.38 Special 3-inch barrel performance?

Mr_Flintstone said:

Well, you can go a little above posted .38 Special +P load data if you are loading for a .357 Magnum revolver. Most don’t recommend it because there’s a chance they might make their way into a regular .38 Special revolver. I’d mark them well so there’ll be no mistaking them for regular .38 Special.

You can probably get there with 3N37, N350 ..... They’ll probably be right at the top of the max pressure for .38 Special +P or a little higher.

Click to expand...

Really good advice for the OP on marking the 38 +P+ loads with something ... red tip them with fingernail polish or something. Dip, don't paint ... red or yellow.

As far as those two powders you nailed it. He can do it with either of those. I really like the N350 to get it done though .... recoil shouldn't be bad and neither should the fireball.

Powder Valley has had N350 lately .... not sure about this morning.

A few months ago I was working with my Ruger Sp101 3". This is one of the French Police trade-in revolvers, chambered in 38Spl. The one with the funky - but very comfortable - Trausch grips. These grips are definitely not for concealed carry.

In this pic one can see the French proofmarks - one just forward of the cylinder release button on the cylinder itself, another on the barrel just forward of the frame. There is a third on the frame just forward of the trigger, but bad lighting makes it difficult to see.


Leer TL358-158-2R was the bullet, which is a tumble-lube round nose; the old stand-by for 38 Spl. Mine weighed 160gr with my range lead alloy.

3.4Gr Promo (RedDot) gave me 741 fps , ES 39 SD 12.6 - this was the average of 3 cylinders, so 15 rounds.
A good clean load, easy shooting and accurate. An every day load, as I have boo-coo Promo.

6.4Gr HS-6 (rubbing right up on +P territory, but GRT says 15.6K PSI)
856 fps, ES 49, SD 15
Again, 3 cylinders; 15 round average.
I haven't benched this yet for accuracy, but shooting through the chrony it seemed good. It was a heavier load than the Promo, but did not have excessive muzzle rise.
I wouldn't hesitate to use this load in a defense situation, perhaps replacing the round nose bullet with a flat nose of some sort.

Shivahasagun said:

Working on this again.

I think using less CFE-P is just going to cause more erratic velocities. I've learned a few times now CFE-P really likes pressure. I'm done with it in .38 spl. And .45 acp, and .25 acp.

Which brings me back to Titegroup.

I'm no longer trying to get a "hot" .38 defense load. Getting these 160 gr LHP bullets to 850-875 fps with consistancy & accuracy will be fine.

Haven't checked with the computer program yet but will do that to help get an idea where to start.

Somewhere between 4 and 5 grs of TG probably.

Any experiences with this?

Click to expand...

TiteGroup runs a little hot and tends to be better for jacketed. For that bullet I tend to prefer Accurate #5, Unique, or Universal. I’m pretty sure 4gr of TG will put you into +P territory so I would definitely work up to that from 3.3-3.5 as starting loads. Remember, when you start seeing signs of pressure is the time to stop.

Shivahasagun said:

Yes I did a little research and you're right I'll probably end up between 3.5-4.2.

This is for my 3 inch Colt King Cobra .357 looking for 850-875 with the GT 160 gr lead hollow point bullet.

I went through several stages finding a defense load for this gun. In the end it seems YOU were right because I'm doing what you'd (and probably some others) suggested months ago.

A warm 158 gr load from a steel gun with a good grip and trigger is not only enjoyable to fire, reducing fatigue, but follow-up shots flow rapidly and smoothly. The expansion and penetration of such a bullet is on-par with what we can typically expect from a service-caliber handgun.

Am running a little low on Titegroup. So I may try a different powder if this next trial isn't quite what want.

Click to expand...

The good news is TiteGroup is showing up on shelves again. In another post someone mentioned gas checks for flat base bullets. I haven’t ever heard of such a thing but it seems like it might be a good thing for you try out for your lead loads with TiteGroup. Thought it was worth a mention.

How about trimming a 357 case to 38s legnth? It works fine.

It looks like this thread has evolved over time.

It's not clear if you were trying to load a 38 Special case to be fired at high velocity in a 357 gun or in a 38 Special gun. If you're using a 357 gun, it's safe to shoot at 35,000 psi in either a 357 or 38 Special case. The brass is not weaker nor is it the thing that contains most of the pressure. The thing about loading 357-level pressure loads in a 38 Special case is that your bullet will be effectively seated deeper due to the shorter case. It can make a difference of a tenth of a grain or more depending on the powder. If you stay meaningfully under published max 357 loads, you should be fine.

You will not see signs of pressure exceeding the 38 Special or 38 Special +P limits of 17,500 or 20,000 psi. Brass and primers simply will not show you anything at these arbitrary limits. Brass and primers for 38 may not show signs until fired at over 50,000 psi. That's where extraction will be hard and small pistol primers will start to crater. 38 Special brass and primers are not thinner, weaker, or softer than 357 brass, and the primers are the same ones used regularly in 327 Magnum at 45,000 psi -- a pressure that is exceeded significantly by proof loads. If you're trying to stay under 38 Special or +P pressure levels, looking for signs is pointless.

Moving on to where this thread seems to be today, I will say that Titegroup has some great features. It has been slandered by some reloaders maybe because of how little extra mass of it will risk destroying guns. It is a high-energy powder and very unforgiving. You just can't fit enough Trailboss or even H110 into a case to threaten a 357 Magnum chamber and there is virtue in that. I like Titegroup because it ignites very consistently. That is its greatest virtue to me. High-volume loads can be hard to ignite consistently from shot-to-shot. Small-volume loads of many powders are position-sensitive. The pressure/time curve varies depending on where the powder was in the case. Titegroup is also very clean-burning. Using clean-burning primers, I can fire hundreds of rounds of it and my gun will have no carbon fouling at all. Just a little white ash and copper. Titegroup is also very economical. I can't say the difference to other powders matters a lot to me, but I can get over 1000 rounds out of 1 pound, whereas with other powders I might only get 800 or so.

Shivahasagun said:

Working on this again.

I think using less CFE-P is just going to cause more erratic velocities. I've learned a few times now CFE-P really likes pressure. I'm done with it in .38 spl. And .45 acp, and .25 acp.

Which brings me back to Titegroup.

I'm no longer trying to get a "hot" .38 defense load. Getting these 160 gr LHP bullets to 850-875 fps with consistancy & accuracy will be fine.

Haven't checked with the computer program yet but will do that to help get an idea where to start.

Somewhere between 4 and 5 grs of TG probably.

Any experiences with this?

Click to expand...

Yes and the 3.8 right off the bottle is excellent. The Lyman casting manual is much lower. 3.8 is the highest loading I have seen anywhere for 38spl so there is no working up.

3.8 gn. of Titegroup under a 158 grain LSWC at 1.475" is published at 15,400 CUP, near the SAAMI pressure limit for 38 Special, but still well under the CIP limit for 38 Special and the SAAMI limit for 38 Special +P. It's certainly well-within the pressure limits of a 357 chamber. The thing with a lot of cast lead bullet data is that it's often not specified with respect to Maximum Average Pressure, but to velocities considered optimal for the lead alloy of the specific bullet the data is for. Cast bullets of various alloys and hardness will obturate at certain velocities and pressures and well above those they will lead the bore. You will especially see this in Magnum cartridge data, where the maximum loads in the cast bullet data is nowhere near the pressure limits. The data is likely to be specified to a maximum velocity above which it is believed the bullet alloy being used will foul bores with lead. It is less likely they test each bullet to the point they have to scrub lead fouling from their piezo-equipped test barrels.

If you want to develop the loads further, you might consider the effect of your barrel length. A 3" vented revolver barrel (subject of this thread) is not going to develop the velocities that a 7.7" test barrel does (what Hodgdon used). Hodgdon got 920 fps, but you won't get that with 3.8 grains out of a 3" revolver. In this case, the data is pressure-limited, but with slower powders and higher pressures (+P and 357) it is likely to be limited by the velocities that the bullet likes. For example, in 357, Hodgdon's max load of Titegroup for a Cast LSWC is 5 grains at only 24,900 CUP because by then the bullet is going 1100 fps out of their 10" test barrel. You can load over 6 grains before you get near pressure limits, but by then the cast bullet would be fouling their test barrel. Will it foul your barrel at the velocities it achieves in 3 inches? You could try it and see or use a chronograph and try to predict. A lot of it depends on the bullet you use. Hodgdon lists data for another 158 grain LSWC, from Meister bullets, where they go up to 1300 fps with CFE Pistol powder, but still at only 28,500 psi. The Meister bullet is hard cast.

westernrover said:

3.8 gn. of Titegroup under a 158 grain LSWC at 1.475" is published at 15,400 CUP, near the SAAMI pressure limit for 38 Special, but still well under the CIP limit for 38 Special and the SAAMI limit for 38 Special +P. It's certainly well-within the pressure limits of a 357 chamber. The thing with a lot of cast lead bullet data is that it's often not specified with respect to Maximum Average Pressure, but to velocities considered optimal for the lead alloy of the specific bullet the data is for. Cast bullets of various alloys and hardness will obturate at certain velocities and pressures and well above those they will lead the bore. You will especially see this in Magnum cartridge data, where the maximum loads in the cast bullet data is nowhere near the pressure limits. The data is likely to be specified to a maximum velocity above which it is believed the bullet alloy being used will foul bores with lead. It is less likely they test each bullet to the point they have to scrub lead fouling from their piezo-equipped test barrels.

If you want to develop the loads further, you might consider the effect of your barrel length. A 3" vented revolver barrel (subject of this thread) is not going to develop the velocities that a 7.7" test barrel does (what Hodgdon used). Hodgdon got 920 fps, but you won't get that with 3.8 grains out of a 3" revolver. In this case, the data is pressure-limited, but with slower powders and higher pressures (+P and 357) it is likely to be limited by the velocities that the bullet likes. For example, in 357, Hodgdon's max load of Titegroup for a Cast LSWC is 5 grains at only 24,900 CUP because by then the bullet is going 1100 fps out of their 10" test barrel. You can load over 6 grains before you get near pressure limits, but by then the cast bullet would be fouling their test barrel. Will it foul your barrel at the velocities it achieves in 3 inches? You could try it and see or use a chronograph and try to predict. A lot of it depends on the bullet you use. Hodgdon lists data for another 158 grain LSWC, from Meister bullets, where they go up to 1300 fps with CFE Pistol powder, but still at only 28,500 psi. The Meister bullet is hard cast.

Click to expand...

If your chasing speed a longer barrel is a safer more effective change than increasing powder charge. Trying to move a house with a Honda civic vs a semi is choosing the wrong tool for the job. Putting a turbo on the civic just means you'll smoke the transmission or clutch that much quicker.

I agree completely. I have no use for a 3" barrel. The shortest I have are 5 and 5.5 for concealment, and I'd like to take a crack at carry with a 6, 6.5 or 7. The virtues of longer barrels are manifold. They give velocity with less powder. They do it with lower pressure, and can therefore use faster powders. With faster powders, they deliver the velocity with less muzzle pressure and blast. They're more accurate. They're easier to conceal than big grips. Even so, the subject of the thread is 3". I have a couple revolvers like that, and I'm selling them for that reason alone. One is so awesome except for the 3" barrel, that I'm considering changing the barrel to keep it, but it will require a refinish that will make the job a few hundred dollars more expensive than trading it for a gun already with a long barrel.

westernrover said:

I agree completely. I have no use for a 3" barrel. The shortest I have are 5 and 5.5 for concealment, and I'd like to take a crack at carry with a 6, 6.5 or 7. The virtues of longer barrels are manifold. They give velocity with less powder. They do it with lower pressure, and can therefore use faster powders. With faster powders, they deliver the velocity with less muzzle pressure and blast. They're more accurate. They're easier to conceal than big grips. Even so, the subject of the thread is 3". I have a couple revolvers like that, and I'm selling them for that reason alone. One is so awesome except for the 3" barrel, that I'm considering changing the barrel to keep it, but it will require a refinish that will make the job a few hundred dollars more expensive than trading it for a gun already with a long barrel.

Click to expand...

I like 3” barrels for Specials - .38 and.44 - and really like them with the old Colt Police/S&W cartridges. But for anything I want to use past rock throwing distance I look for 5” or better. Fixed sights are fine as long as I can find a good load that does anything I might want it to do. Adjustable sights are really only important if you change loads a lot.

Shivahasagun said:

Longer barrels are great until you want to conceal your gun somewhat comfortably for hours with an inside the waistband holster in the appendix position when it's over 90 degrees from 11am to 8 pm, crazy humid all day, and you're wearing shorts and a T-shirt going about your busy day in a county of over a million people.



The vast majority of good Floridians who carry a gun at all, especially in summer, (which is May-October) throw a .380 in a shorts pocket.

Click to expand...

I believe this to be a false equivalency. Pushing pressures to increase velocity is not accepting a weapons limitations based on a need. If you want to go fast you don't buy a fully loaded limo you get a motorcycle. Both can do the speed limit no problem. Trying to drag race the limo is what we're discussing.

Shivahasagun said:

Longer barrels are great until you want to conceal your gun somewhat comfortably for hours with an inside the waistband holster in the appendix position when it's over 90 degrees from 11am to 8 pm, crazy humid all day, and you're wearing shorts and a T-shirt going about your busy day in a county of over a million people.



The vast majority of good Floridians who carry a gun at all, especially in summer, (which is May-October) throw a .380 in a shorts pocket.

Click to expand...

You must be in the Miami-Dade, Orlando or JAX metroplex areas. Around the north central parts of the state, most folks carry a revolver, typically a .38Spl or .22Magnum, in a fanny pack or pocket holster; however, the recent pocket-rocket 9mm's have become much more popular.

Most urban workplaces around here refuse to allow on-prem carry. CCW's have to leave their guns in the car or not carry at all. I have only heard of a few schools that have searched employee vehicles for guns back when the safe schools laws were new, and I'm pretty sure those dismissals got tossed and reversed in court/arbitration.

Locking it in the car, in the heat and humidity, renders most guns useless until they cool down to below boiling water temperatures.

The employers that do allow on-prem CCW are private businesses (mainly in transport from what I'm hearing) or are more rural.

In terms of pocket carry, for use at smell-my-breath range, I really don't see any advantage to a .357Magnum over a .38S&W, or a 9mm over a .380ACP. You're not going to be engaging a pack of rabid Ninja warriors successfully with any of the above and if you live where there's serious gang activity, keep in mind those kinds of street urchins routinely engage LEO's without care. They run in packs and don't care if their pack mates go down. I suggest moving to someplace less dangerous.

Pushing what is essentially black powder pressure levels could be compared to drag racing a limo, but it was clarified that the gun being used is actually 357, so the weapon's limitations aren't even being approached.
A more practical limitation that does get exceeded with 357's is the shooter's ability to handle the recoil effectively. A full pressure 357 Magnum load with slow powder out of a 340 PD generates more recoil velocity than the hottest 500 Magnum loads. In the lightest snubnosed J frames and LCR's, the 357 Magnum can have stupid levels of recoil that are incredibly punishing. But it doesn't have to be nearly that ridiculous before it begins to affect the performance of most shooters. The L-frame and GP-100 weren't developed just because of rare forcing cone cracks (a problem that had many other solutions). When revolver users really began to use 357 Magnum, forced by mandates to train with what they carry, it was found that the recoil was excessive for most shooters in Model 19's and Ruger's Six series, and a lot of revolver users adopted the 38 Special +P or +P+. This wasn't a failure to accept the weapon's limitations, but a success in accepting the shooter's limitations.

Today, amongst the pre-eminent instructors in defensive use of revolvers, the 38 Special +P is universally promoted -- but not because they're concerned about the limitations of the weapons to handle higher pressures. They know that factory 38 Special +P ammo will generate an acceptable level of recoil in the kind of revolvers that are popular for defensive use. Factory 357 ammo rarely does. But it isn't the high pressure alone in 357 Magnum that generates the high velocities that results in the high recoil. 9x19mm ammo uses the same pressure levels as 357 Magnum and it's widely promoted for defensive use because of the low level of recoil it generates compared to 40 S&W and 45 ACP. 357 ammo can be loaded to high pressure with fast powders generating modest velocities and recoil, easily matching the ballistics of 9mm but with shorter barrels and a greater variety of bullet types and weights for an advantage in terminal ballistics. If we confine ourselves to the low pressure limits of 'proper' 38 Special loads, we will fail to match 9mm ballistics, especially with shorter barrels.

westernrover said:

Pushing what is essentially black powder pressure levels could be compared to drag racing a limo, but it was clarified that the gun being used is actually 357, so the weapon's limitations aren't even being approached.
A more practical limitation that does get exceeded with 357's is the shooter's ability to handle the recoil effectively. A full pressure 357 Magnum load with slow powder out of a 340 PD generates more recoil velocity than the hottest 500 Magnum loads. In the lightest snubnosed J frames and LCR's, the 357 Magnum can have stupid levels of recoil that are incredibly punishing. But it doesn't have to be nearly that ridiculous before it begins to affect the performance of most shooters. The L-frame and GP-100 weren't developed just because of rare forcing cone cracks (a problem that had many other solutions). When revolver users really began to use 357 Magnum, forced by mandates to train with what they carry, it was found that the recoil was excessive for most shooters in Model 19's and Ruger's Six series, and a lot of revolver users adopted the 38 Special +P or +P+. This wasn't a failure to accept the weapon's limitations, but a success in accepting the shooter's limitations.

Today, amongst the pre-eminent instructors in defensive use of revolvers, the 38 Special +P is universally promoted -- but not because they're concerned about the limitations of the weapons to handle higher pressures. They know that factory 38 Special +P ammo will generate an acceptable level of recoil in the kind of revolvers that are popular for defensive use. Factory 357 ammo rarely does. But it isn't the high pressure alone in 357 Magnum that generates the high velocities that results in the high recoil. 9x19mm ammo uses the same pressure levels as 357 Magnum and it's widely promoted for defensive use because of the low level of recoil it generates compared to 40 S&W and 45 ACP. 357 ammo can be loaded to high pressure with fast powders generating modest velocities and recoil, easily matching the ballistics of 9mm but with shorter barrels and a greater variety of bullet types and weights for an advantage in terminal ballistics. If we confine ourselves to the low pressure limits of 'proper' 38 Special loads, we will fail to match 9mm ballistics, especially with shorter barrels.

Click to expand...

I can agree so if we are indeed talking about a short barreled pistol being used for sd then go get the 38 +p gold dots and we're done. The bullet is designed to operate exactly in the parameters being discussed.