best round choices for .38 snub nose

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm

the above link claims that a 158g rnl .38spl went through 28.8" of gel?? many more powerful hp bullets penetrated less...according to the chart?

is there such a round??

if so, would a similar .38spl fmj also be a better penetrator that the expanding .38spl hollow points??

ie....more likely to create -entry wound (blood loss) - internal organ damage (passing through organs...blood pressure loss and possible nervous system damage) - exit wound (additional skin wound creating additional blood loss) ??????

do the hp type bullets do something significantly better if they expand fully??

entry wound (blood loss...somwhat larger than a fmj entry wound) - internal organ damage (often displacing more fluid and nicking organs as well as smashing into them) - exit wound (less likely than an fmj) ?????

if they dont expand fully do they perform similar to fmj then??? or is there something in the construction of the hp type bullets that could tend to fragment them , loosing mass more readily...esp through barriers????
 
I carry either the Speer 135gr +P short barrel ammo or more than not the Remington 158gr LSWC/HP +P ammo. (FBI Load) I find the FBI Load to be accurate and reliable even in a short barrel J frame.
 
I'm probably going to catch a lot of flack for this but I learned it from some old pistol shooters when I was a young deputy sheriff and many years later saw the wisdom of it when I was teaching civilians handgun self defense as part of CCW certification.

I recommend target wad-cutters in the 2" 38 Specials. They are accurate, mild in recoil and muzzle blast and surprisingly effective at close range. They always cut a .358" size hole, they can be fired very quickly and with more control than any of the +P rounds already discussed. And they are cheep enough (hand loaded or purchased in bulk) that you can practice a lot and you will enjoy the experience. Being able to dump 5 rounds into a small group as fast as you can work the trigger will produce the desired result, much better than a hit and a miss from the hottest round you can stuff into your J-frame.

I had any number of students (older folks, young ladies and women un-familiar with firearms) become quite confident and competent shooting 148g WCs in their 2" five shot revolvers.

As always, YMMV!
Dave
 
Ayoob recommends the FBI load (158-gr. LSWCHP at +P velocities) by Winchester or Remington, or the NYPD load (Speer GDHP Short Barrel 135-gr. +P). Both have good service records, with the FBI load penetrating further (12-16") and expanding much less (.355-.50 cal.), and the Speer load penetrating less (11-13") but expanding more (.45-65 caliber).

I am also very interested in Winchester's new 130-gr. +P Ranger, which was clearly designed to compete with the Gold Dot load.
 
DaveT...I think I'll give the wad-cutters a try. The old Fed. HS HP's may be a bit much for my old '74 Chiefs Spec. (love that gun) Maybe the wad-cutters will improve my accuracy and not lighten my wallet so much as well. In fact, I think I'll do that now.
 
I don't have near the experience of most of these guys.

But... I settled on the classic FBI load, the Remington 158 gr lead semi-wadcutter hollow-point, +P based on: (1) Research here and other places. (2) Shooting it and a bunch of other stuff in my two J frame .38s. (3) I can shoot both my 442 1-7/8"bbl and my 637 2-1/2"bbl as well or better with it than anything else I've tried.

Since the OP seems to still be shopping for a gun, and not just a cartridge for it, I'll say I like the 637 2-1/2" better, because I can hit a target considerably better with it at 25 yds, and it still pocket-carries reasonably well.

Les
 
A number of other rounds don't have the longevity or the benefit of police shooting statistics to back them up, but still seem to have a lot of promise.

Some of those are the 110-gr. +P Cor-Bon DPX, the Hornaday Critical Defense, the Winchester Ranger 130-gr. +P, and some others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top