.38 MH vs .38 S&W cartridge

[mravery]

Morning all, Happy Thanksgiving!!

I know there have been a couple of threads on this however I'm not sure that there was ever any outcome.

I'm looking at getting an early Xmas present for myself, a Merwin Hulbert in .38 Cal.

Now, what I can tell, the .38 Cal designation on the MH was actually for a .38 MH cartridge. I've also read that the MH cartridge was actually produced by S&W and that it is the same as the .38 S&W.

So, first question, is this true?

I want to be able to shoot this pistol and not have it be a safe queen, if I can't get the ammo for it (and reload for it) than I'll have to pass.

I've read that the MH was built for a black powder round and that the smokeless could be too powerful for it and could damage the pistol.

So, second question, is this true or will the modern .38 S&W cartridge be safe to shoot (I'm looking at the cowboy loads for .38 S&W)

I've also looked and researched and have not found any reloading data for the .38 S&W cartridge using the Trail Boss powder. There has been reference that the .38 Short Colt loading data would be ok.

So, third question, does anyone have loading data for Trail Boss and the .38 S&W cartridge, or will the .38 Short Colt data work?

So, as everyone is trying to recover on the couch after dinner today, pants unsnapped, perhaps we can get a conversation going

Thanks all!!

 

[Deaf Smith]

About the .38 MH..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merwin_Hulbert

http://www.ammo-one.com/MerwinHulbert.html

http://www.oldammo.com/september06.htm

http://www.ammoland.com/2015/06/merwin-hulber-revolvers/#axzz3sei4JyFk

http://www.sixguns.com/range/merwin.htm

"Although the .38 MH revolvers are designated as being chambered for .38 MH it is actually the same case as the .38 S&W."

As for reloading..

http://www.coltforum.com/forums/reloading-range-reports/57110-reloading-pre-1900-revolver.html

So I guess if you can find loading data for the .38 MH, you could use it. But I do suspect the MH cases were 'balloon head' type, and not solid, thus more volume.

Also, since it is a black powder gun, use black powder if possible as they were not made for smokeless powder.

Deaf

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

What I have been able to find about the 38 Merwin Hulbert cartridge is that it was interchangeable with the 38 S&W. But that is only what I have found on the internet, I have no direct experience with the cartridge.

I will tell you that Trail Boss is not a good candidate for a powder for old revolvers made in the Black Powder era. Some folks think Trail Boss is a good substitute for Black Powder, but its pressure curve is much sharper than Black Powder and could easily damage the gun.

I have three large caliber Merwins, two chambered for 44 Russian and one chambered for 44-40. I only shoot them with ammunition loaded with Black Powder. I suggest you do the same.

By the way, the author of that Ammoland article doesn't know what he is talking about on a couple of points. Merwin Hulberts most certainly had a spring loaded latch to hold them together, at least the large caliber ones did. There was a button in front of the trigger guard. Pushing it back towards the trigger guard unlatched the mechanism, allowing the barrel to rotate around the cylinder arbor as in this photo of my 2nd Model Pocket Army.




The business about the vacuum is that on a gun without much wear on it, if the barrel and cylinder are pulled forward rapidly and then released, a partial vacuum will be formed which will tend to push the cylinder and barrel back again. But that has nothing to do with latching the mechanism.

He is also incorrect about 'tight tolerances' allowing the unfired cartridges to fall free while the empties will fall free. It is simply a matter of how far the gun opened up. When completely open, the bullets in unfired rounds retained them in the chambers while fired rounds fell free. Supposedly. In my experience, fired brass often has to be flicked out of the cylinder, and trying to close the cylinder again on live rounds often does not work because the rounds may have shifted in alignment, making it difficult to close the cylinder again.

He also conveniently forgets to mention that while you would empty a MH by opening it up, you have to close the gun and reload one chamber at a time through a loading gate, no different than a Colt.

I doubt that author has ever closely examined a Merwin Hulbert, much less ever fired one.

And he is quoting the oft quoted myth about the precision of the Merwin Hulbert revolvers. Don't get me wrong, I love my Merwins, but the simple fact is they came up with their bizarre design because Smith and Wesson owned or controlled all the patents that allowed them to make a Top Break revolver. Without legal control of those patents, MH had to come up with an alternative design, which is what they did. And with a Smith you could pop it open, and all the fired rounds would be ejected, then while the gun was still open you could pop in fresh rounds and close it up and continue shooting. No reloading one at a time through a gate as on the MH.

 

[Gordon]

I fired lots of .38 S&W factory rounds in my folding hammer Pocket Model M&H it had a barrel rib so was a later one.

 

[mravery]

Hey Gordon, that's the one I'm looking at. Folding hammer and the thick rib down the barrel. Have you had any issues at all?

 

[mravery]

Driftwood, is that one of your MHs, if so, it looks to be a beauty!

It was my understanding the there is a lip in the back of the frame so that as the cylinder turns, the spent shells lip get hooked under the lip in the frame. So when the action is opened, only the rounds that have rotated and the shell lip is under the lip in the frame, are actually expelled when it is opened. The shells that have not rotated around and gotten hooked in the frame lip, stay in the chambers and are not expelled.

Is this correct?

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

It was my understanding the there is a lip in the back of the frame so that as the cylinder turns, the spent shells lip get hooked under the lip in the frame. So when the action is opened, only the rounds that have rotated and the shell lip is under the lip in the frame, are actually expelled when it is opened. The shells that have not rotated around and gotten hooked in the frame lip, stay in the chambers and are not expelled.

Is this correct?

Howdy Again

At the risk of hijacking this thread, I will explain how you load and unload a Merwin Hulbert.

This is the ring at the base of the recoil shield. Notice it is rebated and there is a space under it.







There is a loading gate on the right side of the frame. Unlike a Colt loading gate, which swivels, the MH loading gate slides down for loading. You have to load rounds one at a time through the loading gate, the design does not allow you to load the gun when it is open.






To open the gun to dump out the empties you push the knob in front of the trigger backwards.







This allows the barrel assembly to rotate.






When the barrel has rotated 90 degrees, you pull the barrel forward. The cylinder comes along for the ride. The gun has no ammo in it in this photo for clarity.








In this view there are some rounds in the cylinder. This shows how the rims of the ammo are retained by the the rebate under the extractor ring. The ring is discontinued where the loading gate is, but the ring is 'continued' on the underside of the loading gate. So that when the loading gate is closed, the rims of all the rounds ride under the extractor gate as the cylinder turns.





As you keep pulling the barrel and cylinder forward, the empties will eventually clear the cylinder and will fall out.







The barrel and cylinder only pull forward so far until they reach a stop. The idea was if there were unfired rounds in the cylinder, their bullets would retain them in the chambers, and the gun could be closed again with those rounds still in the cylinder.



That is the theory.

I have found in practice that all the empties do not always fall out, some of them need to be flicked out with a finger.

And the bit about closing the mechanism up on live rounds is a bit problematic too. Usually the live rounds will have shifted enough so that the cylinder will not move back and 'swallow' them. Some fiddling is usually involved to close the gun again with live rounds in it.

Then, in order to reload, you still have to reload one at a time through the loading gate, no different than a Colt. The configuration of the extractor ring prevents slipping new loaded rounds in while the gun is open.

The Merwin Hulbert was a very interesting design, and it is fun to shoot, but it has gained a mythical status over the years. The simple truth is, a Smith & Wesson Top Break was much more efficient. You broke it open and dumped out the empties. Then while it was still open, you reloaded as many as needed, closed the gun and you were ready to keep shooting.

The reason Merwin Hulbert came up with their unique system is that Smith and Wesson controlled all the patents necessary to manufacture a Top Break revolver, so Merwin Hulbert had to come up with an alternative design.

 

[khegglie]

All explained...

Exellent presentation Driftwood.

 

[Dframe]

Thanks Driftwood. Your clear explainations and excellent pix have Cleared up a lot about this interesting revolver. I've never fired one myself but always found them interesting.

 

[BobWright]

Dadburn you,Driftwood! Your photos have almost flung a cravin' on me for a Merwin Hulbert! And I don't want another type of revolver!

Incidentally, I have just been studying the French Galand which operates similar to the MH, but is opened sort of like a falling block under lever rifle.

Bob Wright

 

[mravery]

Driftwood, Thank you SO much for such great pictures and detailed explanation!!

Brings me back to my initial thoughts of wanting to pick up this 38 cal that I'm looking at, however black powder is a no-go as I only have access to an indoor range!

Would the 38 cal be considered the 'large fame' and be on the same size as your 44-40 or would it be smaller?

I've never had one in hand so I have no comparison.

 

[Jim K]

If you REALLY look at Driftwood's excellent pictures, you will see why M&H had to have their own cartridges made, and why .38 S&W might not always work right.

The case length has to be just right. If it is too long, the fired cases will not drop free. If it is too short, the unfired rounds will drop down and not re-enter the chambers when the gun is closed, jamming the gun.

The problem is that old cases marked .38 M&H are not consistent; some are shorter than others marked as .38 S&W, some are longer. And then there were two different lengths of .38 M&H, apparently for different models, though I have seen only one size in that caliber. I am not sure (not being quite that old), but I suspect that such ammunition screw-ups might have contributed to the demise of the M&H. If the revolver's main and heavily advertised feature didn't work, the customer would be unhappy.

As to using .38 S&W, I have fired mine with modern .38 S&W cartridges with no ill effects, and I see no reason a moderate amount of firing would hurt the gun. But I do have to recommend against any extensive firing (even with black powder) with any of the old guns, no matter who the maker. They are just getting too valuable to take chances. And it is only not a matter of guns "blowing up." What if a hammer or trigger breaks? Don't bother to do a Google search. If a spring snaps? You could pay $100 or more to have one made.

Jim

 

[Deaf Smith]

Wonder if you could design a extractor ring that slipped over the rims as you closed it and a bit longer opening so that all cartridges, fired and unfired, fall out so one could reload when the action was open. Might even add a six point cam that would flip the cartridges out as one opened the action.

Add modern steels and a new concept in revolvers is born.

Deaf

 

[joem1945]

I have several pistols that use the .38 S&W cartridge. I do use Trail Boss powder with minimum loads. I get my bullets from MO bullet co. My dies are Lee. I have cut down .38 spl cases but I think StarLine makes them.

 

[Monac]

Deaf Smith, if I understand what you are suggesting, I think the S&W 547 9mm K-frame revolver used such a system. The extractor has little fingers or petals that extend to eject the rimless cartridges when the extractor is pushed backward.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Ah... I have a better way!

How about 1/2 moon clips! That way no gate loader. Just open the action, drop in two 1/2 moon clips and close the action. Then the ring snaps over the clip, not the cartridges, for extraction.

Deaf

 

[Jim K]

All those ideas for improvement of the M&H are good; I suggest you write to the company and see if they will make the changes. Or not.

Seriously, the whole idea was to allow ONLY fired cases to fall away when the gun is opened. The whole design is built around that idea and it is the only reason for the whole system and the way it operates. If the gun is changed to simultaneous extraction/ejection, it has no reason for being.

Jim