How close to 357 numbers with 38 spl+P

[sidheshooter]

For a while, I had one of the GP-NY Rugers made for the NYPD, who specified .38 only, bead blast and DAO. In researching that revolver, I read that it was the same GP, only with the shorter chambers-much as others mention, above. Suffice to say that it ate CorBon and Buffalo Bore like sugar cookies (well, maybe really expensive sugar cookies); I wouldn't be afraid of putting anything you could stuff into .38 brass into that gun.

Saxon, once again, your contributions are eye opening. My only thought looking over that advert was "what the hell did they *do* to the .38 over the years?" The 9mm is about the same or a bit stronger, while the .38 has gone from "Special" to "just .36". Even with a 6" tube, that's pretty fierce ballistics: pretty much almost up in line with what I'd expect to see out of those turbocharged, slick lead Buffalo Bore loadings from a 6"er nowadays.

I'm this close to starting a "historical .38 club", complete with T-shirt, to lobby for a return to real loadings. Your shirt would be free.


As an aside, another quick trip to Tim's BB site yields this info on their "outdoorsman" load:


1255 fps -- Ruger GP 100, 6 inch barrel, 357 mag.
1186 fps -- S&W Combat Masterpiece 6 inch barrel, 38 SPL (circa 1958)
1146 fps -- S&W Mt. Gun, 4 inch barrel, 357 mag.
1167 fps -- S&W Mod. 15, 4 inch barrel, 38 SPL (circa 1968)
1112 fps -- Ruger SP 101, 3 inch barrel, 38 SPL
1043 fps -- S&W Mod 66, 2.5 inch barrel, 357 mag.
* 989 fps -- S&W Mod 340PD, 1 & 7/8 inch barrel, 357 mag.
1027 fps -- S&W Mod 642 (pre dash), 1 & 7/8 inch barrel, 38 SPL

Note that 1250 is coming from a fast, modern 6" GP; the results from the 50's era S&W 6"er are pretty close to yesteryear's hot loads.

 

[BCRider]

I think if this were my gun and I wanted to shoot .357 like loads in it that I'd get the cylinder chambers reamed out to .357Mag spec so I don't need to carefully overload the .38cases and worry about marking the ammo so it didn't find it's way into a .38 only gun.

A reaming job and re-stamping the barrel chambering shouldn't cost that much to do.

 

[stiab]

Check out this ad for S&W labeled ammo from the 1970s. Note the 125 JHP at 1380 FPS.

No, they recinded that. You are looking at a pre-1978 catalog (I have it also) that was used while the testing was being done in long unvented test barrels. After 1978 S&W's testing used real revolvers in barrel lengths of 2", 4" and 6". In those catalogs (I have them also) the same load was advertised with respective velocities of 897 fps, 1040 fps, and 1143 fps. It makes a huge difference when the tests are done out of real guns.

Some (but not all) folks who read the 1970's and earlier factory ammo ads think things were really great back then, but those results could only be achieved in long (10" in the case of the .357 Magnum) unvented test barrels. You could not get those results with a real gun you could actually carry on your belt. The heyday of quality .38 Special ammo (Buffalo Bore et al) is today, not back then.

 

[skidder]

My 38 Service Six hiking load is a 158 XTP with 12 gr. AA#9. Right around 1200 fps. I mark it "Service Six only" due to another 38 I own.

The safety patrol gets a little wound up over loads like this, but if you know your gun and use common sense the sun will still rise in the morning.

I've been reloading for 20 years and never had a misfire. Wish I could say that about the 5% factory ammo that I've fired. My worst factory ammo came in the same box. Two bullets never made it out of the barrel. No gunpowder! The power of the primer lodged the bullet halfway down the barrel. The lack of recoil was a dead giveaway and prevented me from shooting another behind it.

 

[stiab]

I believe they used a 6" barrel. Actual velocities ran a little less, like 50-75 FPS less.

Actually the numbers dropped by hundreds of feet per second in many cases when they went from the test barrels to using real revolvers. For example, the .357 Magnum load with 110 grain bullet was advertised in the brochure Saxon Pig is quoting as running 1800 fps. A year later the updated S&W brochure showed the same load running 1375 out of a 4" barrel Model 13 and 1461 from a 6" barrel Model 66. The earlier brochure states the results were obtained using "industry standard test equipment". In the case of the .357 Magnum that was a 10 inch unvented test barrel. Those results were not obtainable in real guns that were used in the next brochure.

 

[CraigC]

I think if this were my gun and I wanted to shoot .357 like loads in it that I'd get the cylinder chambers reamed out to .357Mag...

I don't think this represents a problem. Far as I know, it shouldn't be an issue finding a gunsmith who will do the job.

 

[Dave T]

Look for .38-44 Heavy Duty loads. Think 158-173gr cast bullets at ~1300fps.

That's a bit much for the original 38/44. My research indicates velocities more in the range of 1100 to 1150 fps from a 4" barrel. The Buffalo Bore +P 38 Spl 158g SWHP-GC is about as close as you're going to get to the original performance of that 1930s loading. I've chronographed the BB from a 1937 5" Heavy Duty and gotten an average of about 1160 fps. From a 4" 357 Mag L-frame I got 1141 fps and from a 3" 681 I got 1105 fps.

I duplicate this performance for practice in StarLine +P brass (so I don't mix these up with standard 38 Specials) with 11.3g - 11.5g of 2400 behind Berry's 158g FP seated to the bullets shoulder. This 38/44 loading has become my favorite load in the 36 caliber revolvers.

Dave

PS: Saxon Pig is absolutely right about today's +P 38 Specials. When I got into handguns and reloading in the early 1970s the standard load for the 38 Special was 3.5g Bullseye behind a 158g RN lead bullet. It delivered ~ 850 fps from a 6" bbl and ~800 fps from a 4" bbl. That's what the much touted FBI +P load from the big three (Rem, Win & Fed) chronographs today.

 

[stiab]

in the early 1970s the standard load for the 38 Special was 3.5g Bullseye behind a 158g RN lead bullet. It delivered ~ 850 fps from a 6" bbl and ~800 fps from a 4" bbl

I know you may be talking about reloads there, but my actual testing of 1960's .38 Special factory loads came close but just a little short of that. From a 4" Model 15 the 158 grain RN averaged 805 fps for Remington, 793 for Winchester, and 740 for Peters. Certainly not the higher numbers some claim for the older factory ammo. You can search this subject on the Ammo section of S&W forum, and see that severak other folks in addition to myself have tested the older factory ammo and found it fell short of what was claimed at the time.

 

[skidder]

Here is my 38 Magnum.

 

[SaxonPig]

I find hard to imagine that there was hundreds of feet per second drop but then again, Stiab doesn't believe a damn thing I ever say. If I had some of that ammo I'd clock it and we'd know. I can tell you that I have loaded the 38 Special to those velocities (clocked from a real, 4" barrel) so it can be done. Now whether S&W was selling ammo that fast we can debate forever but without some examples to test, nobody knows for sure. The only evidence I have seen is the ad, which is not conclusive. But if there is something more concrete, please produce it.

 

[351 WINCHESTER]

Saxon Pig, Regarding S & W's ammo of the 70's. Their published velocities were totally made up. I forget who made the ammo, but as I recall it was either made in Brazil or Mexico and it was garbage.

 

[stiab]

I find hard to imagine that there was hundreds of feet per second drop but then again, Stiab doesn't believe a damn thing I ever say. If I had some of that ammo I'd clock it and we'd know. I can tell you that I have loaded the 38 Special to those velocities (clocked from a real, 4" barrel) so it can be done. Now whether S&W was selling ammo that fast we can debate forever but without some examples to test, nobody knows for sure. The only evidence I have seen is the ad, which is not conclusive. But if there is something more concrete, please produce it.

I do believe some stuff you say SP, for example I know you are reading the numbers as they appear in that pre-1978 ammo catalog because I have the same one. But I also have the next one they issued when they started using real guns to test the velocity instead of machines. Look at the the two pictures below, and you will see what happened to the .38 Special +P previously claimed at 1350 fps. And by the way, I do have a full box of that exact ammo, just haven't gotten around to testing it yet.

Also should say, the ammo brochure you see below is the one they were using in 1979 after the industry standard changed from testing in unvented test barrels.





Edited to add: If anyone would be interested to know how much the published velocities decreased for any particular S&W factory load (including 9mm and .44 Mag), just let me know and I'll post it for you. In general they went down over 20% by using real guns.

 

[Dave T]

stiab,

I stated that "standard" load produced approximately 800 fps from 4" revolvers. You posted:

From a 4" Model 15 the 158 grain RN averaged 805 fps for Remington, 793 for Winchester...

...which gives an average of 799 fps. Please advise where exactly I was wrong or mis-stating the facts?

Dave

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Having chrono-ed original 38/44 ammo and being a collector of 38/44's, I can tell you that the originals did very close to 1100 with a 158 out of a 5" barrel. 1150 out of a 6.5" 38/44.

Do a search on my name and 38/44 ammo. I posted a whole writeup on it showing actual chrono data with a 4" 5" and 6.5" guns with different reloads and original ammo.

1300 with a 158 is modern 357 Magnum ammo territory. Original 357 Magnum (yes I have done it also) does right about 1500 with a 150 out of an 8 3/8" tube.

 

[stiab]

Please advise where exactly I was wrong or mis-stating the facts?
Dave

Dave, I did not say that you were wrong or that you misstated any facts. To the contrary, the average of the 3 averages I tested that day were 779 fps, which I described as "close but just a little short" of the numbers you gave.

 

[stiab]

Do a search on my name and 38/44 ammo

Peter, I have had one of your thread responses saved as a favorite for a couple years now, and have referred it to several other people who were looking for quantified info on the 38/44. And, you have some beautiful guns!

 

[VA27]

Back when revolvers were common issue my first was a heavy barrel Smith Model 10. The assistant chief gave it to me and told me to go to a gunsmith and have it punched out to 357. That was in 1976. I still have that gun (we were allowed to purchase them when we upgraded to Model 65HB's) and it's still fine.

I met an old Trooper that first year whose off duty gun was a Model 64 'Pencil Barrel' punched to 357. I immediately bought one and did the same thing. Never had a moments trouble with it, though 158gr ammo really bucked. I sold that one and wish I hadn't.

I said all that to say that the GP100 will take ANY factory load in 38 and if you punch it to 357 it'll take any factory 357 load. If you handload it'll take any recent book load you can find, including 38/44 loads. Work up slowly and use a chronograph. No worries.

 

[SaxonPig]

What stiab shows almost exactly matches current +P performance. So, either the earlier ad was wildly optimistic OR by the time that later ad was published they had reduced the ammo to what remains as current +P levels.

Again, maybe the ammo they advertised in the early 1970s didn't perform as claimed, but I have, in fact, loaded 38 ammo to those velocities so it is at least possible that they did go that fast.

 

[stiab]

OR by the time that later ad was published they had reduced the ammo to what remains as current +P levels.

There is only a short period between the use of these two brochures, the first was in a box for a 65-2 (pinned and recessed), and the second one was in a box for a 19-4.

S&W tells us the real reason for the difference. In the second brochure it states:" Take a look at the chart below. Note that the velocity and energy figures are based on actual guns, not test barrels".

It don't get any simplier than that.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Just to add some pictures of my favorite revolver round...






Looking back at these pictures it is hard to believe I have bought 10 more 38/44's since then. How time flies when the buying opportunities are good!

 

[stiab]

That's a great pic Peter. Here's an old link I saved a few years ago on the S&W forum with more 38/44 ammo pics...

http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/104260-38-44-ammo-pics.html

 

[SaxonPig]

We are talking the 1970s and that was the period when the ammo started being down-loaded. I still think it is POSSIBLE the early flier, while likely optimistic, did advertise ammo loaded hotter than what was offered in the later ad. I note, again, that the second ad offers ammo that virtually duplicates CURRENT performance from +P. I think the earlier ammo was hotter.

 

[zxcvbob]

I have a GP-100, 4 inch barrel, that's 38 spl only. Most all of my reloading is for standard 38 spl. Just want to know what would be some nice hot loads for the GP-100 as it's built on a 357 frame.

12.5 grains of 2400 with a 158 grain hard lead SWC or RNFP bullet. Paint the case heads red or something so you don't accidentally load them in your old zinc-alloy framed RG

 

[stiab]

I note, again, that the second ad offers ammo that virtually duplicates CURRENT performance from +P.

That's not surprising since it continues be tested in real guns.

I think the earlier ammo was hotter.

There is no doubt it was faster out of those unvented test barrels, AKA "industry standard test equipment". SP, also note that the earlier S&W ammo brochure that you have a copy of says: "Test barrels are used to determine ballistics figures. Individual firearms may differ from these test barrels."

 

[wep45]

.38 special isnt even in the same universe as .357 magnum