Double-Ball for.38 Special

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Oyeboten

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,696
Used to be one could buy .38 S&W Special Cartridges loaded with two round lead Balls of about .36 Calibre.

A .36 Calibre Ball weighs about 80 Grains, so, overall weight of projectile(s) is on par enough with standard .38 Special Loadings.


I have wondered how these would be as a defensive round?


Any opinions?
 
Yes these were Remington facotry loads. When firing them in 4" barrel the spread at 7 yards I remember was not too far apart.
 
I see two possible problems with the idea:
  1. Compared to a standard bullet, a spherical ball would have very little engagement with the rifling, and might not be as stable in flight.
  2. Although the two balls might well have a muzzle velocity comparable to a standard bullet, each hall has only about half the mass of the bullet and will not penetrate the target as well.
 
Seems like I recall a magazine article about double bullet .38 loads, don't remember which magazine. He had a bullet mold that cast a very light .38 wadcutter, which he described as looking something like a tuna can. What I don't recall is the exact weight of the cast slug, except that two of them were heavy enough to make safe loads disappointing in the velocity department. He then rigged something up to cut 148 grain wadcutters in half, and loaded them stacked. Much better results, though they were still a very short range proposition.
 
Most of these 'novelty' loads have dubious accuracy. And hitting what you WANT to hit is an important part of any self defense scenario.
 
7 yard accuracy was decent. One of the gun rags had articles on how to handload 3 and four disc shape lead cast bullet loads in to .38spl's or .357mag caes.
 
The Ball loads are Remington Factory loads, as Moonclip says. I still have a box or two of them, somewhere. At 7-10 yards, the grouping was fairly tight.

It was Dean Grinnel who tested the "tuna can" pellets. IIRC, he had Richard Lee make a mold that was about 1/3 of a 148-gr. wadcutter, and did some of reloading with them. I still have the Gun Digest something-or-other with the article in it, as Jubjub remembers. When Grinnel set the round up right, you got a nice little triangle perhaps 1.5" on a leg at about ten yards.

This work was done in the Eighties, and was a follow-on to the kind of loads and reloading done during the Seventies--i.e., the (in)famous Speer 8 38 Special loads, some of which were really 357-pressure rounds.

Hollowpoints were still quite underdeveloped; It was the FBI work coming out of the Miami massacre in the late Eighties that made this kind of work possible; until then there were no widespread standards for penetration, expansion, lack of fragmentation, and so on. Prior to that, at least one theory of effective PD ammunition design called for more projectiles, even though less penetration was likely.

Jim H.
 
Yeah...'Pucks' or 'discs' do not sound very good...even if they would tumble before and after striking a target...heck, they might start tumbling while still in the Barrel.


I think the double-Ball could be good, if velocity were not too low...but, only for fairly close ranges.Velocity could be anything any 158 Grain would get.


As my question concerns this as a possible defensive round, this would usually be across-a-room distance, or less, possibly much less...where, the Balls might remain in tandem or very close to it...but even if ending up side-by-side, no matter...I doubt they'd wander very much from one-another.
 
Hi jfh,



Interesting...


I've been wondering why simple well-behaving Hollow-Noses, in pure Lead even, did not come about and find favor long ago?


For that matter...do present day 'Gold Dots' 'Hydro-Shok' et al, really behave any better than, or with any advantage over, a 158 grn pure Lead or Lead Alloy Hollow Nose in .38 Special?


Is their mushrooming 'technology' anything more than an excuse to sell gimicky high priced 'hi-teck' Bullets, when right shaped non-jacketed Hollow-Nose Lead would do just as nicely at 'mushrooming'?
 
Oyboten: Well, the Speer / Hornady LSWC-HP 158-gr. bullets were around--that's what made "the FBI Load". But, with the kind of ballistics favored at the time--if not 38 Special, then 357 balls-to-the-wall--the leading was like in the 357 early days. So JHP development started--but they had enough trouble avoiding separation without worrrying about optimized ammo. It was made worse with the Semi Auto changeover for LE, with exponential increase and rounds being shot--

Arguably, the Hydro-Shock design--a post in the middle--will do better expansion with clothing layers than a standard hollow point. I also know that LSWC-HPs tend to plug up a bit more. Federal started optimizing their Hydro Shock cartridges for the given caliber, but then I lost track of them--i.e., Speer grabbed all the attention. FWIW, the Federal 129-gr. PD ammo virtually duplicates the Speer GDSB135-gr--and I think it is Hydro-Shok design, isn't it?

Right now I like the FBI-type rounds--but that's because a 38+P 158-gr. practice round can be built so easily, and you can certainly build carry ammo as well--just tweak the practice round to optimize it for the Speer or Horndy 158-gr. LSWC-HPs.

Carry ammo for perhaps .14 or .15 a round, the last time I bought those bullets. And, built as a 357 round running 900 fps from a 2" barrel, you have a downloaded 357 round, and a potent one.

Jim H.
 
I thought Leading was possible to avoid in .38 Special and even some ways above it's normal range of Velocities by correct choices of Bullet Lube even if using pure Lead Bullets.


Granted...much of this History for expanding Bullets appears to have ended up having to do with ferocious accelerations in short Barreled Revolvers...and, to unusually high fps, where Leading became an issue...which, I suppose would not be a problem in a longer Barrel attaining the same fps, less ferociously.

Jacketed Bullets I believe need quite higher pressures behind them, and strain the Revolver more because of it, than do Lead or Lead Alloy ones of the same weight, for attaining the same fps.


If memory serves, FPS for 158 Grn RNL .38 Special in 1898, was 950, with 3f Black Powder behind it...but, I presume a six inch Barrel.


I have tried finding LSWC 158 Grn Factory Ammo, or, just the Bullets...to no avail.


Anyway...I've been brooding on what Bullet/fps/Cartridge to be considering (even if respecively,)for the (few, if cherished) S&W .38 Special Revolvers I have and may sometimes Carry.

Barrel Lengths are 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.


Only a couple of which would be imagined to be 'rated' for +P.


My thoughts led to recalling the old 'Double Ball' idea...


And, also, for a pure Lead, widely Hollow Nose, 158-ish Grn Bullet...Round-Hollow-Nose would even be fine, I'm sure...or widely-Hollow-Nose-Semi-Wad...or even a Hollow-front-Wadcutter.


And, if with pressures say, at or below 20,000 psi, which any S&W .38 Special regardless of age ought to be happy with now and then, if with the right Powder, if that's enough for the Bullet in question to be going 650-ish from a Snubby, or 950-ish out of a 6 inch Barrel length, should such a Pure Lead Bullet not behave well-enough in expanding?

Heck...I could get these fps out of these Revolvers with 3f BP for that matter...though I am sure various Smokeless Powders once decided, should be able to do better, with out over-pressuring things.


Brooding...musing...learning...


Thanks..!
 
Both the Speer and Hornady LSWC-HPs are low BHNs.

IIRC, the Speer is 7 and the Hornady is 4--they are both swaged rounds. The Hornady seems to be a bit smaller diameter, and can be harder to crimp neatly with thin cases. But neither of them lead up much at up to CIP pressures.

A max True Blue load with a lead 158 is 5.6 for 38 Special; for +P, it is 5.9. 5.6 gr. gives about 750; 5.9 gives about 780 or so from a 2" barrel. At CIP pressures (<=21,750; adopted ca. 1984) I've gotten them up to about 860 from a 2" barrel. 38+P max loads should run out to about 900 for a 4" barrel; beyond that, I am not sure.

The min-to-max for True Blue is 5.0-5.9gr. Buy some, get either the Speer or Hornadys, and build 'em up. BTW, I also like #5 for these kind of loads, but they are dirtier, and True Blue has a really broad sweet spot for accuracy--a grain wide, I found, with only minor shifts in POA.

Jim
 
They were known as the Remington Duo Ball loads, available also in .357 Magnum.
 
I've loaded #000(?) buckshot 2-up in .38SPL and 3-up in .357MAG. It works OK, but as noted is not as good as a good HP. I can send you some balls if you want to try it.
 
im trying to remember if the purpose of the duo ball loads by remington were either to reduce over penetration or to increase the odds of hitting internal organs on the first shot.
2 bullets go through a few inches apart, increase chances of hitting something important like heart or lungs on the first shot.

i know the exotic ammo companies that load 3 buckshot pellets in a 38 claim it reduces blow through, but a .36 diam roundball with 150 fpe on it has teh ability to go through a person. the 32 sw has less energy and has been proven to shoot through dogs and people via fbi autopsy reports.

also, the "disks" are being used in a shotgun loads. 8 or 9 discs of a tungsten material to penetrate door locks or to decrease overpenetration on muggers.
 
I have loaded three tripe O buck in a speer shot capsule in the 38 special.
 
I tried some double and triple ball/disc loads in .357 and concluded they were not worth the trouble. The big advantage of multi-bullet loads is that the bullets spread out and bring suitable blessings to more than one target. That makes some sense in mililtary rifles and machineguns where there can be a lot of targets (as in the mass attacks in the Korean war), but I don't see much point using them in close combat.

The problem is that each "bullet" is light and doesn't penetrate well, and a close pattern (1 or 2 inches at 10 yards) doesn't really add much in the way of hit capability.

The military dual bullet load, in 7.62 NATO, had the base of the bottom bullet angled so it would fly off at a tangent from the other, the exact opposite of what I saw at close range with the handgun loads.

Jim
 
I loaded these back about 40 years ago.
I gave away hundred of rounds of these double and triple bullet rounds to people for "house loads"

I used round balls or a combination of light weight bullets.

For a thread not long ago I loaded and shot some of these multi bullet loads.
I used three different loads.
Starting at the bottom the two holes are from Hornady JHP bullet over a short wadcutter bullet.
Next up is a lead RN bullet over a short wadcutter bullet. The hole next to the loaded round nose lead bullet and the hole just above the bullseye.
The four top holes are from two rounds loaded with two short wadcutter bullets.
The four bullets to the right are just an example of the short gas check wadcutter bullets.

As you can see, depending on the bullets used the spread at 10 yards is about 2-3 inches.

I chronographed this load in 2005 from a short barrel 38 and got a little over 700 fps.

multibullettest38.gif
 
Hi M2 Carbine,



Very cool...


Looks good to me.


Somehow I like the idea of the 2 - .36 Cal 'Balls' as a .38 Special Loading.


Or, in a .357 Case, one can have "Three".


Probably, these would be best out of a longer Barrel, where, with no nasty pressures or nasty report or nasty recoil, even if out of an old 6-inch Model 1899 or 1902 or 1905, the little Ball-Babys could be whizzing along nicely at 900 -1000 fps+, no problem...as could any 158 Grn Lead Bullet, for that matter.


'House Gun' wise...if a .38 Special...a Long Barrel has it's advantages.


Carry wise, of course, usually, a Snubby seems the easiest.
 
Brassfetcher should test the 357 double-ball load--

Or, at least, we should get a chrono reading.

I'm going to try to locate my boxes--haven't unpacked it since I moved nearly ten years ago.

Has anyone ever seen chrono results on these?

Jim H.
 
Hi jfh.



I'd expect a chrono reading to show that three Balls out of a .357, would be enjoying the same fps, for the short-haul anyway, as any single Lead Bullet of their combined weight if over the same Powder Charge.


If in a six-inch Barrel .38 Special, over 21-1/2 grains of 3f Black Powder, two Balls should be going around 900-950fps...far as I know...


So, out of a .357, depending on Barrel Length, Powder choice and charge...could/should be well into the 'teens' to my expectations...


I intend also to try the 'Two Ball' (.454 ) Cartridge in .45 Long Colt once I am re-loading.


Been looking at Chronographs on e-bay...too...
 
I've got some of the Remington 357 duel ball loads. A little less recoil and two projectiles that strile within 2" or so when shot from a snubby @ 20'. I

To further complicate things you might want to search "snake loads" or "snake stopper". There are some pretty interesting loads around that use a combination of a single ball and some #9 shot. Allot of fun to play with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Who knows 38 specials?
Replies
5
Views
588
Big B
B
D
  • Locked
.38 special roundnose for defense
2 3
Replies
62
Views
15K
Jim March
J
Panzerschwein
  • Locked
Very Impressive .38 Special Load
2 3
Replies
66
Views
10K
USSR
U
B
  • Locked
38 special and power
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
ZVP
Z
B
  • Locked
.38 Special Federal Home Defense?
Replies
8
Views
1K
Gunsnrovers
G
Back
Top