Speer short barrel loads

Status
Not open for further replies.

short barrel

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
367
Does anyone know what makes the Speer short barrel load different from other loads? Is it a special powder? Perhaps faster burning? If so, why would it be specifically for short barrels? If it's better in shorter barrels, why would it not be better in longer barrels? I keep thinking it's a marketing strategy for snubby advocates, but then that doesn't seem like something Speer would do.

Myself, I love .38 snubbies. My favorite gun. I even like the little Charter Arms. I own no few short 38's. My next purchase will be a Model 60 3", although the reviews are not so good. I wonder if the Speer load would be best for that if I don't use .357's in it.
 
Slower powders will always yield the highest velocities, regardless of barrel length. If there is anything different with the powder, it is a low flash variety. It's usually a more tender bullet that expands at lower velocities.
 
The .38 Special short barrel load is different because it uses a 135 grain Gold Dot bullet especially designed for just that caliber.

It has a bigger hollow-point cavatity designed to open reliably at short barrel .38 velocity.

I don't think the powder is anything special, as the factory load velocity can be duplicated or exceeded wth several off the shelf powders available to hand loaders.

rc
 
I keep thinking it's a marketing strategy for snubby advocates, but then that doesn't seem like something Speer would do.

They are in the business to make money, and marketing products to specific buyers is part of that business. So while I like Speer ammo because it hits where I point, don't assume they would not make a minor improvement for short barrels, and then put that name on the box, even if the improvement is nearly irrelevant.

However, those loads are pretty good in general, and the bullet is meant to expand at lower velocities as rc and Craig pointed out. Is it worth the extra money? I think so as any advantage is a good thing when protecting your life.
 
It's the bullet design that makes the largest difference in the performance of this round...it was optimized for performance in short barrels.

You have to remember that the genesis of this round was a LEA request for a round that was controllable and would expand in their department issued J-frames. Speer just decided to offer it to a larger market
 
Remington's new GS loads for compact handguns use different primers and powder, but as already mentioned, it was changes to the bullet that had the greatest affect on terminal performance. The primer and powder changes were to reduce muzzle flash and lower EVs.
 
The Gold Dot used for those short barrel loads, is designed to expand at lower velocities. I've reloaded with those bullets, and the Speer data specifies that there is a risk that they will deform if pushed at velocities above 1,000 fps.. This allows for a lower velocity, lower recoil, and reduced muzzle flash, while still achieving good bullet expansion.

GS
 
I wonder if the Speer load would be best for that if I don't use .357's in it.

The SB 357 loads Speer puts out are very tame.

I think the advertised fps for the 135grn load is close to 1000fps (in 357), thats a mild load, maybe only a 10% faster than the SB .38 load.

If you want to use the SB load I would go with the 357 over the .38, It probably wont feel much different in terms of recoil, or muzzle blast. Your md. 60 is a perfect platform for their SB 357.
 
The .38 Special short barrel load is different because it uses a 135 grain Gold Dot bullet especially designed for just that caliber.

It has a bigger hollow-point cavatity designed to open reliably at short barrel .38 velocity.

I don't think the powder is anything special, as the factory load velocity can be duplicated or exceeded wth several off the shelf powders available to hand loaders.

rc
I agree with that post, the bullet was specifically designed for reliable expansion at the lower velocities associated with a short barrel revolver.
 
short barrel said:
If it's better in shorter barrels, why would it not be better in longer barrels?

It probably is so you're better off buying the short barrel stuff unless it's markedly more expensive.


Lone Star said:
What's the data on that new Golden Saber load? I haven't seen anything on it yet.

I have a bunch of the new.38 Spl load and use it in my CC firearms, a pair of Ruger KLCRs. I don't know why the launch has been delayed. 95% of the work was completed by the beginning of November last year. :confused: The launch might have been affected by the "failure" of the R51. I can tell you that the .380 Auto, .38 Spl snd 9mm loads showed significant improvement over existing GS loads from short barreled pistols and revolvers. The .45 ACP is such a good performer that it was hard to improve on. There really aren't any short barreled .40 S&W pistols so that was a fool's errand.
 
Actually, the difference will depend on the cartridge in question. If you look carefully at the .45 Auto 230 gr rounds you will find that the SB load has a very different hollowpoint. From what I have heard, the 9mm standard and SB loads are almost identical.

Speer used to have the whole technical package for the 135 gr .38 Spec SB load on their website in PDF format. I haven't seen it on their site in a long time, though.
 
Does a typical, run of the mill (not designed for a short barrel) 124 gr.+P 9mm hollow point from a 3" barrel generate enough velocity to expand, or would I be better off using standard velocity hollow points, or even FMJ? I'm asking because I just bought a couple of boxes of Winchester Ranger 9mm +P 124 gr. T-Series, RA9124TP, for my 3" CS9.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top