Federal .38 Special "Train and Protect" LSWC-HP

[revchuck38]

Federal's description is here (https://www.federalpremium.com/handgun/train-protect/train-protect/11-TP38VHP1.html). It looks interesting but I haven't found any testing online. I do know that the last iteration of Federal's +P LSWC-HP load was known for not expanding. Has anyone found anything on this new load?

[Outpost75]

Federal's description is here (https://www.federalpremium.com/handgun/train-protect/train-protect/11-TP38VHP1.html). It looks interesting but I haven't found any testing online. I do know that the last iteration of Federal's +P LSWC-HP load was known for not expanding. Has anyone found anything on this new load?

At only 830 fps I would have zero confidence of getting ANY expansion with this load, if the lead alloy and cavity geometry if the same as their older 38G.

The Federal 38G +P load which was 50 fps faster was not a stellar performer.

[camsdaddy]

Interested in following. Federal may have pulled a rabbit out of a hat. I would have to believe they released it knowing they would catch flak if it didn’t work. Worst case scenario it’s another source for LSWC.

[Navin Johnson]

Are there not already loads that work?

[revchuck38]

Are there not already loads that work?

Yes, but availability is sketchy at this time. I first saw my carry load, Remington's 158-grain LSWC-HP, for sale today after about a year of its not being out there. Winchester's version is supposed to be good too. If Federal's new iteration of this load works well it'd give us another option. Plus it's about half the price - $.80/round versus $1.50/round for the Remington. I might order a couple of boxes just to play with it.

ETA: I ordered two boxes off Federal's website. I'll check for velocity and POI/POA when it gets here.

[Outpost75]

Interested in following. Federal may have pulled a rabbit out of a hat. I would have to believe they released it knowing they would catch flak if it didn’t work. Worst case scenario it’s another source for LSWC.

I think it far more likely it was a way to use up the millions of reject bullets accumulated over the years which failed the LE performance spec.

Developing in a special box to appeal to the mall ninjas and charging an exhorbitant price is good marketing and a way to make money selling your scrap.

[camsdaddy]

I think it far more likely it was a way to use up the millions of reject bullets accumulated over the years which failed the LE performance spec.

Developing in a special box to appeal to the mall ninjas and charging an exhorbitant price is good marketing and a way to make money selling your scrap.

Sounds like one heck of a business model

[jetfire]

Federal's description is here (https://www.federalpremium.com/handgun/train-protect/train-protect/11-TP38VHP1.html). It looks interesting but I haven't found any testing online. I do know that the last iteration of Federal's +P LSWC-HP load was known for not expanding. Has anyone found anything on this new load?

It's exactly same as that load just in new packaging.

[Outpost75]

Sounds like one heck of a business model

Not the first time they've done it either. 168-grain .308 Match #308M (https://pistol-forum.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=308M) with soft case heads which the government rejected repacked for commercial sale.

[revchuck38]

It's exactly same as that load just in new packaging.

Do you know this, or is it your inner snark monster talking?

[Tokarev]

Are there not already loads that work?




Yes, but availability is sketchy at this time. I first saw my carry load, Remington's 158-grain LSWC-HP, for sale today after about a year of its not being out there. Winchester's version is supposed to be good too.

Remington version didn't do well in my gel test from a couple years ago.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?31785-38-Special-Lead-Bullet-Gel-Test&highlight=test

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Wondering Beard]

Remington version didn't do well in my gel test from a couple years ago.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?31785-38-Special-Lead-Bullet-Gel-Test&highlight=test

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

As far as I remember, none of the "big threes" 158gr +P LSWCHP did well in ballistic gelatin tests but they still did quite well on bad guys.

[revchuck38]

Remington version didn't do well in my gel test from a couple years ago.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?31785-38-Special-Lead-Bullet-Gel-Test&highlight=test

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


As far as I remember, none of the "big threes" 158gr +P LSWCHP did well in ballistic gelatin tests but they still did quite well on bad guys.

The 158-grain +P LSWC-HP loads were designed to work well from the 4" barrels in common use in the '80s. I'm not surprised they didn't expand from a 2", though penetration was still good.

FWIW, the velocity of the Remington load from my 3" M10-7 was ~835 fps and ~865 fps from my 4" M10-8. My notebook is in my range bag which is in my truck or I'd be more precise. :) I run Winchester's 130-grain Ranger Bonded +P in my 642 because it needs lighter bullets to hit POA and because it's Doc-recommended. The 642 has its own dedicated ammo can of 125-grain handloads for practice.

[jetfire]

Do you know this, or is it your inner snark monster talking?

Inner? Sir my snark monster is very external.

And I do actually know it, the load specs are exactly the same as previous packaging according to the sell sheets.

[revchuck38]

...the load specs are exactly the same as previous packaging according to the sell sheets.

Uh, nope. Here (https://www.federalpremium.com/handgun/train-protect/train-protect/11-TP38VHP1.html) is the current stuff. Here (https://www.luckygunner.com/38-special-p-158-gr-lswchp-federal-le-50-rounds#info) is the stuff it replaced. The new stuff is brass cased and standard pressure, the old stuff is nickel cased and +P. The bullets do look fairly similar; the darker color on the new stuff could well have been caused by more time in the tumbling media. I'm unaware of anyway non-+P 158-grain LSWC-HP offered by Federal prior to this.

It's also quite possible that Federal just subbed brass cases for nickel and backed off on the powder charge enough to bring it to standard pressure specs. They claim it's a new bullet design. We won't know until a reputable source actually tests this load, and it's a good chance that'll never happen. I'm going to test it for velocity and accuracy, but then I'm a disreputable source. :) Worst case, I've really overpaid for two boxes of practice ammo.

[jetfire]

Uh, nope. Here (https://www.federalpremium.com/handgun/train-protect/train-protect/11-TP38VHP1.html) is the current stuff. Here (https://www.luckygunner.com/38-special-p-158-gr-lswchp-federal-le-50-rounds#info) is the stuff it replaced. The new stuff is brass cased and standard pressure, the old stuff is nickel cased and +P. The bullets do look fairly similar; the darker color on the new stuff could well have been caused by more time in the tumbling media. I'm unaware of anyway non-+P 158-grain LSWC-HP offered by Federal prior to this.

It's also quite possible that Federal just subbed brass cases for nickel and backed off on the powder charge enough to bring it to standard pressure specs. They claim it's a new bullet design. We won't know until a reputable source actually tests this load, and it's a good chance that'll never happen. I'm going to test it for velocity and accuracy, but then I'm a disreputable source. :) Worst case, I've really overpaid for two boxes of practice ammo.

I wasn't aware they had different claimed MVs on the new load vs the old one, that's interesting. Regardless, my dude at Federal says that the projectile is the same as the old one. I stand corrected on the velocity, although I'd be willing to bet that the new stuff chronos hotter than 830 FPS.

[revchuck38]

I wasn't aware they had different claimed MVs on the new load vs the old one, that's interesting. Regardless, my dude at Federal says that the projectile is the same as the old one. I stand corrected on the velocity, although I'd be willing to bet that the new stuff chronos hotter than 830 FPS.

If it's the same bullet, then it'll be dedicated to my M49 which shoots to POA with 158s. Nothing that weight is going to expand anyway. :) I'll chrono it when it gets here, it'll be interesting to see what we end up with.

[jetfire]

If it's the same bullet, then it'll be dedicated to my M49 which shoots to POA with 158s. Nothing that weight is going to expand anyway. :) I'll chrono it when it gets here, it'll be interesting to see what we end up with.

Definitely. I can say that I shot some the new one and the old allegedly +P load out of that Python I beat up and the felt recoil impulse was so similar that I couldn't have told you one from the other.

[Lost River]

Yes, but availability is sketchy at this time. I first saw my carry load, Remington's 158-grain LSWC-HP, for sale today after about a year of its not being out there. Winchester's version is supposed to be good too. If Federal's new iteration of this load works well it'd give us another option. Plus it's about half the price - $.80/round versus $1.50/round for the Remington. I might order a couple of boxes just to play with it.

ETA: I ordered two boxes off Federal's website. I'll check for velocity and POI/POA when it gets here.


What are your thoughts on a 170 grain powder coated LSWC-HP loaded warm?

I know an older gentleman who casts and PCs amazing bullets. I was considering paying him to cast me up a big batch if there was enough of a market for such things. I set back a bit of Starline brass for such a project, but I just haven't decided on a direction.

A +P defense type .38 might be the way to go, if the demand is there.

https://i.imgur.com/KQXKwdi.jpg?1

https://i.imgur.com/bbA2a9t.jpg?1


They are what I currently keep loaded in my Model 15 that is kept as one of the house guns.

[Hambo]

What are your thoughts on a 170 grain powder coated LSWC-HP loaded warm?


They are what I currently keep loaded in my Model 15 that is kept as one of the house guns.

Have you tried any of those in magnum cases?

[revchuck38]

What are your thoughts on a 170 grain powder coated LSWC-HP loaded warm?

I know an older gentleman who casts and PCs amazing bullets. I was considering paying him to cast me up a big batch if there was enough of a market for such things. I set back a bit of Starline brass for such a project, but I just haven't decided on a direction.

A +P defense type .38 might be the way to go, if the demand is there.

I like the idea, but I've read and bought into Mas's thoughts on the use of non-factory loads for self defense. And I've already got a couple hundred rounds of 170-grain LSWCs loaded to .38-44 specs. :)

[03RN]

Have you tried any of those in magnum cases?

Id like to see it at 1200fps:cool:

[Lost River]

Have you tried any of those in magnum cases?

I have not done any real testing of that bullet in .357s.

I have a supply of new .38 Special Starline brass, and FAR more people shoot and buy .38s than they do .357s by a very wide margin.

I would do up some .357s but acquiring new .357 brass right now is like trying to find a reasonable redheaded woman at an ANTIFA meeting.

[Lost River]

I like the idea, but I've read and bought into Mas's thoughts on the use of non-factory loads for self defense. And I've already got a couple hundred rounds of 170-grain LSWCs loaded to .38-44 specs. :)

Fortunately I am actually a licensed manufacturer. I just do small scale stuff currently. Eventually (if the people I paid a stupid amount of money to will get it done) I will have a website, but right now the locals keep me busy.

Its an odd business though, trying to gauge what people want. What they say they do, and then what they will actually buy are often two very different things. 95% of the shooting public will load virtually anything that goes bang into their guns, even for defense purposes.

I made up a batch of 9mm that was meant as a bear/outdoors defense load, that would also be great for use against vehicles, back when we were having all the riots last summer. It used a Rim Rock 147 grain hard cast Flat Nose at around 1100 FPS. Exact same bullet that Buffalo Bore uses in their +P 9mm OUTDOORSMAN load, and same velocity range.

The locals, even sportsmen going into the mountains, just wanted the cheapest FMJ or poly coated lead they could get. I even explained that the hard cast @ 1,100 was a better choice and a fraction of the cost over BB. Nope, they wanted walmart style ammo.

Figured out right there that I would probably concentrate on mostly revolver ammo, as the 9mm specialty stuff was a bit pointless for 95% of the market. Plus when the big outfits get caught up, you can't compete with the production capabilities, and what they pay for components (plus they make the primers) so making wadcutter .38s, .44s, specialty .45 ACP, etc and other specialty (fun) stuff is a better way to go anyways.

[Hambo]

I would do up some .357s but acquiring new .357 brass right now is like trying to find a reasonable redheaded woman at an ANTIFA meeting.

Well, you've got me looking for .38 Short Colt brass ;)

[Outpost75]

I wasn't aware they had different claimed MVs on the new load vs the old one, that's interesting. Regardless, my dude at Federal says that the projectile is the same as the old one. I stand corrected on the velocity, although I'd be willing to bet that the new stuff chronos hotter than 830 FPS.

If the load is standard pressure, rather than +P, more than 830 fps is highly unlikely from the 4-inch vested test barrel or an actual service revolver. From a 1-7/8" S&W J-frame typical of current production it might make 700. From a 3" S&W Model 13 maybe 800 if the cylinder gap is at Mean Assembly Tolerance, not over 0.006", but most of the ammunition factories quit using the 4-inch vented test barrel by the year 2000, because nobody was ordering contract quantities of revolver ammo which required its use.

For normal commercial production most manufacturers went back to the older, easier to use, solid test barrel which produces that higher (unrealistic compared to a revolver) velocity number which the marketing guys love to hype. I expect THAT is where your 830 fps number comes from. I eagerly anticipate chronograph data with measured barrel lengths and cylinder gaps, firing in both 2-inch and 4-inch barrels, comparing this load side-by-side on the same day against established standards of factory ammo, such as the Winchester X38SPD 158-grain lead HP+P, and on the low-end, anybody's big-3 US brand 148-grain midrange target wadcutter.

[Lost River]

Well, you've got me looking for .38 Short Colt brass ;)

The Short Colt stuff has been really fun!

If the general shooting public were more aware of it, I have no doubt it would be substantially more popular.

Those little 9mm length cartridges and J Frames are like PB&J! They put a smile on your face. :cool:

[Lost River]

If the load is standard pressure, rather than +P, more than 830 fps is highly unlikely from the 4-inch vested test barrel or an actual service revolver. From a 1-7/8" S&W J-frame typical of current production it might make 700. From a 3" S&W Model 13 maybe 800 if the cylinder gap is at Mean Assembly Tolerance, not over 0.006", but most of the ammunition factories quit using the 4-inch vented test barrel by the year 2000, because nobody was ordering contract quantities of revolver ammo which required its use.

For normal commercial production most manufacturers went back to the older, easier to use, solid test barrel which produces that higher (unrealistic compared to a revolver) velocity number which the marketing guys love to hype. I expect THAT is where your 830 fps number comes from. I eagerly anticipate chronograph data with measured barrel lengths and cylinder gaps, firing in both 2-inch and 4-inch barrels, comparing this load side-by-side on the same day against established standards of factory ammo, such as the Winchester X38SPD 158-grain lead HP+P, and on the low-end, anybody's big-3 US brand 148-grain midrange target wadcutter.

This absolutely matches my experience.

Data from factories I found out was obtained using a 7" unvented test barrel. Compared to shooting in an actual revolver, using various barrel lengths, the factory listed velocities were grossly overstated. In fact on one powder manufacturers website, their data, versus actual field data, confirmed using two chronos ( that averaged within 6 FPS of each other over 20 shots), showed the factory data to be overestimated by almost 300 fps when using 125 grain lead truncated cone .38s. If I recall right it was around 285-290 FPS average.

Pretty dang far from what they said that their load would produce, to say the least.

[Outpost75]

Velocity data from 2-inch and 4" service revolvers, both having been selected as having 0.005" cylinder gap:

.38 Special chronograph data, S&W Model 15, 4” REVOLVER, 0.005” cylinder gap 6-22-93.

Federal 125 Nyclad HP___________852 fps, 25 Sd
Remington 148 HBWC___________747 fps, 6 Sd
Winchester 148 HBWC___________742 fps, 13 Sd
WCC87 Ball M41 130-gr. FMJ_____748 fps, 21 Sd
Winch.Q4070 110-gr. JHP +P+ LE_1062 fps, 39 Sd
Winch. X38SPD 158-gr. LHP +P___920 fps 21 Sd
Winchester Q4196 158-gr. LRN____793 fps, 10 Sd
Federal 158 LRN 38A____________808 fps, 16 Sd
Federal 158 LHP+L 38G__________ 883 fps, 16 Sd
Fed. HydaShok 147-gr. JHP +P+LE_ 965 fps, 33 Sd

.38 Special chronograph data, Colt Detective Special 2” REVOLVER, 0.005” cylinder gap 6-22-93

Federal 125-gr. Nyclad SWCHP_____772 fps, 33 Sd
Fed. HydraShok 147-gr. JHP+P+LE__920 fps, 6 Sd
Remington 148-gr. HBWC_________702 fps, 12 Sd
Winchester 110-gr. Silvertip HP_____864 fps, 28 Sd
Winchester 125-gr. Silvertip +P_____827 fps, 10 Sd
Winchester 148-gr. HBWC_________ 697 fps, 18 Sd
Winchester Q4196 158-gr. LRN_____ 728 fps, 24 Sd
Winchester X38SPD 158-gr. LHP +P__831 fps, 10 Sd
WCC87 Ball M41 130-gr. FMJ________718 fps, 31 Sd

74674746757467674677

[Chuck Whitlock]

Fortunately I am actually a licensed manufacturer. I just do small scale stuff currently. Eventually (if the people I paid a stupid amount of money to will get it done) I will have a website, but right now the locals keep me busy.

Its an odd business though, trying to gauge what people want. What they say they do, and then what they will actually buy are often two very different things. 95% of the shooting public will load virtually anything that goes bang into their guns, even for defense purposes.

I made up a batch of 9mm that was meant as a bear/outdoors defense load, that would also be great for use against vehicles, back when we were having all the riots last summer. It used a Rim Rock 147 grain hard cast Flat Nose at around 1100 FPS. Exact same bullet that Buffalo Bore uses in their +P 9mm OUTDOORSMAN load, and same velocity range.

The locals, even sportsmen going into the mountains, just wanted the cheapest FMJ or poly coated lead they could get. I even explained that the hard cast @ 1,100 was a better choice and a fraction of the cost over BB. Nope, they wanted walmart style ammo.

Figured out right there that I would probably concentrate on mostly revolver ammo, as the 9mm specialty stuff was a bit pointless for 95% of the market. Plus when the big outfits get caught up, you can't compete with the production capabilities, and what they pay for components (plus they make the primers) so making wadcutter .38s, .44s, specialty .45 ACP, etc and other specialty (fun) stuff is a better way to go anyways.

I, for one, hope that when you are ready to ship out product, that you'll post something up here on PF.

[jandbj]

Well, you've got me looking for .38 Short Colt brass ;)

I solved that problem by buying 500 loaded rounds from Lost River.

[MandoWookie]

The Short Colt stuff has been really fun!

If the general shooting public were more aware of it, I have no doubt it would be substantially more popular.

Those little 9mm length cartridges and J Frames are like PB&J! They put a smile on your face. :cool:

Several years ago I bought several boxes of Magtech( I think?) .38 Special Shorts off of Luckygunner. I think I even started thread asking about them on here. Little stubby cases loaded with 125 grain bullets. Dont recall what the claimed FPS was, but those suckers were fun in my j-frame, and like .22s in the Security Six.
I haven't been able to find them since, and wished I had bought all I could have afforded at the time. Only downside with them was they were filthy and smokey.
I hope you are successful in getting more people aware of these Short Colts, I would love to have another option out there.

[Outpost75]

You might want to check charge hole diameters on your older service revolvers. I have three pre-1980 S&W "former cop guns" which readily accept the Remington brand of .38 S&W brass or ammo as well. R-P .38 S&W brass has a base diameter forward of the rim which is the same as their .38 Special.
Not so with older Rem-UMC, Western, WRA, modern W-W, Federal, Fiocchi or Starline, which are "too fat."

My S&W 37-1, 10-5 and 28-2 all can use R-P .38 S&W ammo or reloads in that brass. And so can my S&W Model 940 in 9mm!

74726747277472874729

[Lost River]

I, for one, hope that when you are ready to ship out product, that you'll post something up here on PF.

When I get the website up and going I will.

But I will make sure that it gets done properly and gladly make sure the Little Lebowski's Urban Achievers are rightly taken care of, since it will be an e-commerce site.

Which I didn't realize what I was getting myself into when the good idea fairy said "Hey I know! Make ammo!, that beats carrying a gun and traveling!":rolleyes:

The make ammo part is easy...

[revchuck38]

The ammo came in yesterday. Instead of the 15-20 days wait before shipping, it shipped in four days. I went to the range this morning, placed the ProChrono Digital about ten feet from the bench, and had at it.

I brought three revolvers to the range so I could get data from three different barrel lengths. I ran a cylinderful through each gun. Here's what we got:

2" S&W 642-2: 758 fps/SD 23

3" S&W M10-7: 843 fps/SD 13

4" S&W M10-8: 853 fps/SD 15

Looking at the difference in SDs between the J frame and the K frames, I decided to put another five rounds through the 642 to see if the first run was an anomaly. It actually came out with a bigger SD - 764 fps/SD 30. The gun has the original factory springs in it as far as I know - it was a KY SP trade-in.

The 4" gun had one low round (830 fps). The average velocity would've been higher, and the SD tighter, without it.

I ran a cylinderful each through the 642 and the 3" on a B-8 at seven yards. POI was about as expected, a bit high with the 642 and right on with the 3" M10. The 642 hits to POA with 125s. Accuracy was okay.

Both K frames gave higher velocities than advertised (830 fps) and were about where I've chronographed both Federal and R-P LSWC-HP +P loads in the past. This backs up jetfire's perception that he couldn't tell a difference between these loads and +P loads in the same gun. This was apparently achieved by the use of a relatively slow powder, as evidenced by the metric shit ton of unburnt powder left behind. This isn't the ammo you'd want to use to practice live-fire speedloads.

IMO, this is decent "cheap" defensive ammo. There's no way to tell if it'll expand, but at least it'd work as a regular SWC. Since it's $3/box more than Federal's RNL load, it's pretty cost-effective. I'm not switching to it, but I'll keep it as a backup for my R-P load.

[Outpost75]

Might note that the 642 is not a true 2-inch barrel, but is probably 1-7/8". That 1/8" difference does matter. Also useful to know the barrel-cylinder gap of the test revolvers, as that matters also. MANY recent S&Ws I've checked in the last ten years have loose gaps over 0.008" and I have seen new in box examples over 0.010" which they would have never shipped 20 years or more ago.

[revchuck38]

Might note that the 642 is not a true 2-inch barrel, but is probably 1-7/8". That 1/8" difference does matter. Also useful to know the barrel-cylinder gap of the test revolvers, as that matters also. MANY recent S&Ws I've checked in the last ten years have loose gaps over 0.008" and I have seen new in box examples over 0.010" which they would have never shipped 20 years or more ago.

I need to stop by AutoZone and get a new set of feeler gauges and check the b/c gaps on those guns, thanks for the reminder!

[revchuck38]

I got a new set of feeler gauges (the kid at the auto parts store didn't know what they were, he had to search on the computer). Measuring from the left side, the 642 and the 3" M10-7 would barely admit the .007 blade, and the 4" 10-8 would admit the .006. The right side was about .001 tighter on all of them. In theory, I should have the breech end of the barrels squared, but...nah. They shoot fine as they are.

[awp_101]

I got a new set of feeler gauges (the kid at the auto parts store didn't know what they were, he had to search on the computer).

That should one of the signs of the end times, right?🤦🏻*♂️

[deputyG23]

Might note that the 642 is not a true 2-inch barrel, but is probably 1-7/8". That 1/8" difference does matter. Also useful to know the barrel-cylinder gap of the test revolvers, as that matters also. MANY recent S&Ws I've checked in the last ten years have loose gaps over 0.008" and I have seen new in box examples over 0.010" which they would have never shipped 20 years or more ago.

I have a ‘76-‘77 4” 10-5 that chronographed a full 100 FPS less with the same load than my .38 4” GP-100.
Checked the BCG and the measurement was .013.
S&W was having quality issues under Bangor Punta ownership as well.

[Stephanie B]

Fortunately I am actually a licensed manufacturer. I just do small scale stuff currently.

Biggest problem that I have with buying ammo is that a number of companies won't ship to CT. IIRC, all that's required is for them to keep a copy of my permit and driver's license on file. SGAmmo is one of the ones that will ship.

Which is a long-winded way of saying that if you do get your webstore up and running, I'm interested.

[Lost River]

Steph,

I am in the very early stages of doing the development with the design people, so it will be a few weeks/month out at the earliest, but I will definitely let you, and my other PF Friends know. :cool: