Paging Outpost75: 38 vs. 357 Revolver

[okie john]

Question for Outpost75:

I’m currently out of a 38 or 357 revolver and the full-charge wadcutter thread is calling me to reconsider that.

I’ve got good 22s, Glocks for carry, and good revolvers for game over about 20 pounds, so my uses would be marksmanship development, new shooter training, hunting small game, and in a distant fourth place, carry/self/home defense. I also handload.

I feel like all of this could be done with a K-frame 38 Special loaded with ammo between target wadcutters and the FBI load. But my preference has always been for the 357 because one revolver can shoot both cartridges. Given the pandemic weirdness and the election-year scarcities that have become the norm, I’m not sure that I should change that stance.

Based on the full-charge wadcutter thread, it seems wise to stick to 357 cases in 357 revolvers, which is not a problem. At the same time, everything about the 38 Special cartridges and the revolvers in which it’s chambered makes a LOT of sense.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks,


Okie John

[Outpost75]

I don't care for the current production S&W revolvers and all of mine are pre-1980. I also have older Colts pre-1970 and my Rugers are all pre-2000.

My general feeling is that an old gun which works, is worth more to me than a new one which doesn't. I see too many quality issues with current product to get very excited about many of them. Some new Rugers I have recently seen would have never left the factory when I was QA manager in the 1980s. They fix them OK, but you shouldn't have to return a new gun to the factory to fix it.

The only "new" handguns I have bought recently have been Pietta and Uberti single-actions from Cimmarron. While it takes some tinkering to get the sights on, and to adjust the actions, they are classics which have character. The workmanship on the current crop of Italian single-action is superior to my pre-WW1 Colts.

[okie john]

I don't care for the current production S&W revolvers and all of mine are pre-1980. I also have older Colts pre-1970 and my Rugers are all pre-2000.

My general feeling is that an old gun which works, is worth more to me than a new one which doesn't. I see too many quality issues with current product to get very excited about many of them. Some new Rugers I have recently seen would have never left the factory when I was QA manager in the 1980s. They fix them OK, but you shouldn't have to return a new gun to the factory to fix it.

The only "new" handguns I have bought recently have been Pietta and Uberti single-actions from Cimmarron. While it takes some tinkering to get the sights on, and to adjust the actions, they are classics which have character. The workmanship on the current crop of Italian single-action is superior to my pre-WW1 Colts.

Agree 100%, but I'm trying to choose between a Model 66 and a Model 67. What are your thoughts on the two cartridges? I'd stick to 158-grain and heavier bullets in the 357 Magnum due to forcing cone issues.

thanks,


Okie John

[Totem Polar]

Not outpost, but I do have some experience with revolvers. All else being equal, I have a slight preference for .38 in .38 chambered guns, but all else is never equal from gun-to-gun. A nice example of a 66 works for me. Speaking of which, you are always welcome to try mine out.

[okie john]

Not outpost, but I do have some experience with revolvers. All else being equal, I have a slight preference for .38 in .38 chambered guns, but all else is never equal from gun-to-gun. A nice example of a 66 works for me. Speaking of which, you are always welcome to try mine out.

I'm definitely leaning more toward a 38 than a 357, but the swirl remains strong at this point.

And I may take you up on that offer.


Okie John

[Outpost75]

Agree 100%, but I'm trying to choose between a Model 66 and a Model 67. What are your thoughts on the two cartridges? I'd stick to 158-grain and heavier bullets in the 357 Magnum due to forcing cone issues.

thanks,


Okie John

I shoot more .38 Specials than .357s, and if a +P handload in .38 Special isn't up to the job, I usually skip the .357 and go to something bigger. The exception to that practice is when traveling if limited to a handgun... My usual EDC is a K-frame .38 Special, but if a second gun is going along and there isn't room for a rifle, a 4-inch .357 Ruger Service Six or S&W Model 28 Highway Patrolman go along.

The 66 and 67 are both viable choices IF you don't intend to shoot a high volume of .357 Magnum ammunition through them, as they are not durable.

I'm unable to attach the US Border Patrol test evaluations of the S&W 66 and 67 Vs. Ruger Security Six, Speed Six, due to file sizes, but if you want to PM me with an email address which can accept about 10MB in .pdf attachments these can be freely distributed.

[okie john]

I shoot more .38 Specials than .357s, and if a +P handload in .38 Special isn't up to the job, I usually skip the .357 and go to something bigger. The exception to that practice is when traveling if limited to a handgun... My usual EDC is a K-frame .38 Special, but if a second gun is going along and there isn't room for a rifle, a 4-inch .357 Ruger Service Six or S&W Model 28 Highway Patrolman go along.

The 66 and 67 are both viable choices IF you don't intend to shoot a high volume of .357 Magnum ammunition through them, as they are not durable.

I'm unable to attach the US Border Patrol test evaluations of the S&W 66 and 67 Vs. Ruger Security Six, Speed Six, due to file sizes, but if you want to PM me with an email address which can accept about 10MB in .pdf attachments these can be freely distributed.

Done.

And thank you for your generosity.


John

[Spartan1980]

Since you handload consider this. If you also cast bullets a Lyman 357156 gas check mold gives a handloader some unique options. Bullet casting isn't hard and can be started up without breaking the bank. But this mold has two crimp grooves. The first is for seating long in .38 brass and can only be chambered in .357 chambers and was intended for loading ".38/.44 type" loads in large frame .357M guns. The second is for seating in .357 brass and gives a standard SWC loading.

My thinking is that seating this bullet in .38 brass would be more accurate in the .357 chamber due to the less length to travel to the throat and forcing cone. I have this mold but have always used it for full house magnum loadings and I still have to develop some .38 loads with it. It's on the list but life has not relented in being in the way of my progress.

Just a thought since you prefer .357 guns...

[okie john]

Since you handload consider this. If you also cast bullets a Lyman 357156 gas check mold gives a handloader some unique options. Bullet casting isn't hard and can be started up without breaking the bank. But this mold has two crimp grooves. The first is for seating long in .38 brass and can only be chambered in .357 chambers and was intended for loading ".38/.44 type" loads in large frame .357M guns. The second is for seating in .357 brass and gives a standard SWC loading.

My thinking is that seating this bullet in .38 brass would be more accurate in the .357 chamber due to the less length to travel to the throat and forcing cone. I have this mold but have always used it for full house magnum loadings and I still have to develop some .38 loads with it. It's on the list but life has not relented in being in the way of my progress.

Just a thought since you prefer .357 guns...

My issue with casting isn't money, it's time. I went down that rabbit hole back before Veral Smith went to prison, and I learned that I don't have time to cast, shoot, and reload, so I decided to stick with shooting and reloading.

I remember Skeeter Skelton talking about the Thompson dual-groove bullet in the 357 back in the day. Montana Bullet Works offers it, and I could get some from them if I go that route. I've also tried a Veral Smith dual-groove design in a couple of 5-shot 45 Colts. They definitely solve several problems.


Okie John

[SCCY Marshal]

...I'm trying to choose between a Model 66 and a Model 67...

The 67 is going to be lighter for lack of the underlug if you plan to clock any miles. It can also, at least occasinally, handle loads that are knocking on midrange magnum's door:

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=291

I'd personally take the 67 over the 66 since it's already not that much easier to carry than a 28 and, if gong magnum, I'd as soon step up to a more appropriate frame size. If you're packing for small game, might as well save some ounces and the 67 is less popular so you are more likely to find a good deal. Especially since there is not reason other than flatter trajectory to put up with the much increased muzzle blast to choose .357 over .38 for little furbearers.

[FrankB]

The emperor has no clothes!

I disagree about older S&W revolvers being better than new models. Hand fitting was required because the machining equipment was crap compared to today. Existing specimens for the days of old are either slightly used, have been repaired, or were exceptionally well fitted samples. I’ve owned 3 older S&W revolvers: 1957 Model 36; 1972 Model 60; and a 1970’s Model 19. They were all fine, but not Rolex quality. Two were sold to forum members, and they’re happy. My six recently made S&W revolvers are all perfect: .005”-.006” B/C gap, tight lockup, perfect timing, and assembled well. The single exception was my 4” 686’s extractor ratchets. They were a little ragged looking, and my OCD caused me to have Dave Olhasso fit a new extractor. I’m not a metallurgist, but today’s steel is supposedly much better than yesteryear’s.
I’m going to be 60 in a few months, and have had my fair share of older cares, motorcycles, cameras, sailboats, bamboo fly rods, toasters, and all that. I don’t miss any of it, and have fully embraced the 21st Century.

[Stephanie B]

03RN has a fairly high round count through his 66-8.

[Borderland]

I'll add my perspective even tho nobody ask for it. A model 19 or 66 is about as versatile as they come. The nice thing about .357 is you can load it up or down. My Hornady manual lists 4 powders that will give you 900 fps using lead and six that will give you 1150 fps using FMJ. That's with an 8" barrel so slower with a shorter barrel but the ratio would be the same.

I load using .357 brass for about 850 fps. and shoot those in two model 19's. There is no need to burn more powder and buy FMJ bullets to play around at the range. If I wanted either of those for HD/SD I would buy a box of the hot stuff so I can shoot thru car doors and refrigerators.

38's are nice, I have a few, but those are J frames and not a lot of fun to shoot. Of course a K frame 38 would be just as nice as a K frame .357 but without the versatility.

Buying a K frame 38 spl. makes about as much sense as an N frame 44 spl. 44 mag can be loaded up and down the same way.

I know, some people just like the specials. I've lusted for a model 24 for awhile but the prices have stopped me.

[Tuvia]

I would get a dedicated .38. I don't like to shoot .38 in a .357. I have a .38 target gun that is just a blast to shoot.

[Totem Polar]

I'm definitely leaning more toward a 38 than a 357, but the swirl remains strong at this point.

And I may take you up on that offer.


Okie John

You can try anything I’ve got if you’re around, brother.

[Duelist]

I'll add my perspective even tho nobody ask for it. A model 19 or 66 is about as versatile as they come. The nice thing about .357 is you can load it up or down. My Hornady manual lists 4 powders that will give you 900 fps using lead and six that will give you 1150 fps using FMJ. That's with an 8" barrel so slower with a shorter barrel but the ratio would be the same.

I load using .357 brass for about 850 fps. and shoot those in two model 19's. There is no need to burn more powder and buy FMJ bullets to play around at the range. If I wanted either of those for HD/SD I would buy a box of the hot stuff so I can shoot thru car doors and refrigerators.

38's are nice, I have a few, but those are J frames and not a lot of fun to shoot. Of course a K frame 38 would be just as nice as a K frame .357 but without the versatility.

Buying a K frame 38 spl. makes about as much sense as an N frame 44 spl. 44 mag can be loaded up and down the same way.

I know, some people just like the specials. I've lusted for a model 24 for awhile but the prices have stopped me.

I don’t like shooting .357 much in a K frame - I have a bit of joint trouble all up my dominant arm, from wrist, to elbow, to shoulder. I have had a 19 and a 13. I currently have a 60-9 which is technically a .357, but I pretend it’s not cut for that. Mostly, I use it to practice shooting a J frame without having to shoot an airweight all the time. I shoot a lot of .38 through my 15-4, which is lighter and better balanced for me than the K frame .357s were, but pleasant with all .38 loads which can range from very light to pretty heavy and honestly do most of everything I will ever need a revolver to do. If I shoot .357, it’s through a 6” N frame or my Marlin 1894. The Marlin is fun to shoot .38s - they are like .22s through the rifle - and the heaviest .357s are pleasant and not even a chore, even when my gimpy shoulder won’t take much recoil.

[Lester Polfus]

Agree 100%, but I'm trying to choose between a Model 66 and a Model 67. What are your thoughts on the two cartridges? I'd stick to 158-grain and heavier bullets in the 357 Magnum due to forcing cone issues.

thanks,


Okie John

If you're talking full-tilt boogie Mag-a-num loads, I agree. And...

There are some "middle Magnum" loads like the 125 grain Golden Saber and 135 Grain Gold Dot that are more like "really hot 9mm" energy levels that I don't believe have the same forcing cone issues, but offer some pretty good performance for your distant fourth use case.

I use them as "town loads" when I'm toting the GP100 on one of our backcountry adventures.

[CSW]

Another unsolicited opine:

Find an old Ruger Security Six in stainless. It's not quite the GP100, but it'll outlast you.

[RevolverRob]

Ruger LCRx in .357 Magnum?

Lighter than a K-Frame. I'm not sure about long-term reliability with magnums jetfire - but with wadcutters you aren't going to wear it out, with +P .38s you probably won't wear it out either. Downside it carries 5 instead of six. You have to decide if the reduction in weight is worth it.

Polymer sub-frame and good grip design make them more comfortable to shoot than any J or K, unless you're running Hogues on them. Better trigger than any Smith or all steel Ruger currently produced.

[Zeke38]

I have 357s in J.K and L frame sizes. I load a 357 power equivalent out of all three. Right now it is a 358156 158SWC over 9.2 grains of HS-6 and whatever primer that is on the shelf. Good for a little over 1.000fps in all my guns in 357. This load is also very accurate and an excellent SD load.

I live in Central Idaho and if I'm trucking off to the woods, I take a revolver that is most usually a 44 or some type, usually Smith and Wesson.

I used to do the 38 dance with my J and K frame and +P and bullseye loads. Now it is a simple 158 gr SWC as listed above and a 800fps load. SD loads are from the ammo vendors.

Simplicity in loading and using. The 38/357 loadings are finicky for POA/POI when you begin swapping bullet weights and powder brands and charges. One load for both and know where they shoot with that load. Hits count/ Misses don't!

[jetfire]

Ruger LCRx in .357 Magnum?

Lighter than a K-Frame. I'm not sure about long-term reliability with magnums jetfire - but with wadcutters you aren't going to wear it out, with +P .38s you probably won't wear it out either. Downside it carries 5 instead of six. You have to decide if the reduction in weight is worth it.

Polymer sub-frame and good grip design make them more comfortable to shoot than any J or K, unless you're running Hogues on them. Better trigger than any Smith or all steel Ruger currently produced.

It's a well known fact that I love the LCR series, but the LCRx in 357 doesn't make a lick of sense to me. Sure, it's a little heavier than the 38 version, which supposably helps recoil mitigation, but we're only ever going to shoot 38s out of it anyway, so I'd just stick with the 38 version and be happy. Of course, what I really want is Ruger to make a 3 inch LCR in 327 Federal, but that's never going to happen.

[OlongJohnson]

It's a well known fact that I love the LCR series, but the LCRx in 357 doesn't make a lick of sense to me. Sure, it's a little heavier than the 38 version, which supposably helps recoil mitigation, but we're only ever going to shoot 38s out of it anyway, so I'd just stick with the 38 version and be happy. Of course, what I really want is Ruger to make a 3 inch LCR in 327 Federal, but that's never going to happen.

Agreed. For me, the point of the gun is the lightness, and with the larger grip and .38 SPL loadings, the LCRx is fine for recoil. Go with the .38 and take the lightness.

Also, build a six-shot .327 Fed. I'd even take it in H&R, especially with a 4-inch barrel.

I'd also really like it if the SP101 and/or GP100 trigger mechanisms were redesigned to benefit from the thinking behind the LCR trigger. It's pretty straightforward geometry, not magic.

[jetfire]

I'd also really like it if the SP101 and/or GP100 trigger mechanisms were redesigned to benefit from the thinking behind the LCR trigger. It's pretty straightforward geometry, not magic.

I have this wonderful dream that Ruger will build a scaled up LCR, called the Lightweight Medium Revolver, that holds six shots and uses the same cylinder geometry as the K-frame so speed loaders will interchange. They'd sell literally dozens to degenerate revolver nerds, and I'm willing to bet that at least 50% of the sales would come from this forum.

[Totem Polar]

They'd sell literally dozens to degenerate revolver nerds, and I'm willing to bet that at least 50% of the sales would come from this forum.

I dunno, bro... there are a lot of desiccated old farts hanging around places like The High Road and the Ruger forums to give us a serious run for the money on a cheap new medium frame 3” six-shooter. Just saying.

;)

[03RN]

I wouldn't hesitate to buy a new m66. Counting the empty boxes from rimrock Ive shot over 20k magnums and 5-7k +p specials in my 66-8.

For the OPs purposes a .38 k frame would be fine too. 1000fps with a 158gr bullet is an easy load to achieve and BuffaloBore makes a 158 @ 1250fps if you needed it.

[Dave T]

I have this wonderful dream that Ruger will build a scaled up LCR, called the Lightweight Medium Revolver, that holds six shots and uses the same cylinder geometry as the K-frame so speed loaders will interchange. They'd sell literally dozens to degenerate revolver nerds, and I'm willing to bet that at least 50% of the sales would come from this forum.

If they make it a 3" I'd buy one of those and I don't need or want any more guns...said the busted up old phart.

Dave