[rainbowbob]

I've recently joined IDPA and the rules state that ammo must meet a certain ""Power Floor". This is determined by the weight of the bullet X the muzzle velocity.

I shoot a M 15 K frame (.38 spl). Most factory .38 spl ammo doesn't meet this power floor spec. Which is completely counter to IDPA's stated mission - but that's another thread. I've concluded that I will need to shoot +P to insure making the power floor in .38 spl.

So here is the question:

What is the consensus on shooting lots of +P through an older, all-steel K frame?

I believe the M 15-3 was made before +P came on the scene, so as far as I know it's not rated for it (because it didn't exist). Please correct me if I'm wrong.

My assumption is that a well-made, all-steel frame would not be damaged at all by by +P. If the newer lighter frames can take it - why wouldn't it? Again, please correct me if I'm wrong.

[I imagine this has been debated already - but I've never been able to get the search function on this site to work for me.]

[GRIZ22]

If you call S&W Customer Service and give them the serial number they will tell you if your 15-3 is okay with +P. I think it may be.

[w_houle]

What is the consensus on shooting lots of +P through an older, all-steel K frame?
You can get by with a few. Exactly how many is a few is a question well debated, but my take is no. A cylinder full + a few speed loaders? Sure! Competitive shooting like that? Not unless I already had plans of replacing that gun in a very short order.

[earlthegoat2]

You will find that older 38 special loadings acually exceeded the pressures of todays 38 +Ps. Doesnt make sense to me either. It is possible that Smith and Wesson will tell you not to use it still though because like everything else in the US they have to be careful about being sued so their lawyers tell them to say you cannot use +P in anything older.

That gun should be able to digest a steady diet of +Ps with no ill effects. But it was never rated for it, oooooooooo

[Jim Watson]

I'd quit agonizing over it, buy whatever 158 grain lead roundnose I could find, and go shooting. You will not be chronographed except at major matches and local shoots will be very understanding about the current lack of choice in ammo.

Especially considering that Fiocchi, one of the recommended brands that DOES come in above the power floor, was giving one of our guys multiple misfires on Saturday.

Handloading is The Answer but requires time and equipment you perhaps don't care to put into it. And primers are not all that available now anyhow.

[rainbowbob]

You will find that older 38 special loadings actually exceeded the pressures of today's 38 +Ps...That gun should be able to digest a steady diet of +Ps with no ill effects.

I've read this before, which is why I thought it wouldn't be a problem. Any idea how to find pressure specs on the old loads (and why don't they make them anymore)?

[w_houle]

Okay, so +P might be only 10% hotter than standard

[rainbowbob]

I'd quit agonizing over it, buy whatever 158 grain lead roundnose I could find, and go shooting.

I agree, Jim...BUT...

I want to play by the rules, and I plan to shoot the state match next year and (although it's a long way off) I want to get used to the ammo I'll use for that.

Handloading is The Answer

Again, I agree...BUT...

As you guessed, it's time and money I don't want to invest right now. I realize it is probably inevitable, however.

Admittedly, the bur under my saddle is the fact that the power floor requirements for SSR are counter to IDPA's stated mission. I wonder if that power floor was established at a time when .38 spl loads were more potent as earlthegoat said.

I realize it is unrealistic and somewhat pissy for the "new guy" to want to change the rules before he's shot his classifier or his second match.

Which brings me to another question...do they chrono the classifier? If so - I need to solve this problem before then.

[Oro]

Any idea how to find pressure specs on the old loads (and why don't they make them anymore)?

Up until around the mid-70s, .38 Special was 20,000 psi, and it was only 'lowered' by SAAMI - the European industry org., CIP, still uses this level as their limit. SAAMI now defines the US standards as 17,500, and by extension .38 +p is 10% higher or 19,250.

I have verified this in the past in a SAAMI/CIP comparison chart published online, but I don't have the link handy right now.

I think your options are pretty much three-fold: 1) Buy hottest +p you can, 2) reload, or 3) find a friend who shoots the caliber in the competition and buy some from him.

With the volume you are likely to be shooting, I think reloading is going to pay for itself pretty fast and solve all your problems. As a simple history though, IDPA was established, I think, two decades after the .38 Special limits were changed.

[JohnKSa]

Up until around the mid-70s, .38 Special was 20,000 psi, and it was only 'lowered' by SAAMI - the European industry org., CIP, still uses this level as their limit. SAAMI now defines the US standards as 17,500, and by extension .38 +p is 10% higher or 19,250.I suspect that up until around the mid-70s, .38special pressure was measured in CUP, not psi. CUP and psi are two different measurement methods and units--and they are not at all equivalent.

In addition, comparing CIP (not CUP) and SAAMI figures is difficult as the measurements not made the same way.

To date I've not seen any conclusive evidence to support the common allegation that modern factory ammunition is watered down compared to ammunition available in days of yore. I have seen a lot of confusion caused by mixing CUP measurements with psi measurements, confusing psi numbers measured using the CIP technique with psi numbers measured using the SAAMI technique, misunderstandings caused by manufacturers shortening standard barrel lengths for measuring advertised muzzle velocities, etc.

[rainbowbob]

I think your options are pretty much three-fold: 1) Buy hottest +p you can, 2) reload, or 3) find a friend who shoots the caliber in the competition and buy some from him.

I think you are right about those choices, ORO. I know you know a little something about S&W K frames...what about shooting a steady diet of +P through a little used, super tight, M 15-3?



I've not seen any conclusive evidence to support the common allegation that modern factory ammunition is watered down compared to ammunition available in days of yore. I have seen a lot of confusion

If (as you suggest)...

...factory ammo IS as potent as it was in the 70s...

...and given that +P is reportedly 10% more pressure than that (whatever that is)...

...does that suggest a steady diet of +P is too much for a decent steel K frame?

[ArchAngelCD]

It's my opinion any post war all Steel revolver can be safely shot with commercial +P ammo because the current ammo that's called +P is not as "hot" as the hotter standard ammo of the past. Back in the day the pressures for a .38 Special were well over the current limits of only 17,000 PSI and .38 Special +P ammo was first rated at 21,500 PSI, then 20,000 PSI and now only 18,500 PSI. Most of the stuff on the marker marked +P doesn't come close to 18,500 PSI so I say shoot away. My comments exclude the really hot stuff put out by CorBon and a few others but I'm sure Remington, Federal and Winchester +P ammo is just fine. (Again, IMO of course)

[Oro]

I suspect that up until around the mid-70s, .38special pressure was measured in CUP, not psi. CUP and psi are two different measurement methods and units--and they are not at all equivalent.


Correct. But CUP was not the only method used - transducers have been around since the 60s. The technical data is available online about the different measurements and variations. The current differences between CIP and SAAMI standards are standardized in PSI and published. Yes, there are possible technical anomalies, but they do represent the best efforts of series scientists to be comparable.

Problems arise when comparing figures stated in CUP straight to PSI figures - they aren't comparable, but pressure transducers have been used in the industry since the '60s, so it's not impossible to have accurate PSI measurements going back decades.

Bob - Based on what I know, I would have no problem with any amount of +p in a post war K frame like ArchAngelCD said. Will it wear the gun a little faster? Yeah, a teeny amount. Is it unwise or unsafe? No.

[Oyeboten]

If memory serves, the 1898-1899 Loadings for .38 Special, in Black Powder, had a 158 Grn RNL Bullet, going 950 fps out of a six inch Barrel.

Would this not meet the 'IDPA' requirements? ( Lol...could they say "No"? )


Anyway...while on the matter of the '+P' Cartridges...lets all remember that the occasionally encountered "+P+" .38 Special Ammunition/Cartridges are a lot hotter, and, should only be fired from a .357 Magnum, and, never from a .38 Special Revolver.

[Old Fuff]

Such a can of worms.... :banghead:

1. When someone says "older S&W K-frame" it can be anything from the first ones made in 1899, to maybe last year. For the purposes of this discussion I will say "Post World War Two (1946).

2. It used to be that the numbers derived for .38 Special loads in manufacturer's literature was obtained using 6" barreled revolvers. Later they went to vented 4" ones in test fixtures. More accurate results, but obviously subtracting 2 inches of barrel length does make a little difference.

3. Firing today's mainstream Plus-P ammunition in a post-war K-frame will not blow up the gun, nor stretch the frame. It may however cause accelerated cylinder end-shake. The condition is easy to fix, but you do need to watch for it. Battering of the cylinder's notches, caused by fast double-action shooting, and slamming the cylinder opened and closed during speed loading when game playing will cause more wear then anything the ammunition might do, and this is unavoidable and will happen regardless of the ammunition used.

4. Also look out for some Plus-P ammunition that's loaded by smaller specialty companies that have a reputation for "high then the others performance." Regardless of how you do it, it takes X-amount of pressure, in Y-length of barrel, to drive Z-weight of bullet at a certain velocity.

[SaxonPig]

This whole nonsense with +P is getting real old.

Factory +P is NOT A HOT LOAD or even A WARM LOAD. It is, in fact, a very mild load that is 3,000 PSI BELOW the maximum allowable pressure for the caliber.

If is says 38 Special on the barrel it can shoot any amount of the weak +Ps you want. They really are a weak load. A 125 at 925 FPS? Give me a break. That's a wuss load for sure.

If you call S&W their lawyers will tell them to tell you to buy a brand new gun as that's all they "OK" for +P. What a load of horse manure.

This is a 1942 M+P pictured with the 500 +Ps and some of the 600 +P+s (125@1150) that I shot through it for a lark.


http://www.fototime.com/979CC61C28BAB00/standard.jpg

[Jim Watson]

That brings up something I have wondered about in terms of wear and tear and suitability of older or lighter guns for full power ammunition.

Bubba's Bullet Boutique says that with special order powder, they get a 158 grain .38 Spl up to 979 fps at standard chamber pressure.

Major Big Ammo Mfg Co. buys reasonably suitable powder in bulk and sells a 158 grain .38 +P at 850 fps.

Joe Schmuck can only find fast burning wadcutter powder, magnum primers, and stiff jacketed hunting bullets in the post election panic, shops all sources for the heaviest "recipe" ever published, and ends up with that 158 grain bullet at only 750 fps but with +P+ chamber pressure because of the component mismatch.

OK, whose ammo is going to be the hardest on a gun?
Is Joe's high pressure - let's say 20% over standard for +P+ - going to put axial stress on the frame and loosen it up by actually stretching the topstrap?
Or is Bubba's B.B.'s Best going to pound it loose from recoil with a bullet launched at 30% higher velocity even though the chamber pressure is not great?
Or maybe the factory +P will combine enough pressure and recoil to shake things loose more than either?

[Old Fuff]

Major Big Ammo Mfg Co. Doesn't necessarily use reloader's canister lot powder, but instead develops a load for a particular lot number of powder. After careful testing they know what they're going to get. Then they load x-number of cartridges, and assign that quantity a cartridge lot number. Selected samples are tested to see if the production run duplicated laboratory performance and pressures. The system isn't perfect, as on occasion a certain lot number of cartridges is sometimes recalled - but usually the performance is predictable, or if off is in a downside direction.

Joe Schmuck looks in his handbook for a load that will give him what he wants. Unless he has a chronograph to check velocity (he knows the bullet weight) he may or may not be getting what he expects, and it's unlikely he has any way to check pressure, except by looking for signs on the fired cases.

As for the gun-gamers, if they are going to allow .38 Special revolvers they should also allow regular .38 Special ammunition. But that's another matter. Any wise competitor planning to attend a major tournament where there is an ammunition power factor will have had his/her choice chronographed well before it’s time to leave.

Bubba's Bullet Boutique's business depends on the customer belief that they can get more velocity for less pressure using a particular weight bullet. Maybe, but if that was possible the big guys would be doing it too. However when it comes to high-end loads, they have to have one that will be within specification, regardless of the barrel length the cartridge is fired in.

And depending on the powder, barrel length can make a difference in both velocity and pressure.

[sidheshooter]

Two observations: one, I have shot literally *thousands* of rounds of +P (and hundreds of rounds of +P+ corbon 158 gr LSWCHP "RCMP") through a K frame model 64 and it's still a lot tighter than some revolvers are new. Granted, it sounds like my 64 is a little more recent than your 15, but I'd buy a used 15 in good shape and take it to IDPA with whatever plus P made the floor and shot the best. There is a lot out there in the world to lose sleep over; this is not one of those things (IMHO, of course).

Secondly, I asked Tim Sundles at buffalo bore's bullet boutique the exact question that Jim Watson mentions (related to a minty model 12-3 that I had recently scored), and his response was this:

Without getting into long explanations jad0110 basically has it right.

Recoil is not going to cause any problems with alloy frames. Peak pressure
and the curve used to get there will cause all of the problems with revolver
wear. Powder/primer/bullet selection is the key to high speed loads that
operate at relatively low pressures.

[Jim Watson]

Thanks, that is what I was wanting to know. Of course the source has an interest in that explanation, but it is something to go by.

[rainbowbob]

Now we're gettin' somewhere! Thanks for all the helpful responses.

Some of what I've concluded based on the input so far:

Most .38 spl +P will make power floor

Most .38 spl non +P doesn't.

IDPA rules should reflect that reality if they're going to allow .38 revolvers to compete.

A nice tight M 15-3 will handle plenty of +P.

I bought this revolver because I wanted to learn to compete with it. It's a good shooter, and any of the damage I do using it to play games can probably be repaired.


Let the games begin!

Now if I could just find about 1000 rounds or so of +P...

[SaxonPig]

JohnKSa- I have actually tested 38 Special ammo from the 1960s and 1970s and had another researcher share his findings on 1950s-1970s ammo he tested. Velocities are generally about 100-120 FPS less on new ammo.

Here's the chart provided to me.

Chart #1:

Some .38 Special velocities actually measured (not claimed by the manufacturer) from a 4" Colt Official Police:

Remington 158 grain lead made in the late 1960s-early 70s...840 fps
Peters 158 grain lead made in the 1950s...800 fps
Western Super-X 158 grain lead made in the mid-late1960s...810 fps
Western 150 grain metal-piercing made in the mid-late 1960s...1000 fps
Remington 158 grain lead "Hi-Speed" made in the 1950s...920 fps

My personal observations are similar to the above with most 1960s & 1970s 158 grain loads running in the 840-870 range. Current standard loadings from the major manufacturers using 158 grain bullets run 730-750 FPS, or around 110-120 FPS less than the older stuff. Current factory ammo is indeed watered down from what it once was.

Refuse to believe if you prefer.

[KyJim]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this yet but Smith and Wesson's owners manuals specifically state that +P ammo is okay in the all-steel revolvers which have the model number inside the yoke. This coincided with some improved metallurgy around 1957. So, a 15-3 should be good to go.

[JohnKSa]

I have actually tested 38 Special ammo from the 1960s and 1970s and had another researcher share his findings on 1950s-1970s ammo he tested. Velocities are generally about 100-120 FPS less on new ammo.VERY interesting, that is the first hard information I've seen indicating that result. I recall we had a similar discussion about 3 years ago, but at that time you were relying on published velocity figures for your comparisons. I didn't realize you had done some actual velocity testing or acquired results from actual velocity testing since that time.

In fact, the only really decent evidence I had seen to date was an article I read in the Aug/Sep 2006 issue of Hanguns in which the author/researcher chronographed a good bit of vintage ammunition vs modern stuff. His conclusion was that there was essentially no difference in terms of pressure/velocity and he attributed the common claims to the contrary to the changes in the way advertised velocities were measured over the time period in question. In 1977 (about the time most folks target as the time when the ammo got "watered down") SAAMI began pushing the ammunition manufactures to begin chronographing SD/LE revolver cartridges in 4" vented test barrels as opposed to the much longer (8" and longer) unvented test barrels they had been using. The published velocities naturally dropped significantly.

So now we have two similar tests with contradicting conclusions. I wish life were simpler...Recoil is not going to cause any problems with alloy frames. Peak pressure and the curve used to get there will cause all of the problems with revolver wear. Powder/primer/bullet selection is the key to high speed loads that operate at relatively low pressures.I can't see how this makes any sense. Short of catastrophic issues I believe that what wears guns out is recoil--parts banging against each other when the gun is fired.

I'd say that the load that generates the most recoil (Bubba's) is hardest on the gun--and that is true right up until Joe Schmuck packs enough powder in a cartridge to stretch something or blow something up.

In other words, hotter loads will wear out a firearm faster than lighter loads even if both are well within the pressure limits of the firearm. How much faster? Depends heavily on the loads and on the firearm. In some cases it's essentially a theoretical difference in that neither load will wear out the gun in a lifetime. In other cases it might be a very practical difference.

[DBR]

The thing that stretches a revolver frame is the case head pushing against the recoil shield resisting the force of the expanding propellant gas pushing against the base of the bullet. Even though the bullet is accelerating out of the barrel the gas is trying to expand the volume of its container while the bullet is in the barrel. This force is resisted by the frame. This force is a function of pressure and to a lesser extent the impulse that occurs when the case hits the shield.

The recoil moves the whole gun as a piece (not accounting for the inertia of the parts).

[JohnKSa]

The thing that stretches a revolver frame...I consider stretching the frame to be a catastrophic issue. I was talking about the revolver loosening up over time, developing endshake, timing issues, etc.The recoil moves the whole gun as a piece (not accounting for the inertia of the parts). Ideally the recoil moves the whole gun as a piece. But to make that true the gun wouldn't be able to have any moving parts. In reality the gun is made up of many parts and all of the moving parts have to have a certain amount of play between them or they will bind. That means that when recoil moves the gun, those parts bang against each other. Heavy parts like the cylinder can strike a pretty good blow to their neighbors and eventually that can result in more play which turns into a downward cycle.

[jfh]

The CIP rating for 38 Special is =< 21,750 PSI, not 20,000 PSI. This metric / European standard has no standard pressure or plus ratings; just the one standard.

Here (http://www.intermin.fi/intermin/images.nsf/files/33CA651FED8A01F0C2256FBE003048AF/$file/PIST+REV+IV+haku+02.pdf) is a link to a PDF file of CIP pressures for various cartridges. (The Home Page (http://www.lapua.com/index.php?id=1195) is Lapua Handgun Data.) Note that the pressure is given in BAR. For 38 Special, the Maximum Average Pressure is 1500 BAR. This is the lowest, BTW--the Proof pressure is plus 30%.

and here (http://http://www.centauro-owners.com/articles/psibar.html) is a BAR-to-PSI converter.

1500 BAR = 21,755.7 PSI.

added on edit: Note that these handgun cartridge pressures were primarily standardized in 1984, and this chart revision is typically for 2007. IOW, it is current information. With this in mind, I have to speculate about the nature of U.S. firearms--e.g., those produced for SAAMI ammunition guidelines. Do you suppose that since 1984 S&W or Ruger have shipped 38 Special handguns with 'stronger' cylinders (or whatever) for their European contracts, or that they simply have made them to one general standard, and that any 38 Special handgun manufactured / sold in the U.S. will handle CIP loads. My bet is that they do.

And, on a related issue--about those BB 158-gr. 38 Special Heavy loads: I chronoed them at over 1000 fps from two different 2" barrels--an M&P340 and a 640. For the life of me, I cannot see how that ammo runs under even CIP standard pressures.

Jim H.

[SaxonPig]

Bear in mind that the writers make their living off advertising revenues and the companies buying the ads want us to believe they have not lowered velocities.

I believe what I see more than what a writer who wants to protect his job says in print.

Back in the 1980s the late Charles Askins wrote of ammo companies reducing loads. It's been known for a long time to be happening.

[Old Fuff]

Rainbowbob:

I bought this revolver because I wanted to learn to compete with it. It's a good shooter, and any of the damage I do using it to play games can probably be repaired.

Yes and no. On one hand you have possible damage related to the ammunition you use, and on the other damage caused by the stress related to use in competition.

The second will likely be the more serious, especially damage caused by the cylinder stop battering the notches in the cylinder during fast double-action shooting. This can be repaired, but not inexpensively. Extensive fast double-action shooting can result in the cylinder stop battering both the window in the frame that the "ball" (the part that locks the cylinder) passes through, as well as the cylinder notches. A one-time repair requires a special cylinder stop that is wider then standard, but if the gun loosens up again a new cylinder will be required.

I have no desire to discourage you from using your model 15 in competition, but I do want you to understand all of the possible consequences, not just those related to ammunition.

There are ways to reduce cylinder notch battering, but they require expert fitting of the cylinder stop to insure full engagement in the notch, and making a relief cut on one side of the ball.

[DBR]

JohnKSa:

I should have said "stresses" rather than "stretches" although in the extreme the stress causes stretch.

The individual parts banging around during recoil is mostly a function of their inertia which I mentioned.

[rainbowbob]

I have no desire to discourage you from using your model 15 in competition, but I do want you to understand all of the possible consequences, not just those related to ammunition.

Thanks, Old Fuff. Your comments on anything related to revolvers is gospel as far as I'm concerned.


Extensive fast double-action shooting can result in the cylinder stop battering both the window in the frame that the "ball" (the part that locks the cylinder) passes through, as well as the cylinder notches.

I'm not very fast...so maybe I'll be OK. ;)

I'm willing to risk once-a-month outings that involve no more than 150 rounds at a time with this good old shooter. I'll let you know how it holds up.

[Jim Watson]

I wonder how long a gun lasted Ed McGivern or how many rounds Jerry Miculek gets out of a good revolver. A friend's PPC revolver was pretty loose after 150,000 wadcutters and the barrel was eroded about halfway down. But he never noticed until he loaned it to a guy who stuck a bullet, shot it out, and bulged the worn barrel.

[Old Fuff]

I'm not where my copy of Fast and Fancy Revolver Shooting is, but in the book McGivern went into that, and perhaps someone that has the book at hand can offer some insights. I do remember that the number represented a considerable amount of shooting. Also I believe that most of it was done with handloaded ammunition that used a modest charge of powder behind a 158-grain full-wadcutter. That isn't a typo. He had a mold that cast 158-grain wadcutters. The book has a full chapter on reloading ammunition during pre-World War Two days.

I will also note that the cylinder stop in his pre-war revolvers were fitted in a slightly different (and better) way then later production.

[rainbowbob]

Thanks, Old Fuff. Your comments on anything related to revolvers is gospel as far as I'm concerned.

In fact, I learned about the desirability of the Model 15 from comments by Old Fuff, and decided I had to have one as a result.

[Old Fuff]

No!

No!

No!

I want them all. It's an addiction...

(Old Fuff clutches a model 15 to his bosom... :evil: :D)

[ArchAngelCD]

Oh man, I want to clutch a Model 15, really!!! :banghead:

[earlthegoat2]

Me too,

http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll66/earlthegoat2/SDC11395.jpg

[Old Fuff]

looks very clutch-able to me... :D :cool: