S&W M&P Early Model .38 Special and +P Ammo

I would not.

S&W tells us +P ammo is safe in any all steel revolver with a model number. (1957 on) Some claim any post WWII all steel revolvers are safe with +P ammo. Your revolver is neither. I would not and I don't think you should either.

NO, it is not safe.

Standard pressure .38 Special ammo is safe, preferably with a lead bullet. (17,000 psi or below)

Edit: try this ammo
https://www.ammunitiontogo.com/prod...-38-special-fiocchi-148gr-lead-wadcutter-ammo
or
https://www.ammunitiontogo.com/prod...spec-remington-umc-158gr-lead-round-nose-ammo

Or similar ammo.

I have an early m and p from 1948, Smith stated when I asked before and they said any post war .38 should be fine with plus p. It's important to note that today's plus p loads are about equivalent to the original .38 loads. The plus ps of yester year were hotter and those would be the ones you want to stay away from. Now even when I shoot .38s I don't shoot plus p loads but I wouldn't hesitate to put a couple of boxes in an older 40s m and p.

It’s probably safe but not necessarily a good idea. The gun is not going to blow up but you will increase wear.

Poster #4 knows what he is talking about. Here is the best read on +P ammo. It is at best the equivalent of the original 38 Special ammo that was meant to be a big step up from the 38 Long Colt round it replaced. And it was and then later dumbed down to what you get now marked 38 Special.

http://shootingwithhobie.blogspot.com/2009/01/p-phenomenon-by-saxonpig.html

Manufactured in 1940/41?
Would you want your 70 year old plus granma running triathlons?

P5 Guy said:

Manufactured in 1940/41?
Would you want your 70 year old plus granma running triathlons?

Click to expand...

If the gun is structurally sound there is absolutely no reason not to shoot and carry it. The gun can easily handle today's plus p loads. If he had a box of 70's super vel rounds than I'd advice caution. It is a betrayal to history and the men that crafted and carried these weapons to let them rot in a safe.

If you read the link I posted it pretty much tells you that +P is at best what the original 38 Special was. And the guy that wrote the article used an older gun with loads that exceed +P and did no harm to the gun. If the OPs gun was able to fire original 38 Special loads then the new +P stuff should not hurt it. My version of +P might be a different story.

I have one from before S&W started hardening the cylinders, so I take it easy on that one (it shipped in 1917). Anything after 1919 I wouldn't worry too much about. I have a 1960's Speer reloading guide that calls for 6 grains of Unique with a 158 grain lead bullet, so .38 Special used to be loaded pretty heavy, as others have mentioned.

I have a 1948 M&P and I will not shoot my .38 Special +P ammo in it. That's because my ammo is bumping up against the 20,000 PSI limits!

Again, because the OP said his M&P is not post WWII I advise him to be extremely careful what he shoots in that wonderful old revolver. There is nothing wrong with standard pressure 148gr HBWC ammo or 158gr LSWC/LRN ammo for the range.

Please don't assume I mean to say for you to turn your .38 into using .38-44 loads but the worry of using plus p of today is a mute point to me.

I don't think you run a chance of blowing up your gun, but my guess would be it would help shoot it loose a lot faster but either way, I wouldn't take the chance. And since nobody else did, I will ask the question. Why would you want to? Shoot the lightweight wadcutters which are more enjoyable anyway and have a gun that will still be shooting when you are long gone.

How in the world would loads that the gun was designed for shoot it loose faster, jeeze this is an m and p Smith and Wesson we are talking about there is literally a gazillion of these things made.

Ted Murphy managed to wear out a couple of K Smiths back when IDPA SSR power factor was 125 and it took +P in most brands to do that.
I don't know what "a lot of rounds" meant to Saxon Pig - I think he was once proud of a 350 round program - but a competition schedule of match and practice will use a whole great lot of ammo.
Probably more than you plan.
I just wouldn't go to the expense.

Its got a hear treated cylinder and as was stated, the older ammo topped out at what today are considered plus p pressures. You wont blow it up, but a steady diet will lead to reduced lifespan

Gun Master said:

I think what most are saying, is that since +P was introduced, they have lowered the loading now to what was nearer the standard load. You won't blow up the gun, but you might loosen the screws and fittings with a steady diet of +P. For guns shot less often, like in a drawer beside the bed, it wouldn't hurt to have 6 rounds of +P.

Right guys ?

Click to expand...

I am specifically stating that today's plus p loads are equal to the standard loads of yore. The gun was designed for standard loads so logic dictates that if today's plus p loads are equal to the old standard and today's standard is even less then today's plus will NOT accelerate wear on the gun like people believe. If you shoot the old timer plus p loads or hot .38 loads then absolutely the gun can shoot loose or even blow up depending on the charge. But for today's loads, the gun will be fine. For heaven's sake people are shooting guns made from the 1800s the damn 1940s was not truly that long ago in the big scheme of time.

Who knows what and why the factory is doing, but they do seem rather soft.
But for the handloader, things haven't changed much. Data in Lyman 49 of 2008 is not significantly different from Lyman 44 of 1967. 2008 velocities are a bit lower because they were using a 4" vented pressure test barrel instead of a real 6" revolver. If you want the old standard of a 158 at 850 fps, 3.5 grains of Bullseye should still do it for you.

I think the best thing to do for full power in a .38 is to use lead bullets. The friction of a jacket can sap a lot of energy when you are operating at black powder levels, which is where the .38 Special started out. One shooter got 967 fps with black, although out of a 7.5" barrel.
Unless you just like tinkering with alloy, lube, and diameter, the now-common coated lead bullet seems the way to go.

Jim Watson said:

Who knows what and why the factory is doing, but they do seem rather soft.
But for the handloader, things haven't changed much. Data in Lyman 49 of 2008 is not significantly different from Lyman 44 of 1967. 2008 velocities are a bit lower because they were using a 4" vented pressure test barrel instead of a real 6" revolver. If you want the old standard of a 158 at 850 fps, 3.5 grains of Bullseye should still do it for you.

I think the best thing to do for full power in a .38 is to use lead bullets. The friction of a jacket can sap a lot of energy when you are operating at black powder levels, which is where the .38 Special started out. One shooter got 967 fps with black, although out of a 7.5" barrel.
Unless you just like tinkering with alloy, lube, and diameter, the now-common coated lead bullet seems the way to go.

Click to expand...

I agree with using lead bullets. Preferably some sort of flat as opposed to RN, Keith SWC is the favorite.

Unless you are shooting at man or beast, there is no reason to avoid the roundnose.
As Phil Sharpe said, the true Keith SWC is heavy with long bearing surface and will not deliver the velocity of the Sharpe design. Or other makes meant to seat short enough for .357 Magnum.
Would that affect the zero of a fixed sight revolver? Probably not much.

Jim Watson said:

Unless you are shooting at man or beast, there is no reason to avoid the roundnose.
As Phil Sharpe said, the true Keith SWC is heavy with long bearing surface and will not deliver the velocity of the Sharpe design. Or other makes meant to seat short enough for .357 Magnum.
Would that affect the zero of a fixed sight revolver? Probably not much.

Click to expand...

Guess that would just depend on the application for the weapon. I've used Keith SWC for coup de grace shots on a couple of deer. They work great for coyotes and racoons as well. Never had to shoot a man with that load and I hope I never have to

Or keep your old style hammer block clean.

Jim Watson said:

Unless you are shooting at man or beast, there is no reason to avoid the roundnose.
As Phil Sharpe said, the true Keith SWC is heavy with long bearing surface and will not deliver the velocity of the Sharpe design. Or other makes meant to seat short enough for .357 Magnum.
Would that affect the zero of a fixed sight revolver? Probably not much.

Click to expand...

Also if not shooting at man or beast why not shoot the lightest and most comfortable load instead of the hottest. I get so tickled when I go to the range. There is always some young guy with a 44 or 357 mag that is only shooting the hottest loads he can find. I'm sure its an ego trip. They are all over the target if on it at all. It takes an experienced shooter to control heavy magnum loads. I'm a firm believer that at least half of the people out there carrying guns would be much better off in a gunfight if they had a load lighter than the one they are carrying. Give me accuracy and follow up over power every time. "A hit with a .22 is much more deadly than a miss with a .44"