PDA

View Full Version : Is the .38 Special still relevent as a carry round?



SteveK
06-11-2014, 10:07 AM
Picked up a Ruger Service Six in .38 spl. with a 2.75 inch barrel and dearly love it. Looking for opinions given today's bullet technology. Thanks in advance.

Chuck Whitlock
06-11-2014, 10:13 AM
Here's a good start:

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4336-BUG-s-380-ACP-vs-38-Sp

RevolverRob
06-11-2014, 10:48 AM
Still relevant? Yes.

The loads all mentioned in the linked thread are worth evaluating. The most common standard today seems to be the 135-grain Gold Dot load. For a bigger 2.75" Ruger or K-Frame, I would also look at the Buffalo Bore 158-grain LSWCHP +P which puts out near magnum like velocities even from short guns, but is not a round I recommend anyone shoot in a J-Frame.

-Rob

SteveK
06-11-2014, 10:58 AM
A S&W 442 has been my BUG for years. It's what I have on me when I don't have a gun. I'm interested more in opinions on the Ruger Six-series/K frame size guns. My bad for not being more specific. Although I believe it should be mandatory for everyone to own a 642/442 j-frame, I don't consider them a primary weapon.

RevolverRob
06-11-2014, 11:06 AM
Steve, even in larger .38 guns most folks are carrying what we might think of snub loads or some variation of them. The 135-grain Gold Dots are optimized for 2" barrel but seem to work just fine out of 4" guns as well. A lot of guys are still carrying the Federal or Remington 158-grain LSWCHP +P rounds. You might look at the Buffalo Bore round I mentioned above. It's one of the hottest .38 Special rounds out right now and it's my preferred round in bigger guns. It is not a round I would consider shooting in a smaller gun, too much speed and recoil, but would work in a mid-sized frame gun. I worked with that round quite a bit in a 4" M64 that I had for a long time, it averaged just about 1150 FPS out of a 4" barrel and there wasn't much left to pick up of one living thing I shot with it (a jack rabbit).

-Rob

JodyH
06-11-2014, 11:12 AM
I'm a big fan of the old school Buffalo Bore 150gr. full wadcutter. Not fancy but penetration isn't a issue and with a full diameter flat profile expansion isn't really needed.
For a legit defensive load they're remarkably easy to shoot. Plus most fixed sights are regulated to them.

Totem Polar
06-11-2014, 11:22 AM
One more fan of that 158gr BB load. Pretty much the spiritual successor to CorBon's 90s-era 158 gr LSWCHP +P+ "RCMP" load, but faster.

I'm a long-time revolver fan, and I still think my 2" S&W model 12 is one of the best carry guns ever made (don't shoot the buffalo bore in it though). I've got boxes upon boxes of the "FBI" load by several makers stashed away for my Js, Ks, and SPs. I like how the load and all those guns form a system: every revolver I have in that chambering shoots to the same POA.

I also have some boxes of that 150gr full wadcutter load that I sometimes throw into a 70s 3" 36-1. Also good stuff.

NEPAKevin
06-11-2014, 01:35 PM
FWIW, the Ruger Service Six that I had was finicky in the sense that the fixed sights were pretty much right on with light loads and heavy bullets, such as a 148gr 38 special wadcutter target load or factory 158gr RN, but would shoot low and to the right with lighter bullets at higher velocities, 125gr 357 magnums.

JonInWA
06-11-2014, 01:36 PM
While I happily defer to DocGKR's expertise and data in these things, I've been very pleased with Remington's Golden Saber JHP in 125 gr .38 Special +P for years. One of the things that I like about it is that Remington/UMC has what I consider an analog load, their less expensive UMC 125 gr SJHP .38 Special +P, sold in 100 round boxes, which make a great practice/IDPA competition load. I use these combinations in both my 4" Security Six and 4" GP100.

I believe that .38 Special +P is a viable defense load, but due to the hand/eye coordination needed for revolver reloading, I tend to now restrict my revolver carry to daylight, nightstand, or IDPA match use, as I discussed in what turned out to be a fairly long thread some months ago: http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9821-Re-Thinking-Revolver-Carry-Particularly-At-Night

I prefer the .38 Special +P to .357 Magnum due to the lower blast/recoil, and quicker recovery times between shots.

Best, Jon

jetfire
06-11-2014, 01:54 PM
Science fact: Ruger Six-series guns make women's clothes fall off.

Unlike the K-frames, you can feed a Six a steady diet of magnums and not worry about breaking the gun; that being said for all my "Six" guns, especially the fixed sight models I almost invariably carry 158 grain LSWCHP. This bullet shoots to the sights usually, and there are, to borrow a phrase from a friend, entire graveyards full of dudes that have been killed by it. If the HP version of the round is hard to find, I'll just carry regular 158 gr LSWC and not sweat it too much. It has the penetration to get to vitals, and it may not expand into a flower of death blossom, I reckon it'll get the job done.

okie john
06-11-2014, 02:18 PM
Picked up a Ruger Service Six in .38 spl. with a 2.75 inch barrel and dearly love it. Looking for opinions given today's bullet technology. Thanks in advance.

Relevant? Yep. The cartridge does everything the 9mm can do, plus a little. The typical 38 revolver is a little behind the times, but only a little. A good shooter armed with a 38 is a very serious opponent.


Okie John

theJanitor
06-11-2014, 02:53 PM
I sure hope it is. My only snubby is a 2" colt, and doesn't rate +P, so I'm using the 110gr Hornady Critical Defense

KevH
06-11-2014, 03:01 PM
Relevant? Very

I've shot and own a bucket of autos, but I'm still very comfortable with 38 Special and 357 Magnum revolvers. The S&W M12 remains one of my all-time favorite guns.

Chuck Haggard
06-11-2014, 03:42 PM
I carry one or two 642s daily, as BUGs typically.

In my old Security and Speed Sixes I used to carry magnum ammo, because magnum, but my reloads were normally .38 +P because my BUG was a Colt Cobra or DS.

I wouldn't cry in my sleep and wet the bed if suddenly I had to carry Gold Dots or one of my other prefered loads and go without a semi-auto.

Tamara
06-11-2014, 03:52 PM
Science fact: Ruger Six-series guns make women's clothes fall off.

Blind women, maybe. :p

jetfire
06-11-2014, 04:08 PM
Blind women, maybe. :p

I prefer the term "sturdy" women.

LHS
06-11-2014, 04:40 PM
Science fact: Ruger Six-series guns make women's clothes fall off.


I think the technical term for that is "aggravated sexual assault"...

#stoprapeculture

TR675
06-11-2014, 04:50 PM
I think the technical term for that is "aggravated sexual assault"...

#stoprapeculture

Perfect.

2379

Stephanie B
06-11-2014, 07:50 PM
I sure hope it is. My only snubby is a 2" colt, and doesn't rate +P, so I'm using the 110gr Hornady Critical DefenseLots of discussion elsewhere that what is now +P is equivalent to what was .38 Special before the cartridge was downrated for fear of blowing up pre-Great War guns. I don't know how true that really is. Supposedly the Colt Detective Specials are OK for +P, but not a steady diet of them.

There's a guy who does a lot of testing of short-barreled guns into ballistic gel. If I remember right, the Winchester Ranger/PDX1 round is pretty impressive in his tests. The Critical Defense +P a little less so. The FBI load HPLSWCs just sort of zipped right through the blocks.

Either way, I wouldn't want to get shot with any of them..... :D

Haraise
06-11-2014, 08:02 PM
The cartridge does everything the 9mm can do, plus a little.

I'd really like to see where you got your data on the above. .38 special compared to HST or Ranger T, especially.

Chuck Haggard
06-11-2014, 09:51 PM
I'd really like to see where you got your data on the above. .38 special compared to HST or Ranger T, especially.

I would argue that the .38 is more versatile. It's normally tough to run wadcutters, and snake shot, and 158gr hard cast Keith style SWCs....., etc., from a 9mm.

For purely anti-personnel use the 9mm is clearly more developed, bullet wise.

Haraise
06-11-2014, 10:07 PM
I would argue that the .38 is more versatile. It's normally tough to run wadcutters, and snake shot, and 158gr hard cast Keith style SWCs....., etc., from a 9mm.

For purely anti-personnel use the 9mm is clearly more developed, bullet wise.

Oh yeah, totally agree with that. No question. But 'everything that 9 can do and more?' That's a bit of an oversell.

Wheeler
06-12-2014, 12:26 AM
Oh yeah, totally agree with that. No question. But 'everything that 9 can do and more?' That's a bit of an oversell.

What can a 9mm do that a .38 Special can't? I'm honestly curious, not contentious.

Haraise
06-12-2014, 12:41 AM
What can a 9mm do that a .38 Special can't? I'm honestly curious, not contentious.

The explanation of that was quoted in the post you quoted. And stated in the one above that. And in the post before that one. More highly developed anti personnel ammunition.

JDM
06-12-2014, 12:48 AM
Is the 9MM 124g +p GoldDot more developed than the .38 Special 135g +p GoldDot?

Wheeler
06-12-2014, 01:01 AM
The explanation of that was quoted in the post you quoted. And stated in the one above that. And in the post before that one. More highly developed anti personnel ammunition.

I don't disagree with Chuck's assessment. I think he's spot on. The 9mm has more highly developed bullet designs available. I asked what a 9mm can do that a .38 can't which I thought was a rather specific question.

Haraise
06-12-2014, 01:02 AM
Is the 9MM 124g +p GoldDot more developed than the .38 Special 135g +p GoldDot?

That's a really good question, in general. Has Gold Dot been updated since the late 80's/early 90's when it was introduced? I couldn't find a year. I know HST is at least a second generation product that superseded the hydrashocks which were developed about the same time (from what I read), but no idea if Gold Dot has been updated. Maybe DocGKR would know?

EDIT: Doing some research, looks like in 2004 the short barrel line of Gold Dots was added. .38 special was included but 9mm was not. So that might make the .38 special the more developed round of the two. There are cartridges loaded for the 9mm short barrel, but there isn't a separate bullet product number listed on Speer's component website, so the actual bullet might be the same for 9mm short barrel with a different powder.

Wheeler: I can't pick up a box of those more highly developed bullet designs (HST) and shoot them in a .38. I'd say bullets are an important part of a cartridge, personally.

DiscipulusArmorum
06-12-2014, 01:39 AM
That's a really good question, in general. Has Gold Dot been updated since the late 80's/early 90's when it was introduced? I couldn't find a year. I know HST is at least a second generation product that superseded the hydrashocks which were developed about the same time (from what I read), but no idea if Gold Dot has been updated. Maybe DocGKR would know?

EDIT: Doing some research, looks like in 2004 the short barrel line of Gold Dots was added. .38 special was included but 9mm was not. So that might make the .38 special the more developed round of the two. There are cartridges loaded for the 9mm short barrel, but there isn't a separate bullet product number listed on Speer's component website, so the actual bullet might be the same for 9mm short barrel with a different powder.

Wheeler: I can't pick up a box of those more highly developed bullet designs (HST) and shoot them in a .38. I'd say bullets are an important part of a cartridge, personally.

I recall DocGKR saying that the 9mm 124+p load was not updated or changed for the short barrel line because it was already an excellent performer and didn't really need any tweaks (paraphrasing). I may dig up the citation later, or perhaps he'll chime in.

JDM
06-12-2014, 03:49 AM
This is an interesting discussion.

Like many (most?) of the members here, I carry a high-cap 9mm most of the time. However, there are instances when carrying a 16 shot handgun is not practical.

While I'm sure no one is going to suggest a J frame is the same or better than a SIG 228 with everything else being equal, perhaps when speaking about the individual projectiles being launched by the J frame equality with the high-cap 9mm becomes possible.

Or maybe this whole discussion is putting way too much focus onto the minutia.

At any rate, it's interesting.

:)

LSP972
06-12-2014, 05:40 AM
Or maybe this whole discussion is putting way too much focus onto the minutia.

At any rate, it's interesting.

:)

This.

Think about it… we're comparing two cartridges whose main differences are case design (rimmed vs rimless) and case (powder) capacity. Both take .36 caliber bullets. From what I've seen in the lab, its all about what is hit, and where. No doubt that 9mm projectiles are more highly developed; but they have to be, because lead semi-wadcutters don't work so hot in most self-feeding actions.

But to take this to next step, exactly what are we comparing? Velocity plays a BIG part. Are we talking a .38 snubby, or a four-inch "service revolver"? Standard pressure 9mm, or +P/+P+? I regularly see both 9mm FMJ and .38 RNL bullets that have killed with one shot. But I certainly wouldn't put those type bullets in my defensive handguns if I could get a good expanding type.

We see more than a few 124gr +P Gold Dots, because that's what the local PD issues for those officers carrying 9mm. They are usually very consistent, unless bone is hit. When that happens, ALL bets are off. The only constant I've observed is that bonded bullets tend to stay together better; this is one of the big claims about HST, even though they are not "bonded" in the true sense of the word (they have a cannelure, as opposed to a chemical bond between core and jacket).

The State Police and local Sheriff's Office have begun issuing HSTs in .40 and 9mm. The only shootings with this ammunition we've had so far have not involved hitting meat, although conversations I've had with lab rats in other parts of the country indicate it does well in that medium. But judging from what I've seen them do in the water tank, HST is what my carry autos are loaded with. The water tank is like ballistic gelatin; a comparator, nothing more.

My J frames have the 135gr Short Barrel Gold Dot. But I also have a quantity of 158gr LSWCHP which I would carry in a heartbeat (and did, for many years). And I have a bunch of .38 target wadcutters that I would not hesitate to load up with. In a snubby revolver, I don't think it really matters; because unless the ammunition is really "hot", you're not going to get much, if any, expansion from a 2" barrel.

In my semi-autos, I'm looking primarily for reliability, and accuracy at longer distances (25 yards +). Bullet design and/or "development status" is secondary. Bottom line, I think, is that both cartridges are fully developed and viable. Simply pick the offering that best suits your purposes/needs.

.

NEPAKevin
06-12-2014, 09:31 AM
In my old Security and Speed Sixes I used to carry magnum ammo, because magnum, but my reloads were normally .38 +P because my BUG was a Colt Cobra or DS.


I know of one guy who only carries 38 specials due to what happens when you shoot specials, fail to adequately clean chambers, then shoot magnums. Hate to admit that I too figured this out the hard way.

Chuck Haggard
06-12-2014, 09:37 AM
If one is talking factory ammo, and not Elmer Keith Memorial Handloads, then the 9mm beats the .38, and .357mag beat both, IMHO.

A 124-125gr bullet in even a +P .38 from a service length revolver is typically under 1000fps, 124gr +P Gold Dot typically runs in the 1275fps range from my G17s. While velocity ain't everything, one needs enough to have the energy to get the work done.

The Gold Dot is one of the few newest tech bullets available in the .38, while the 9mm has had the blessing of being the subject of intense bullet development and tweeking, as has the .40 and .45acp (Ranger-T, HST, etc., etc....), hence my comment above.

I am thinking about starting a thread on snubby ammo, just because even when one has the very best of the new tech bullets expansion AND penetration seem to still be a very real issue.

Chuck Haggard
06-12-2014, 09:38 AM
I know of one guy who only carries 38 specials due to what happens when you shoot specials, fail to adequately clean chambers, then shoot magnums. Hate to admit that I too figured this out the hard way.

Mine wasn't a cleaning issue, but a being able to use your extra ammo in either gun issue. Kinda like how people pair up the Glock 17/26 or 22/27 for service pistol/BUG carry.

Wheeler
06-12-2014, 09:44 AM
Wheeler: I can't pick up a box of those more highly developed bullet designs (HST) and shoot them in a .38. I'd say bullets are an important part of a cartridge, personally.

Let me ask my question in a different way. What can one accomplish with a 9mm that one cannot with a .38? What advantage(s) does a 9mm have over a .38? There's more to carrying a gun that potentially stopping bad guys, so lets lift that narrow focus.

TR675
06-12-2014, 09:57 AM
Let me ask my question in a different way. What can one accomplish with a 9mm that one cannot with a .38? What advantage(s) does a 9mm have over a .38? There's more to carrying a gun that potentially stopping bad guys, so lets lift that narrow focus.

Shoot someone 7 to 17 times?

On a one-to-one basis I guess they're roughly comparable; biggest difference is the platform itself. Revos conceal much better for me, but autos do everything else better. So, about 50% of the time I carry a revolver, although that's changing now that I trust my Shield a bit more.

RevolverRob
06-12-2014, 10:16 AM
I'm not sure how a 9mm +P can be better than a .357 Magnum from the same size barrel length and especially from longer barrels, unless the .357 load is downloaded. For comparison, I run 125-grain Gold Dot .357 Magnum load in a 3" gun and it averages 1300 FPS, the 124-grain +P Gold Dot from my 3.5" 3913 is running 1250, from a 3" barrel in 9mm, I'd expect more on the order of 1150-1200. Speed isn't everything, but in this case the magnum is the superior round in terms of physics. And it's not difficult with practice to get quality fast hits with either gun. I like both rounds equally.

The .38 Special is a more versatile round, not because of the round itself, but because its most frequently used in revolvers. Meaning, you can load a wider variety of bullet types and that makes it a more versatile platform. Make a comparison, a Smith and Wesson Model 52 is a semi-auto chambered in .38 Special that feeds only full wadcutter target ammunition, accuracy in that platform is amazing, but versatility? No. The versatility is from the revolver platform itself, not the cartridge. Although the .38 Special certainly benefits from the 100+ years of existence...then again so does the 9x19.

There is a distinct advantage of 9mm +P to .38 +P, it is the ability to hold more rounds in the same space, because the cartridges are more shorter and rimless. A Glock 19 is approximately the same size as my 3" M65 and yet holds 15+1 to my 6. If your personal assessment requires a double-stack handgun with plenty of cartridges then the 9mm +P has serious advantages. That said with the proliferation of single-stack 9mm handguns being used in concealed carry, I find the gap between a 7+1 or 8+1 9mm and a 6 or 7 shot .38 and especially .357 Magnum to be much smaller. In terms of .38 +P being inferior because of bullet selection, I'd suggest that's likely not true, given the wide range of bullets available for the .38. Although, I would love to see a 147-158 grain HST in .38 Special +P, that would be the kittens.

I have a feeling this is going to turn another revolver thread into a revolver v. semi-auto thread, which is irrelevant to the topic at hand. The current offerings in .38 Special +P largely match those of 9mm +P and it's an appropriate comparison in terms of overall performance. Getting weighed down in the idea that one is superior to the other is a bit ridiculous, they are actually both on equal footing. And this is coming from a guy who chooses to carry revolvers almost exclusively.

-Rob

Haraise
06-12-2014, 10:25 AM
Shoot someone 7 to 17 times?

On a one-to-one basis I guess they're roughly comparable; biggest difference is the platform itself. Revos conceal much better for me, but autos do everything else better. So, about 50% of the time I carry a revolver, although that's changing now that I trust my Shield a bit more.

Wheeler: Shoot them more, shoot them 'deader.' That's pretty much my whole focus in firearms, despite how narrow you think it is. I'd recommend asking someone else if you're looking for other answers.


I'm not sure how a 9mm +P can be better than a .357 Magnum

Quoting Chuck here "... and .357mag beat both, IMHO."

Who said a shot of .357 is worse than 9?

SteveK
06-12-2014, 10:42 AM
My intention wasn't to turn this into a revolver v. auto debate but gain information on current ammo trends and such. Specifically, does the .38 special still have a place on the hip beyond the BUG application. Capacity is not my concern here. I suppose the way to go would to be to stock up on 135g +p Gold Dot and drive on and possibly test drive some of the Buffalo Bore line.

Wheeler
06-12-2014, 10:55 AM
Oh yeah, totally agree with that. No question. But 'everything that 9 can do and more?' That's a bit of an oversell.

This is where I keep getting hung up.

Is there some form of empirical data that shows the 9mm can kill 'em deader on a round per round comparison? I've always believed that all handgun cartridges are pitiful popguns when it comes to stopping a determined attacker and usually a lid the caliber debates. I've also always believed a 9mm and a .38 Special were roughly equivalent with the .38 having an edge in versatility and in the case of my handguns in my hands, accuracy.

I'm not knocking your choice of caliber or your reasons for choosing what you chose. If you chose to carry a .32 Long I'd respect the choice. I'm just trying to figure out what you data you were basing the above statement on. I get the capacity advantages. Was there more?

RevolverRob
06-12-2014, 11:12 AM
Quoting Chuck here "... and .357mag beat both, IMHO."

Who said a shot of .357 is worse than 9?

My apologies to Chuck. I misread what he wrote. I have to remember to not post before coffee.

Steve, I think you're spot on with respect to the .38 Special. I do think the .38 has a place on a hip but like all things that's largely personal preference. For some (like me) revolvers are easier to shoot well. So much so I personally sold all my striker fired guns and have only TDA semi-autos and DA revolvers. That's more a reflection on considerable trigger and dryfire time behind DA guns. I also personally find mid-size 2.5-3" guns a easier to conceal than a Glock 19 by a wide margin. I think if you try out the BB stuff you'll find a very happy place with your Ruger in terms of accuracy and power.

-Rob

Robinson
06-12-2014, 12:25 PM
The .38 Special is relevant to me. When I'm not carrying a 1911 I carry a revolver loaded with 158gr LSWCHP+P ammunition -- which others in the thread have mentioned as well. I normally use the Remington version but I'd like to try the Buffalo Bore offering in my guns.

A full-size revolver loaded with .38+P IMO offers a good balance of power and low recoil/flash/bang.

DocGKR
06-12-2014, 01:26 PM
.35 cal bullets are .35 cal bullets, regardless of which cartridge is used to launch them. On the other hand, quantity as a quality all of its own, as I previously wrote about: http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?716-The-quot-new-quot-J-frame. I'll take 15 rds of 9 mm over 5-6 rds of .38 Sp/.357 Mag any day of the week. On a shot for shot basis, the 9 mm 147 gr works as well or better than the .38 sp 158 gr +P.

Gold Dots have periodically been improved over time.

Chuck Haggard
06-12-2014, 02:02 PM
Ref Gold Dots, I know the 124gr bullet has been improved at least once since it was introduced due to our involvement with Speer after a few OISs we had where penetration fell under the catagory of "P for plenty".

okie john
06-12-2014, 02:12 PM
I'd really like to see where you got your data on the above. .38 special compared to HST or Ranger T, especially.

My comment was based on my general experience shooting and handloading both cartridges. I should have said, "The cartridge does everything the 9mm can do, plus a little, but not enough to choose one over the other based purely on the cartridge itself."

I apologize for my role in driving this thread off topic.


Okie John

LSP552
06-15-2014, 07:26 PM
Very relevant, especially in small revolvers. I've yet to find a 9mm semi-auto that could replace my 642/442 for pocket carry.

Ken

Chuck Haggard
06-21-2014, 09:04 AM
Very relevant, especially in small revolvers. I've yet to find a 9mm semi-auto that could replace my 642/442 for pocket carry.

Ken

Agreed

LHS
06-24-2014, 01:41 AM
Very relevant, especially in small revolvers. I've yet to find a 9mm semi-auto that could replace my 642/442 for pocket carry.

Ken

To me, that's where the .38 shines in modern times. It's a niche role, but nothing I've found fills it quite as well.

Dave T
06-28-2014, 06:31 PM
I'm one of those folks who is completely under whelmed by today's so called +P offerings. I remember back in the early to mid 1970s a cop I knew who carried a M-14 as his duty gun bought reload practice ammo in 2000 round lots. He always chronographed to see that it was as ordered performance wise. I watched him testing some before a combat match and it was averaging right around 850 fps from his 6" barrel. He ran six rounds through a 4" and it came out a little over 800 fps. The load was 3.5g-3.7g (don't remember exactly) of Bullseye behind a 158g RNL projectile.

Last year a friend who's an ICOR competitor and carries a revolver daily, asked me to chrono some Rem +P 158g SWC-HP. In a 4" S&W chambered for the 38 Special it averaged 807 fps. Sounds exactly like that old cops practice hand load back in the day. And since when is a 125g or 135g bullet @ 925 fps a barn burner?

Sorry all you fans of +P but I remain completely under whelmed. The glaring exception to this is the Buffalo Bore 38 Special +P 158g SWCHP-GC, which duplicates the old 38-44 round from 1930. (smiley face goes here)

Dave

JodyH
06-28-2014, 11:50 PM
It's 2014 not 1970. Bullet design's come a long way baby.
Velocity ain't all its cracked up to be anymore.
But if you feel the need, the need for some speed... the Wilson Combat XPB+P 110gr. clock in at 1050fps from a 4".
You get a modern bullet and velocity!
It's like magic.

RevolverRob
06-29-2014, 12:38 AM
I agree with Jody that velocity isn't all its cracked up to be.

In the case of the Remington +P and Federal +P LHPs for instance, you'll find the velocity difference between the two to be about 100 FPS, with the Federal round being faster. The reason for this appears to be the hardness/softness of the lead. Remington's LHPs are quite soft (able to be deformed if dropped on a hard surface from just 6 inches above it, in my experience), as a result they don't need to be driven fast to expand reliably. In fact quite the opposite, if you drive them really fast (up around 1000 FPS), they tend to come apart, without penetrating effectively. By contrast Federal used a harder lead that doesn't deform as easily and needs to be driven faster to reliably expand. It's the same story with the Buffalo Bore bullets. I haven't had this confirmed, but I suspect BB uses two different 158-grain LSWCHPs in their two different loads, the standard pressure (for older snubs) appears to be softer lead than the +P loads I currently have stocked.

I really like the Barnes bullets, but don't like what light fast bullets do to forcing cones and I don't like that they don't hit with factory fixed sights in the way 147-158 grain bullets do.

-Rob

JodyH
06-29-2014, 09:36 AM
I got lucky in that my new 442 shoots dead on at 20 yards with the Wilson/Barnes ammo.

Wheeler
06-29-2014, 11:21 AM
I figure that anything that can poke holes in me that weren't issued to me is relevant, especially from a distance. If nothing else it's relevant to know the capabilities of carious platforms and ammo. As to whether it's relevant for us to train with a certain platform or caliber, we constantly preach to each other that shot placement is paramount therefore, if one is capable of shooting more accurate with a model 10 .38 special then that particular fun and ammunition is extremely relevant to that person, more so than any current service caliber platform.

In regards to +P, those ratings have always been about pressure, not velocity. Velocity is a result of the increased pressures, not vice-versa.

Dave T
06-29-2014, 01:26 PM
It's 2014 not 1970. Bullet design's come a long way baby.
Velocity ain't all its cracked up to be anymore.
But if you feel the need, the need for some speed... the Wilson Combat XPB+P 110gr. clock in at 1050fps from a 4".
You get a modern bullet and velocity!
It's like magic.

Not sure where you're going with that friend but you totally missed the point of my post. Much is made of the higher pressure (what the +P stands for) of today's offerings. I was pointing out they are the equivalent of what was once standard 38 Special ammunition. And, what on earth would I want with a 110g 36 caliber bullet at 1050 fps?

Dave

nycnoob
06-29-2014, 01:49 PM
Much is made of the higher pressure (what the +P stands for) of today's offerings. I was pointing out they are the equivalent of what was once standard 38 Special ammunition.

I have an old S&W model 38. It is not rated for +P but when I wrote S&W they said not to worry it is safe for modern +P.

JodyH
06-29-2014, 02:30 PM
And, what on earth would I want with a 110g 36 caliber bullet at 1050 fps?
Because the Barnes XPB is the only .38 special JHP that reliably penetrates and expands after going through intermediate barriers?

Rich
06-30-2014, 06:51 PM
38spl is my favorite cartridge !
90gr to 200gr bullets what's not to like?

In A.W. S&W J frames (M642) I like using the regular 38spl 148 WC because of recoil. they are around 700FPS out of a 4inch barrel.( Federal 148,Win 148.Rem 148) Even with that low of velocity it still has enough penetration.
For speed strip and my loaders I use Bonded 130W or 135GD

If S&W would make a M10 or even a M13 with a 3inch barrel I might give up my SIG and HK and go back to my roots.

Rich
06-30-2014, 07:02 PM
I got lucky in that my new 442 shoots dead on at 20 yards with the Wilson/Barnes ammo.

I haven't found a J frame yet that didn't have a POA/POI that = 158gr.


I haven't tried the barnes 110gr. The bullet is all copper so its longer . so it might have the same POI as the 158gr.

( like how close the POI is between M855 and MK262. the SS109 is a longer bullet than regular lead jacket 62gr bullets because of the 10gr mild steel insert)

Rich
06-30-2014, 07:04 PM
The .38 Special is relevant to me. When I'm not carrying a 1911 I carry a revolver loaded with 158gr LSWCHP+P ammunition -- which others in the thread have mentioned as well. I normally use the Remington version but I'd like to try the Buffalo Bore offering in my guns.

A full-size revolver loaded with .38+P IMO offers a good balance of power and low recoil/flash/bang.
+1
love doing bill drill using GP100 or a 686 using 38spl loads

Dave T
07-03-2014, 11:01 AM
If S&W would make a M10 or even a M13 with a 3inch barrel I might give up my SIG and HK and go back to my roots.

They have in the past, including the stainless versions in the M64 and M65. Be advised, a lot of folks have discovered these and the 3", RB K-frames are in high demand. When you find one for sale it will probably be for a commanding price. If you come across one for what seems to be a reasonable price, grab it. Another probably won't pass you way in quite a while.

Dave

David Armstrong
07-03-2014, 04:28 PM
I've carried a 38 Spl as either a primary or a secondary gun for about 30 years now and have never seen any reason to think it wouldn't do what I needed it to do. A 642 or 442 in the pocket works quite well as a BG fighter, IMO. So yes, it is still relevant for me

SAWBONES
07-03-2014, 06:18 PM
I believe all of us obsess about these things because they are the things we can control.

We want to believe we can influence the outcome of a violent life-and-death personal physical struggle by having the best gun, in the best caliber, using the very most potent cartridge available in that caliber.

When "the balloon goes up" (as Col. Cooper used to say), those are all good things to have, of course, but they probably mean a lot less than qualities such as personal awareness & readiness, and personal courage & skill.

I too carry Remington 158gr LSWCHP+P or Gold Dot 135gr+P JHP "short barrel" .38 Special in a 1 7/8" barrel J-frame or two from time to time, especially in the hottest "less clothing worn" summertime ;), and don't rue that condition as being notably less prepared than when carrying a G26, G19, G30 or Colt CCO.

dookie1481
07-13-2014, 11:49 PM
I believe all of us obsess about these things because they are the things we can control.

We want to believe we can influence the outcome of a violent life-and-death personal physical struggle by having the best gun, in the best caliber, using the very most potent cartridge available in that caliber.

When "the balloon goes up" (as Col. Cooper used to say), those are all good things to have, of course, but they probably mean a lot less than qualities such as personal awareness & readiness, and personal courage & skill.

I too carry Remington 158gr LSWCHP+P or Gold Dot 135gr+P JHP "short barrel" .38 Special in a 1 7/8" barrel J-frame or two from time to time, especially in the hottest "less clothing worn" summertime ;), and don't rue that condition as being notably less prepared than when carrying a G26, G19, G30 or Colt CCO.

Wise.

Rich
08-01-2014, 01:49 PM
They have in the past, including the stainless versions in the M64 and M65. Be advised, a lot of folks have discovered these and the 3", RB K-frames are in high demand. When you find one for sale it will probably be for a commanding price. If you come across one for what seems to be a reasonable price, grab it. Another probably won't pass you way in quite a while.

Dave

Like I fool I sold my collection of S&W K & L frames thinking I could always buy a new one.

Dave T
08-02-2014, 10:42 PM
Like I fool I sold my collection of S&W K & L frames thinking I could always buy a new one.

You can buy a new one, if you like the misshapen frames and the IL (idiot lock).

Just sayin',
Dave

FotoTomas
08-05-2014, 05:01 PM
Due to some interesting circumstances after a motorcycle accident...the only two handguns in my home at the moment are a S&W Model 19 Combat Magnum with a 4" barrel and a S&W Model 638 in 2" variety. The snub gets whats left of my old S&W/Federal Nyclad ammo, 125 grain nylon coated lead and the 4" has some Remington 125 grain .38 Special +P for social purposes. I would be quite happy with a 3" Speed Six from Ruger as well and believe the .38 Special is very relevent for me. 9mm and .38 Special are my two favorite handgun cartridges and are quite "Relevent" for personal defense.

45dotACP
08-08-2014, 10:31 PM
I'm fairly certain that if I was entirely unarmed and the balloon ascended, I'd be glad if I found a flare gun or a loaded Colt Dragoon. That said, I'd feel more comfortable with a G26 than a j frame. Then again, I would also feel more comfortable with a platoon of multi tour, combat veteran, career Marines...but some things just fit better in my waistband than others.