[learn2shoot]

Are either of these 3 interchangable. I want to say NO; that they are all mutually exclusive.

[robertbank]

No, you were right.

Take Care

Bob

[Strings]

heh... when I first picked up my .38S&W, the guy at Gander Mtn (where I went looking for ammo) tried telling me that .38S&W is the same as .38spl. Unfortunately for him, I had the cylinder from the pistol with me (I anticipated the problem)...

Mas was present when I bought my .38S&W (an old Enfield service pistol). He said that there are some good SD loadings out there for it. It's a nice, easy shooter, although ammo is a bit pricey (as it's uncommon). I actually want to get another Enfield, and have it modified for carry (be more in gunsmithing fees than the base gun will cost)...

[Jim Watson]

I would be interested to hear what "good SD loadings" there were for .38S&W. I don't think I have ever seen anything but the original (back to 1876)146 gr RN, 200 gr RN Super Police, 200 gr British .38-200, and the 178 gr British FMJ adopted because they got worried the Krauts would spank them for using lead bullets. And I wouldn't know where to get anything but the 146 except by handloading.
Comparable to .380 with heavier bullets at lower velocity.

[Strings]

I can't honestly remember who he said made 'em: CorBon, or one of the other "premier" manufacturers? Can't recall...

If I was going to use a .38S&W as a carry piece, I would NOT feel wrong using handloads. Then again, I take steps to avoid the possible legal troubles that have been outlined about handloads and SD...

[pete f]

9 mill bore, =.355 inch

.38 special bore= .357 inch

.38 S&W bore = .361-.362 inch.

plus the cases are completely different and in no way is there an interchangeability process, (a into b, but not b into c etc)

[robertbank]

The Edmonton City Police carried the Enfield .39S&W until the late sixties. We had a bank robbery occur and two officers emptied their guns into the back window of the fleeing car. All the rounds bounced off the glass. City swtiched to the .38spl and now the police there carry the .40S&W Glocks.

For self defense there are a lot better cartridges out there.

My uncle carried one across NW Europe back in the mid 40's. Never fired the thing. The fact he was commanding a squadron of Shermans might have had something to do with it.:D

Take Care

Bob

[Strings]

Sorry, but i HAD to resurrect this one... :D

First off: the Brits found no problem with the .38 S&W in the 200 gr loading. And coming up with a hollowpoint shouldn't be all THAT difficult (and would be fun to boot).

Second: as a defensive piece, I shouldn't need to shoot at any cars.

The idea behind making a "carry Enfield .38" would be to have a truly ambi revolver: for that, you need a top-break. Besides... I think it would be a fun gun to own!

I have plenty of "good CW guns". I even have some "great CCW guns". This would be a "fun CCW gun"... ;)

Strings: thread necromancer

[seeker_two]

.38 S&W bore = .361-.362 inch.

Hmmm....I wonder if you could convert an Enfield revolver to moon clips and use 9mm Makarov.....or at least use Makarov loading data......

[Old Fuff]

Strings:

The Old Fuff also has several "correct" CCW handguns, but that doesn't stop him from occasionally carrying a .38 S&W Safety Hammerless... :what:

But anyway, if you want to have fun (and why not?) consider that the Enfield barrel can be considerably reduced without effecting the ejection system. Can't say that about a hand ejector.

Also this revolver has a Colt-style "V" mainspring, so the bottom of the butt can be substantially shortened, although you would have to make custom stocks.

On most examples the hammer is already bobbed...

I don't think the required modifications would be particularly difficult or expensive.

So I say, have at it! :cool:

[robertbank]

Whether or not the Brits used this revolver is really not relevant. The cartridge is anemic in the extreme. Loadings of 2.5 gr of Bullseye are not what you call earth shaking. Fun little inaccurate plinker but that is about it. I have no doubt if you were to hit a man at close range in the right spot he would die eventually. But....

If you accept all of that and want what it is then it is a great little cartridge. Just don't expect more from it than that.

It really is to bad nobody produces a similar size revolver with modern steel for more powerful cartridges. A strong top brake revolver is much faster to reload for most than a swing out cylinder IMHO.

Take Care

Bob

[Strings]

Like I said, this would be a "fun" gun. For carry it would be, at most, a back-up: carried cross-draw on the weak hand side, so either hand could access...

[ArchAngelCD]

Hmmm....I wonder if you could convert an Enfield revolver to moon clips and use 9mm Makarov.....or at least use Makarov loading data......
I'm sure a 9X18mm round would blow up almost any .38 S&W revolver, maybe even the Enfield No.2. They just weren't made to take that kind of pressure. Other than the Enfield the Max pressure for a .38 S&W is 14,500 PSI. The 9X18mm Makarov produces pressures of ~25,000 PSI even though there is no SAAMI spec for it. It's not had hot as a 9X19mm Luger @ 35,000 PSI but heavier than a 9X17mm (.380 Auto) @ 21,500 PSI. At pressures of up to and possible over 25,000 PSI I highly doubt a top-break .38 S&W will be able to hold together.