Light 38spl loads

[kidneyboy]

It’s hard to beat 2.7-2.8 grains of bullseye with a 148 grain HBWC for a pleasantly shooting .38 special load.

And accurate !
I have loaded thousands of these over the years.

 

[Walkalong]

I’m another “no filler” guy. I tried them, didn’t really help, had much better luck choosing the right powder(s) To get better numbers with less position sensitivity.

 

[3rdTennCoB]

With light loads taking up little case capacity, I will seat wadcutter flush to take up some of the excess space, but say I use LRN bullets and crimp at the crimping groove, is there any consequence in shortening the case a bit? Maybe a quarter inch at most to take up some of that space? Kinda turn it into a bit of a 38spl "short"

 

[.38 Special]

The two issues which come to mind are that 1) after firing those rounds you will need to aggresivly brush the chambers to remove the "crud ring" which can prevent full length rounds from fully seating, and 2) it just isn't necessary.

 

[3rdTennCoB]

Why would it not be neccessary? Is there little chance of a squib due to excess case space if they are full length, loaded with say 2.8 2.9g of hp38 with a bullet set at the crimp grove/start of the ogive?

 

[DudeFromSweden]

With light loads taking up little case capacity, I will seat wadcutter flush to take up some of the excess space, but say I use LRN bullets and crimp at the crimping groove, is there any consequence in shortening the case a bit? Maybe a quarter inch at most to take up some of that space? Kinda turn it into a bit of a 38spl "short"

You don't reslly have to crimp 38special at all, so don't get too hung up on the crimping groove. .38 Special nailed it in his post really, and as to your follow up question, if you load below published charge weights, at the specified oal, you can absolutely run into problems with squibs.

Seating a LRN like you would a WC and then just straightening out the belling has one major drawback I can think of, it's fiddly with speed loaders. For me, the benefits of not risking a squib greatly outweighs that for my plinking and bullseye loads. Another drawback is, as I stated in my previous message in this thread, that the loading data to go by is a guesstimation at best, so please stay safe and decrease oal in increments, looking for signs of excess pressure if you go that route!

 

[Riomouse911]

If you want a great starting/training load try a coated 146 gr RN from Eggleston bullets and 3.1 gr bullseye in.38 Spl cases. They load a bit long in .357 cases, so watch the OAL to be sure it fits in your revolver cylinder.

This shoots well in every .38 and .357 I own with minimal recoil.

Stay safe.

 

[fxvr5]

I made some test rounds (5 rounds each) with light charges of Winchester 231. Used SNS coated 148 grain DEWC seated flush. Fired from a S&W Model 67 with a 4" barrel. Some were fired powder forward, some powder rearward. There was no significant difference in those speeds, so I'm showing the average.

2.4 gr Winchester 231 = 612 fps
2.2 gr Winchester 231 = 569 fps
2.0 gr Winchester 231 = 526 fps

You might recall that the 2.2 grain load was the minimum listed in the Hornady manual, already posted. The Hornady manual showed 2.2 grain of 231 for 550 fps from a 4" Model 15. My speed with 2.2 grains of 231 is pretty close to that.

I might load more later and with a larger sample size, but these results looked encouraging in that the speed was high enough that they should not result in a stuck bullet - in my opinion!

YOUR EXPERIENCE MIGHT BE DIFFERENT. If you decide to try this, load plenty for a fair test. Shoot them over a chronograph so you can monitor the speed. My criteria for a 'safe' load (should not result in a stuck bullet) is around 500 fps from a 4" barrel. Expect a 100 fps loss if shooting with a 2" barrel.

Use this criteria and this load data at your own risk. Not all 148 grain bullets will act the same with the same load, so proceed with caution.