.38 S&W with 200g bullet--penetration tests

Status
Not open for further replies.
The "German Greatcoat Story" debunked!

Many of you have heard of the report attributed to a British sergeant, who stated that the weak .380/200 FMJ ammo wouldn't even penetrate a German greatcoat. (Another instance, or version of that story, is reported above.) Well, after thinking briefly about that claim, I concluded it was either an exaggeration or a case of a near-squib load. Who ever heard of any service bullet that can't penetrate a coat?

Today I shot some CIS-manufactured 178g Mk. 2Z ball ammo from my Mod. 33-1 S&W 4", and it zipped thru three layers of an overcoat, a gallon jug of water, and hammered into the pine tree from which the coat & milk jug were suspended. On the first try, the water caused the bullet to tumble, but it still embedded itself about an inch into the tree--sideways, undistorted.

An additional test saw the bullet drill straight through 3x coat layers, the jug, and drive straight into the tree, much deeper; since the wood closed in behind the bullet, I couldn't measure the depth of penetration. My steel probe couldn't find it. A Colt Police Positive Special 4" bbl. in caliber .38 S&W had the same results. Ditto for another bullet fired from the 33-1 thru three layers of overcoat, w/o a water jug--straight into the trunk, too deep to find. Tomorrow I'll try to find them with a drill.

I've seen a report elsewhere by a former member of the Royal Hong Kong Police, who stated that he shot much of the Mk. 2Z ammo in the 1960s, and many bullets barely made it out of the barrel. (I'll find the link & include it in my upcoming range report.) Clearly, that's a manufacturing flaw in the ammo and is not any true reflection of the caliber's inherent capability. I believe that the "German greatcoat" story stems from the same cause: bad manufacturing, not bad design per se.

More follows soon about a variety of other .38 S&W tests conducted today, as well as photos of today's "Greatcoat Test." I'll also chronograph the 2Z ammo I'm shooting, to compare to British Army specs.

Old Fuff, you are right again! A friend brought his Colt Police Positive Special up here to shoot today, and it did fine with 178g FMJ Mk. 2Z ammo. Ditto with Remington factory 146g LRN. Also, my 215g long-nosed 35-200 (.35 Remington rifle) bullet chambered easily. My .360-ish LSWC, plus .360 200g LRN, could not chamber in his Colt. I'll load up some of my .358 200g LRNs to see if they will chamber.
 
W.E.G.,
Now at least I know not to try wearing an overcoat as a bullet-proof vest. If I had to wear one down here in Louisiana, I'd die of heat stroke even if no BG ever gets close!

On a more serious note, I surely don't know anything about Zen, and I'm an enthusiastic shooter rather than an expert ballistician--or a salesman for obsolescent calibers :) Nonetheless, it seems that .38 S&W in modern solid-frame guns truly is just shy of .38 SPL ballistics, and the ultra-conservative 685 fps LRN factory ammo doesn't do it justice. This cartridge can provide some punch in a very compact package with low recoil and report. With adjustable sights it would be a small game round at best, and its only modern-day LE application is as a BUG. . .but for SD/HD, I think it can be adequate as it apparently was for decades.

Tomorrow I'll try to upload a photo of what a 200g LFN (almost a true wadcutter, I "smushed" it so much) does to the first two milk jugs it hits. Then it drills neater holes thru 4 more jugs. Thus, quick energy dump like a JHP, more penetration than JHP, but caliber-size wound channel is smaller than an expander. Seems to me that is a useful combination.

If I can scare up a few 110g Speer Gold Dots, I'll see if they can expand at these vels.
 
Hi LousianaMan,


Really enjoying the info and tests.


Being this is a rather slow round, would not pure Lead be a better choice for Bullets, than Wheel Weight alloy?


Lastly, if anyone wishes to have Bullet's yaw greatly or tumble in their targets, adjusting a mould by modifying it's interior nose area, or otherwise making an off-center front angle aspect to the nose or front end, will do it nicely...which for most SD distances, will not matter as for effecting accuracy in flight.


I hope also to be doing some loading tests for .38 &W, but, my two Revolvers for the Cartridge are not as strong as those above, being a 5 inch Barrelled circa 1906 S&W Break Top, and, a 3rd Model Iver Johnson snubby, so...I will stay with 3F BP, or, if I dare, "777"...

.38 Special wise, the 200 Grain Bullet is also a very interesting prospect, and, depending on the Revolver, should prove well worth experimenting with also of course.
 
Last edited:
OK, W.E.G., I guess you should call me "Grasshopper" from here on out. (Remember Caine on Kung Fu? :) Since I'm a historian, I certainly don't believe that the latest is necessarily the greatest, so I qualify in that part at least. . . .

Oyeboten,
I have read & heard that pure lead is far more likely to flatten & expand upon hitting bone, and that makes sense to me. Interestingly, however, when I fired pure lead 200g slugs into water & wetpack today, I got no expansion & no deformation worthy of note.

I nonetheless plan to use pure lead for the heavy bullets loaded for actual defensive purposes, and use WW for practice. If I wind up adopting a mid-weight WC or SWC for SD/HD with the 4" guns, I will test to see how pure lead does at those somewhat higher velocities. While I would like the bullet to flatten, I also want it to penetrate thru & thru. Indeed, since the HD (4") gun is more likely to have to shoot through cover, I may well want a harder-cast bullet for it, saving pure lead for the SD/snubbies.
 
Louisiana Man:
I am another following this thread with interest. Did you chronograph the 178 grain and 200 grain rounds?
I'm beginning to think that It should be possible to make minimum powerfactor for IPSC, IDPA or ICORE (200 grains at 625fps or 178 grains at 703fps).

For some reason the idea of rocking up to an IPSC shoot with my old Webley MKIV in a period canvas holster and actually competing tickles my funny bone. I need to see if the K frame speedloader will work with the MKIV. :D
 
Radagast,
I'll chrono the Mk. 2Z today. I've already chrono'ed the 358430, which in WW weighs 192-93g and 50-50 WW-Pb + tin weighs 197-98g. They chrono'ed at 630 and 639, IIRC. My 213-14g RCBS 35-200, a bullet designed for the .35 Remington rifle, clocked at about 625ish.

Based on the numbers you quoted, it's feasible. In fact, the original British Mk. I service ammo was 200g +/-2g at about 630. (Different sources say 600, 625, 630, or 650). Sounds like this was the minimum-powered round that was chosen for IPSC. In this country, it was called the ".38 Super Police" and was a common LEO choice from the 1920s-50s or so.
 
Hi LousianaMan,


I am thinking Pure Lead not so much for deforming on impact, but, for slightly better obturation in upsetting and engauging the Rifleing during interior Ballistics phase...thus, m-a-y-b-e, adding a few FPS, all else being equal.


My 3rd Model Iver Johnson 'Snubby' should be among the strongest of the small American made five shot Break Tops of yesteryear...so...I may try full volume loads of "777" in it, with some sort of pure Lead Bullet of usual or slightly over usual weight, and, with some 200 Grain if I can obtain some...though my thought had always been for the Bullet to be dead flat or dished on the front for this Revolver's prospective SD applications.

Been thinking also of trying a tapering 'V' shaped slot for the Bullet front ( for the .38 S&W and also .38 Special ) , to see if it would open up like a "Y" when hitting resistence-materials.

Love this Thread!


Thank you for sharing all this info and experiment...it is very welcome to my own interests, and definitely interesting and fun.


Anyway, I plan on chronographing 3F BP Loadings in my two respective Barrel Length .38 S&W Chambering Revolvers, and, if I can get to it while we are young, I will report my results here in your Thread.

.38 Special wise, I did find that full house ( meaning for the modern non-Baloon-Head Cartridge holding a little less ) 3F BP, and 158 Grn Lead Bullet was exceeding slightly the usual off-the-shelf 'Standard' Ammunition of same Bullet Weight in Smokeless...this in a 3 inch Model 10, and other longer Barrel ones also, via the Chronograph.

So, far as factory off the shelf Ammunition, I would expect the same with .38 S&W.

And, 3F BP or "777" may even do better for the 200 Grain Bullets than smokeless ( or than safe and sane smokeless loadings I mean ), since - unless I am mistaken in my recollection - Heavier Bullets with BP tend to enjoy higher FPS than lighter ones to some extent for any given Barrel Length Revolver.

If it is breezy out, one hardly notices the extra smoke...( Lol...and true! ) and the recoil and report are definitely nice, 'healthy' and seem more agreeable than the relatively 'sharp' versions which smokeless tends to offer.
 
Last edited:
W.E.G:
I qualified for the Australian IPSC team a number of years ago (Production Division) so I do have some skill, but I doubt I would be able to beat the small group of revolver fanatics we have. It would mainly be for giggles.

LouisianaMan:
Thanks for that. I've wondered about the 125 floor as a lot of .38 Special factory loads make 120 or there abouts. As there were a few South Africans and British shooters around at the beginning of IPSC you may have hit it on the head, with the minimum power floor being set for the Webley rounds.
 
LousianaMan,

Thanks for confirming my thoughts on the overcoat fairy tale!

This is one of the best threads going on the THR right now- there is only so much gibberish I can stand about latest polymer-framed, striker-fired wonder pistol.
 
Chrono results, British Army Mk. 2Z ammo test, plus more "Greatcoat Shooting"!

Just a short report tonight from the battlefront, as your correspondent is busy catching up on both shooting and writing at this time. More to follow soon on yesterday's shoot!

LOAD: CIS .380 Rimmed, Mk. 2Z ball ammo, 178g FMJ

GUN: S&W Mod. 33-1, 4" bbl.

CHRONO RESULTS (10 rds.), temp. 80 degrees: LO 618.1; HI 656.4; AVG: 641.1; ES: 38.29; SD: 13.49. Completely consistent with 600-650 fps velocities listed for British ammo. Quite consistent. Absolutely no barrel fouling.

POI at 50 feet, off chair/sandbags, sitting on ground: +5 3/4", R 2 1/2". First two rds. off paper (high); adjusted POA to bottom of cross, resulting in 8/8 hits in 2 1/4" group. 7 of the 8 went into 1 1/4".

ADDITIONAL "GREATCOAT TESTING":

1. Shot #1 @ 15', chrono'ed at 604.1 fps: went thru approximately 12-16 layers of wool coat plus multiple linings, cracked open milk jug behind the coat. Bullet fell out of coat upon examination, and the density of folds made it impossible to accurately determine the bullet's path. (It makes a small hole in the wool, and tends to practically seal up.) Bottom line: poorly-designed test shot, but it did show that if you rolled your overcoat up into a tight roll about 12"H x 18"W x 18"D, the bullet wouldn't get through :) In the photo, the uppermost cartridge case & bullet are from this shot. Bullet is undeformed, and neatly fits into fired case.

2. Shot #2, chrono'ed at 632.2 fps: went through 8 layers of wool coat fabric, 8 layers of synthetic coat lining, 4 water-filled milk jugs, lightly dented stop board and rebounded into jug #4. The holes ripped in the milk jugs indicated the bullet was nose-first entering jug #1, tumbling as it exited jug #1 and thereafter. I read somewhere that the water:gelatin ratio for bullet penetration is approximately 2:1. If that's correct, this shot would have penetrated 12" of gelatin (9" while tumbling), plus 8 plastic layers of milk jugs (7 while tumbling), AFTER passing through 16 layers of coat/lining. The bullet path was generally straight, deviating only slightly while traversing the jugs more or less through the center. Appropriately, this coat was marked "Made in England"! In the photo, the lower cartridge case & bullet are from this shot. Bullet is undeformed, and neatly fits into fired case.

I guess opinions may differ as to the desirability of having a pistol bullet tumble within its target, as tumbling may generally cause the bullet to veer unpredictably. If it was originally on track to hit vitals, it might miss. On the other hand, if it was originally on track to miss vitals, it might veer into a vital part. But the way Shot #2 acted, it provided both a straight track & lots of tumbling; plenty of penetration against unarmored targets, with presumably a wicked wound channel. This would also tend to reduce overpenetration & get lots of "target effects" before possibly exiting the target.

I will provide more shot analysis from yesterday's shoot ASAP. I'll close now with the observation that it's high time to put the infamous "German Greatcoat Story" to rest. Obviously, it was a case of faulty ammo. BTW, the only BIB I've ever experienced was in a S&W M-1917, shooting WWII surplus .45 ACP ball ammo. That didn't lead me to argue that the .45 was a "weak sister."
 

Attachments

  • 38 S&W cartridge and 178g Mk 2Z bullet photos, 6 APR 10 009.jpg
    38 S&W cartridge and 178g Mk 2Z bullet photos, 6 APR 10 009.jpg
    85.6 KB · Views: 16
  • 38 S&W cartridge and 178g Mk 2Z bullet photos, 6 APR 10 035.jpg
    38 S&W cartridge and 178g Mk 2Z bullet photos, 6 APR 10 035.jpg
    57.4 KB · Views: 15
  • 38 S&W cartridge and 178g Mk 2Z bullet photos, 6 APR 10 012.jpg
    38 S&W cartridge and 178g Mk 2Z bullet photos, 6 APR 10 012.jpg
    71.7 KB · Views: 19
Actually the standard barrel length for .38 revolvers in the English and allied military services was 5 inches, although during 1940 and '41 they were glad to accept lengths from 4 to 6 inches.

My point is that the ammunition you tested would have done slightly better from a revolver with a barrel an inch longer. You need one of the old .38-200 Smith & Wesson's, Enfield's or Webley's in your research project. :cool:
 
Well done LouisianaMan, well done!


Have you a way to load some of these Cartridges with 3f BP? Or, "777"?
 
Thanks Louisiana Man. Add 50fps for the extra inch of barrel on the Webley and it looks possible. I'll add a Regulation Police to my future toy list as well. :)
 
The Old Fuff will make a suggestion he’ll probably regret… :uhoh:

Among a small number of us, it is known that older Colt Police Positive and Police Positive Special revolvers that were chambered to use a cartridge they called the “Colt .38 New Police” (which is identical to the .38 S&W) have tighter bores and chambers, and because of this can be successfully reloaded with more common .358” diameter bullets in place of the uncommon .361” diameter ones.

Because in our more tactical world the .38 S&W cartridge has fallen out of favor, since it cannot be obtained with the magic word “Plus-P” after its name, these fine revolvers can be obtained in common barrel lengths of 4, 5 and 6 inches, and the longer the barrel the less they are worth.

As they are perceived by most younger buyers to be absolutely worthless because they aren’t heavy enough to make a good boat anchor, they frequently can be found at much lower prices then an equivalent Smith & Wesson, or Webley, because both of these have a small cult following that so far the Colt’s lack.

In terms of handcrafted quality those made during the late 1920’s to about 1940 far exceed anything being made today, and the little cartridge can be safely hand loaded to .38 Special/Plus-P specifications, hollow point bullets and all if that floats your boat; in a very compact 6 (not 5) shot package, with a positive hammer block safety.

But don’t tell anyone I let the cat out of the bag, this is just between you and me… :evil:
 
W.E.G.

At a starting point of $650 I think it won't draw any bids. It's not good enough to attract a collector (most of which aren't interested anyway), and shooters will be even less interested. At small shops with used gun counters, gun shows, and local auctions one would be hard pressed to get $250. Neither the revolver or the ammunition it uses are very popular. If you should come across one offer cash, and watch the price drop like a stone in a mill pond. Even Guillermo should be able to cut a deal on one of these. To help lower the price even more, ask them what kinds of ammunition they have in stock, :eek: and if they have any, express dismay that it doesn't have hollow-point/Plus-P bullets... :evil:

Keep in mind that the Police Positive, which is slightly shorter then the Police Positive Special, is the more likely to be found chambered in .38 CNP/.38 S&W. Otherwise the two revolvers are the same.
 
This is making me think I really should start carrying my little Terrier more ...
I wonder if it fits into the same Holster my LCR does. Nope it's a bit too loose. *le darned*
 
Does anybody have access to Textbook of Small Arms 1929, a British publication that evidently has good info about the original British Army .380/200g cartridge?

It was just recommended to me by Ian Skennerton, author of "The Book" on the .380 Enfield revolver.
 
And Old Fuff,
You'll be proud of me. . .I'm about to get a PPS in .38 S&W from "Revolvergeek" down in Baton Rouge. He shot it up here w/me on the "tests" a couple weekends back, which I still have to write up :) It's a former RHKP (Royal Hong Kong Police) gun.

Don't know why I'm doing this. . .because now I need a short-barreled Colt to go with it, thereby complementing/replicating my .38SPL duo of PPS and D.S. And of course, I'll have to size my .361 bullets smaller, because the wide meplat and LSWC ones don't chamber in this Colt. (Why do I do this to myself???) Oh well, maybe it will like my unbeagled 140g LSWC mold :) Will find out pretty soon!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
The .38 S&W: penetration vs. milk jugs
Replies
9
Views
1K
ArchAngelCD
ArchAngelCD
D
  • Locked
Bullet Expansion & Penetration tests
Replies
0
Views
866
dodgestdshift
D
D
  • Locked
Bullet penetration and expansion tests #2
Replies
1
Views
762
larry3screws
L
Tony_the_tiger
  • Locked
.44 special snub vs. Water Jugs, S&W, Corbon DPX, Buffalo Bore, Underwood
Replies
16
Views
2K
Tony_the_tiger
Tony_the_tiger
D
  • Locked
bullet penetration and expansion tests #3
Replies
1
Views
520
Ben Shepherd
B
Back
Top