THINK .38 SPECIAL (NOT .357)

golden said:

...the .38-44 load.... THEY DID NOT RECOMMEND THE K-FRAME Military & Police REVOLVER TO USE THIS AMMO.

Jim

Click to expand...

Actually, at least in the late 40's... they did.




Honestly, I am dumbfounded that people still think that "+P" loads are like stuffing your cylinder with dynamite. The gun ain't gonna blow up. It's not gonna fall apart. It's not gonna wear out. People have been shooting Heavy Duty and "+P" factory and handloads for generations now in their K frames and even J frames.

S&W used an N frame to make their .38 Heavy Duty mainly because it was 1930. Even regular shooters were not used to any kind of real recoil. Most pistols simply didn't kick that much. The .45 acp was often considered a monstrous beast that kicked like a mule. People today may laugh at that, but at the time, heavy or sharp recoil was a problem. The N frame was chosen because it would be heavy, and reduce some of the recoil.

Zendude and Stophel,

The problem with the +P loads is that when police used them all the time and not just as carry ammo, the K-frame could stretch or go out of time. You could replace the parts for the timing issue, but if the frame was damaged, you probably had to junk the gun.

My agency used the +P+ load and replaced it. The real problem with this load, was that it was not consistent. We had 1 shot stops and then failures to stop.

We replaced it with the .357 magnum and used the 110 grain jhp as standard issue, but some units had the 125 grain sjhp ammo. The problem there was the 125 grain could fracture the forcing cones on our S&W K-frame revolvers (I and the rest of my class at the academy were issued model 13's with 3 inch barrels and round butts). We heard these were FBI rejects.
They were relatively light, compact and not hard to shoot with the 110 grain load. Liked them for off duty carry. However, I was soured on the K-frame be the continuing problems when using .357 ammo.


CLEAN97,

The Super Police was a horrible load that used a 200 grain lead round nose bullet. It had even lower velocity than the 158 grain lead round nose and in one test, it could not penetrate the side glass of an American car. The Chief of the LAPD once said he liked this round because it was so weak, an officer shot with his own gun would probably survive!

Pat Riot,

I considered my last model 19, a gun with a terrific trigger and a pair of ROPER style stocks, a really great .38 Special. It just had problems when shooting a steady diet of .357 magnums. I can shoot .38 Specials through my S&W model 15's, so the model 19 did not make sense. If I have a .357, I want to be able to shoot .357 magnums in it, like my favorite RUGER Security Six.

Jim

Stophel,

Have you seen any other recommendations from S&W, like in the 50', 60's, 70's or now? They must have really been worried about losing business to COLT. I would not even consider shooting the real .38-44 loads in a K-frame on a regular basis.

Also, in the 1930's, were shooters still shooting the .45Long Colt? KEITH was writing about heavy .44 Special loads after blowing up a .45Long Colt. Then within a few years, S&W brought out the even heavier recoiling .357, so I do not think recoil was the reason for using an N-frame. Elmer KEITH published some heavy loads that have been reduced in the loading manuals, since he published them. For good reason.

Also, I cannot imagine anyone wanting to shoot a .38-44 type of load in a J-frame. At least not twice. If you think these heavy recoiling loads will not harm your gun, then fine. I will save them for a .357 and never, never in a J-frame.

Jim

Golden, I bought theS&W model 19 just because I wanted one. I knew when I bought it that there were issues with the forcing come with light loads. I do shoot it with 158 grain magnum loads on occasion. It’s a very accurate revolver with the right .38 Special loads.

As someone who is generally drawn to the classic and traditional in the handgun world, it's kind of strange to me that I've never had much affection for the .38 Special cartridge.

I have several revolvers chambered in .38 Spl., but almost all of them are unfired/ANIB 1930s and 1940s Colts that I swiped at an estate sale a few years ago for below-market prices (several Officer's Model, Official Police, and Police Positive Special revolvers). I grabbed a 1957 Officer's Model Match at the same estate sale that I do enjoy shooting, but it nonetheless generally gets left behind for something in (at least) .357 Mag. on range days. I have never fired a single round of .38 Spl. in any of my .357 Mag. revolvers. When it comes to shooting wheelguns, I like to feel it and hear it, and the .38 Spl. is just a little too tame, I suppose. If I had any interest in shooting small-frame revolvers, I would probably feel differently.

I do not carry a revolver but a smallish 9mm semi auto, yet, I love shooting revolvers. I reload and for simply punching holes in paper at 25 yards, the .38 Special is not only sufficient but suited perfectly well. Miculek's old standard load was 2.8gr of Bulleye behind a 158gr bullet, making for a very soft .38 Special load. Over the course of well over one hundred thousand .38 Special reloads alone I have saved a lot, a whole lot of powder and saving powder equals saving money.

By the way, the bullseye revolver record has been set with a S&W 14 and is still unbroken.

I have a couple of 357mag k-frames as well as several k's in 38spl. The 357s spew lots of flame and a thunderous, ear-splitting report.

Very impressive.

But I'm one of those guys who prefers the old 38spl, even for carry. Mine's a 642, BTW.

Everyone loves magnums..........till arthritis sets in.

golden said:

The problem with the +P loads is that when police used them all the time and not just as carry ammo, the K-frame could stretch or go out of time. You could replace the parts for the timing issue, but if the frame was damaged, you probably had to junk the gun.

Click to expand...

golden, I am sorry to quibble, but have you, with your own eyes, seen a S&W K-frame that was stretched and out of time from shooting +P loads? Not the +P+ ones you mention later? I am not arguing with you, but I am surprised that would happen with any post-WWII K-frame. Unless it was shot so much that even mid-range wadcutters would have worn it out, of course. I have been surprised to learn new things many times here, so I would not doubt your word.

I've owned dozens of 357 Magnum revolvers over the years. Mostly S&W, but plenty of Ruger, Taurus, and Colt thrown in. I almost never shot 357 ammo in them. All I ever shoot is a piece of paper, and they don't take a lot of killing. I just really like the 357 guns like the Model 19, Security-Six, and the Python.

Still I agree with those who say there is something about a dedicated 38 Special revolver. I've cut my herd back quite a bit over the years, but still keep a Model 15, and a Colt Trooper in 38 Special, both from the mid 60's.

Model 15-2 1966



Colt Trooper, 38 Special Test target in the box is dated 12/27/1965

Tallball said:

I like them both and have various revolvers chambered in both.

357 is fun in large revolvers.

38 special is nice in smaller revolvers.

I've purchased them with that in mind.

Click to expand...

Same here, and a light alloy J-frame in .38 Special hits my hand harder than an all steel 6" full lug barrel .357 magnum revolver any day of the week. Both firing ammo allowed by the rollmark on each gun.

professir said:

Everyone loves magnums..........till arthritis sets in.

Click to expand...

For me it's the double action trigger pull, more than felt recoil, that is giving my early arthritis fits.

Do you have a 357 Blackhawk?

If I curl my pinky underneath the plowhandle grip, hold it a bit looser than a DA revolver, and let it curl up a little bit with the recoil, it is gentle on my wrist, hand, fingers, etc. For me it is gentler than shooting a SA/DA revolver SA.

That has helped me a lot as my arthritis has progressed.

Tallball said:

Do you have a 357 Blackhawk?

If I curl my pinky underneath the plowhandle grip, hold it a bit looser than a DA revolver, and let it curl up a little bit with the recoil, it is gentle on my wrist, hand, fingers, etc. For me it is gentler than shooting a SA/DA revolver SA.

That has helped me a lot as my arthritis has progressed.

Click to expand...

The only single actions I have are rimfires or blackpowder. My finger joints and knuckles of my shooting hand are developing pain when squeezing or pulling things, like double action triggers. Rimfire or centerfire.

mcb said:

I agree OP.

I am a 357 Magnum hater.

If I had a quarter for every-time I have read on a gun forum that, "I have a 357 Mag J-frame that I only shoot 38 Special +P in." I could buy one of those mean little 340 PD's and throw it in a river.

My CCW revolver is a S&W 442 and my woods carry revolver is a S&W Model 10 heavy barrel. That old Model 10 currently is getting carried more than all my other handguns combined (revolver and semi-auto) If I need more omph than 38 Special I step up to a revolver who's caliber starts with a 4. I hunted deer for several years with a S&W 610 and now am using a M29.

I do own two 357 Mag revolvers. My Ruger Blackhawk convertible has more 9mm through it than 357 Mag, but mostly gathers dust in the back of the gun cabinet. My S&W 627 is my gamer-gun and gets fed a steady diet of hot loaded 38 Short Colt. It has had less than a box of 357 Mag fired in it since I bought it.

The worst thing I ever did to my ears was shoot my 357 Mag revolver without hearing protection. I am not saying it's a good idea but I can shoot my 38 Special revolver without ear-pro and not be left with my ears ringing the rest of the day after the experience. I can even shoot my 10mm Revolver without ear-pro and its more pleasant than shooting a 357 Mag without ear-pro.

IMHO the 357 Mag is a Jack-of-all-Trades and thus Master-of-None. For anything I would use a revolver for I have a better choice than 357 Mag.

YMMV, and yes I have my asbestos underwear on for the flaming I am likely going to get for the above post.

Click to expand...

Confound you! And confound the execrable calumnies in which you assay to involve the mighty .357.

Your pitiable screed would have brought mirth to my heart and tears of condescending joy to my eyes, were it not for those more impressionable forum members here assembled, members who in a spirit of sincerity and good will have come to ask that we share with them our wisdom.

To spit in their faces, as you have moistly done, by not only failing to acknowledge the 357 Magnum as the Queen of Calibers (and one of only two that can guarantee a one-shot stop to even the clumsiest shooters), but by going on to burden these innocent forum-members with falsehoods so miserable that I hesitate even to dignify them with quotation here...

Why, I have half a mind to report you to the Revolver Subforum Administrator.

All I know is my gp100 5 inch half lug ATE up Winchester 110 gr 357 magnums. I could shoot those all day long. I haven’t ran anything hot through it yet. Felt like mild 38 specials in the smaller guns. I do like the BANG and FLASH at the range. You know when “that guy” is shooting magnums. Bap bap bap bap-bap bap BOOOM!! Oh boy!!!

pairof44sp said:

Confound you! And confound the execrable calumnies in which you assay to involve the mighty .357.

Your pitiable screed would have brought mirth to my heart and tears of condescending joy to my eyes, were it not for those more impressionable forum members here assembled, members who in a spirit of sincerity and good will have come to ask that we share with them our wisdom.

To spit in their faces, as you have moistly done, by not only failing to acknowledge the 357 Magnum as the Queen of Calibers (and one of only two that can guarantee a one-shot stop to even the clumsiest shooters), but by going on to burden these innocent forum-members with falsehoods so miserable that I hesitate even to dignify them with quotation here...

Why, I have half a mind to report you to the Revolver Subforum Administrator.

Click to expand...

Bravo, I had to look up calumnies and expand my vocabulary.

But though mighty, your fiery rebuttal in defense of the 357 Mag, the lowly Jack of all Trades, has been turned by my asbestos underwear and my wisdom gained from years of experience using revolvers to do battle against hordes of cardboard silhouettes, falling steel targets, and their most evil captain, the Texas star. Just this past weekend I had tasks that required I venture into the deep dark wilds and my skills where put to the test. I was sorely set upon by the the devil's favorite and cunning tempter, the serpent. Despite being outnumber 7 to 1 by those rattling vipers I did not retreat but did battle, armed only with my noble Model 10, loaded with the guardian's choice of 38 Special. Thus armed, I did emerge the victor from the trial. I have little doubt the 357 Magnum would have left me arrogant with the corrupting power of the Magnum and I would have turned from the true path of accuracy, and would have failed the trial, succumbing to the vipers poison.

mcb said:

Bravo, I had to look up calumnies and expand my vocabulary.

But though mighty, your fiery rebuttal in defense of the 357 Mag, the lowly Jack of all Trades, has been turned by my asbestos underwear and my wisdom gained from years of experience using revolvers to do battle against hordes of cardboard silhouettes, falling steel targets, and their most evil captain, the Texas star. Just this past weekend I had tasks that required I venture into the deep dark wilds and my my skills where put to the test. I was sorely set upon by the the devil's favorite and cunning tempter, the serpent. Despite being outnumber 7 to 1 by those rattling vipers I did not retreat but did battle, armed only with my noble Model 10, loaded with the guardian's choice of 38 Special. Thus armed, I did emerge the victor from the trial. I have little doubt the 357 Magnum would have left me arrogant with the corrupting power of the Magnum and I would have turned from the true path of accuracy, and would have failed the trial, succumbing to the vipers poison.

Click to expand...

Ah, a true devoté of Saints Patrick, Smith, and Wesson!

Love my Ruger LCR 9mm, None of the noise of the 357 nor the flash, no where near the brutal recoil of the 357. the 9mm this side of pleasant before going harsh. Love the ballistics.

That said, I love the Smith 642 and the lightness and ease of carry.

http://mousegunaddict.blogspot.com/search?q=lcr+9mm

chicharrones said:

For me it's the double action trigger pull, more than felt recoil, that is giving my early arthritis fits.

Click to expand...

Mine is pretty bad. So I HAVE to have a DA/SA revolver. Recoil is a problem too. I may end up just using my Kimber Micro. Even the weight of the Colt Cobra is bothering me. Getting old is not for sissys. ;p;

But though mighty, your fiery rebuttal in defense of the 357 Mag, the lowly Jack of all Trades, has been turned by my asbestos underwear and my wisdom gained from years of experience using revolvers to do battle against hordes of cardboard silhouettes, falling steel targets, and their most evil captain, the Texas star. Just this past weekend I had tasks that required I venture into the deep dark wilds and my skills where put to the test. I was sorely set upon by the the devil's favorite and cunning tempter, the serpent. Despite being outnumber 7 to 1 by those rattling vipers I did not retreat but did battle, armed only with my noble Model 10, loaded with the guardian's choice of 38 Special. Thus armed, I did emerge the victor from the trial. I have little doubt the 357 Magnum would have left me arrogant with the corrupting power of the Magnum and I would have turned from the true path of accuracy, and would have failed the trial, succumbing to the vipers poison. [/QUOTE]

MY hero!

S&W model 15 w/ 2" barrel is one of my favorites.

Monac,

No, on the frame stretch, not personally. I am going on what Massad AYOOB wrote about the model 19/66 and the K-frames in general. His writing on the problems with the model 66, got him in hot water with S&W. It seems that stainless steel is more susceptible to overheating and caused more problems for model 66 owners..

On the out of timing, I purchased a S&W model 10 and it has gone out of time and been repaired several times.
Also, way back in the 90's, when I was issued a S&W model 13, several of the guns issued to my class had to be taken back by the service for problems. One froze up solid on the target range one day. We had not gotten to using magnums rounds at that point, just .38 Special +P. Overall, out of about 46 guns issued, there were various problems with about 12 guns.

I purchased two model 66's for uniform carry and gave up on them. I went to an L-frame 681 and it has worked much better.


Shoebox,

The 5 inch RUGER GP-100 is one of my favorite .357's. I personally think it is one of the best overall .357 magnum revolvers for shooters who are after more than a personal defense revolver.
Long live the mighty .357!

Remember, not every target may be made of paper or leave you alone!

Jim

golden said:

Monac,

No, on the frame stretch, not personally. I am going on what Massad AYOOB wrote about the model 19/66 and the K-frames in general. His writing on the problems with the model 66, got him in hot water with S&W. It seems that stainless steel is more susceptible to overheating and caused more problems for model 66 owners..

On the out of timing, I purchased a S&W model 10 and it has gone out of time and been repaired several times.

Click to expand...

Thanks, golden! I have Ayoob's book about his favorite handguns. I will re-read the chapter about the S&W Military & Police.

I did not know that +P loads would make a revolver go out of time faster than standard pressure loads either. Just one of the many things I have learned here!