Hypothetical: .38 snub non-expanding only

Status
Not open for further replies.

gordonagain

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2009
Messages
15
There have been a lot of threads around gun forums about defensive rounds for the .38 snub. I think it's fairly established that there are some reliable expanding rounds available in today's market. But what if... (due to bans, the hp had never been invented, whatever)... you only had non-expanding rounds to choose from for your .38 snub, what would your choice be? Would you go with a wadcutter, semi-wadcutter, or do you think lead ball would be just as good? Or do you think it really wouldn't matter? Interested to hear bullet weights you might prefer as well.
 
All bullet designs have worked. And failed. If I couldn't get hollow points I would use flat nosed slugs, and if all I could get were round nose I would use those too. Making hits to vital areas is the name of the game. The hollow point was intended to minimize penetration. If it provides more stopping(killing) power thats just a bonus. There are no magic bullets.
 
The round I carry in my .38 defensive gun has been out of production for years - over twenty.. Remington Multi-ball.

That's two 000Buck balls inside a .38 case (crimped on outer ball) at around 825fps. Each 000Buck ball weighs in at 70gr, so the total load is 140gr -- about the same as a target wadcutter. Each 000Buck ball is made of dead-soft lead so it'll splatter instead of ricochet and is less likely to pass through walls inside the house (or more importantly exterior walls of your house). From my 3" barrel, the two balls will print about an inch apart at 50', AND, you get two separate wound channels!

The book Handloading for Handgunners has load data to load your own.

Why do I carry this instead of more modern loadings? I really don't want to have to rely on bullet expansion at .38 velocities from a snubbie.
 
I would have a similar answer if the definition of "non-expanding" bullet allowed soft lead. Pick a soft wadcutter or WFN of whatever weight you want, and load one or two. Lead round ball was effective in the old days because it was so soft that it easily expanded and flattened.

If you have to use "hard cast", then I'd want something with a flat nose (wadcutter), and since even light ones penetrate well I'd probably look for a heavy and a light one (light loaded below the heavier one) and load a duplex round.
 
What I always carry 38 full double end wadcutters at 800+ fps with SWC for relaods.
 
Another vote for a full wadcutter at 850-900 fps

That would be already loaded in the gun, the reload in a speedloader would be SWC, because they help reload speed
 
The round I carry in my .38 defensive gun has been out of production for years - over twenty.. Remington Multi-ball.

That's two 000Buck balls inside a .38 case (crimped on outer ball) at around 825fps. Each 000Buck ball weighs in at 70gr, so the total load is 140gr -- about the same as a target wadcutter. Each 000Buck ball is made of dead-soft lead so it'll splatter instead of ricochet and is less likely to pass through walls inside the house (or more importantly exterior walls of your house). From my 3" barrel, the two balls will print about an inch apart at 50', AND, you get two separate wound channels!

The book Handloading for Handgunners has load data to load your own.

Why do I carry this instead of more modern loadings? I really don't want to have to rely on bullet expansion at .38 velocities from a snubbie.
__________________

I thought loads like this were banned federally? Not the same, but isn't that alot like ( I think they atre called) Hoxie bullets? Kind of like a hollowpoint with a ball loaded into it?
 
Last edited:
I am almost 100% positive they are not banned, and I've never heard of Hoxie before.

And Winchester still makes a hollowpoint bullet with a BB in it, for the .25 Auto and maybe others.
 
158 grain LSWC or LSWC-HP.
135 grain Speer Short-Barrel Gold-Dot.

Anything else, except LRN, or those "magic" two ball loads.

rc
 
I really wish Remington still made the multi-ball load.
I've seen handloaded rounds similar, I really want to find a box in 38 Special.
 
Lyman Copy of the Kieth 173 grain SWC

I use a stout load of WW 231 and it shoots to the point of aim at ten yards.
I will gladly trade expansion for penetration.
 
With only non expanding ammo to choose from it'd be an easy choice for me. I'd go with the Buffalo Bore full wadcutter. Their velocities are taken from real guns. I've chronographed their 9mm & .38 Special ammo & in both instances my chronograph reccorded higher velocities than Buffalo Bore claimed. It's good ammo.
Frank
 
My two snubs are loaded with 148-grain flat-nosed FMJ rounds. Probably not the "best" or "hottest" non-ex rounds, but I'm happy with them. They shoot pretty much to POA, and are easy to come by.
 
Hi, W.E.G.,

"J frame, pre Chiefs Special". Sure it is not a Terrier in .38 S&W, on an I frame?

No matter what it is, it is a beautiful little gun.

(People who can shoot like that don't need to worry about what kind of bullets they use; one through the eyeball does it every time.)

Jim
 
Keith shaped LSW is what id use.

But... I'd want a snub in .45 ACP (actually .45 Autorim.) That way the snub with have the biggest SW shaped slug made!

Love to see a L frame 2 1/2 fix sighed .45.

Deaf
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top