Weak spot on smaller frame SAA in 38 spl

[RealGun]

The (square) CL is the standard Italian date code, not a proof mark.
That is a new gun, CL is this year, 2014.

My source website on the subject of "Italian proof marks" indicated it was the proofing mark, which did indicate a year. However, I haven't been able to explain the M in the CM. It is not CL on the gun, but indeed CM. My source table ended at 2011. What source did you find?

 

[Jim Watson]

Geez, I am illiterate.

I find this:

1994 = BD
1995 = BF
1996 = BH
1997 = BI
1998 = BL
1999 = BM
2000 = BN
2001 = BP
2002 = BS
2003 = BT
2004 = BU
2005 = BZ
2006 = CA
2007 = CB
2008 = CC
2009 = CD
2010 = CF
2011 = CH
2012 = CI
2013 = CL
2014 = CM

 

[RealGun]

...which I think brings us to the conclusion that my Uberti Stallion Pocket 38 will safely handled +p.

 

[Old Fuff]

...which I think brings us to the conclusion that my Uberti Stallion Pocket 38 will safely handled +p.

I would suggest that you change "us" to "me."

You are probably right, but why tempt fate? As I understand it, neither the maker (Uberti) or importer (Cimarron Arms) endorse the use of Plus-P ammunition in this particular revolver. They're plenty of other revolvers on the market that are certified for use with high-performance ammunition, and those chambered in .357 Magnum offer no doubt what so ever.

Obviously the choice is up to the gun owner, but in the event that something goes wrong, no mater how unlikely that is, both the manufacturer and distributor/retailer will quickly back out of the picture, leaving the shooter with absolutely no support.

 

[RealGun]

...which I think brings us to the conclusion that my Uberti Stallion Pocket 38 will safely handled +p.

I would suggest that you change "us" to "me."

You are probably right, but why tempt fate? As I understand it, neither the maker (Uberti) or importer (Cimarron Arms) endorse the use of Plus-P ammunition in this particular revolver. They're plenty of other revolvers on the market that are certified for use with high-performance ammunition, and those chambered in .357 Magnum offer no doubt what so ever.

Obviously the choice is up to the gun owner, but in the event that something goes wrong, no mater how unlikely that is, both the manufacturer and distributor/retailer will quickly back out of the picture, leaving the shooter with absolutely no support.

The hand wringing is well intended, I'm sure, but "we" is the summation of this thread, which included information that European proofing was more stringent than domestic +p designation. There seems a lack of good reason to categorically condemn imports on the basis of lacking a +p stamp, yet having a European proof mark.

 

[Old Fuff]

There seems a lack of good reason to categorically condemn imports on the basis of lacking a +p stamp, yet having a European proof mark.

Regarding markings, no they're isn't. But maybe one should take this into consideration.

As I understand it, neither the maker (Uberti) or importer (Cimarron Arms) endorse the use of Plus-P ammunition in this particular revolver.

However this doesn't preclude someone that owns one of these revolver from shooting whatever they want to. But...

...in the event that something goes wrong, no mater how unlikely that is, both the manufacturer and distributor/retailer will quickly back out of the picture, leaving the shooter with absolutely no support.

It boils down to a matter of good judgment.

 

[RealGun]

You're either cherry picking the thread to favor a point of view or missing the parts about the Italian stamping indicating the proofing was more stringent than for any gun stamped "+p".

I don't see an opening for any condescension regarding judgment.

 

[Old Fuff]

It boils down to a matter of good judgment.

As I understand it, neither the maker (Uberti) or importer (Cimarron Arms) endorse the use of Plus-P ammunition in this particular revolver.

In other words, maybe others who own this particular revolver should ask before they leap. You've made up your own mind, and I'm comfortable with that. However others might have concerns, and I would say that an opinion from Uberti or Cimarron Arms would carry more weight then either of us.

 

[RealGun]

See post #17

 

[Vern Humphrey]

But keep in mind that while doing this, the cylinders on early New Service and other revolvers were made from mild steel and not specifically heat treated until 1902 or later. The were proofed for smokeless powder loads as they were made at the time. Some of the heaver loads made today should not be used in vintage New Service revolvers made before the early/middle 1920's.

Correct. Mine is a 1906 gun, and has a heat-treated cylinder. About 17.5 grains of Hodgdon's Li'l Gun behind a 250 grain cast bullet is about tops for that gun.

 

[Old Fuff]

See post #17

I did as you requested.

I am sure that Uberti (who manufacturers this revolver) is well versed in the requirements of Italian proof requirements. Never the less the company recommends that Plus-P ammunition not be used in it. I am reasonable sure that this stated opinion is based on possible (not necessarily probable) liability concerns. The same can be said about Cimarron Arms.

Clearly this model is aimed at the Cowboy Shooting community that tend to use loads that are lower then the highest specified. If owners (such as yourself) want to disregard the manufacturer's position that is your business. But I am at a loss at understanding why - considering that the revolver is intended to be used for what it is - anyone would find a good reason to ignore the maker's view, proof testing not withstanding.

Perhaps you should discuss with a metallurgist the difference between catastrophic vs. progressive failures.

 

[RealGun]

See post #17

I did as you requested.

I am sure that Uberti (who manufacturers this revolver) is well versed in the requirements of Italian proof requirements. Never the less the company recommends that Plus-P ammunition not be used in it. I am reasonable sure that this stated opinion is based on possible (not necessarily probable) liability concerns. The same can be said about Cimarron Arms.

Clearly this model is aimed at the Cowboy Shooting community that tend to use loads that are lower then the highest specified. If owners (such as yourself) want to disregard the manufacturer's position that is your business. But I am at a loss at understanding why - considering that the revolver is intended to be used for what it is - anyone would find a good reason to ignore the maker's view, proof testing not withstanding.

Perhaps you should discuss with a metallurgist the difference between catastrophic vs. progressive failures.

I don't believe I ever said I intended to use +p ammo. I thought we were discussing what the gun was capable of shooting and why. I have no knowledge of Taylor's Uberti's position on 38 +p. Where did that come from? Maybe I missed something here. In any case, I don't see the justification for more condescending comments.

 

[cottonmouth]

I have a model P Jr. and the instructions say not to shoot +P ammo in it. I have always shot standard velocity SWC's.

J.B.

 

[RealGun]

I have a model P Jr. and the instructions say not to shoot +P ammo in it. I have always shot standard velocity SWC's.

Well, my manual from Uberti, Single Action Revolver and Revolving Carbine, that came with my Taylor's Uberti Stallion Pocket 38, says only to use commercially loaded ammunition...so which instruction has credibility or at least will be taken seriously and followed exactly? There is no explicit mention anywhere of .38 S&W Special +p, since the manual is not specific to a model or caliber. They leave it up to me to be aware of differences between models.

Additionally, it says to always keep an empty chamber under the hammer, despite the gun having a 1/4 cock "safety" feature and a cylinder base pin safety feature. Their lawyers are not going to control how I use the gun to its best advantage.

The last entry in the manual (A. Uberti S.p.A) is the following interesting paragraph under "Warning Notice!!":

"All are (sic) firearms are subject to proof testing at the Italian National Proofing House and are proofed to much higher pressures than normal pressures. Furthermore, the chamber dimensions and head space are tested according to the Saami (sic) and C.I.P. regulations."

 

[Cump]

The generic manual I've referenced online says to use quality factory ammo within SAAMI or CIP. If I am aware of the pressure specs, it would be reasonable to conclude American +P (under CIP pressures) would be safe. That said Cimarron's disclaimer is understandable since it can't be sure the consumer is sure of the pressures of all over pressure rounds (especially reloads, and maybe there are some marketed over CIP). And Cimarron doesn't lose anything since the guns are for a cowboy-load market anyway ...

I'm not planning on shooting +P because I want these to last, and there is no need. But ... I have a family member that for some reason combines half-used boxes, and I've seen some 38 spl and 38 +P mixed. I'll seriously deliver Cimarron's disclaimer, but also won't sweat it if one or two +P make it through.