Experiments with the .38 S&W. Pics and range results.

[thatguy]

A few weeks ago I picked up an Enfield pistol (the break-action British service pistol) at a gun show. I had sort of wanted one for maybe 20 years but didn't want to pay a lot since it would just be a toy. See them going for $250+ now and to me that's crazy. Saw this one on a table with a tag reading $110. I swear, it looked unfired. Some storage and handling marks, but no sign of it ever having actually been shot. I asked if he'd take a C note and it was mine. Walked over and got some correct brass from another dealer. Now I needed dies.

Wow! RCBS wants $137 for a set of .38 S&W dies! I nearly croaked. Checked the auction sites and picked up a set of RCBS dies in about 98% (in the old cardboard box, no less) for $13 off ebay. Now I was in business.

Wait, I still needed the proper .360 bullets. I wanted to buy some .360 sized bullets but the bullet dealer I like wasn't at the show when I bought the gun and the brass, so I decided to try loading some .357 lead bullets (125 grain FP "cowboy" bullets). No problem crimping them, and today I ran it out to the range and I think it shot the undersized slugs pretty good. I loaded 4.5 grains of Herco and according to the manual this should produce around 925 FPS. Hey, that's only 50 FPS behind a factory 125 +P .38 Special. What do you think about that? Maybe we are making a mistake by passing over all those great .38 S&W revolvers when looking for a defensive pistol? As long as you hand load, that is.

The target shows a nicely clustered 3" group shot at 21 feet double action. This gun is DA only and the trigger pull is at least 15 pounds so holding the sight picture was rather trying to say the least. The group would have been a bit better if it weren't for the one errant shot at 3 o'clock. I actually called that, knowing that I had jerked one off to the right due to the heavy trigger.

All in all, I say not bad.

The pistol:



The target:

 

[J Miller]

I've always wanted a Webley revolver. They are just soooooo ugly, like an English Bulldog.

Looks like you got a real good deal on that one.
If you want to try something a bit different, load some 147gr HB wadcutters for it. Use the same loading data you would use for the 146gr RNL bullets, and seat the bullets to the same OAL as the 146gr RN.
I used to load this load for a S&W Victory Model in 38S&W. Worked great.

Joe

 

[mainmech48]

Not real shabby for an Enfield, which is what's pictured. While it is based on the Webley design, this varient was developed by the Royal Arsenal at Enfield as a wartime expedient to reduce cost and simplify production.

You might like to do some experimenting with HBWCs in your handloads if you have trouble finding 0.360-0.361" cast bullets for it. You have to seat them way out in order to keep enough powder capacity to be usefull, but they can give really surprising accuracy in .38 S&W. Might save you some hassle and expense.

I'm really surprised that you didn't seem to have any POI/POA issues with that light bullet, especially if your actual velocity is close to the manual's estimate. Many years ago, I had an old Webley surplused from the Hong Kong PD that I had to file about half the front sight off of before I could get them regulated for the standard 146 gr. .38 S&W loads. POI was way low compared to the few round of surplus 200 gr. issue stuff I could find.

FWIW, and I know this will sound like heresy to some, you might want to tone those loads down a bit, even with the very light-for-the-caliber bullet. My guess is that the manual's loads were worked up with a solid frame S&W or Colt of some sort. Any top-break, even one as relatively stout as the Webley/Enfield, isn't going to hold up to higher than design-standard pressure loads very long without problems. YMMV, but why press your luck?

 

[thatguy]

The 4.5 load isn't the top one listed. They feel very mild and the cases drop from the chambers if the gun is inverted. I think the people writing these manuals are aware of the types of guns out there and are usually pretty good about advising which loads are not intended for certain firearms.

Yes, the load shoots very low. Common with lighter/faster loads and fixed sights. I was aiming at the top of the 6 ring to get the rounds into the black.

 

[Jim K]

In response to another thread, I slugged the barrels on mine and guess what? .357. I know what the books say, and all the experts, but I can still read a mike, and if I couldn't, I have an electronic caliper that says the same thing.

Jim

 

[.455_Hunter]

My First Handgun

I hope you enjoy your Enfield!
My father bought one for me for $120 in 1989 when I was in junior high (what would Sarah Brady would think!). It is a 1937 No.2 MK I* with wooden grips, and was arsenal reconditioned in 1948. This gun was a great companion during my high school years for hiking, camping and scary trips into Denver. Though some people may laugh, it was very comforting to carry this gun stoked with FN mil spec 178 gr. FMJs during hikes along the Colorado Front Range. I felt very secure from two legged predators and somewhat secure from the four legged ones. I drew it a few times when the mountain lions got a little too close for comfort. I have no problems shooting nice groups at 15 yards, and my action is nice and smooth. It still serves as a back-up HD gun for my wife and I.

 

[mainmech48]

As I said, YMMV. Most of the manuals I've used have a caution concerning using their data in top-break revolvers to one degree or another. Some limit the caveat to older "pocket" guns, the Lyman #47 goes so far as to recommend against using reloads in any top-break. Your manual may not.

Of the ones I have readily to-hand (Lyman and Lee) neither contains any loading for any powder greater than 4.5 grs. There are only two of these and both of those are maximum. One is with Unique and a 121 gr cast bullet, the other is HS-7 with a 158 gr. The only load with Herco listed is with a 146 gr., and it maxes at 3.2 gr.

I don't have the exact SAAMI pressure spec, but the highest recorded figure for a max load in either is 12,400 C.U.P. The next highest is 11,500. Most powders listed max out at less than 11,000 with the 3.2 Herco/146 combo maxing at 10,400.

It also might be good to point out that military ammo has its own pressure specs and arms for them are designed within those parameters. Commercial specs, as those of SAAMI or its European equivalents, may be quite different for the same cartridges and cannot be equated with certainty. The standards for "safe" mean/peak pressures for commercial/reloaded ammo, as well as the unit system for measurment of same, have changed at least a couple of times within recent memory. IMO, when current data is applied to arms and cartridges designed and manufactured under what were almost certainly very different standards, this would suggest that a certain amount of extra caution might be in order.