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

[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.

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!

[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!"

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.