raveon59
Member
I have just purchased a 'like new' S&W Model 28 mfg in either 1963 or 1964, depending who you speak with at S & W. I plan to use the 28 as a back woods gun. Will the 28 hold up to the Federal Cast Core rounds?
Model 28 durability
- Thread starter raveon59
- Start date
- Status
Jim March
Member
Yes, it can take 'em. Not in "unlimited amounts" mind you, and you should "run the checkout" because if the cylinder is already fitting somewhat sloppy, the battering of the "heavy hunting loads" such as that and the Cor-Bons will greatly accellerate wear. What matters is any "front/back play" - see also the first post, this forum for a link to the "checkout procedure".
I am of the opinion that the GP100 is slightly tougher than that gun, even though the GP is smaller. The differences are the metallurgy, the lack of sideplates on the Ruger, and the lockup latch on the crane of a GP.
In any case: if your gun is reasonably tight, then I'd shoot enough "heavy stuff" of a given type to know where they're printing and grouping, but other than that use them for hunting only.
I fully realize this may be too conservative a position, and my experience with old 27s/28s is purely "book knowledge". I'm admitting I'm not the world's biggest expert on these. But, I have read tales of them being shaken loose with very strong loads and the amount of shooting I'm talking about should be all you need in any case.
I am of the opinion that the GP100 is slightly tougher than that gun, even though the GP is smaller. The differences are the metallurgy, the lack of sideplates on the Ruger, and the lockup latch on the crane of a GP.
In any case: if your gun is reasonably tight, then I'd shoot enough "heavy stuff" of a given type to know where they're printing and grouping, but other than that use them for hunting only.
I fully realize this may be too conservative a position, and my experience with old 27s/28s is purely "book knowledge". I'm admitting I'm not the world's biggest expert on these. But, I have read tales of them being shaken loose with very strong loads and the amount of shooting I'm talking about should be all you need in any case.
raveon59
Member
shooting loose
Thanks Jim, I had a S & W .44mag Mountain Gun that I shot the cast core's thru, only a few times, and besides being almost unbearable to shoot, the screw in the cylinder release fell out and I swear the entire gun aged many years-loosened up in one range session...thought the N frame could take the heavy .357 a little better....I think limited use is the way to go...
Thanks Jim, I had a S & W .44mag Mountain Gun that I shot the cast core's thru, only a few times, and besides being almost unbearable to shoot, the screw in the cylinder release fell out and I swear the entire gun aged many years-loosened up in one range session...thought the N frame could take the heavy .357 a little better....I think limited use is the way to go...
Quantrill
Member
I bought a model 28 back in 1969 NIB. I think i paid $98 for it at the time. I still have it. It has won a number of PPC matches in it's time, killed deer and was carried as a duty weapon for years. It is the one gun I would keep if I were limited to one. I have Herrett grips on it that are worn and scratched that I had to trace my hand for and send the tracing to Herrett. Pulling that gun is like shaking hands with an old friend. It has never required any than ordinary maintainance. I have trusted my life to this gun. It has digested everything from absolute max loads to sqibs and shot loads. You have a keeper. Quantrill
raveon59
Member
Model 28
Thanks Quantrill, On some auction sites a NIB or like NIB the 28 is going for $625.00..Although mine is in the box with the papers and a very slight cylinder ring and no holster wear, I paid $385.00 and fell lucky considering its age...$98.00!!!but that's when money was worth something...
Thanks Quantrill, On some auction sites a NIB or like NIB the 28 is going for $625.00..Although mine is in the box with the papers and a very slight cylinder ring and no holster wear, I paid $385.00 and fell lucky considering its age...$98.00!!!but that's when money was worth something...
Something else you should consider is whether or not you need the absolute most powerful round ever made to kill what you are planning on hunting.
I am also sort of interested in this thread. I just picked up my M-28 last week. Paid $300 for it. It is about 95%. Very little wear on the recoil shield and only a little holster wear around the muzzle. It is almost too pretty to carry, and that leads me to want another gun to use instead so I can keep my M-28 pretty.
I think S&W had a good marketing strategy with that one.
Right now I am thinking that I should try some hard cast lead bullets at around 1400 FPS. I think that should do on a PA whitetail.
I am also sort of interested in this thread. I just picked up my M-28 last week. Paid $300 for it. It is about 95%. Very little wear on the recoil shield and only a little holster wear around the muzzle. It is almost too pretty to carry, and that leads me to want another gun to use instead so I can keep my M-28 pretty.
I think S&W had a good marketing strategy with that one.
Right now I am thinking that I should try some hard cast lead bullets at around 1400 FPS. I think that should do on a PA whitetail.
J Miller
Member
I have a four screw Mdl 28 that I bought amost 25 years ago.
I bought it well used, with unknown ammounts of 38's through it.
Since then I have put 8516 rounds down range with it. Hunted with it. Carried it driving armored trucks, and shot targets with it.
It's been retimed twice.
Endshake has been reset once.
And the barrel was set back and recut because of forcing cone and rear of barrel erosion.
Mdl 28's are strong, but they were designed for 158gr standard 357 ammo.
The hotter 125gr stuff will cause rapid wear of the forcing cone area, and the heavier stuff will beat the cylinder loose sooner than you want.
It may also cause cracks at the forcing cone area of the barrel. Thats why S&W beafed this area up on the L frames.
Were it my choice, I skip the super heavy bullets, and stick with the 168-173gr Keith loads.
If that wont kill what you want, you need a bigger gun.
I bought it well used, with unknown ammounts of 38's through it.
Since then I have put 8516 rounds down range with it. Hunted with it. Carried it driving armored trucks, and shot targets with it.
It's been retimed twice.
Endshake has been reset once.
And the barrel was set back and recut because of forcing cone and rear of barrel erosion.
Mdl 28's are strong, but they were designed for 158gr standard 357 ammo.
The hotter 125gr stuff will cause rapid wear of the forcing cone area, and the heavier stuff will beat the cylinder loose sooner than you want.
It may also cause cracks at the forcing cone area of the barrel. Thats why S&W beafed this area up on the L frames.
Were it my choice, I skip the super heavy bullets, and stick with the 168-173gr Keith loads.
If that wont kill what you want, you need a bigger gun.
raveon59
Member
S&W 28 Blab
Hey SaxonPig-Beauty IS in the eye of the beholder..but check this site out-http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg77-e.htm-it has a 6" 27 and a 4" 28 back to back. The blueing on both look pretty good to me...the 28 isn't dull and ugly but more of a satin finish-mine looks as good as the one in the photo-AR$ are not the same as NY$-it costs more to live in NY so things cost more to buy...besides, the 27's and 28's are a rare find in my neck of the woods....you're right on target about that auction site-nice photos but delusional prices....
Hey SaxonPig-Beauty IS in the eye of the beholder..but check this site out-http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg77-e.htm-it has a 6" 27 and a 4" 28 back to back. The blueing on both look pretty good to me...the 28 isn't dull and ugly but more of a satin finish-mine looks as good as the one in the photo-AR$ are not the same as NY$-it costs more to live in NY so things cost more to buy...besides, the 27's and 28's are a rare find in my neck of the woods....you're right on target about that auction site-nice photos but delusional prices....
raveon59
Member
High Mileage 28
Hey J Miller, Did you ever think of starting a high mileage thread? Your 28 has to take some sort of record...do you keep your cars that long? The only pieces I ever put that many rounds thru (now this is at one time & I realize your's wasn't at one time-and I have never put 9K rounds thru any handgun) are a few SKS'S and AK'S at a 4th of July party with my bros a few years back-we must have gone thru at least 3 cases-pass the ibuprofen...lost my bench with the divorce-I guess hubby #2 was a reloader ( the guy can't be all bad)-I pine for a new set every time I go the dealer....would you be so kind as to give me the recipe for the168-173 Keith load...Now this is going to sould off, especially for a Viet Vet, but I just don't have the stomach for dressing down a kill..so I don't kill...except if me or mines life would depend on it-then what ever it was, I couldn't eat it anyways...cast core for backwoods carry and 110gr jhp for every day use....
Hey J Miller, Did you ever think of starting a high mileage thread? Your 28 has to take some sort of record...do you keep your cars that long? The only pieces I ever put that many rounds thru (now this is at one time & I realize your's wasn't at one time-and I have never put 9K rounds thru any handgun) are a few SKS'S and AK'S at a 4th of July party with my bros a few years back-we must have gone thru at least 3 cases-pass the ibuprofen...lost my bench with the divorce-I guess hubby #2 was a reloader ( the guy can't be all bad)-I pine for a new set every time I go the dealer....would you be so kind as to give me the recipe for the168-173 Keith load...Now this is going to sould off, especially for a Viet Vet, but I just don't have the stomach for dressing down a kill..so I don't kill...except if me or mines life would depend on it-then what ever it was, I couldn't eat it anyways...cast core for backwoods carry and 110gr jhp for every day use....
J Miller- Given that you have abot 22 more years of experience with a .357 than I, I would like to ask you a question.
I am about to start loading for my "new" M-28. I will be priming the brass tonight.
I plan to load only 158 gr hard cast lead and JHP/JSP bullets. What velocities should I stick with for the M-28? I really only want to use it for general woods carry and to hunt Whitetail deer if a shot presents itself. Most of my shots will kill pop cans and clay pigeons.
I would appreciate any advise you or anyone else can give me.
Thanks.
I am about to start loading for my "new" M-28. I will be priming the brass tonight.
I plan to load only 158 gr hard cast lead and JHP/JSP bullets. What velocities should I stick with for the M-28? I really only want to use it for general woods carry and to hunt Whitetail deer if a shot presents itself. Most of my shots will kill pop cans and clay pigeons.
I would appreciate any advise you or anyone else can give me.
Thanks.
Last edited:
Jim March
Member
Goon: what's your barrel length?
It matters, regarding your question. Bigtime.
It matters, regarding your question. Bigtime.
Jim March
Member
With a 6" tube and that gun, absolutely you can get 1,500fps with a 158 projectile. Georgia Arms "Deerstoppers" will do that from a 6". Hardcast handloads with the right powder choice will get there with less pressure, but of course with no expansion.
I'd buy 50 Deerstoppers myself, shoot 6 or 12 to see where they group, carry them in the woods as needed and be done with it.
I'd buy 50 Deerstoppers myself, shoot 6 or 12 to see where they group, carry them in the woods as needed and be done with it.
Johnny Guest
Moderator In Memoriam
Handloads for the Highway Patrolman
raveon59 and goon - - -There are at least two threads current in Handloading & Reloading forum of THR, concerning .357 ammo. For all around use, the lead 158 to 173 gr. SWC with 7.0 of Unique, or a bit more, is highly favored. It is a true low end magnum load, while still being pleasant to shoot and quite accurate in most revolvers. I'd say that any N frame S&W would take almost unlimited amounts of this load without accelerated wear. Depending on a lot of factors, it will clock somewhere around 1150 to 1200 fps in a Highway Patrolman.
You can go a good deal hotter and still be safe, but the internals are subject to battering. Somewhere around 14.0 gr. of 2400 with same bullets is another good load.
Maybe this particular model N-frame is easier to locate in the southwest because it was born here.
The Texas Department of Public Safety, which includes the Highway Patrol, wanted a .357 but didn't want to pay for the beautiful, highly polished blue finish and finely-checked topside of the pre M27. S&W made up the Highway Patrolman (pre-28) as a plainer finished version, with a full 4" barrel. This is not to say that the lockwork or accuracy of the HP gun was inferior to the nicer one--Just had a low polish "service finish" blue job with sandblast frame edges. A lot of jobbers and police supply places also stocked the HP for officers in smaller outfits (in Texas and elsewhere) to procure as private purchase items. Many of these later came on the market as officers upgraded to Pythons and M19s (as I did in the late 1960s. )
I really don't know how many other state, local, and county also adopted the HP as issue or "highly recommended" for their personnel.
The Highway Patrolman is a truly classic service revolver, though not as "pretty" as the Model 27 or its unnumbered predecessor. It renders excellent service, is accurate and takes heavy loads well. I think of it in parallel with the USGI Colt 1911A1 and the Government Model .45 pistols: Both very efficient, and to some people, the GI service gun is more valuable than the more nicely finished commercial model.
Best,
Johnny
raveon59 and goon - - -There are at least two threads current in Handloading & Reloading forum of THR, concerning .357 ammo. For all around use, the lead 158 to 173 gr. SWC with 7.0 of Unique, or a bit more, is highly favored. It is a true low end magnum load, while still being pleasant to shoot and quite accurate in most revolvers. I'd say that any N frame S&W would take almost unlimited amounts of this load without accelerated wear. Depending on a lot of factors, it will clock somewhere around 1150 to 1200 fps in a Highway Patrolman.
You can go a good deal hotter and still be safe, but the internals are subject to battering. Somewhere around 14.0 gr. of 2400 with same bullets is another good load.
Maybe this particular model N-frame is easier to locate in the southwest because it was born here.
The Texas Department of Public Safety, which includes the Highway Patrol, wanted a .357 but didn't want to pay for the beautiful, highly polished blue finish and finely-checked topside of the pre M27. S&W made up the Highway Patrolman (pre-28) as a plainer finished version, with a full 4" barrel. This is not to say that the lockwork or accuracy of the HP gun was inferior to the nicer one--Just had a low polish "service finish" blue job with sandblast frame edges. A lot of jobbers and police supply places also stocked the HP for officers in smaller outfits (in Texas and elsewhere) to procure as private purchase items. Many of these later came on the market as officers upgraded to Pythons and M19s (as I did in the late 1960s. )I really don't know how many other state, local, and county also adopted the HP as issue or "highly recommended" for their personnel.
The Highway Patrolman is a truly classic service revolver, though not as "pretty" as the Model 27 or its unnumbered predecessor. It renders excellent service, is accurate and takes heavy loads well. I think of it in parallel with the USGI Colt 1911A1 and the Government Model .45 pistols: Both very efficient, and to some people, the GI service gun is more valuable than the more nicely finished commercial model.
Best,
Johnny
Quantrill
Member
The original "Keith Semi-wadcutter" is Lyman mould #358429 at 168/173gr. Keith recommended it with 13.5gr of 2400 powder. Hard cast, I find that this combo will accomplish just about anything a .357 was meant to do. There are some casting companies that specialize in Keith bullets. There are also many others that advertise "Keith type" bullets. I have found that the original is the best. Quantrill
V
VictorLouis
Guest
J Miller, I beg to differ.
First of all, I can't imagine the Federal Cast-Cores being any worse than the original .357 Magnum loads that the N-frame was redesigned around. I'm talking about 158s in the 1,700fps+ range out of the 6" tube. Most loading books of today contain no data approximating the ballistics of those original loads.
The hot 125s you mention became a problem for K-frame revolvers back-in-the-day. That's what prompted the new 'compromise' L-frame with it's beefier forcing cone and other dimensions, though lighter than the N-frame. BTW, the L-frame pales in comparison to the N-frame in .357. Just look at the two side-by-side.
In point of fact, I really think the N-frame is over-built for the .357 cartridge. After all, with some modified heat-treatment, the same platform became the Keith-inspired .44 Magnum.
Now, as DaveT will attest to, there 'may' be some issue with timing or stop-notch wear in 'some' guns. Aside from McGivern, there just wasn't much fast-and-fancy DA shooting done in those days. It was SA, or DA at a rather slow, methodical pace. The fast DA builds a good deal of inertia in such a heavy cylinder with the small charge-holes. This can lead to the cylinder-stop peening the edges of the notches on the cylinder. Ditto the chance of accelerated wear to the hand. However, I feel that such examples are much more the exception, rather than the rule.
First of all, I can't imagine the Federal Cast-Cores being any worse than the original .357 Magnum loads that the N-frame was redesigned around. I'm talking about 158s in the 1,700fps+ range out of the 6" tube. Most loading books of today contain no data approximating the ballistics of those original loads.
The hot 125s you mention became a problem for K-frame revolvers back-in-the-day. That's what prompted the new 'compromise' L-frame with it's beefier forcing cone and other dimensions, though lighter than the N-frame. BTW, the L-frame pales in comparison to the N-frame in .357. Just look at the two side-by-side.
In point of fact, I really think the N-frame is over-built for the .357 cartridge. After all, with some modified heat-treatment, the same platform became the Keith-inspired .44 Magnum.
Now, as DaveT will attest to, there 'may' be some issue with timing or stop-notch wear in 'some' guns. Aside from McGivern, there just wasn't much fast-and-fancy DA shooting done in those days. It was SA, or DA at a rather slow, methodical pace. The fast DA builds a good deal of inertia in such a heavy cylinder with the small charge-holes. This can lead to the cylinder-stop peening the edges of the notches on the cylinder. Ditto the chance of accelerated wear to the hand. However, I feel that such examples are much more the exception, rather than the rule.
Jim March
Member
Victor may very well be right, although I feel quite solid that the "heavies" should only be fired in a gun that's "properly tight" - and that goes for *anything*. If the cylinder is already sloppy, heavies will just slaughter it.
The thing is though, very few people NEED to shoot "nothing but heavies" in *any* 357 gun.
Target-grade 357 158 lead hardcasts at 1,100 - 1,200 won't have that thing even breaking a sweat. Ditto any milder jacketed stuff. It'll hardly notice 38s of any sort.
The very hot 125 JHPs and 158 heavy hunting rounds...I'd go easy, in almost anything this side of a Blackhawk, Vaquero or Redhawk.
The thing is though, very few people NEED to shoot "nothing but heavies" in *any* 357 gun.
Target-grade 357 158 lead hardcasts at 1,100 - 1,200 won't have that thing even breaking a sweat. Ditto any milder jacketed stuff. It'll hardly notice 38s of any sort.
The very hot 125 JHPs and 158 heavy hunting rounds...I'd go easy, in almost anything this side of a Blackhawk, Vaquero or Redhawk.
I will try the load with Unique first, since I have about half a pound of it on hand. I will have to wait a few days for the cast bullets that I traded for, but I have some Speer 158gr JSP's that I will start playing with. All I really want is something that will up-end a deer. I will most likely load something lighter for recreational shooting. The gun will most likely never see any "heavy" rounds.
No need to wear a gun that nice out.
Now I need a M-19...
Damned Smith & Wessons are gonna put me in the poorhouse. At least I will be well heeled.
No need to wear a gun that nice out.
Now I need a M-19...
Damned Smith & Wessons are gonna put me in the poorhouse. At least I will be well heeled.
Mannlicher
Member
Since we are all posting personal anectdotal stories, to suggest one view or the other, I may as well chime in.
My 6 inch Model 28 in .357 has fired thousands of rounds of 158 grain, (mostly Speer) over 15.7 grains of 2400. This pushes 1300fps in my gun. I see absolutly no excessive wear. This old timer is tight as a tick.
As an aside, my Model 19 4 inch has no problems with this load either.
Smith's were designed to take .357 ammo, and they do it well.
My 6 inch Model 28 in .357 has fired thousands of rounds of 158 grain, (mostly Speer) over 15.7 grains of 2400. This pushes 1300fps in my gun. I see absolutly no excessive wear. This old timer is tight as a tick.
As an aside, my Model 19 4 inch has no problems with this load either.
Smith's were designed to take .357 ammo, and they do it well.
Johnny Guest
Moderator In Memoriam
NOTICE!!!
CAUTION: Certain of the above handload information greatly exceeds published maximums. It should be noted that neither the administration nor staff of The High Road assume any responsibility for damage to firearms nor injury to persons caused by use of such load data. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.
As this is not the forum for which I have primary responsibility, I am not (yet) editing out the loads.
Mannlicher, the 2400 load you give is above the max listed in the 1970 Lyman #45 manual, and a full FIVE GRAINS (no, not point five) above max in the Speer #12. I admit to using some over max loads of 2400 myownself, and I stopped well below the load you give. I was getting sticking cases and cratered primers in a M66 S&W and a Colt .357. I used Federal magnum primers - - -Maybe you're using a lot harder primer or something.
Good luck.
Johnny
CAUTION: Certain of the above handload information greatly exceeds published maximums. It should be noted that neither the administration nor staff of The High Road assume any responsibility for damage to firearms nor injury to persons caused by use of such load data. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.
As this is not the forum for which I have primary responsibility, I am not (yet) editing out the loads.
Mannlicher, the 2400 load you give is above the max listed in the 1970 Lyman #45 manual, and a full FIVE GRAINS (no, not point five) above max in the Speer #12. I admit to using some over max loads of 2400 myownself, and I stopped well below the load you give. I was getting sticking cases and cratered primers in a M66 S&W and a Colt .357. I used Federal magnum primers - - -Maybe you're using a lot harder primer or something.
Good luck.
Johnny
Last edited:
What VictorLouis is referring to is my experiences with my first duty weapon, a Model 28 4", back in 1973. Paid $97 for it with the police discount S&W offered at the time. I carried and shot that gun for one year and it needed the attention of a good revolver smith (timing and end-shake were very bad).
My duty load was a 158g JHP (I think it was the Sierra but memory fades) over about 13.5g of 2400. My practice load was either the 158g cast RN over 8g of Unique or the Keith 168g SWC over 10.5g of the afore mentioned 2400.
What did in my N-Frame wasn't shooting magnum loads but practicing rapid fire DA shooting. I shot a minimum of 100 rounds a week of the above reloads, almost all in rapid fire. That's what did in my Model 28, IMO. And by the way, I am in no way knocking N-Frame Smiths. I've purchased three of them in the last 6 months (two being Model 27s in 357 Magnum). These days I do my rapid fire shooting with a 1911 of some persuasion. The revolvers are for fun.
I used to do a lot of long range Silhouette with Models 27 (.357) and 29 (44 Mag). As we all know the (27,28) is just the same as the 44 magnum model 29 except it has a much greater forcing cone and cylinder wall thickness. I've shot a number of 29's loose, but not a tight model 27. Had to switch to Dan Wesson for the 44 Magnum, but the 27 held on. I used the cast Keith bullets in both calibers.
Elliot
Elliot
Johnny Guest
Moderator In Memoriam
VictorLouis, I must take leave to differ - -
- - with you, sir. You stated,
The original, advertised, velocities for the then-brand new .357 S&W Magnum cartridge ran 1510 to 1570 fps with a 158 gr. lead SWC from an 8-3/8 inch barrel. This load was an absolute bear for leading, and sometime later Winchester began affixing gas checks to the base of their bullets. There was also a metal jacketed full metal jacket bullet with a small flat meplat sold as "metal piercing" or "metal penetrating," supposedly for anti-vehicle use. While this one made no pretense of expansion, it DID avoid leading pretty well. All of these were some HOT ammo.
Saxon Pig's mention of the 158/1400 load is right in line with my recollection of the rating current when I first begn taking ain interest in velocity figures, some time around 1962 or so. Really, when you think of it, this figure, if taken from a six-inch barrel, is not too great a step down from the original, late-1930s claims.
VictorLouis, I really don't doubt there were some handloaders who claimed to have reached velocities in the 1700 fps range. I just doubt they truly did it with 158s in a six-inch revolver barrel and shot many of those loads. Remember, the concept of common, privately owned chronographs is a fairly recent phenomenem. Sometimes, I muse that SOME of the reduction of velocity claims comes from a realistic assessment of the TRUE speed of some of the older loads. Another factor is that scientifically accurate pressure measuring devices were and are FAR more scarce than chronographs. Many, MANY "scientific hand loaders" cobbled up loads which, if they didn't Ka-BOOM and wreck the gun in the first 50 rounds, were passed around, printed someplace and became part of the handloading canon. ( ) Recent testing of some of the "Old Standards" reveals that many were well up there in pressures, skating around the thin edge of metallurgical (and perhaps metaphysical) safety margins.
Best,
Johnny
- - with you, sir. You stated,
While I agree with your premise that
the real Way-Back-When Factory loads, they weren't quite THAT warm.
The original, advertised, velocities for the then-brand new .357 S&W Magnum cartridge ran 1510 to 1570 fps with a 158 gr. lead SWC from an 8-3/8 inch barrel. This load was an absolute bear for leading, and sometime later Winchester began affixing gas checks to the base of their bullets. There was also a metal jacketed full metal jacket bullet with a small flat meplat sold as "metal piercing" or "metal penetrating," supposedly for anti-vehicle use. While this one made no pretense of expansion, it DID avoid leading pretty well. All of these were some HOT ammo.
Saxon Pig's mention of the 158/1400 load is right in line with my recollection of the rating current when I first begn taking ain interest in velocity figures, some time around 1962 or so. Really, when you think of it, this figure, if taken from a six-inch barrel, is not too great a step down from the original, late-1930s claims.
VictorLouis, I really don't doubt there were some handloaders who claimed to have reached velocities in the 1700 fps range. I just doubt they truly did it with 158s in a six-inch revolver barrel and shot many of those loads. Remember, the concept of common, privately owned chronographs is a fairly recent phenomenem. Sometimes, I muse that SOME of the reduction of velocity claims comes from a realistic assessment of the TRUE speed of some of the older loads. Another factor is that scientifically accurate pressure measuring devices were and are FAR more scarce than chronographs. Many, MANY "scientific hand loaders" cobbled up loads which, if they didn't Ka-BOOM and wreck the gun in the first 50 rounds, were passed around, printed someplace and became part of the handloading canon. (
) Recent testing of some of the "Old Standards" reveals that many were well up there in pressures, skating around the thin edge of metallurgical (and perhaps metaphysical) safety margins. Best,
Johnny
Jim March
Member
And on top of that, most of us just don't need to wring every last ounce of kerblam out of every shot. Would I like my classic, 60s-era gun to last forever, if I had one? You bet! And it CAN, shooting 38s most of the time, 357 anti-personel grade sometimes, light use of the woods heavies as needed.
Why not?
Why not?
- Status
