Well-Armed with a 4" .38 and 158 gr LRNs?

[.455_Hunter]

In these times of high cap polymer semi-autos and scandium magnum revolvers shooting the latest designer JHPs, I am taking a little to poll to see how folks really feel about the following scenario-

You are in need of a handgun to protect yourself and your family from an undefined threat- maybe a home burglar, maybe a carjacker, maybe a rapist, who knows? The only one available to you is a 4" fixed sight, blued, all-steel revolver such as a S&W Model 10, Colt Official Police or Colt Police Positive Special. The only ammunition available is standard pressure loads from Winchester or Remington featuring the 158 gr. LRN bullet at 755 fps and 200 fpe. No substitutions allowed other what has been previously mentioned.

How do you feel?

 

[ChristopherG]

How do you feel?

Very happy with the gun; very sad about the ammo.

Given the tiny little wound channel created by a LRN, I'm going to be more aware than ever of the crucial importance of shot placement--and perhaps more likely to follow two body shots with a head shot than I would be if I were shooting a better-designed and more potently-propelled bullet.

 

[Euclidean]

Well if that's all there is and there ain't no more, no point in worrying about it is there?

But since we're contemplating it anyway, 80% of my desires are satisfied as any of those firearms, if they're in good working order, are incredibly reliable designs.

 

[Old Fuff]

I wouldn’t worry a bit...

There are better options, but the guns in question are both reliable and accurate. The ammunition will penetrate to a vital organ from almost any angle. So it’s a matter of shot placement and marksmanship.

During the 1950’s I often carried an S&W K-38 Combat Masterpiece with standard police loads. Frankly, there wasn’t a whole lot of choice.

My friend, the late Col. Charles Askins Jr., laid a fair number of folks low with a .38 Special Colt New Service while he was a Border Patrolman, and later as an Army officer in North Africa and Italy.

But Charley could shoot...

 

[Ohen Cepel]

Improve the ammo choice and I would be fine!

LRN is a poor choice these days.

 

[357wheelgunner]

Throw in some 158gr+P SWC-LHP and I'd feel as armed as a person can be....But I can shoot a 4" revolver like I can point my finger. The "FBI load" is what I'm currently toting in all of my wheelguns, when the winter comes along I'll switch over to 158gr .357 gold dots though

 

[frankt]

Gun is great, ammo could use some improvements.

 

[DMK]

I'd go with Speer 135gr. Gold Dots. $15 bucks will get you a box of 20 which would give you a load, a reload and enough ammo left to test it.

But if all you had was what you got then you gotta make due.

I prefer a revolver over a semi for CCW. Maybe I'd choose .357 in a 4" K-frame, but a good .38 round would be OK too.

 

[1911Tuner]

re:

.38 Special LRN? Not by choice...but as Fuff observed...There's a lotta men pushin' up daisies because of that round.

 

[Ichiro]

The gun is fine, but the ammo choice is stupid.

I can see the logic in owning a Model 10: it is a well-made and ergonimic gun that is easy to shoot, the gun is easy to maintain, and the 4" barrel will allow .38s to achieve an effective velocity. It's a perfect gun for the caliber and also cheap to come by in a used specimen.

However, limiting the ammo to the practice type makes no sense. For a few bucks more, a person could easily buy a box of some kind of hollowpoint, or even an FBI load. I recently purchased 10 boxes of Remington LSWCHP +P from Natchezss.com for less than $10 per box.

It just makes no sense at all to use substandard ammo when better options are available for a few bucks more. It's an artificial limitation.

 

[Old Fuff]

Da Fuff did say...

There are better options

Which of course there are. But it is bullet placement that's the surest "stopper," especially if a bullet is deposited somewhere in the central nervous system.

Rember the man did say...

The only ammunition available is standard pressure loads from Winchester or Remington featuring the 158 gr. LRN bullet at 755 fps and 200 fpe. No substitutions allowed other what has been previously mentioned.

Fuff’s first rule of gunfighting is: Know how to shoot…

 

[Seven High]

Old Fuff: If Col. Askins was alive today, what type of firearm do you think he would carry? What caliber?

 

[Iggy]

There are a lot of us still around that packed that combination for a lot of years.

There are better, but us ol timers are still here!!!

 

[1911Tuner]

re:

On a final note...If my ammo is limited to the low velocity sort, I want a heavy bullet.

 

[huntsman]

shootin straight with a thirty eight is better than givin give with a forty five.

 

[grendelbane]

You would be better armed than three quarters of the pistol packing population of the 20th century. It is hard to believe that the major advances in pistol ammunition were made in my lifetime.

It is strange, because its not that people in the naughty oughties a century ago were technologically incapable of producing better ammunition. There were jacketed soft points loaded in the 19th century. The principles of expanding handgun ammunition were well known, and some effort was made to produce better loads.

However, due to 2 World Wars, and a Great Depression, not much advancement was made until the last half of the century.

I can still remember old-timers telling me that hollow point bullets were illegal. I think part of the problem is the older generations were not accepting of expanding bullet technology.

 

[Croyance]

Drawing that gun in a car would be awkward.

It would be okay. I would prefer differnt ammunition, I don't see the point of that limitation. Placement is pretty important.

 

[M2 Carbine]

Iggy
There are a lot of us still around that packed that combination for a lot of years.
There are better, but us ol timers are still here!!!

+1

 

[Archie]

Pretty much with the crowd...

The revolver is fine. The ammunition is somewhat lacking. Still, all in all, one is prepared for the situation and one makes allowances.

I can think of worse combinations. Better combinations aren't hard to conjure either.

 

[atlctyslkr]

Not the best but alot of people are relying on alot weaker guns.

 

[Chindo18Z]

I've seen five people gunned down at close range (1-2 yards) by a deranged man armed with an 2" barreled RG .38 revolver. He fired six shots of 200 gr. LRN, striking five victims. Six shots, all hits. All victims were immediately on the ground; one dead, two critically wounded, two seriously wounded. This from a true "Saturday Night Special" firing an obsolete bullet design at extremely sedate velocity.

I would not carry 158 grain LRN by choice, but have no doubt that the round can kill and kill quickly.

Shot placement is everything. All bullets are lethal. Even in calibers and configurations which are not optimal.

 

[Eightball]

I would personally prefer .357, but that's a piddly difference. I love my 620, and I'd trust my life to any S&W .38..............


....but it's not a .357 . (Yes, I saw the "no subs").

 

[bg226]

At handgun velocities and energies, I disagree that expanding ammunition is more effective than non-expanding ammunition.

The Model 10 + 158 gr LRN package worked on humans before our time and it shall work on humans in our present time.

 

[Ramius]

.38 is good, .357 is better..

I voted 'undergunned', not because I felt the load was insufficent, but because there is something better available.

Doesn't matter that I used to carry that exact combination, that was then, this is now- and if something better is available, I'd be stupid not to take that option.

And I'd trust my life to about any pistol made by Smith & Wesson, esp. the classic revolvers.

 

[Big Gay Al]

Doesn't matter that I used to carry that exact combination, that was then, this is now- and if something better is available, I'd be stupid not to take that option.

EXCEPT, as mentioned above, the ONLY option availabe in this situation is what was mentioned in the very first message.

However, my opinion, I would feel ok with the pistol choice, I would not be so happy about the ammo available.

Which leads me to this somewhat logical question...IS there a reason why the limitations on gun and/or ammo specified?