Is .38 spl. destined to be a "Tier 2" performer?

[dogcaller]

I cut my teeth shooting a 4" GP100, then migrated to fantastic plastic: USP40, then Glocks, then Sigs, CZ, etc. Many moons later I pick up a police trade-in model 64 for a song, I buy a nice Kramer holster for it (at ~1/3 of what I paid for the 64) and I'm digging it. Except for the sights--but that's another story, right?

I have a 638 I use for occasional pocket carry, using 148 DEWCs. So anyway, this 64 riding so nice in the Kramer has got me thinking about the .38 as a defensive piece in a way I haven't before, and I'm wondering why it is loaded the way it is... I think it's no surprise that the .38 is not considered to not be as capable a performer as modern 9s, .40s, .45, etc. There's no magic involved, obviously, so I figure it must be a velocity issue, but I'm not sure it's that simple... When I look at ballistic charts, I see that 125 gr. .38+P is often loaded ~75-ish FPS slower than 124 gr. 9mm standard velocity, and ~100-150FPS slower than 9mm +P.

There is obviously PLENTY of case capacity in those big .38 spls. Can the K-frames not handle it? That would be surprising to me--but that's why I'm asking. What is stopping anyone from loading .38s to proven 9mm velocities with comparable bullets? No one considers 9mm as hard to handle, even with +P rounds, so what gives?

[BehindBlueI's]

Case volume isn't the issue. The only reason the .357 magnum is longer is so they can't be loaded in .38 Special revolvers.

The question of if a given gun can handle "+P" loads is going to vary depending on the revolver. There's some pretty hefty .38 loads out there and some guns designed for them. Others...not so much.

I suspect what holds the .38 back is the lack of R&D and the market. I would guess the vast majority of defensive ammo sold for .38s is destined for a 2" barrel of some sort. There's just not many people carrying a 4-6" .38 these days. So the loads and bullets aren't designed with "duty pistol" in mind.

[Rex G]

Keep in mind that revolver ammo does not have to climb feed ramps, so the cavities in the noses of the bullets can be quite deep and wide. Or, if one wants to use flat-nosed full wadcutters, not all of which are loaded mild, that is something that precious few auto-loaders can hope to feed.

I am not “choosing sides,” here. I use auto-loading and revolving pistols.

[okie john]

Here you go: https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=108

158 grains at 1,000 fps.


Okie John

[03RN]

Its pretty easy to get a 158gr bullet to 1000-1100fps. What 9mm can claim that?

I do agree its odd that its so hard to find service quality factory ammo with 125gr @1100-1200fps which I think should be feasible.

I think its similar to 45-70s. The cartridge and most guns are capable but some guns are not.

[Totem Polar]

Here you go: https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=108

158 grains at 1,000 fps.


Okie John

That stuff is a lot hotter than 1,000 fps out of a service revolver. Honestly, I’d be just as happy if they toned it down a hair so it’s actually going 1k out of the average 3”. That said, it’s good stuff.

[FrankB]

Speaking of case volume.... I bought a BUNCH of Federal Micro HST just before the drought began. Federal claims that its recessed bullet compacts the powder, given it a better burn than the loose powder in a regular .38 special round. I’ve seen many expansion tests with this round, and its 130 grain bullet almost always expands to .75 inches. Is it an innovative round? Maybe, but someone might have done something similar before.

[jtcarm]

Its pretty easy to get a 158gr bullet to 1000-1100fps. What 9mm can claim that?

I do agree its odd that its so hard to find service quality factory ammo with 125gr @1100-1200fps which I think should be feasible.

I think its similar to 45-70s. The cartridge and most guns are capable but some guns are not.

It is easy, and that’s why we have the .357 magnum.

[spyderco monkey]

I cut my teeth shooting a 4" GP100, then migrated to fantastic plastic: USP40, then Glocks, then Sigs, CZ, etc. Many moons later I pick up a police trade-in model 64 for a song, I buy a nice Kramer holster for it (at ~1/3 of what I paid for the 64) and I'm digging it. Except for the sights--but that's another story, right?

I have a 638 I use for occasional pocket carry, using 148 DEWCs. So anyway, this 64 riding so nice in the Kramer has got me thinking about the .38 as a defensive piece in a way I haven't before, and I'm wondering why it is loaded the way it is... I think it's no surprise that the .38 is not considered to not be as capable a performer as modern 9s, .40s, .45, etc. There's no magic involved, obviously, so I figure it must be a velocity issue, but I'm not sure it's that simple... When I look at ballistic charts, I see that 125 gr. .38+P is often loaded ~75-ish FPS slower than 124 gr. 9mm standard velocity, and ~100-150FPS slower than 9mm +P.

There is obviously PLENTY of case capacity in those big .38 spls. Can the K-frames not handle it? That would be surprising to me--but that's why I'm asking. What is stopping anyone from loading .38s to proven 9mm velocities with comparable bullets? No one considers 9mm as hard to handle, even with +P rounds, so what gives?

The problem is theres so many older .38's of dubious quality and strength.

I think whats needed is more ".357 lite" loads, loaded to replicate 9x19 performance and powder charge. Ie 125gr @ 1100fps from a J frame, 1200-1250fps from a 4."

This would provide more ballistic performance then .38+p, but a less recoil and much less blast then a proper .357. And there'd be no safety concerns, as any .357 revolver could easily handle it.

.38 +p 125gr = 850fps J frame; 950fps 4" (too little)
".357 lite" 125gr = 1100fps J frame, 1200fps 4" (goldilocks)
.357 Magnum 125gr =1200fps J frame, 1425fps 4" (too much)

The difference between the Remington Golden Saber .357 'lite', vs the classic full power .357 Remington SJHP shows the .357 lite concept well:
https://i.ibb.co/Sdd1Q38/Screen-Shot-2020-12-29-at-10-50-18-PM.png

[JHC]

To BehindBlueI's point about load development - if Hornady would do a Critical Duty load of 135 grain at 1000 fps the .38 would be right there with the other service pistol calibers.

[revchuck38]

dogcaller - The reason for the relatively large .38 Special case is that it was originally designed as a black powder cartridge and needed that room to fit enough black to give it a performance advantage over its then-competitors.

Since the majority of folks who carry guns rely on autoloaders and those that carry revolvers tend to carry J frames, there's little-to-no incentive for ammo companies to spend R&D money on an updated .38 Special version for service-size guns. They'd never recover their investment. Federal could do it relatively cheaply by adding about 20 grains to the current HST load and balancing the powder charge, but since they're getting scalper's prices on anything they can push out the door right now, it makes no business sense.

IMO, the old-school FBI loads by Remington and Winchester are still good performers in service-size guns with the exception of intermediate barrier performance...if you can find any. :rolleyes: I carry the Remington version when I carry a 4" K frame.

[dogcaller]

I appreciate the replies. It seems the answer is market-based rather than limitation-based, and that definitely makes some sense, even if it is slightly annoying to someone looking for factory carry ammo. Maybe I’ll try some of the Buffalo Bore. I probably have a box of 158gr LSWCHP +P buried somewhere...

[BehindBlueI's]

I appreciate the replies. It seems the answer is market-based rather than limitation-based, and that definitely makes some sense, even if it is slightly annoying to someone looking for factory carry ammo. Maybe I’ll try some of the Buffalo Bore. I probably have a box of 158gr LSWCHP +P buried somewhere...

There are some good +P options. If you can find them to purchase.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4336-BUG-s-380-ACP-vs-38-Sp goes into depth on a few.

Anecdotally, the Winchester bonded +P mentioned in that thread worked for me vs an aggressive pitbull that surprised me and got me on the forearm before I could react.

[jtcarm]

The problem is theres so many older .38's of dubious quality and strength.

I think whats needed is more ".357 lite" loads, loaded to replicate 9x19 performance and powder charge. Ie 125gr @ 1100fps from a J frame, 1200-1250fps from a 4."

This would provide more ballistic performance then .38+p, but a less recoil and much less blast then a proper .357. And there'd be no safety concerns, as any .357 revolver could easily handle it.

.38 +p 125gr = 850fps J frame; 950fps 4" (too little)
".357 lite" 125gr = 1100fps J frame, 1200fps 4" (goldilocks)
.357 Magnum 125gr =1200fps J frame, 1425fps 4" (too much)

The difference between the Remington Golden Saber .357 'lite', vs the classic full power .357 Remington SJHP shows the .357 lite concept well:
https://i.ibb.co/Sdd1Q38/Screen-Shot-2020-12-29-at-10-50-18-PM.png

Bingo.

I was thinking just the other day a .357 -P (say, under 30,000 PSI) would make a great SD round.

Looking at LuckyGunner stats for .357, what jumps out at me is the difference in terminal performance for the same round between 2” and 4” barrels. This tells me the velocity window is too wide for one bullet.

[revchuck38]

jtcarm - FYI, Remington loaded a version of the Golden Sabre load prior to the introduction of the GS bullet, using the same bullet as the full-power load but at the same velocity as the current GS load. I believe that it was introduced in the mid-to-late 80s. It was developed in response to issues with K frames shooting the full-power load.

[03RN]

Bingo.

I was thinking just the other day a .357 -P (say, under 30,000 PSI) would make a great SD round.

Looking at LuckyGunner stats for .357, what jumps out at me is the difference in terminal performance for the same round between 2” and 4” barrels. This tells me the velocity window is too wide for one bullet.

The golden sabers, silvertips, and critical duty already exist.

The reason Im interested in warmer .38 loads are commonality across my guns.

Eta and because I like to tinker and I think the .38 is capable, along with the guns

[gato naranja]

Bingo.

I was thinking just the other day a .357 -P (say, under 30,000 PSI) would make a great SD round.

A lot of intelligent and practical people over the years have used what could be considered a ".357 -P" load, and not always in the .357 Magnum case. The more political components of law enforcement hierarchies and the ammunition companies seeking their custom may not have shown much enthusiasm, but they have generally had different priorities than we mere drones have.

Personally, I seldom need full power .357 Magnum loads and still have what is - at my age - a lifetime supply of them. A ".357 -P" is something I will still actually buy.

[jh9]

The difference between the Remington Golden Saber .357 'lite', vs the classic full power .357 Remington SJHP shows the .357 lite concept well:
https://i.ibb.co/Sdd1Q38/Screen-Shot-2020-12-29-at-10-50-18-PM.png

A Rem 125gr SJHP at or over the 1,450fps threshold that doesn't fragment? Kinda sus. I think that one always goes to pieces in organic gel and free range felon. So I don't think a comparison can really be made between the two since clear gel.

[Baldanders]

Bingo.

I was thinking just the other day a .357 -P (say, under 30,000 PSI) would make a great SD round.

Looking at LuckyGunner stats for .357, what jumps out at me is the difference in terminal performance for the same round between 2” and 4” barrels. This tells me the velocity window is too wide for one bullet.

Synthetic gel tests prove nothing.

Nothing at all. No good for comparison with organic gelatin tests.



That being said, we have covered this topic a bunch in various threads, especially the .38 snubby ammo threads.

I have argued for a ".38 magnum" designation to allow a 9mm para-type load in .38 Special. With the passage of time, I have become content with the Gold Dot .38 Short Barrel load, and if I really needed a power upgrade, I would use the .357 short barrel load in my 640.

I don't enjoy Airweights with +p 125 grain, anyway. I would probably be carrying target wadcutters in an alloy jframe.

I would feel fine with the Ranger/SXT or Gold Dot 135 grain .38 loads in a 4-6" gun. Heck, I would be OK with the old school Remington .38 sjhp 125 or the 158 grain LSWCHP too.

[Totem Polar]

The golden sabers, silvertips, and critical duty already exist.

The reason Im interested in warmer .38 loads are commonality across my guns.


Add the .357 GDHP to the list.

And, I agree: there is a lot to be said about a +P+ .38, since we now have guns that can handle it.

I feel that the 135gr .38 GDHP load could really use another 100 fps across the board, from 1 7/8” barrels up to 4”. 890fps out of 4” K-frames makes me just reach for the Remington FBI load or .357 -P instead.

And, since it always comes up in these conversational swings, a modern version of the old Federal +P+ hydra-shok 147 grain would be great. How hard would it be to adapt the 147 HST bullet to a .38 case, and drive it to an honest 975-1000fps out of a 4” tube?

Or the 147 GDHP?

[Sal Picante]

Didn't they stop making .38-44 "Hi-Speed" ammo because it'd blow up older Smith's?

This stuff was "fun" to shoot... out of an LCR (38 not .357)...

p/BequGV3nPtx

[Duelist]

Didn't they stop making .38-44 "Hi-Speed" ammo because it'd blow up older Smith's?

This stuff was "fun" to shoot... out of an LCR (38 not .357)...

p/BequGV3nPtx

Blow up? Nah.

Wear out faster? Maybe.

[revchuck38]

And, since it always comes up in these conversational swings, a modern version of the old Federal +P+ hydra-shok 147 grain would be great. How hard would it be to adapt the 147 HST bullet to a .38 case, and drive it to an honest 975-1000fps out of a 4” tube?

Or the 147 GDHP?

I never had a chance to try that +P+ HS load, but I suspect it might not have reached those velocities from a standard revolver given industry advertising standards. :) Still, one of those bullets in a revolver would be enough to get me to switch, especially since they'd hit POA from a fixed-sight 4" gun whereas current high-tech loads hit low, at least in my guns.

[03RN]

Add the .357 GDHP to the list.

And, I agree: there is a lot to be said about a +P+ .38, since we now have guns that can handle it.

I feel that the 135gr .38 GDHP load could really use another 100 fps across the board, from 1 7/8” barrels up to 4”. 890fps out of 4” K-frames makes me just reach for the Remington FBI load or .357 -P instead.

And, since it always comes up in these conversational swings, a modern version of the old Federal +P+ hydra-shok 147 grain would be great. How hard would it be to adapt the 147 HST bullet to a .38 case, and drive it to an honest 975-1000fps out of a 4” tube?

Or the 147 GDHP?

I dont even know if we would need +p+. Just load to the upper end.

18,000psi is still a +p. Lets see more loads or data for reloading like from buffalobore or underwood. Im guessing they load to 20k

[Dave T]

Didn't they stop making .38-44 "Hi-Speed" ammo because it'd blow up older Smith's?

Actually no, they didn't. The 38-44 passed into obscurity because it's younger cousin (by 5 years) took over and dominated the medium bore high performance market. That was the 357 Magnum.

S&W's advertised performance for the 38-44 was a 158g bullet at 1125 fps. If you want to duplicate that today you can load 11g-11.5g of 2400 behind that weight bullet, or you can buy the almost exact performance from Buffalo Bore. Their 38 Special +P 158g SWCHP-GC duplicates the old 38-44. I've chronographed it in both a 4" Heavy Duty and a pre-War 5" HD. Velocities ran from 1127 to 1141.

Dave

[03RN]

Actually no, they didn't. The 38-44 passed into obscurity because it's younger cousin (by 5 years) took over and dominated the medium bore high performance market. That was the 357 Magnum.

S&W's advertised performance for the 38-44 was a 158g bullet at 1125 fps. If you want to duplicate that today you can load 11g-11.5g of 2400 behind that weight bullet, or you can buy the almost exact performance from Buffalo Bore. Their 38 Special +P 158g SWCHP-GC duplicates the old 38-44. I've chronographed it in both a 4" Heavy Duty and a pre-War 5" HD. Velocities ran from 1127 to 1141.

Dave

Fwiw
My 4" m64 got 1089fps with a 158gr swc over 11.5gr 2400.

[spyderco monkey]

A Rem 125gr SJHP at or over the 1,450fps threshold that doesn't fragment? Kinda sus. I think that one always goes to pieces in organic gel and free range felon. So I don't think a comparison can really be made between the two since clear gel.

That section of chart is to show the difference in velocity between the two Remington .357 loads.

There's only a 113fps difference between the ".357 Lite" Golden Saber vs Full power SJHP from the 2" barrel.

Where you really see that the GS is a ".357 lite" load is the 4" velocity comparison. The GS is 1182fps - about a 9mm NATO level of power - whereas the SJHP is clocking 1473fps. Thats a 291fps difference - and a corresponding increase in blast and recoil from a J frame.

[OlongJohnson]

How hard would it be to adapt the 147 HST bullet to a .38 case, and drive it to an honest 975-1000fps out of a 4” tube?

Or the 147 GDHP?

I'd be amazed if an engineer hasn't doodled up a CAD model of those options. The science is done, as 0.002 inch isn't going to change any physics. Just make it a hair bigger. But they would have to tool it, and that's expensive. My production engineering lizard brain also worries about getting product mixed up. If the .357 bullets got loaded in .355 cases, that could lead to a range of bad things happening, and .355 bullets in .357 cases would a the minimum have poor accuracy, but possibly also issues with jumping crimp, etc. It would be better if you could tell the bullets apart without a caliper in your hand, which would mean an all-new design. Perhaps the reason we see 130-140-gr loads from several manufacturers.

Hodgdon has data for a 146gr Speer JHP in .38 +P, but with a 7.7-in barrel. Four loads are >1000 fps, seven are >975 fps.

I think it's clear that your target can be done with a 4-in barrel, but it's entirely possible that to get the 975-1000 fps range from a slightly shorter 3 inch barrel preferred by many for carry would require pressures not reliably within the .38 +P standard. That would make it have to be loaded in .357 cases, and a load labeled .357 at that power level would be almost sales-proof for people who aren't posters here. Plus, it couldn't be loaded in all the M64/M67 and non-.357 J frames out there, which is kinda the point.

BBTI http://ballisticsbytheinch.com/38special.html doesn't have exactly the data I'd like to show, but it's worth another pass through the .38 and .357 pages there.

TLDR: After thinking it through, it's likely that your proposed target is possible, but in practical terms, there are just enough complications to keep it from being a slam dunk.

[RevolverRob]

I'm honestly hoping now that Barnes has been bought by Sierra, we can get a steady supply of the 140-grain bullets in .357". That particular bullet will make a very fine .38 Special load at 1000fps. The Barnes factory load in .357 Mag is actually a bit too hot and could stand to be dropped about 150fps (from 1400 to 1250). The Buffalo Bore loading in .357 Magnum is about perfect, actually.

Buffalo Bore or Sierra or someone should do a 140-grain XPB +P .38Spl load. That all copper projectile at 750-800fps from a snub should work well and it should hit like a brick shithouse from a 4" gun.

A man can dream...

[Brian T]

I'm honestly hoping now that Barnes has been bought by Sierra, we can get a steady supply of the 140-grain bullets in .357". That particular bullet will make a very fine .38 Special load at 1000fps. The Barnes factory load in .357 Mag is actually a bit too hot and could stand to be dropped about 150fps (from 1400 to 1250). The Buffalo Bore loading in .357 Magnum is about perfect, actually.

Buffalo Bore or Sierra or someone should do a 140-grain XPB +P .38Spl load. That all copper projectile at 750-800fps from a snub should work well and it should hit like a brick shithouse from a 4" gun.

A man can dream...

Dammit, yes. I think that 140gr XPB offering from Federal is/was the finest .357 offering out there. I'd love to see it loaded in .38+P. I suppose if I can find some reloading bullets, I can work some loads up, and I know I build another Fackler Box.

[diananike]

Reloading really is the answer for the .357
My favourite loads are 125gr REM SJHP and XTPs loaded in front of 2400 powder for 1325fps in a 4.2” barrel.
I also load a .38-44 with 140gr XTPs and H110 for 1140fps
Both of these recoil about perfectly and show a marked improvement in power over 9mm

[RAM Engineer]

If Hornady would load the .38+P Critical Defense load (90311) with the FlexLock bullet from the Critical Duty line, that would hit the sweet spot for me.

[revolvergeek]

And, since it always comes up in these conversational swings, a modern version of the old Federal +P+ hydra-shok 147 grain would be great. How hard would it be to adapt the 147 HST bullet to a .38 case, and drive it to an honest 975-1000fps out of a 4” tube?
?


I have been planning to load some of those up to test that theory. I have some of the 147 +P+ HS load, and bought a bunch of 147 HST bullets from RMR a while back. I just never had gotten around to doing it. Plan is to pull the HS, put the same powder charge back, and load the HST in with a decent crimp, and then find somebody with a couple gel blocks to play with! :cool:

[medic15al]

That stuff is a lot hotter than 1,000 fps out of a service revolver. Honestly, I’d be just as happy if they toned it down a hair so it’s actually going 1k out of the average 3”. That said, it’s good stuff.

This is what I keep in my 4in 64 and HB M10. Never felt uncomfortable carrying these loads when I was posted on a .38 revolver only post some high paying clients like to stipulate. Armed security on FT and PT for 19yrs moonlighting. (In B'ham, ALA)

[Scal]

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/01/06/hydra-shok-deep-380-auto/

Assuming ammunition is ever readily available again, I would be interested to see how the 38 hydra-shok deep does in gel tests.

I do think that a “throttled down” barnes bullet load as discussed upthread is an interesting idea.

Until we have a “magic bullet” for 38 snubs, I am going to keep rolling with 38 wadcutters and 135gr short barrel gold dot in a speedloader as my reload. I have found that in airweight snubs, even something like the snubby gold dot load makes for difficult follow up shots for me. So even if the 38 pressure limits are not really the thing holding back ammunition performance, I do wonder if something that can pass an FBI gel test out of said snubs is just going to be really difficult to shoot well at speed.

[Wyoming Shooter]

Here are interesting test results for .38 Special short barrel ammo:

https://revolverguy.com/38-snubby-ammo/

[03RN]

I'll be loading up some 125gr xtps @ 1000fps over the next 2 days. I'll be able to compare them to factory 130gr +p bonded rangers in 2, 3, and 4" barrels.

Maybe some 9mm too.

[Pistol Pete 10]

Folks, plenty of bad guys(and good guys) have been put down by the old LRN .38 bullet. Bullet placement is king no matter the caliber. The 38 ain't dead, far from it.

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

Folks, plenty of bad guys(and good guys) have been put down by the old LRN .38 bullet. Bullet placement is king no matter the caliber. The 38 ain't dead, far from it.True. Plenty of folks have been run over by horse and buggy, too -- still easier and more effective to do it in a Model T. ;)

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

Here you go: https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=108

158 grains at 1,000 fps.


That stuff is a lot hotter than 1,000 fps out of a service revolver. Honestly, I’d be just as happy if they toned it down a hair so it’s actually going 1k out of the average 3”...

They did. Standard pressure version of the +P in OJ's link.

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=110

[03RN]

Folks, plenty of bad guys(and good guys) have been put down by the old LRN .38 bullet. Bullet placement is king no matter the caliber. The 38 ain't dead, far from it.

A lrn is about the worst design possible. And thats coming from a guy who is currently carrying swc-wn in my .357

[OlongJohnson]

I keep coming back to the thought that perhaps a plain ol' cup and core 158-grain hollowpoint when launched from a service-size revolver in front of a +P charge has enough mass and momentum to penetrate a useful distance even after expanding effectively, and hence newer technologies designed to enable lighter bullets going faster to hang together are not required for it to be effective.

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

I keep coming back to the thought that perhaps a plain ol' cup and core 158-grain hollowpoint when launched from a service-size revolver in front of a +P charge has enough mass and momentum to penetrate a useful distance even after expanding effectively, and hence newer technologies designed to enable lighter bullets going faster to hang together are not required for it to be effective.I'd wager there's a lot of truth to this and it's why the three biggies as well as boutiques like Buffalo Bore and Underwood still produce versions of the FBI load.

The question of momentum is significant. A while back there was a lot of discussion at the S&W Forum after members chronoed current versions of Winchester, Federal and Remington FBI loads versus same from decades back and came to the conclusion (rightly or wrongly I do not know) that current versions were watered down. At least one manufacturer also switched to a harder lead, the result being greatly diminished mushrooming.

So to your point, yes, if the load is to specs in charge and hardness.

For FBI loads, Buffalo Bore seems to be the one still doing it right; their standard pressure version linked above hits numbers that the old +P versions did, and they use a soft enough alloy. BB's +P version is more like a light Magnum.

[Totem Polar]

They did. Standard pressure version of the +P in OJ's link.

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=110

Not hot enough.
:D

Seriously, the “Goldilocks” load would be in between the two. JMO.
Cor-Bon “+P+” version that would reliably break 1000fps out of a 4” K-frame NY-1, and it was a good blend of pin-busting power and controllability.

[03RN]

I keep coming back to the thought that perhaps a plain ol' cup and core 158-grain hollowpoint when launched from a service-size revolver in front of a +P charge has enough mass and momentum to penetrate a useful distance even after expanding effectively, and hence newer technologies designed to enable lighter bullets going faster to hang together are not required for it to be effective.

Not sure if my thought process is right but if you see luckygunners clear gel test you can see that the 2" .357 158gr xtp is going 1089 and penetrates and expands. Not sure if that would work at 1000fps in organic gel but it gives a good starting point.

I know I can get 1000fps with a hardcast 158gr bullet. Not sure about a jhp.

[03RN]

Not hot enough.
:D

Seriously, the “Goldilocks” load would be in between the two. JMO.
Cor-Bon “+P+” version that would reliably break 1000fps out of a 4” K-frame NY-1, and it was a good blend of pin-busting power and controllability.

Rimrock sells that bullet. 5.7gr be-86 will get you to 1000fps

[revchuck38]

I keep coming back to the thought that perhaps a plain ol' cup and core 158-grain hollowpoint when launched from a service-size revolver in front of a +P charge has enough mass and momentum to penetrate a useful distance even after expanding effectively, and hence newer technologies designed to enable lighter bullets going faster to hang together are not required for it to be effective.


I'd wager there's a lot of truth to this and it's why the three biggies as well as boutiques like Buffalo Bore and Underwood still produce versions of the FBI load.

The question of momentum is significant. A while back there was a lot of discussion at the S&W Forum after members chronoed current versions of Winchester, Federal and Remington FBI loads versus same from decades back and came to the conclusion (rightly or wrongly I do not know) that current versions were watered down. At least one manufacturer also switched to a harder lead, the result being greatly diminished mushrooming.

So to your point, yes, if the load is to specs in charge and hardness.

For FBI loads, Buffalo Bore seems to be the one still doing it right; their standard pressure version linked above hits numbers that the old +P versions did, and they use a soft enough alloy. BB's +P version is more like a light Magnum.
A "cup and core" hollowpoint is a jacketed hollowpoint, the various versions of the FBI load are non-jacketed. I haven't seen any tests where .38 Special +P 158-grain JHPs have expanded from service-size revolvers. Some of the 125-grain loads seem to do okay, though.

The current FBI loads may be a bit slower, but does it matter? As long as they penetrate deeply enough and expand while doing so, we should be good. I'm using the R-P version and trust me, it ain't a powder puff load.

Federal is the company that switched to a harder bullet. Prior to the switch, that's what I carried, but I changed to R-P after the switch.

[03RN]

A "cup and core" hollowpoint is a jacketed hollowpoint, the various versions of the FBI load are non-jacketed. I haven't seen any tests where .38 Special +P 158-grain JHPs have expanded from service-size revolvers. Some of the 125-grain loads seem to do okay, though.

The current FBI loads may be a bit slower, but does it matter? As long as they penetrate deeply enough and expand while doing so, we should be good. I'm using the R-P version and trust me, it ain't a powder puff load.

Federal is the company that switched to a harder bullet. Prior to the switch, that's what I carried, but I changed to R-P after the switch.

I think harder barriers pose problems for swc-hp bullets

[revchuck38]

I think harder barriers pose problems for swc-hp bullets

That's my understanding too.

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

A "cup and core" hollowpoint is a jacketed hollowpoint, the various versions of the FBI load are non-jacketed. I haven't seen any tests where .38 Special +P 158-grain JHPs have expanded from service-size revolvers. Some of the 125-grain loads seem to do okay, though.

The current FBI loads may be a bit slower, but does it matter? As long as they penetrate deeply enough and expand while doing so, we should be good. I'm using the R-P version and trust me, it ain't a powder puff load.

Federal is the company that switched to a harder bullet. Prior to the switch, that's what I carried, but I changed to R-P after the switch.Ah. I didn't know "cup and core" and assumed. Thank you for the correction; I'll reflect it in the earlier post.

I have current Remington, Winchester and Buffalo Bore version of the FBI load and like them all; my fixed site Ks and Js do, too, for POA to POI, but I standardized a while ago on Gold Dot Short Barrel in .38+P.


EDIT: Outside the edit window for the earlier post.

[OlongJohnson]

A "cup and core" hollowpoint is a jacketed hollowpoint, the various versions of the FBI load are non-jacketed.

Correct in my intent. I used that term to differentiate traditional JHP construction (e.g., Hornady XTP) from newer bonded technologies (e.g., Gold Dot and HST).

[RAM Engineer]

I have current Remington, Winchester and Buffalo Bore version of the FBI load and like them all; my fixed site Ks and Js do, too, for POA to POI, but I standardized a while ago on Gold Dot Short Barrel in .38+P.

How does the Gold Dot Short Barrel do in 4" barrels? I ASSume it is optimized for 2" barrels?

[03RN]

So, if in clear gel bullets typically penatrate farther and expand less the 125gr xtp looks pretty decent if I can get it over 1k fps


https://youtu.be/W7gyckVYUPs

https://youtu.be/1hIBOeOhs3o

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

How does the Gold Dot Short Barrel do in 4" barrels? I ASSume it is optimized for 2" barrels?My understanding is that Speer's 135gr Short Barrel loads in .38+P and .357 use the same bullet.

Per those who have contacted Speer, in the 38+P load the GDSB out of a 4" barrel should perform as designed; in the .357 load, it's advised not to use it in barrels over 3" or risk overdrive.