Developing a snubbie load in .38SPL with Gold Dots

[Master Blaster]

I have been looking through my load books for a good snubbie load but it seems that even though folks carry snubbies there is a dearth of reloading data for them, most loads are developed with 6" barrels or test barrels.

My firearm is a 2.25" Model 36 chiefs special circa 1973.
The literature that came with the gun seems to indicate that the standard .38 spl. loaded in the 70's was in fact what we now call +p.

So has anyone here developed and chronographed a load for a snubbie revolver in .38 spl or +P?

Looking through speer #13

It seems that even with a 6" barrel the difference between regular and +p is only 80 FPS.

I am thinking the best load would be with titegroup powder, since it is fast burning and will not hopefully produce a fireball outside the barrel like some slower powders. Hopefully this will result in higher velocity from a snubbie.

The load is 4.4 gr titegroup and a 125 gr gold dot for 933 fps, I would expect it to run about 750-800 fps from a snubbie due to the shorter barrel but the faster powder may negate the 50 fps velocity loss per barrel inch and make it somewhat less.
Add 80fps and 0.5 gr of powder for +p.

Anyone done any load development along these lines???

Thanks

 

[Mike Irwin]

You've ID'ed a serious flaw in reloading books, one that people have known about for a long time, but which no one really seems to want to do much about, unfortunately.

Some years ago (maybe the late 1980s) American Rifelman had an article on handloading specifically for the .38 Spl. snubby. I THINK that it was written either by Charlie Petty or Ed Matunas.

Handloader magazine may have had a similar article sometime in the early 1990s, but I can't remember for certain.

 

[benewton]

FWIW, I use a 110 behind 4.7 of Bullseye for a carry load in my 74ish DS, which is the minimum standard pressure load. Since these are assembled on a Dillon, and not individually weighted, I note that the +P loads max out at 5.1, from Speer 12.

Bullseye is my standard pistol powder, since it works reasonable well across the spectrum of handguns that I own, none of which are magnums, and a single powder greatly simplifies logistics.

My practice load, however, is a 358429 "linotype" CLSWC over 3.5 of Bullseye. This comes from the data in Lyman's third edition, and it's taken from a 4" barrel, and, given that my fractional algebra is correct, it shoul run around 700 in that barrel.

Data is available in Lyman's for 92, 121, and 141 grain rounds, which might be of interest to you as a starting point, if nothing else.

As an aside, I used to use and old .44 Special Bulldog as my winter carry, and I didn't even bother to load jacketed slugs for it. I figured that the velocity would be too low to expand them, and, besides, if three or four 245's didn't do it, nothing in gilding metal would!

 

[bogie]

I'm weird... If I was loading a .38 snub for defensive purposes, I'd go for VERY hot +P+ loads of a fast powder (would NOT shoot these for practice), with a very light bullet - 110 or 125 grain JHP.

Last two rounds would be fireballs - 180 grainer with a bunch of slow powder.

 

[popbang]

I have been working on a snubby load in 38 Special. I found the best one so far is a +P loading with N340 of 6.4 grains. With the load listed out of a Ruger SP-101 with a 2-1/4" barrel I am getting an average velocity of 1020 fps using a 125 grain Remington Golden Saber bullet with an OAL of 1.450".

This is the max load listed in Vihta Vuori book. Don't take my word for anything check it out yourself.

 

[Johnny Guest]

Interesting differences in approach - - -

1. Light JHP bullet, pushed as fast as possible, usually with quick burning powder, hoping for expansion

2. Light JHP bullet, ditto, with large quantities of slower burning powder

3. Heavier lead bullet, at moderate (read, "fairly slow") velocity, with conventional charges.
- -A. SWC, about 158 gr., with perhaps 4.5 gr Unique or the equivalent, looking for penetration and accurate placement, figuring much expansion is a fantasy.
- - B. Full wad cutter, often a hollow base, loaded backwards, again with a modest charge of powder, figuring the optimum shape and soft lead will promote some expansion, or, if not, at least cut a full diameter hole.

An old Speer loading manual, I think it was number 10, which I bought new in the early 1970s, gave load data for short barrel guns. They touted the light-to-mid weight bullets, 125 to 146 gr, with huge quantities of slow burning powder, like 2400. Yes, they admitted LOTS of flash and some unburned powder, but had the chronograph results to show that they SHOULD be pretty efficient, withal.

My personal preference for my 2" barrel revolvers is the Remington (or Winchester) factory 158 LSWCHP +P. My personal experiments shooting into pipe sealing compound, wet paper, and water filled plastic jugs were strictly amateur stuff compared to calibrated ballistic gelatin, Fackler boxes, and the like. The true indicators are, of course, the autopsy results. This load will consistently deform and expand slightly, even from the snubs, while going very deep.

Additional benefits of this load are that it has a modest flash, and holds accuracy 'way on out there, while the wadcutters become unstable at fairly short range. While a high speed load, it still hits close to point of aim on fixed sight revolvers, while the 90 to 110 and 125 loads usually hit quite low. The price is moderate compared to the super duper JHP factory loads, and it is easy to have a cheap practice load with cast swc handloads and 231 or Unique powder.

I shoot mostly alloy frame snubs, and the +P ammo will loosen 'em up beore too long. I practice with standard velocity loads, and verify sights with a few rounds of +P every year or two. Realistically, this is pretty good practice.

Before you put too much faith in the light bullet loads, try to run 'em over a chronograph and see what velocities you REALLY obtain. You might just come to the same conclusion I did about the heavier bullets that actually do go deep.

Best of luck - - -
Johnny

 

[ed dixon]

MB: I asked basically this same question myself and got very little response. I thought that was for a lack of interest, but Mike explains that it's really a lack of (published) information. Interesting to know.

 

[Johnny Guest]

OOOPPS - - -My bad.

Master Blaster - - -
I apologize for getting off on a tangent in my response to your original post. The topic heading was, "Developing a snubbie load in .38SPL with Gold Dots," and I never even mentioned that particular line of bullets.

As you could probably tell, I'm fairly opinionated as to loads for MY use in MY two-inchers. One of my pet peeves,though, is when someone asks a specific question, and some responder just takes off on another tangent.

Anyhow, keep us updated on your project/progress.

Best,
Johnny

 

[Mike Irwin]

Geezing a little today, Johnny?