.38 s&w

[Old Grumpy]

ArchAngleCD "IMO you shouldn't have loaded charges that were lower than the starting charge weights. You are a little lucky you didn't cause a squib load and with the velocities you listed it was possible."

Yes I used lower than "starting charge weight" loads but I had studied and examined the possibilities for quite some time before I got my feet wet. Starting charges are set using several factors: consistent burning, consistent pressures, consistent velocities, etc. To think that 0.2gr less than published starting charge weight will prevent the bullet from exiting the barrel is not reasonable. The case volume to charge weight ratio was acceptable (not like using 2.0gr in a .357 mag case), the powder was not as temperamental as some (296) to low charge weights, and the shooter was careful to make sure every round exited the barrel. Each shot was run across my chrono and of the 45 total rounds (in three test batches) I had four that produced error messages not a velocity. Each time I could open the action and look down the barrel (top-breaks make that easy).

So I did not go into this half asleep and I did not go to extremes (like a starting charge of 1.0gr).

Your comment about erratic or incomplete powder burn is probably correct (one reason those weights are below published starting levels) and is supported by the data from my chrony.

I do not profess to be an expert reloader but I do have quite a bit of experience reloading. I understand how published data is developed and I also understand why the limits are set. If I had followed the published advice ("For use in solid frame revolvers only") I would not be able to make any reloads to shoot in my top-break. Even though it was made in the early 1960s, by it's design, it is grouped in with revolvers made over a century ago.

IMO, Using charge weights below published minimums should not be taken lightly (we agree on that) but I do feel that, within reason and with the proper cautions, starting charge weights can be reduced.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Old Grumpy,
My warnings about using charge weights below the published minimums was more for the new reloaders reading this thread than you. I didn't mean to sound condescending.

 

[Old Grumpy]

ArchAngelCD, no offense taken. There are lots of new (inexperienced) reloaders who frequent these forums and we (those who post) should try to make everything as clear as possible. Your points were well taken and if a reloader does not know the basics and use reasonable caution they can get into trouble fast. If they are lucky it will just cost them money. However some mistakes can be very dangerous.

One of the basics all new reloaders must realize is the fact there are reasons for all data found in reloading guides. Maximum charge weights are there for a reason, exceeding them can be disasterous to both the weapon and to those nearby. Minimum charge weights for most powders (with some notable exceptions) are not quite as hard line as the maximum charges, but a reloader needs to know what they are doing before throwing charges outside the published limits (both lower and upper).

I keep detailed records of my loads and I know what signs to watch for. I never exceed the maximum published charges and 99.5% of my loads fall into the mid range charge weights. I also have full knowledge of my firearms, their conditions, and their history. Every reloader, no every shooter and reloader should have an idea of the condition of their weapons and their limits.

Reloading is fun but if you reload you owe it to yourself and those around you to learn as much as possible about this sport (hobby) and to always do it safely.

ArchAngleCD, I respect your position and value your opinions. Let's do it safely or take up knitting.

 

[weekender823]

Regarding TrailBoss and top breaks. I have been doing this for my top breaks, and have tried a couple of different lead bullets I use for 38 special. I just use the case capacity - 10% general guideline. My perception is that the loads are safe and shoot well, but it would really raise my confidence level to see some chronograph numbers on a couple of loads.Would anybody be willing to try that and post some results? I'm not particular about the bullet, I would probably adopt whatever load was posted, and would be really grateful for it.

As always, thanks to all to post here!

 

[Old Grumpy]

weekender823, I'd be willing to get you some reading but I don't have any TrailBoss, in fact I've never used it. I've heard it is a bulky powder (designed to more completely fill the case) and possibly designed to produce a little more smoke (for Cowboy Action).

The 2.0gr of W231 did fill the case enough to be easy to visually check. I'd say once the bullet (150gr) was seated there was not a whole lot of extra room left. No where near compressed but not enough room for another grain.

 

[Walkalong]

One nice thing about small cases, you can see the powder charge easily.

 

[dagger dog]

FROGO,

Thanks for the info, I shoot TrailBoss in 45 Colt and 38 Special,never thought about it in the Iver.

 

[FROGO207]

^^^ I usually try what is the most obvious answer first cause I need the extra time to load more ammo. I have a lot better luck with TB in the old black powder firearms and this also keeps me from hot-rodding something that should not be attempted.

 

[Old Grumpy]

Well gang I made it to the range this week and tried out another test batch for the old .38 S&W. Here is the information on this load and some photos. I have found some interesting "quirks" the old Iver Johnson has. First and foremost is the firing pin mark. The pistol's firing pin is milled out of the hammer blank. Therefore it is fixed and inflexable. When the firing pin strikes the primer and ignites the powder the pistol "flexes" (it is a top-break). While the movement is extremely small it does cause the firing pin to pull a small section of the primer cup. The marks appear a lot like a Glock's firing pin strikes. At first it had me worried, was I over pressured and the primer was starting to cup. All of my loads were either below or at starting charge weights. The cases ejected easily and nothing appeared wrong. Then I looked closely at the marks and the "light came on".

My S&W model 64 has a hammer mounted firing pin but it is "pinned" to the hammer and has a little bit of flex to it. Has anyone out there noticed similar marks on the primers of their top-breaks?

Here is the load data:
Brass: RP-UMC
Primers: WSP
Powder: Titegroup
Charge: 2.0gr
OAL: 1.154"
Lo: 552.6 fps
Hi: 625.9 fps
Avg: 593.39
XS: 73.3 fps
SD: 25.95
Ergy: 117.3 ft-lb

The loads were somewhat dirty but with such small charge weights and low pressures I think almost any powder will be somewhat dirty.

 

[Salmoneye]

My S&W model 64 has a hammer mounted firing pin but it is "pinned" to the hammer and has a little bit of flex to it. Has anyone out there noticed similar marks on the primers of their top-breaks?

My Albion Motors .38 S&W (.38/200) has a 'pinned' firing pin, and my primers look like your top row right two, and middle row left two...

 

[solvability]

I have been loading my Webley with either W231 or Unique and the 200gr lead bullet. I may be loading a bit hot for most other top breaks but they work fine in the Webley. A very gentle round -likely on both ends.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Now that is a good looking revolver Grumpy. You're right, those are funky looking firing pin marks on the primers. Some at look abused! lol... I have a Enfield revolver in .38 S&W and while the firing pin hits hard the primers don't look like that at all. I just got a hold of a Iver Johnson 5 shooter in .38 S&W but it's nowhere near as nice as yours. As a matter of fact mine isn't safe to shoot yet, I need to get it repaired...

 

[Old Grumpy]

ArchAngelCD, photos? What model?

The Model 66 was normally a .22 but in the early 60s Iver Johnson built a few Model 66s in .38 S&W and called it the 66S. They produced these from about 1961 to 1964 and they appear to be fairly rare birds. I've checked GunBroker over the years and I have not found another 66S listed.

It shoots nice with these loads and I'll soon try some loads using N320. I've heard it works well in nthe .38 S&W. I'll keep posting my data as I develop it.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I'll post a few photos as soon as I get some of the rust off the revolver, it's in really rough shape.

 

[Old Grumpy]

I made up yet another test load for the old .38 S&W. These rounds use 2.2gr of N320. A fellow reloader uses a 4.7gr load and suggested starting at 2.4gr but I went another 0.2gr lower. His loads (2.7gr) ran right at 690 fps from a 5" barrel. I'd like to see these around 580 fps but we'll see what they run. Stay tuned.