Felt Snappiness: 357 Mag v. 38 Short Colt

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Trying new loads for 38 Short Colt ammo. The 38 SC brass is slightly more voluminous than 9mm brass with a slightly larger case diameter and case length ... but close nonetheless.

So naturally I looked at 9mm load data. Found the Western Powder load data PDF and look at 9mm loads for True Blue. There was no exact match for my 125 gr Berry's FN bullets but for 124 gr Berry's RN bullets it had 5.9 gr. Since these were NOT +P loads and since the 38 SC case capacity is slightly larger, I went with 6 gr. of True Blue.

Went to the range today and was getting an average of 1080 FPS with this load ... but they were "snappy", actually snappier than Barnes 357 self defense loads.

So riddle me this: why would this 38 SC load firing a 125 gr bullets at ~1080 FPS be more "snappy" than a 357 124 gr load?

Attached is a picture of the case heads of the spent 38 SC brass. I don't see of any signs of excess pressure.
View attachment 1165404

Actually, 6.0gr is the maximum load.


You really need to get better about posting the prescribed warning when you post max and/or untested data. I know you don’t care but it would be harmful to the rest of us if someone got hurt because they mistook your post as a tested, correct load and mirrored it. This isn’t Reddit and we don’t celebrate conning people into blowing up their guns.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I have no doubt that the rate of acceleration is changing constantly. All I’m saying is that I have no means to measure it.

Just my opinion but I think the porting is doing its job and that’s the difference you’re feeling. One powder takes better advantage of the compensated barrel than the other. That would also be a factor in whether the bullet undergoes rapid acceleration which falls off quickly or a slower rate of acceleration which continues to be positive without much negative travel. Autocomp in my wife’s Taurus .32H&R has better velocity with less felt recoil than a similar mv load using Red Dot. The barrel ports do their job.

 

[jski]

Actually, 6.0gr is the maximum load.
View attachment 1165470

You really need to get better about posting the prescribed warning when you post max and/or untested data. I know you don’t care but it would be harmful to the rest of us if someone got hurt because they mistook your post as a tested, correct load and mirrored it. This isn’t Reddit and we don’t celebrate conning people into blowing up their guns.

No one should use any loads posted here or elsewhere without fully researching them. I told people exactly where I got the load data from, so I was hiding nothing! I concealed nothing!

 

[FROGO207]

To me the faster the propellant with the lighter bullet gives me more "snap". The slower propellant with the heavier bullet gives more of a push with all things equal. The porting makes a difference as noted.

For the record anytime I deviate from published data (from bullet or propellant manufacturer) I will add a disclamer. Just because 100 people on the net call a load safe does not mean it has been tested safe lawsuit wise.

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

There is a phenomenon that has been alluded to here, but not yet actually discussed: jerk. Let’s start with some already discussed terms; velocity is the rate of change in position and acceleration is the rate of change in velocity. Likewise, jerk is the rate of change in acceleration. With all other factors held constant, when the acceleration rate increases rapidly we get a snappy recoil versus a push recoil when the acceleration rate increases more slowly. With the much smaller case size, the pressure builds more rapidly in 9mm size cases than it does in 357 magnum size cases. This causes the bullet’s rate of acceleration to increase more quickly. This in turn causes the recoil acceleration to change more rapidly (snappy).

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

No one should use any loads posted here or elsewhere without fully researching them. I told people exactly where I got the load data from, so I was hiding nothing! I concealed nothing!

Go read this:

REQUIRED READ for those posting Extra HEAVY LOAD Information

THIS IS IMPORTANT- - - - - In the spirit of advancing knowledge and encouraging the open sharing of information amongst The High Road forum members, the near-unrestricted posting of handloading information and specific loads is allowed. HOWEVER--- We owe it to one another to include proper...

www.thehighroad.org

 

[ballman6711]

No one should use any loads posted here or elsewhere without fully researching them. I told people exactly where I got the load data from, so I was hiding nothing! I concealed nothing!

You may want to edit your original post to include a warning of some sort.

chris

 

[SingleActionAndrew]

Look at the original post!

I've reread it as I did before posting and don't see this data point

 

[crstrode]

You kinda went off the reservation with this load data combo so I think GRT or Quickload will be needed to answer your question. Any answers you get here would be educated guesses at best.

It is not possible to go off the reservation if the starting point is in the wrong state . . . check that; wrong country.

 

[crstrode]

Oh yeah, lest I forget, way back when I first thought about using Starline’s 38 SC brass, I called their in-house ballistician and asked if their SC brass could handle 9mm pressures and he responded by saying that “many competitive shooters load it to those levels”. I didn’t push him further.

His first name is Hunter (strangely enough).

Actually, Hunter is the in-house custodian.

 

[jski]

Actually, Hunter is the in-house custodian.

Really? What this guy’s last name?

All I know is that I called Starline and asked to speak with their ballistician and they said that would be Hunter then he answered. Later he also sent me an email responding to a question.

If you doubt it, call Starline yourself and ask to speak with their ballistician, Hunter. Go for it!

 

[fxvr5]

Hunter Pilant. He's listed at the process manager. He does their videos, too.

"Hunter Pilant has been working as a Manager, Process Technical Support at Starline Brass for 12 years."

 

[jski]

Hunter Pilant. He's listed at the process manager. He does their videos, too.

"Hunter Pilant has been working as a Manager, Process Technical Support at Starline Brass for 12 years."

He’s a sharp guy. He was the one who told me that there is no SAAMI spec for either the 38 Short or Long Colt. He said they (the Short Colt) are primarily targeted at competitive shooters.

 

[AJC1]

He’s a sharp guy. He was the one who told me that there is no SAAMI spec for either the 38 Short or Long Colt. He said they (the Short Colt) are primarily targeted at competitive shooters.

Cip which is the euro zone standard does list the cartridges. Sammi was likely created after 38sc was obsolete, therfore no one submitted it. Most of the time people don't use the same name for two cartridges for saftey sake. I'm also thinking that the new version doesn't use heeled bullets like a 22lr and the original.

 

[CoalTrain49]

My guess is a much faster powder in your short Colt loads vs our .357 load.

That would be my guess also. I load for both. I use 2400 for my 357 loads and American Select for my 38 Short Colt loads. AS is a pretty fast powder (think Green Dot burn rate) but I don't use very much of it. Pressure is way below 9x19 and the MV is around 700 fps. I shoot it in my S&W model 36. My goal wasn't to make 38 Short Colt into 9x19 for my revolver, although I think many comp shooters do that. Starline wouldn't be selling the brass if they didn't have a market for it.

Personally I don't see anything wrong with that approach if one is using that ammo in a 357 revolver. I certainly wouldn't put it in an old 38 SC revolver and expect to have all of my fingers in working order after I did my Elmer Keith destructive testing.

Everyone realizes 38 Short Colt was a black powder cartridge, right?

This article will more or less clue a person in on what's going on with 38 SC

An NRA Shooting Sports Journal | Handloading The .38 Short Colt For Competition

Modern competitive revolver shooters use .38 Short Colt for its short case, which is faster to eject and reload than the more common .38 Special.

www.ssusa.org

Full speed ahead.

 

[jski]

Personally I don't see anything wrong with that approach if one is using that ammo in a 357 revolver. I certainly wouldn't put it in an old I frame 38 SC revolver and expect to have all of my fingers in working order after I did my Elmer Keith destructive testing.

Full speed ahead.

I wouldn’t consider using these 9mm loads in anything but a 357 wheelgun.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I don’t understand the visceral resistance to posting a recommended warning that the post contains unpublished or over-spec material. It’s a courtesy the forum moderators requested to protect the forum and the service providers from liability. Are there really people so rude and disrespectful that they will argue to the death to avoid being courteous?
That’s sad. It’s really kinda pathetic, too. I’m sure I have no further need of that person.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Oh boy, did this post ever go into the weeds.

The more I read posts like this, the more I don't want to post any load data.....anywhere.

Maybe the moderators would caution everyone to stop posting load data unless it's published.

 

[jski]

Warning inserted into original post.

Of course the warning is a bit nonsensical. There is no “published” load data for the 38 Short Colt.

“The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge.” I’m not sure what that means.

But if that makes you feel better …

 

[CoalTrain49]

Warning inserted into original post.

Of course the warning is a bit nonsensical. This is no “published” for load data for the 38 Short Colt.

“The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge.” I’m not sure what that means.

But if that makes you feel better …

Thank you.

 

[mcb]

Warning inserted into original post.

Of course the warning is a bit nonsensical. There is no “published” load data for the 38 Short Colt.

“The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge.” I’m not sure what that means.

But if that makes you feel better …

Hodgdon actually "publishes" some very conservative modern load data for 38 Short Colt in their online database.

 

[jski]

Hodgdon actually "publishes" some very conservative modern load data for 38 Short Colt in their online database.

That must have been recent but nonetheless: MEA CULPA! That’s the only “published” data I’ve seen. Max velocity of 771 FPS, that has to be for very old guns.

I don’t think that’s Starline’s intended/targeted market.

 

[reddog81]

What's the case capacity of the 38 SC brass vs 9mm? That 9mm load is bumping right up against the 35K PSI limit. It's very possible the 38 SC load has a higher pressure than the 357 load. The larger 357 case allows for more powder at a lower PSI, which means the possibility for a higher velocity with lower pressure.

 

[Walkalong]

Warning inserted into original post.

Thank you.

 

[mcb]

That must have been recent but nonetheless: MEA CULPA! That’s the only “published” data I’ve seen. Max velocity of 771 FPS, that has to be for very old guns.

I don’t think that’s Starline’s intended/targeted market.

Given that 38 Short Colt was originally developed for coverting Colt 1851 Navy Cap and ball revolvers to metallic cartridges with a conversion cylinder, yes pretty old. I don't believe there was ever a revolver designed from the ground up to use 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt served this role.

38 Short Colt due to it's use in cap and ball revolvers also originally used .375 diameter bullets that were heeled into the cases similar to 22LR. It was also a black powder only cartridge and had fallen into obscurity before smokeless powders came along. It was not until the last few decades did it resurface and we started loading it with modern smokeless powers and .357 diameter bullets.

Not sure why it resurface in it's modern form of smokeless and .357 diameter bullets but SASS and ICORE competition where probably the primary drivers in the 1980's & 1990's??? It had a short live popularity in USPSA revolver division for two or three years starting in 2014. That was my exposure to it as I switched from a 45 ACP 625 to 38 Short Colt in a 357 Mag 627 for my USPSA Revolver division.

-rambling