

For pure short range defense, the poor accuracy and fragmentation is kinda sorta acceptable. For uses where certain penetration and good accuracy are desirable, I still refer the factory LSWetc.

Interesting thing - - Last Saturday, four guys standing around waiting to shoot at a match. Three were pretty knowledgeable cops, and the fourth asked about good defense ammo for his snub. Turned out all three of the peace officers had concealed on their persons S&W J frames, loaded with the exact same cartridge.

At various times, I have furnished that load for both sons, ex-wife, current wife, three lady friends, and assorted others about whose safety I care.

Best,
Johnny

[popbang]

Some reputable sources recommend a 148 gr. wad cutter for use in 2 inch revolvers where expansion is questionable even with lead hollow point semi wad cutters.

[Johnny Guest]

With all respect to you, sir - - -
I have suggested use of standard wadcutter loads as defense ammo for a couple of people with severe arthritis. There are also some who have an absolute terror of the recoil and muzzle blast of a heavier load.

I cannot picture, though, when even the full diameter meplat of a 148 gr. wadcutter would be better medicine that the 158 SWC +P.

The 148 WC is intended to go 770 fps from a six-inch barrel but is probably doing more like 625 from a two-inch. The 158, even if it doesn't expand, is still doing around 800 from the two inch. Additionally, that almost mushy soft lead HP bullet appears to have been carefully designed, and DOES expand, to some extent, even at these fairly modest velocities.

Sorry I don't have the exact figures at hand, but I have chronographed both loads from two-inch revolvers, and this is fairly close.

Best,
Johnny

[popbang]

Johnny Guest,

Here is a writing and a link to some pictures of two individuals who have done testing on various bullets. You can believe it or discount it I simply was giving another option.

Here is from Tactical Forums:

"Unfortunately, out of a 2” barrel, numerous .38 sp bullets which perform well in ideal circumstances, ALL failed to expand in our testing when fired through heavy clothing--this includes the 158 gr +P LSWCHP. For the lightweight .38 Sp 2” J-frames, a very mild shooting, yet still effective load from a terminal ballistic perspective is a standard pressure FULL wadcutter design, as used in target shooting. WHILE NO EXPANSION OCCURS, PENETRATION IS ADEQUATE AND THE PERMANENT WOUND CHANNEL IS SURPRISINGLY LARGE DUE TO THE FLAT FRONT OF THE WADCUTTER DESIGN. The harder the bullet material and the sharper the right angle at the bullet leading edge the better, as this enhances the efficient cookie cutter action of the full wadcutter shape. I highly recommend the use of standard pressure target style 148gr full wadcutters in the 2” .38sp revolvers. " ~DocGKR (emphasis added)

"Out of the 3" and 4" guns, the 158 gr +P LSWCHP work well, especially the Remington R38S12. Unfortunately, NONE of these rounds expand when shot through heavy clothing using a 2" J-frame. Because of this, we have gone to plain old standard pressure wadcutters--you don't lose anything and may gain a slightly bigger permanent crush cavity, as well as make it easier for follow-up shots." ~DocGKR

http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum78/HTML/000282.html

And here is from AmmoLab is David DiFabio's recent short barreled testing:

http://www.ammolab.com/38spcl_-1.htm

I have also searched the site for a remark David DiFabio made that in a 2 inch gun the wad cutters produced as good or better results than other bullets but could not find it.


As far as I am concerned I am not saying that wad cutters are better, as I don't believe in .38 Special out of a two inch any bullet will expand reliably. So, to my way of thinking a bullet that cuts a hole is a good choice. Again, I am not saying you are wrong but I don't believe that a lead hollow point semi wad cutter is the only answer.

[WebHobbit]

The .38's iffy performance from 2 inch barrels is exactly why I switched to .357 Magnum snubs.

All .357 HP loads from 110 grains to 158 (180 may be questionable) WILL reliably expand even from 2 inch barrels. There is no question of that. There is MORE than enough velocity available that these rounds can afford to give some up in a snub and still work well.

[Johnny Guest]

- - -Evaluates that information, and makes one's own choices.

Is a two-inch .38 Special, with ANY load the best of all possible manstoppers? Of course not! Far better to go with a 3" .44 magnum with firebreathing superloads. I carry a .45 loaded with Gold Dots nine days out of ten, myself. But there are times I want to carry a lightweight, compact revolver, and I make MY best choice of what I want to carry in it. I have no stake in your personal choice.

Several years ago, my duties took me to Dallas County Crime Lab a couple of times a month. It is part of the Medical Examiners Office, just upstairs from where the pathologists do post mortem exams on EVERY shooting death victim in Dallas County and several counties nearby. One of the firearms examiners was a shooting pal, always ready to share data - -At least photos of the bullets, and frequently I viewed the actual bullets. The shooting reports were at hand. The least deformation I saw with the 158 LSWCHP was from, yes, a two-inch Chief, when the nose flattened out to approximate full wadcutter shape. The vast majority, though, expanded from about .400 on up to above .500. Again, recall the extra velocity. The .38 bullets were about equally split between two- and four-inch firings, with a couple from 2-1/2 and three-inch guns. I only remember seeing two which had been fired from barrels longer than four inches.

These deaths took place at all seasons, in admittedly mild climate - - -But few Texans are accustomed to REAL cold, and tend to bundle up in temps which would cause our northern brethern little discomfort. So - - - some bullets went in through zero clothing or through t-shirts, but also through several heavy layers. The lighter bullets tended to clog up and fail on heavy clothing - - 115 gr 9mm and 90 to 125 gr. .38s.

I feel that calibrated ballistic gellatin can be a pretty valid test medium, when used properly. I dunno the testing methods of the authorities you quote. But I have seen the "blood bullets" from many dozens of "tests" in the most demanding laboratory of all. I am convinced that I have made MY best choice. Yours may, of course, differ.

Best regards,
Johnny

[popbang]

As I said I am not saying anything is the best, but in a discussion of which bullet is best for a snub nose .38 Special I feel that all options must be at least looked at. Your findings are helpful but so are other sources. My intention was not to prove you wrong but rather to bring out another possible loading.

Myself I carry a .45 loaded with 230 grain Gold Dots also, and like you there are days when I want a light gun. In that I usually carry 148 grain full wad cutters.

[RON in PA]

Tests done at ammolabs.com and in a recent "Handguns" article using four layers of denim in front of ballistic gelatin showed poor expansion of the 158 grain LSWCHP +P load and most others when shot through a snubbie. Does this relate to the real world? I don't know, but the old FBI load sure does have universal approval by most gunrag writers and many that post here. One type of ammo that has done well in denim covered gelatin is the 130 grain Winchester SXT +P.

[Lone Star]

Johnny Guest-

I think I know the man you mean who was with the Dallas forensics lab. He went to a well known ammo maker, and has been a good source of data. He remembers you, and spoke well of you.

I like the lead SWC-HP, which Winchester introduced in 1971. I asked their Dallas rep at that time what the "MS" on the box meant. He said it was, "Maximum Service", and he had to call the plant at East Alton, IL to find out, so I guess that's the official word...

I think Speer's Gold Dot .38 round is probably okay, and I buy the Fed's 129 grain Hydra-Shok when I can't find the lead HP's. I want to try that Winchester SXT 130 grainer.

Col. Rex Applegate studied knife effectiveness in combat, and talked with a Finn who'd stabbed a number of Soviets in their wars. He concluded that a six-inch blade was adequate to reach vital organs. I'd guess that says something about the penetration needed in frontal shootings. Still, the heart is a tough organ, and I want to be sure I get a bullet deeply into it or beyond. Getting a snub .38 bullet clean through a large/fat man's body and cracking or breaking the pelvis isn't easy, but if anything will do it, I think the lead HP Plus P is the bullet that I'd choose. The Gold Dot may be the runner-up.

Lone Star

[Johnny Guest]

I did not name him for various reasons - -A true gentleman, family man of quiet demeanor, working for a rather conservative outfit, etc. A valued friend and one I don't get to see nearly often enough.

Glad to know the official "MS" definition. The first couple of sentences of my 16 June reply were conjecture of purest ray serene, nothing more.

I haven't chronographed the lswchp loads in a few years and don't have my notes at hand. I seem to recall that the Remington version was a few fps faster than the Winchester. I compared the two last week, each from boxes purchased within the past year. The Rem bullet has a slightly larger hollow than the Win, if that's worth anything.

I'm due to chrono some rifle loads here soon, and I'll try to remember to check the two brands side by side, from, let's see - - - Two inch Colt and S&W, four inch ditto, 3.5 inch S&W, and six inch Colt. Don't have a six inch Smith available. I'll also compare two or three 158 gr handloads to see which is the nearest duplicate for practice.

Speaking of which, I just picked up the phone and ordered another box of the Rem from the local retailer.

Best,
Johnny