Loose rounds, Western .38 Special Police.

Interesting.

Never heard of the round.

Can you get your hands on some 38 hi-speed?

That would be interesting too.

Cool post. Thanks for sharing

I found a box of Remington 38 Special 200 grain loads in the early 1980s. The box was just the then-standard green and yellow type, with no reference to police use. It is surprising to me that stuff stayed around that long. Even more surprisingly, it shot better than standard 158 grain RN loads from a Colt Official Police I had back then.

I load a replica of the British 38/200 Mk I load that uses a very similar 200gr hemispherical round nose bullet. I have it going a blistering 600 fps from my Webley Mark IV. Matt's bullets (https://www.mattsbullets.com/) sells this bullet and this bullet as loaded 38/200 ammunition if anyone is interested. It's sized .361 but would not take much to resize it down to .358 for the 38 Special Super Police version.

I load a fair amount of 38/200. Its based on the 38 S&W case, but shoots a 200 grain, RN lead bullet that looks very much like the bullets in your pics. I use the Webley MKI bullet made by Matts Bullets.

It would be interesting to see if the results are similar. I load 2 grains of Unique under them, and get around 625-650FPS from that load.

From what Ive read on it, the load is supposed to work as you describe, and the heavy bullet, while moving slowly, just mashes through flesh and bone, and leaves an ugly wound. It would be interesting to see if that were really the case with them too.

I shoot them out of a couple of S&W British Victory's, and a MK2 Enfield. Its an accurate and soft shooting load, and both guns are a lot of fun to shoot.

Ive been thinking about maybe giving them a try in 38 SPL, just not sure if the .361 bullet would work or not.

Matt's Bullets also sells a 195 grain RN sized for .359. Link. I bought 100 of them last year and loaded them in .38 Special on top of a bit more Unique than I should have, so I only shoot them in my .357s. (No overpressure signs on my fired brass, FWIW.) I still have ~25 loaded rounds left. They really smack a gong hanging at 20 yards hard.

AK103K said:

I load a fair amount of 38/200. Its based on the 38 S&W case, but shoots a 200 grain, RN lead bullet that looks very much like the bullets in your pics. I use the Webley MKI bullet made by Matts Bullets.

It would be interesting to see if the results are similar. I load 2 grains of Unique under them, and get around 625-650FPS from that load.

From what Ive read on it, the load is supposed to work as you describe, and the heavy bullet, while moving slowly, just mashes through flesh and bone, and leaves an ugly wound. It would be interesting to see if that were really the case with them too.

I shoot them out of a couple of S&W British Victory's, and a MK2 Enfield. Its an accurate and soft shooting load, and both guns are a lot of fun to shoot.

Ive been thinking about maybe giving them a try in 38 SPL, just not sure if the .361 bullet would work or not.

Click to expand...

You could by some Lee sizing dies (~$20) that will run on a good close arch reloading press and size them down. .003 would be a fairly easy resize. It is a pretty simple process

I remember back in the 80’s reading about this round in one of the popular magazines of the time. The idea was that a heavy for caliber projectile traveling as a low velocity would be so unstable that it would tumble upon hitting its target. If I remember correctly the Britsh came up with the idea in their Webley MkIV .38 S&W 38/200 in 1922.

Click to expand...

This was a bad idea in 1922 and like most bad ideas people forget over time and try it again. The reason you don't see any of this loading around today is because it took 10 years or so for law enforcement to figure out again how bad an idea it was in the 60's. The 200 grain bullet got a poor reputation in the law enforcement community for its lack of stopping power and poor penetration. It offers no advantage for target shooters so the load died from lack of interest. Now, like a bad penny, the idea that the 200gr heavy bullet in the .38 spl would be a viable load pops up on the internet now and then.

Steve C said:

This was a bad idea in 1922 and like most bad ideas people forget over time and try it again. The reason you don't see any of this loading around today is because it took 10 years or so for law enforcement to figure out again how bad an idea it was in the 60's. The 200 grain bullet got a poor reputation in the law enforcement community for its lack of stopping power and poor penetration. It offers no advantage for target shooters so the load died from lack of interest.

Click to expand...

This is also true for the 158 gr. RNL bullet. Every so often someone will post their amazing new discovery and how well it shoots out of their snub nose revolver.

Steve C said:

This was a bad idea in 1922 and like most bad ideas people forget over time and try it again. The reason you don't see any of this loading around today is because it took 10 years or so for law enforcement to figure out again how bad an idea it was in the 60's. The 200 grain bullet got a poor reputation in the law enforcement community for its lack of stopping power and poor penetration. It offers no advantage for target shooters so the load died from lack of interest. Now, like a bad penny, the idea that the 200gr heavy bullet in the .38 spl would be a viable load pops up on the internet now and then.

Click to expand...

If it works properly, i do'nt see how it is a bad idea now or, especially back in an era before the prominence ov HP designs, then. Yawing upon soft tissue impact is a very effective wounding mechanism in rifle calibers, like 5.45 and the ol' 303 mkvii, and it's common sense that it is in handgun calibers to a lesser extent as well. The fort scott tui ammo is looking promising and a high roader here actually claimed to have noticed a very nice looking wound track in gel when testing a mkii style round ov my favorite caliber, .455 Webley. The problem with the .38 ammo tested here is that the bullet profile is not conducive for yawing as something like a more pointed design like the mki and mkii 455 would be. Simply being long does not lend itself to yawing and can actually be a detriment to such, even at greater velocity(see 6.5 Italian and its tendency to penetration and a small wound track). I believe that the reputation ov the 200gr super police(although i'll here note that I have heard polar reports on this round, with some opinions being very positive) alone should'nt sour the principle ov handgun velocity yawing, as it may very well be that the ammo was not actually effective in what it intended to do in the first place.

I remember these rounds. Wish Winchester still made them. The trend back in the 70’s was lighter bullets at higher velocities with the Super-Vel Company leading the charge with their 110 grain hollow-point. I’m not exactly sure that one was any better than the other one. I reload virtually all my ammo these days and note that where 357 diameter bullets are concerned, there just aren’t any bullets available that are heavier than 180 grains. Couldn’t say exactly why but the whole “heavy for caliber” argument seems to have evaporated. I think these bullets fill a very good niche where penetration is placed at a premium over expansion. Missouri Bullet Company makes a very nice 180 grain “Pug-Nose” with Hi-Tek coating that is heat treated. I load these in my 357 (you have to seat them above the crimping groove & taper crimp these as they’re too long to fit most cylinders if you crimp them in the crimping groove). I load mine over 7.0 grains of Unique in 357 Magnum cases with Magnum primers. My load chronographs an average of 1147 fps out of a 4&5/8” Ruger New Model Blackhawk. Their intended use is feral pigs. Not looking to hunt these but occasionally ran into them when doing chores on some of the property where I deer hunted once. These things can be big, tough and bad tempered. I want a round that penetrates under these circumstances. These meet that requirement very well.

The SUPER POLICE is gone because it was SO BAD!
The LAPD issued it and their chief, DARYL GATES was quoted as saying" he preferred this load because it was less likely to kill one of the LAPD Officers, if they were shot with their own gun.
NOTE: Gunworld magazine staff tested it and found that from a 2 inch barrel, it would not penetrate the car side window or door metal. It was a miserable failure at the one thing it was designed for, stopping power.
Heavy bullet handloads using hard cast bullets are normally fired at 900 fps or faster. Remember the old "REAL" super .38 Special load was the .38-44. It fired a 158 grain bullet at 1100 fps and was found to work fine.

Jim

I'm not so sure it was a totally bad idea. Not saying there aren't much better defense rounds, but there are a lot of experts who say you don't need expansion for self defense and have plenty of evidence to back it up. Personally, I would hate to be on the receiving end of one of those huge hunks of lead. I'm far from an expert, but common sense tells me that you should carry the load you shoot the best and let penetration and expansion come second. Looking at the group the OP shot with his 442, that might be the bullet I put in that gun for carry. If 5 rounds grouped like that didn't stop an assailant, I don't think anything would.

The 200 gr .38 Special was (as is) still an effective loading for defense against soft and/or unarmored targets. I have a pretty healthy stash that is carried in some of my older platforms.

455 Hunter,

Check out the results that LUCKY GUNNER got with their ballistic gel tests. You can compare the excellent expansion of the FEDERAL HST 130 grain jhp to the TOTAL NON EXPANSION of the old Federal 158 gr LSWCHP +P, immediately below it.
I will go with a load that has a chance of working as opposed to one that at best will have only a 50 % chance of working.

I have to completely disagree with you that the Super Police is an effective load. It offers no advantage over the 158 grain lead round nose which earned a terrible reputation with the police officers who carried it and nicknamed it, "THE WIDOWMAKER". At best, the Super Police might penetrate deeper, but the 158 gr. lrn already had a proven history of OVERPENETRATION, so what are you getting?

I would note, that hunting loads (including the .38 Special and .357 magnum) usually use heavy bullets with wide meplats and sharp shoulders, not round nose shapes.

Jim

golden said:

I have to completely disagree with you that the Super Police is an effective load.

Click to expand...

OK. You can carry whatever load your little heart desires. And yes, I am completely familiar with the Lucky Gunner tests, have been following terminal ballistics for 30 years (like reading Marshall and Sanow at the LGS after school), and actually get paid to do terminal ballistics R&D as part of my real job with real gov't and commercial clients.

455 HUNTER,

If you have ballistic research or testing that supports your claim of the effectiveness of the Super Police load, please share it with us. And you can also carry whatever your hearts desire, but the point of this posting was the usefulness of the Super Police load. As far as I can see, there is none.

Jim

golden said:

455 HUNTER,

If you have ballistic research or testing that supports your claim of the effectiveness of the Super Police load, please share it with us. And you can also carry whatever your hearts desire, but the point of this posting was the usefulness of the Super Police load. As far as I can see, there is none.

Jim

Click to expand...

OK. Here a few discussion points (some that regurgitate comments above):

In the post WWI era, the British military performed exhaustive tests on the .38 caliber 200 gr lead hemispherical roundnose bullet at ~600 fps. During the tests, performed on cadavers and live animals, it was found that the lead bullet, being overly long and heavy for its diameter, become unstable after penetrating the target, somewhat increasing terminal effect. The relatively low velocity allowed all of the energy of the cartridge to be spent inside the human target, rather than the bullet passing through.

The testing shown in this thread validates the above- tumbling and 18 inches of penetration, which is NOT overpenetration. The 158 gr LRN loading is usually in the upper 20’s for penetration. All ~140 fpe are deposited into the target over a full depth distribution, not the first 6 inches in the case of an overexpanding hollow point, or wasted out the back in the case of an overpenetrative bullet. I have yet to find a negative performance report about a 200 gr .38 loading (either Special or S&W) when shooting an aggressive soft target in police or military service.

I freely admit that this loading sucks for engaging hard targets, whether it’s an automobile or a guy festooned with AK-47 mags in a chest bandoleer, and is NOT a reasonable choice for GENERAL military and LEO use today. However, for the citizen, there are plenty of worse choices, like the trendy super light for caliber hollow points.

Dismissing them as "ineffective" is foolhardy.

455,

I will have to respectfully disagree.
I have little faith in those old British tests because the U.S. did similar test, the famous THOMPSON-LA GARDE tests. Well the conclusion after shooting cows and corpses for the U.S. tests was that the most powerful round was the 7.63 MAUSER round, so they decided to adopt a .45 caliber round!
Also, the British 200 grain lead round was deemed to be in violation of the Geneva convention, so it was replaced by a 178 grain fmj round. I do not know if the .38-200 actually saw any combat.

And since you are talking about military testing, the U.S. military considers 160 fpe as the minimum value for a round to be effective.

Also, 18 inches is OVERPENETRATION! My agency found that 9 inches minimum is all we need. More than 15 inches is too much. Unlike the FBI testing, our conclusions were not based on one failed gun fight.

More recent writing has shown that over heavy rounds are likely to key hole (basically start tumbling before they hit anything) and could strike the target sideways. You might be lucky to get 6 inches penetration and little damage! This is especially true with short barreled revolvers which are less likely to stabilize an overlong bullet.

Additionally, up until people started studying bullet effectiveness with something resembling scientific methods, the data was untrustworthy. When I was young, I absolutely believed Jeff COOPER, when he claimed a .230 grain fmj .45ACP would stop a gunfight 19 out of 20 times and the 9m.m. was lucky to work 10 out of 20 times As a ball or fmj round, the .45ACP is MORE EFFECTIVE than a 9x19m.m., but not a lot.
Use hollow point ammo and that goes out the door, with many 9m.m. rounds being more effective than the 230 grain fm.
My point being that things change and nothing I have seen so far indicates that the Super Police is effective. The LAPD found that when they used it and dropped it.

Jim

golden said:

455,

I will have to respectfully disagree.
I have little faith in those old British tests because the U.S. did similar test, the famous THOMPSON-LA GARDE tests. Well the conclusion after shooting cows and corpses for the U.S. tests was that the most powerful round was the 7.63 MAUSER round, so they decided to adopt a .45 caliber round!
Also, the British 200 grain lead round was deemed to be in violation of the Geneva convention, so it was replaced by a 178 grain fmj round. I do not know if the .38-200 actually saw any combat.

And since you are talking about military testing, the U.S. military considers 160 fpe as the minimum value for a round to be effective.

Also, 18 inches is OVERPENETRATION! My agency found that 9 inches minimum is all we need. More than 15 inches is too much. Unlike the FBI testing, our conclusions were not based on one failed gun fight.

More recent writing has shown that over heavy rounds are likely to key hole (basically start tumbling before they hit anything) and could strike the target sideways. You might be lucky to get 6 inches penetration and little damage! This is especially true with short barreled revolvers which are less likely to stabilize an overlong bullet.

Additionally, up until people started studying bullet effectiveness with something resembling scientific methods, the data was untrustworthy. When I was young, I absolutely believed Jeff COOPER, when he claimed a .230 grain fmj .45ACP would stop a gunfight 19 out of 20 times and the 9m.m. was lucky to work 10 out of 20 times As a ball or fmj round, the .45ACP is MORE EFFECTIVE than a 9x19m.m., but not a lot.
Use hollow point ammo and that goes out the door, with many 9m.m. rounds being more effective than the 230 grain fm.
My point being that things change and nothing I have seen so far indicates that the Super Police is effective. The LAPD found that when they used it and dropped it.

Jim

Click to expand...

I'll let you guys fight out the terminal ballistics but from my research the Mk I 200gr was not officially "deemed" to be in violation but some in the British bureaucracy thought is might be so to be safe the MkII load with a 178gr FMJ was created to be sure. This happened before WWII and the MkI ammo was retained but only to be used for training. The Webley Mark IV and the copy cat Enfield No. 2 were used a lot during WWII. They were the standard issue side arms for the British military through the war (though some units go older Mark VI 455 Webleys and IIRC some 1911's too). And though they "officially" has transitioned to the Mk II ammo when the war did break out the the high demand for ammo, dispirit and stressed supply lines, etc, resulted in a lot of Mk I still being issued to active combat units and used throughout the war.

golden said:

455,

I will have to respectfully disagree.
I have little faith in those old British tests because the U.S. did similar test, the famous THOMPSON-LA GARDE tests. Well the conclusion after shooting cows and corpses for the U.S. tests was that the most powerful round was the 7.63 MAUSER round, so they decided to adopt a .45 caliber round!
Also, the British 200 grain lead round was deemed to be in violation of the Geneva convention, so it was replaced by a 178 grain fmj round. I do not know if the .38-200 actually saw any combat.

And since you are talking about military testing, the U.S. military considers 160 fpe as the minimum value for a round to be effective.

Also, 18 inches is OVERPENETRATION! My agency found that 9 inches minimum is all we need. More than 15 inches is too much. Unlike the FBI testing, our conclusions were not based on one failed gun fight.

More recent writing has shown that over heavy rounds are likely to key hole (basically start tumbling before they hit anything) and could strike the target sideways. You might be lucky to get 6 inches penetration and little damage! This is especially true with short barreled revolvers which are less likely to stabilize an overlong bullet.

Additionally, up until people started studying bullet effectiveness with something resembling scientific methods, the data was untrustworthy. When I was young, I absolutely believed Jeff COOPER, when he claimed a .230 grain fmj .45ACP would stop a gunfight 19 out of 20 times and the 9m.m. was lucky to work 10 out of 20 times As a ball or fmj round, the .45ACP is MORE EFFECTIVE than a 9x19m.m., but not a lot.
Use hollow point ammo and that goes out the door, with many 9m.m. rounds being more effective than the 230 grain fm.
My point being that things change and nothing I have seen so far indicates that the Super Police is effective. The LAPD found that when they used it and dropped it.

Jim

Click to expand...

I am not going debate you point by point. You are clearly a high velocity and expansion guy, and that clearly puts you in a camp incompatible with older projectile technology and its performance capabilities. Just because something is not the latest and greatest does it become ineffective. You also do not have a good grasp on projectile stability and how it effects in-flight and terminal aspects of performance.

455,

We will have to disagree on which one of us does not have a grasp of ballistics.

Also, I do not have anything against older technology that works. I just question your claim to the effectiveness of this round and your lack of supporting evidence.

Jim

golden said:

455,

We will have to disagree on which one of us does not have a grasp of ballistics.

Also, I do not have anything against older technology that works. I just question your claim to the effectiveness of this round and your lack of supporting evidence.

Jim

Click to expand...

I doubt either one of us have direct personal experience for evidence of effectiveness of the .38 200 gr lead round nose on a human target, so you highlight your favored background information and I highlight mine.

I do entrust that a major world military power (at the time) determined them to be best choice for their new revolver program. I also look the anecdotal evidence of people actually used them on a unarmored human target and have yet to find a story where performance was not satisfactory. If you can share specifics on a actual incident, I would be all ears. I has seen several versions of the LAPD story with Gates or Parker being the Chief in question, so the era is not firmly established.

And yes, your knowledge of projectile stability is just enough to be dangerous, with causation, correlation, and secondary versus primary effects in question.

455,

Since you have posted nothing but that questionable test by the British, I will have to assume you have no evidence to support your belief and you choose to use insults to bolster your case because you have nothing else.


Jim

I love how the British military testing I cite is "questionable", but your sources are perfectly valid.

... and I am the one being insulting.

Once again, if the .38 Special 200 gr is such a miserable failure in stopping hostile human targets, their should be some documented specific incidents that show where COM hit(s) did not generate the desired outcome.

What is your physical evidence of "ineffectiveness"?