.38 Long Colt

[Jeff82]

.38 Long Colt was a big failure during the attempted islamist takeover of the Philippines circa late 1800's - early 1900's. This led to the development of the 45 Auto.

What do you think would have happened to the .38 LC had modern bullets been available?

 

[Jim K]

The same thing. There was a general move in all the world's military forces toward the automatic pistol. That was already underway in the US and I doubt it would have been delayed very much no matter what was done with the old .38.

Of course the adoption process was slow, so much that the Army, in frustration, replaced the .38 revolver with the .45 Model 1909 revolver, a Colt New Service. It was, in turn, replaced by the Model 1911 pistol two years later.

Jim

 

[rcmodel]

Same thing that would have happened to it without modern bullets.

It would have been replaced by the .45 then.

And by the .38 Special later.

As was the case.

Anyway, The Hague Convention of 1899 outlawed the use of expanding bullets.
So it was FMJ-RN from then on.

The .38 Colt would have been even less effective then it already was with FMJ bullets.

rc

 

[BobWright]

It wasn't the bullet that doomed the .38 Colt, but rather the power, or lack of it, and the guns chambered for that round. With the coming of the .38 Special in improved revolvers, the .38 Special did all right for itself.

Bob Wright

 

[Monac]

"Attempted Islamist takeover"? You mean the Filipinos effort to become an independent, self-governing country instead of remaining a colony of some foreign power?

I don't really have a dog in that fight, but I find historical revisionism repulsive, even with a thin veneer of gun talk. I'd rather this forum didn't become a hotbed of it.

 

[justin22885]

38lc = .380 in performance

 

[jeepnik]

In the words of some sage or another, "History is written by the victor".

I add this corollary "History is often re-written by the looser after people have forgotten what it was all about to begin with".

 

[joem1945]

I shoot .38 long Colt in my 1894 army colt. I would agree that it's somewhat anemic but could be effective against people not hopped up on drugs.

 

[jimbo555]

The .30-40 krag had trouble against the moro too.

 

[golden]

The 38 Long Colt was weaker than the 38 S&W

The 38 LC was always a weak round. In fact, the .38 Special was a weak round until the +P hollowpoint ammo came out.
You would have to up the pressure of the LC to that rivaling a 9mm Parabellum to make it useful even with hollowpoints.

The .38 Long Colt and .38 S&W had similar ballistics to the notably weak .38 Special Air Force load and I do not see anyone looking to adopt either one. If fact, except for boutique ammo makers, they have simply been forgotten.

Jim

 

[Jim K]

To make things worse, the Army made inside lubricated ammo with a .357" bullet*. But the revolvers before about 1903 were made for the old outside lubricated bullet of about .380 caliber, and the barrels and chambers were made accordingly. When the later revolvers were properly chambered for .38 Special and the barrels made with a .357" groove diameter, the Army was surprised by the sudden improvement in accuracy.

Jim

*Until 1909, there was no contract ammunition; all issue ammo up to that point came from Frankford Arsenal.

JK

 

[Monac]

To make things worse, the Army made inside lubricated ammo with a .357" bullet*. But the revolvers before about 1903 were made for the old outside lubricated bullet of about .380 caliber, and the barrels and chambers were made accordingly. When the later revolvers were properly chambered for .38 Special and the barrels made with a .357" groove diameter, the Army was surprised by the sudden improvement in accuracy.

Jim

Wow. "What we have here is a failure to communicate."

 

[Coyote3855]

Wow. "What we have here is a failure to communicate."

Jim K is a very knowledgeable poster and well informed. So maybe you should explain why you apparently disagree with the information he provided rather than than using a movie quote.

 

[Tallball]

I had the exact same thoughts as Monac (#5) when I read the OP.

 

[Monac]

Jim K is a very knowledgeable poster and well informed. So maybe you should explain why you apparently disagree with the information he provided rather than than using a movie quote.

I don't disagree with JimK. In fact, I agree that he knows much more than I do, since he has long-time gunsmithing experience and I am just a collector. I was trying to make fun of the Army's failure to communicate with itself, in not getting its ammunition specs to agree with its pistol-bore specs. I did not make that clear, and I apologize to JimK if I gave him any offense.

 

[Jeff82]

The United States was not a signatory to the Hague Convention. We've always reserved the right to use whatever ammunition we thought we needed at the time. Several months ago the US Army announced that we would be shifting to hollow point ammunition in the next modular handgun system.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/mili...gun-system-solicitation-hollowpoint/29886907/

As we've moved away from the computer man, one shot stop, and stopping power myth, we come to realize that the only thing that matters with handgun wounding potential is penetration of 12 to 18 inches and expansion. The primary importance being penetration. If if 38 Long Colt can provide 12 to 18 inches of penetration in ballistic gelatin with a modern hollow point then should be more than adequate for use in defensive scenarios. Hard barrier penetration is a separate animal. With modern hollow points could the 38 Long Colt become a contender?

 

[Monac]

...we come to realize that the only thing that matters with handgun wounding potential is penetration of 12 to 18 inches and expansion. The primary importance being penetration. If if 38 Long Colt can provide 12 to 18 inches of penetration in ballistic gelatin with a modern hollow point then should be more than adequate for use in defensive scenarios.

I did not know this was a settled issue. When did that happen?

Also, Google suggests that factory 38 Long Colt ballistics are slightly inferior to standard velocity 38 Special ballistics. My impression is that high-velocity (+P) 38 Special loads are generally regarded as the minimum adequate serious self defense loads, so 38 Long Colt would not cut it (although of course improved bullets would improve it). But I also thought that handgun stopping power was still the subject of intense argument, so what do I know?

 

[Deaf Smith]

The Moro warriors were many times hopped up on drugs, so I doubt a 150 gr. hp at 800 fps or so would have made a difference.

And since .45 colt ssa revolvers were issued, I think a hp in them would have been much better.

 

[ljnowell]

In fact, the .38 Special was a weak round until the +P hollowpoint ammo came out.

Jim

Not really. The round nose bullet isn't the best choice but a full pressured SWC has plenty of ability. +p really isn't anymore powerful than the old stuff before the days of +p.

 

[Jim K]

There are a bunch of enduring myths involved in any discussion of those guns. One is that the .38 Long Colt was totally useless, akin to shooting an enemy with a paint ball gun. Another is that anything in .45 caliber will blow an enemy into little pieces and scatter the remains over a 50 acre lot. Still others are that bullets expand a lot at normal pistol velocities (under, say, 1100-1200 fps) and that any expanding bullet is better than any non-expanding one, regardless of calibers.

Still another is that the .38 revolver was replaced by the M1911 auto pistol, or by the SAA, both with smashing power so great that the Moros immediately became peaceful farmers.

And a common and enduring myth is that those revolvers were made only for .38 Long Colt and will blow up if fired with the super powerful .38 Special.

To take the last first, most collectors don't know that from c.1903 on, Colt chambered both their commercial and military line for .38 Special, and advertised the guns as being for that caliber (standard velocity only, there was no +P or +P+ at the time). The older guns can even accept and fire .357, but that is not recommended.

As for the weak .38 LC, it is on a par with the military revolvers of the day, and better than most. It is common to read someone denounce the .38 Colt revolver and the LC cartridge, and then praise the British WWII Webley and Enfield .38 revolvers, which fired a round that is actually less powerful than the .38 LC.

The belief that anything called .45 is super powerful has been disproven so often it is not worth discussing. The .38 Colt revolver was not replaced by the M1911, but by the M1909 .45 revolver. (Officially; in fact .38 revolvers were issued and ammo contracted for throughout WWI.) And neither gun was so impressive that the rebels surrendered; the fighting went on for years and in fact is still going on.

Jim

 

[Deaf Smith]

Wow Jim, more straw mans in that post than one can shake a stick at.

Deaf

 

[ThomasT]

In an article penned by Jack Lott for Guns & Ammo titled "The 45 and the Moros, A Myth Exploded" he stated that he had always beleived that the 45 colt was an instant man stopper. After doing his own research he found out differently.

He reported the at first the 38 colt worked as expected. In one battle on the northern end of the island US soldiers killed about 230 Moros most of them with the 38 colt pistol. The Army was initially happy with the colt round. It wasn't until the fighting moved to the south end of the island that they started having stopping issues. And not with just the 38 but the 30-40 Krag round and the reissued 45 colt army revolvers. The only sure stopper they had was the pump shotgun loaded with buckshot.

When the US went to the Phillipenes they ran off the french. The Phillipenos were thankful to the americans until it became clear the US wasn't leaving but going to be a new occupying force. The US and the phillipenos went to war. The Phillipene people wanted their freedom.

I doubt many drugs were involved in the way the moro warriors were able to resist bullet shock. I beleive it was more anger about the atrocities commited by US Troops against the women and children. The US burned their villiges and used the people for target practice. The US soldiers even wrote home about shooting the phillipeno natives bragging about it. Don't forget the phillipenos also engaged in atrocities of their own.

I didn't know much about this war myself until I heard some of it on a radio show and did more research myself. Its a good read if you care to Google it.

As for 38 special not being much better than 38 colt that is wrong. The original 38 special was a big step up from the colt. Find a box of Sellior & Bellot 158gr 38 RNL loads and give them a try. They are not +P loads but do get over 900fps from a 6" barrel. Most +P ammo won't match it.

The 38SP was dummed down for use in 5 shot J-Frames just like 357 was downloaded for use in K-Frame revolvers.

 

[MICHAEL T]

The 38SP was dummed down for use in 5 shot J-Frames

When was that I shot a lot of 38 spl out of J frames in early 6o's wasn't down loaded then . Never a problem . Today I shoot +P in these old guns just to get some what back to what was .

I agree today 38 spl offerings are far cry from the 38 of years past . But I don't think J frame was the reason same for 357 . I think more lawyer worried about a law suit .

32 short also downloaded . As I have a couple old S&W 32 short top breaks

 

[9mmepiphany]

When the US went to the Phillipenes they ran off the french. The Phillipenos...

Just for clarity, I thought I'd just add a couple of corrections:

1. The islands being referenced are named the Philippines or Philippine Islands (P.I.)...in honor of Philip II of Spain.

2. The people from the P.I. are correctly referred to as the Filipinos

 

[Jim K]

I think what was "dummed down" was not the loads but the published "ballistic" tables. The old tables had some wild figures, many based on firing revolver and pistol rounds out of 10 and 12 inch pressure barrels, not actual handguns.

The standard .38 Special is not a weak load; it was the police load for decades and has a lot of dead bodies to its "credit". The idea that it takes a HV hollow point to hurt anyone is another modern myth (sorry, Deaf Smith).

With the availability of inexpensive chronographs, the hype became so evident to so many people that the ammo companies had to stop the puff job and put out real data.

As to the Philippines, the US didn't run off the French, who were never there; the islands had been ruled by Spain since the 16th century. In fact, the "Moros" (or Moors, as the Spanish called all Muslims) had converted to Islam only a short time before, so they were not really the old natives fighting invaders - they were Muslims, fighting Christians.

There seems little doubt that drugs were involved; they gave the natives a feeling of invincibility; it takes a lot to stop someone on drugs who believes he is invulnerable.

Jim