.38 Super vs .357 Mag

[mbt2001]

I just like the .38 super...

Honestly it doesn't compare with the .357 mag though. It is more like a 9mm +p+ round.

 

[tipoc]

Quote:
There was no problem with frame cracking with .38 Super LW Commanders.
Simply not true. I'm referring to the Lightweight Commanders produced circa 1950-1965.

I do not know how the new ones hold up. My comments were regarding only the original run/chambering during the above time frames.

I'd go with a steel frame, since proper holsters would support the weight easily.

Some of the original alloy framed guns did crack but so did some of the steel frames. The problem was not the frames, per se, but that folks were not using the proper weight recoil springs for the guns when they first appeared in 1948. Not maintaining the new alloy framed guns springs properly led to some frame battering and cracking and the undeserved rep that "alloy frames crack". If the springs ain't proper a steel framed gun can be battered and crack. That was 50 years ago. I own a 1951 Commander in .38 Super that I've put many thousands of round threw with no problem.

tipoc

 

[David4516]

Regarding the heavy .357 rounds, someone told me that they won't chamber in a smaller revolver like the SP101? Is that true? Could I shoot 180gr loads if I wanted to?

How about .327? 6 shots vs. 5 sounds nice, but is it close to .357 power wise? If it's not, then I don't see the point in buying a new gun, I could just keep packing my 9x18...

So far the only numbers I've seen on .327 are for 115gr bullet at about 1300FPS. Doesn't sound bad but if that's as heavy as they get I don't know if I'm interested...

 

[Gryffydd]

I doubt most 180gr loads would have any trouble in the SP101. 200gr loads might cause a problem, which is why some people load them in 38 special cases.

The .327 really can't keep up with the .357, especially in the heavier bullets. Even then, the lighter bullets really can't come close. 1700fps out of a midsize revolver should be pretty easy with the .357 and 115 grain bullets.

 

[Dr_2_B]

Ruger

 

[David E]

You seem quite confident. Point me to published/accepted statistics on your claim, please.

The gunsmith that showed them to me and told me of them has long since passed away, so you're out of luck.

I can see where the wrong or worn out recoil springs could cause the cracking, so if you get an alloy framed .38 Super, be diligent about the recoil springs!

 

[David E]

Regarding the heavy .357 rounds, someone told me that they won't chamber in a smaller revolver like the SP101? Is that true? Could I shoot 180gr loads if I wanted to?

I don't own one (don't care for 'em) but the original magnums had a shorter frame/cylinder (since the SP-101 was first chambered in .38 spl.) and could only accommodate the 125 grain length loads. Shortly thereafter, they lengthened both frame and cylinder to accommodate the longer/heavier bullets.

Most, if not all, 180 loads will work fine, since the extra weight/length is inside the case, not in front of it.

 

[James T Thomas]

straight record

That 357 round did not emerge from the hunting round category, into the man stopper category, until the bullet technology was perfected.
Much later in the history.
I stated perfected, because even in this new age, defensive rounds are being marketed that do not live up to the claimed hype of those selling them.

I do not know much about the current 38 super ammo, but the last word I knew was that: ammo variety was limited, ammo availability was limited,
and apparently the terminal ballistic thing has not yet been perfected.

For your field use, other factors apply.

 

[Walkalong]

I have two 1911s in .38 Super. I would like a revolver in .38 Super, but the only ones I have seen are pricey. Maybe someday.

I have several .357 revolvers, because there are so many cool .357 revolvers out there.

It's a disease. I swear. Can I get a check from the Govmint (taxpayer ) for this disease, so I can buy more revolvers in .357?

Both suck, don't get either one--- That got 5 votes......I am amazed, I really am. Both suck?

 

[tipoc]

I do not know much about the current 38 super ammo, but the last word I knew was that: ammo variety was limited, ammo availability was limited,
and apparently the terminal ballistic thing has not yet been perfected.

Folks can drop by here...
http://www.midwayusa.com/browse/Bro...3&categoryId=7512&categoryString=653***691***

and here...
http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/ItemListing.aspx?catid=645

to get a rough idea of some of what is currently available in commercially loaded stuff.

Many of the ammo manufacturers use 9mm bullets for the Super as they generally work well.

As far as the "terminal ballistic thing" that's been figured out for the Super as much as any other round.

As some one else said in response to the OPs original posts. It more a matter of what one wants to carry. A 1911 or a revolver. Take your pic.

Either the .357 or the .38 Super will work as defense arms against mountain lion. Neither would be my first choice against black bear but either might do all right as black bear can be more easily scared off then Brown bears by load noises and such.

tipoc

 

[lawboy]

A 1911 45ACP with a good LRN load will do what you need done in the woods and around the homestead. A commander size gun would work well and carry easily, esp. a lightweight. 357 is an excellent caliber for what you describe.

 

[MCgunner]

That 357 round did not emerge from the hunting round category, into the man stopper category, until the bullet technology was perfected.
Much later in the history.

Back in the K frame model 10 .38 special round nose days of 1935 when it came out, the .357 was thought to be superior to the .38 due to its penetration on sheet steel (car bodies were heavy back then) with the 158 grain load. Smith and Wesson sponsored hunting trips to kill large north American game with it, but the first registered magnum went to J Edgar Hoover for a reason.

It didn't make main stream street cop holsters until the Super Vel days of the late 60s in mass, but then one of the things that gave it more popularity for the street cop is putting the round in a K frame. N frames were heavy on the hip. The K frame carried better and shot just as well. I think the advent of the K frame magnums was the true beginning of the .357s popularity with cops, but it didn't hurt that about that time Super Vel came along.

 

[David4516]

I think part of the reason I'm having trouble deciding is that I don't see load data in my reloading manulas that I can trust for the .357 This is because their test guns all have much longer barrels (one was 9 inches, sounds more like a rifle than a handgun to me).

So I'm assuming that the muzzel velocity shown is much higher than it would be for the same load from a barrel that is 2 or 3 inches...

How much difference is there between the 2 rounds when you take into consideration the short barrel on the .357?

I may be way off but my guess is that they'd be pretty close if using similar bullet weights.

From what you guys have told me, the lighter bullets (125gr) are about equal between the two calibers. But how does the 147gr .38 super match up with something like a 140gr .357?

 

[Deanimator]

I'd rather have 9 or 10 rounds of .38 Super any day than 5 rounds of .357.

 

[tipoc]

From what you guys have told me, the lighter bullets (125gr) are about equal between the two calibers. But how does the 147gr .38 super match up with something like a 140gr .357?

The .357 from a snubby will beat the .38 Super. However it's hard to find a Super in a 3" or less barrel. Your choice is between the revolver or a semi. The choice is yours.

Poke around here some...http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/38vs357snub.htm

But the idea of a snubby seems to me to cut across the idea of a carry piece for the ranch that you discussed earlier.

tipoc

 

[DesertMarine]

I would choose a S&W Model 19 with 2 1/2" barrel or 4" barrel. I have carried the Mod 19 for a lot of years and it is great. That with 125 gr JHP is great. It is concealable.
Have never fired or carried a SP, so can't comment on it. I tried Ruger DA revolvers before and did not like their actions. Don' know how good or bad the new Rugers are. Smith revolvers can be tuned to have beautiful actions.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

When you start chopping the barrel of a .357, it gets a lot closer to the .38 super. So much so, I'm not sure I'd know the difference if shot with one or the other. This is with high performance loads and bullets in both. I like the Super. It carries easier, carries more rounds, loads faster (I'm not Miculek), and doesn't hurt my ears as much as a short barreled magnum. There are more powerful things like the 9x23 Win, and 9x25 dillon (a 9mm on the 10mm case) that fit the same size guns as the Super, so they would easily be viable if you are a reloader. The 9x25 exceeds the .357 ballistically.

 

[rkamp]

I just like the .38 super...

Honestly it doesn't compare with the .357 mag though. It is more like a 9mm +p+ round.


Pictured is my old .38 super that served as my field and defensive pistol for 10 years. I have since replaced it with a 10mm. I used Corbon 115gr jhp's for defense and handloaded 147gr XTP's (1200 fps) for woods walking.

I have tried all makes and models the past 25 years and my two main pistols are 1911's (9mm and 10mm). The .38 super is not practical when compared to the 9mm in the 1911 platform. However, it is a great round to handload for and can be very versatile.

 

[RoostRider]

I'd go .357 mag. revolver... don't worry about reload time... have some handy, but don't consider using it very likely...

Cheap ammo for practice (.38 spcl), everyone sells it, everyone who reloads reloads it, lots of others have the caliber (emergency ammo?), reliable, pretty accurate, plenty of punch (even for black bears- and I know bears pretty well), simple to understand and operate, fairly easy to conceal...

 

[tipoc]

The .38 super is not practical when compared to the 9mm in the 1911 platform

Interesting point rkamp. I'm not sure what you mean though. The 1911 has been chambered for the .38 Super since 1929 and is it's original home meaning that the .38 Super was developed to chamber in the 1911. The 1911 was first chambered for the 9mm in the Colt Commander in 1949. So I'm not sure why you consider the .38 Super "not practical" in the 1911.

tipoc

 

[chris in va]

I had the SP101 3"...the sucker is the same size as a Sig 220.

 

[rkamp]

Interesting point rkamp. I'm not sure what you mean though. The 1911 has been chambered for the .38 Super since 1929 and is it's original home meaning that the .38 Super was developed to chamber in the 1911. The 1911 was first chambered for the 9mm in the Colt Commander in 1949. So I'm not sure why you consider the .38 Super "not practical" in the 1911.

tipoc,

Practical in the sense that the 9mm is much, much more readily available and less expensive than .38 Super. There are so many types of 9mm loadings available. Everything from fmj practice to +p+ jhp's. The Super may have been chambered before the 9mm, but for SHTF scenarios the 9mm in 1911 is hard to beat. My old Colt had a fully supported Bar-sto barrel to ensure case support for hot handloads, a lot of 38 Super pistols come with standard barrels. Unless you handload or travel into Mexico the .38 Super does not make sense, but as a fellow enthusiast you know "sense" went out the window a while ago.

My primary defensive load is the Speer 124gr Gold Dot +P at around 1200fps. I saw a box of comparable Winchester 38 Super 125gr Silvertips at the local gun store yesterday at $45 for a box of 50 .

A nice article by S. Camp on the subject:
http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/38SuperTo9mm.htm

 

[tipoc]

"Practical" and there's the rub. Somehow I'm never short of .38 Super ammo. Set handloading aside I usually have a couple of hundred rounds of factory Winchester and Cor-Bon in my stockpile. I'm able to do this by purchasing on line and at gun shows where the price of quality ammo for the Super is about the same as quality ammo for the 9mm.

Now if a fella buys their ammo by the box at the local gunatorium then the 9mm is infinitely more "practical".

For any "practical" purpose the 9mm or the more powerful 40S&W is the better choice. Many more commercial loads of both to choose from. However it is a myth that the Super is hard to find. I posted earlier links to two (of several) online sources for commercial loads of the Super and as I mentioned it's usually available at gunshows.

Mr. Camp's useful article misses a point: the .38 Super, like the 44 Special and the 10mm is an acquired taste. These rounds don't give you anything you can's get elsewhere but they do give ya a combination of balance and power that many appreciate. The .44 Special is not a "Practical" round by some shooters standards the ammo is "hard to find" and more and better commercial loads of the .40 S&W and .45acp are available for a side arm then are available in gunstores for the .44 Special. Yet the .44 Special remains a popular round.

The Super gives a shooter about 100 fps across the board more power than the 9mm and can, and does it with heavier bullets at reduced pressures. It is an extremely accurate cartridge especially out of compensated guns, as IDPA and IPSC competitiors have found for over 25 years now.

Till the development of the 10mm the .38 Super was the most powerful cartridge that could be fired from a semi. That's no longer true but it does not take away from the balance the Super gives one. People shoot the Super because it is a good round and because they like it and because it's natural home is the 1911. But "practical", heck by some folks figuring there's only 3 rounds of ammo practical for semis.

tipoc

 

[David4516]

Based on input so far I'm leaning toward the .357

Now the hard part... saving up the $$$ to buy it...

Which brings me to my next question: is the SP101 a good gun for the money? Or should I look at another brand, like Tarus?

I like the SP 101 (have handled them a couple of times and shot one once) but if there is another similar revolver out there for less $$$ then I might look into it...

 

[tipoc]

SP101 is a good piece for the money and sounds like it would fit your needs. The Taurus Tracker has a pretty good rep though. It's also heavier than the Ruger. Hold both and see what you think.

tipoc