What .38spl standard pressure loads will perform reasonably well out of a 2" barrell?

[Malamute]

Would be interesting. My money may go towards the auto simply functioning with less maintenance (depending on the gun). Overall lifespan, I dont know. people used to be worried about plastic framed guns holding up. Todd Green did this particular test with a G17, the part with wear that stopped it was the breech face of the slide. Interesting if you havent read it.

http://pistol-training.com/archives/6885

Smiths seem to need a hand now and then in centerfire calibers. My old k22 has well over 200K rounds through it best i can recall, and hasnt ever had any internals replaced. LSP 972, who passed recently, had a couple or so Smiths that had obscene numbers of rounds shot through them when he was shooting competition. I dont recall all his comments and observations about revovlers in general. he truly liked them and was very well experienced working on them as well as shooting them. I believe theres a few other guys here that have also shot truckloads of rounds through revolvers. Wayne perhaps being one, I dont recall the others who had shot them a lot over time and in competition.

[Joe in PNG]

Check out the 2000 round challenge thread- shoot 2000 rounds without cleaning. Most quality pistols can do it easily. Most quality revolvers would have problems from barrel leading, to dirt under the extractor.

[BehindBlueI's]

I do hear of cases where revolvers have failed, and failed catastrophically, but semi's can fail catastrophically too. I had a Taurus TCP (small pocket .380) that had a double feed while at the range. The first round went into the chamber and the second went right behind it, pushing it so hard I had to force out the first round with the end of a ball point pen. Had that happened in a fight, I would've been done. Also, if you break a firing pin in a striker pistol, you're done. It's rare but it's happened, probably no less rare then a revolver completely failing.

It's possible, but good luck with making a precision move like that while on the ground with a rapist or a dog. I've read about one design that can fire while being pushed into a body without going out of battery, the Beretta Nano I think it was, but I don't know of any others.

I wonder if anyone ever conducted a test where they had a revolver and semi-auto of comparable quality and price point, then fired both at the same time until one malfunctioned? Barring minor malfunctions aside, FTF, FTE. etc., I wonder then how many rounds they would go before one catastrophically failed?

1) It's a Taurus. That's like buying a Gremlin and then saying 4 door cars suck.

2) You know how many gun fights I've seen lost because a contact shot pushed a gun out of battery? None. Are you worried about someone grabbing your revolver's cylinder so it won't rotate? It's also possible..and a non-issue in the real world in all but the most Powerball odds of circumstances.

3) I've got over 40k rounds through my P226. I've broken a decocker lever and had the fiber optic come out of the front sight. Neither would be a fight stopper. I've got a Springfield 1911 at about the same round count. No issues. I've got God only knows how many rounds through 3 generations of Glocks, and the sole issue was a Gen 3 that had FTF with a WML attached. My 17M is right at 1k now, not one issue.

On the revolver side, I've had a bent crane tie a gun up, I've had a GP100 out of spec from the factory that would lock the cylinder up once it was hot, I've had unburnt powder flakes get under the ejector star that prevented the cylinder from closing, etc. You shoot one enough, you'll break one or have malfunctions. They tolerate neglect better than semi-autos, but I don't think they have a durability edge these days.

What you keep coming back to is it will fit in your pocket. Honestly, that's what it seems you value. The rest is just trying to justify a pocket gun. Trying to get rapid reloads, etc. out of a pocket revolver is like buying a Corvette and saying you value ground clearance and towing capability. Enjoy the j-frame (or 'Vette) for what it is. If you TRULY want those other things, buy a platform that's good at it.

[Malamute]

I agree pretty much with all you said ^^^. Being able to carry it in my pocket is sufficient reason for me to have a J, but its not my only option in a relatively easy carry gun. My next step up is a g19 though.

[Lester Polfus]

I agree pretty much with all you said ^^^. Being able to carry it in my pocket is sufficient reason for me to have a J, but its not my only option in a relatively easy carry gun. My next step up is a g19 though.

That's exactly my set up as well. Once I start carrying the gun on the belt, it might as well be the G19. That answer is gonna be different for everyone, of course, depending on body size/type and manner of dress.

The J-frame is a giant compromise. I can spin myself in circles about it, or just live with it and drive on.

As I'm typing this, I'm surrounded by a bunch of Lee Reloading boxes for the classic turret press I just bought. I big impetus for buying it was to crank out lots and lots of practice .38 Special wadcutters.

[BehindBlueI's]

As I'm typing this, I'm surrounded by a bunch of Lee Reloading boxes for the classic turret press I just bought. I big impetus for buying it was to crank out lots and lots of practice .38 Special wadcutters.

That's pretty much all I run through my LCR and Detective Special, my own wadcutter reloads. Dept policy says I have to carry hollowpoints for duty, so I use +P Gold Dots or PDX-1s with the LCR. The DS is just for fun, I don't qualify with it at work.

[Concerned Citizen]

1) It's a Taurus. That's like buying a Gremlin and then saying 4 door cars suck.

2) You know how many gun fights I've seen lost because a contact shot pushed a gun out of battery? None. Are you worried about someone grabbing your revolver's cylinder so it won't rotate? It's also possible..and a non-issue in the real world in all but the most Powerball odds of circumstances.

3) I've got over 40k rounds through my P226. I've broken a decocker lever and had the fiber optic come out of the front sight. Neither would be a fight stopper. I've got a Springfield 1911 at about the same round count. No issues. I've got God only knows how many rounds through 3 generations of Glocks, and the sole issue was a Gen 3 that had FTF with a WML attached. My 17M is right at 1k now, not one issue.

On the revolver side, I've had a bent crane tie a gun up, I've had a GP100 out of spec from the factory that would lock the cylinder up once it was hot, I've had unburnt powder flakes get under the ejector star that prevented the cylinder from closing, etc. You shoot one enough, you'll break one or have malfunctions. They tolerate neglect better than semi-autos, but I don't think they have a durability edge these days.

What you keep coming back to is it will fit in your pocket. Honestly, that's what it seems you value. The rest is just trying to justify a pocket gun. Trying to get rapid reloads, etc. out of a pocket revolver is like buying a Corvette and saying you value ground clearance and towing capability. Enjoy the j-frame (or 'Vette) for what it is. If you TRULY want those other things, buy a platform that's good at it.

1) It's a Taurus. That's like buying a Gremlin and then saying 4 door cars suck.

To be fair, I've owned several other small pocket semi-autos that suffered malfunctions, the Taurus was the worst case. Not a single one of them survived a range session on the first two or three trips without having some type of malfunction. I don't know about you but I find that to be discouraging. How many malfunctions have I had with my small 2" revolvers so far, even those made buy the terrible, awful Taurus? None... zip, zero, nada. I don't shoot as much as you for sure, but we all have our experiences. I don't base my my policies and personally safety on the personal experiences of others I don't even know. Would you? You may have a thousand and one more experiences then I have, but I may have that one experience you never have, and you won't be there to help or advise me if it happens.

2) You know how many gun fights I've seen lost because a contact shot pushed a gun out of battery? None. Are you worried about someone grabbing your revolver's cylinder so it won't rotate? It's also possible..and a non-issue in the real world in all but the most Powerball odds of circumstances.

Well, I suppose that if someone did loose a fight that way or were mauled to death by a few dogs they probably wouldn't be around to tell you the details of why it happened.

On the revolver side, I've had a bent crane tie a gun up, I've had a GP100 out of spec from the factory that would lock the cylinder up once it was hot, I've had unburnt powder flakes get under the ejector star that prevented the cylinder from closing, etc. You shoot one enough, you'll break one or have malfunctions. They tolerate neglect better than semi-autos, but I don't think they have a durability edge these days.

The why do you still carry one?

What you keep coming back to is it will fit in your pocket. Honestly, that's what it seems you value. The rest is just trying to justify a pocket gun. Trying to get rapid reloads, etc. out of a pocket revolver is like buying a Corvette and saying you value ground clearance and towing capability. Enjoy the j-frame (or 'Vette) for what it is. If you TRULY want those other things, buy a platform that's good at it.

And you keep coming back to this reload issue. That really bugs you doesn't it, the audacity that someone would carry and practice reloads for a revolver? Is that what they teach in professional pistol classes, those that are more revolver centric? Don't bother with carrying or practicing reloads? I never, EVER claimed that my big reason for carrying a J-Frame was because I value rapid reloads. I only said reloading wadcutters would be harder and slower then it would be reloading JHPs IF I ever had to so they would not be the ideal round IF there were something as good in JHP out there.

I wasn't asking about the merits of reloading revolvers or for silly analogies of which make and model of automobile compares to my gun or my particular needs and desires, Gremlin's, Corvette's, etc., I was asking if there were any new .38spl rounds anybody knew of that perform OK out of a 2" snubbie. You believe there are none, that nothing has changed in ammo technology for .38spl since the 1980's, and you may be right. I also think it's possible you may be set in your ways and never bothered to even research any new ammo or designs in .38spl since it really isn't pertinent anymore in your line of work because you've already got everything all figured out, right?

[Concerned Citizen]

Would be interesting. My money may go towards the auto simply functioning with less maintenance (depending on the gun). Overall lifespan, I dont know. people used to be worried about plastic framed guns holding up. Todd Green did this particular test with a G17, the part with wear that stopped it was the breech face of the slide. Interesting if you haven't read it.

There is a YouTube vidoe where someone fires a Gen 3 Glock 17 full auto until it fails. I think it went close to 700 rounds before it failed. The plastic guide rod ended up melting, causing a catastrophic failure. They then replaced that with a steel rod and it went on for another 600 rounds before the front frame warped, then it was out of commission.

While this is an extreme test, I personally don't see why they just don't have metal guide rods. How much weight does it really save by using plastic in this very important part? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub4OswUhLwo

[Joe in PNG]

There is a YouTube test of someone firing a Gen 3 Glock 17 full auto until it fails. The plastic guide rod ended up melting, causing a catastrophic failure. While this is an extreme test, I personally don't see why they just don't have metal guide rods. How much weight does it really save by using plastic? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub4OswUhLwo

That is a totally inapplicable to this debate. Run a M-14, BAR or M2 Carbine through a similar course of fire and you too will have parts go up in flame.
Heck, give Jerry enough moonclips and he could probably set bits on his revolver on fire.

The thing is, you are basically here to get people to confirm your pre-existing prejudices, not learn.

[BehindBlueI's]

The reload issue is just short hand for what you say you value and an attempt to get you to step back and evaluate if what you say you want, what you think you want, and what you actually have overlap. And, believe it or not, even dead people often "tell" what caused them to lose...but a lot of the losers do survive. The majority, in fact.

I'm fine with carrying a revolver, and you'll also note I never told you not to. The opposite in fact, that it will cover the vast majority of random violence. Remember this is strictly random violence, not targeted (domestic situations, disgruntled employee, ambush of uniformed LE type encounters). Vs the resource predator who wants your wallet or the rapist who wants your ass:

1) I'm capacity agnostic. Targeted violence is different. For random encounters, people run out of time before ammo, they've won/lost/tied before the gun is dry. More is better unless you are drowning or on fire, but it's mostly for mental reasons.
2) Reload speed is irrelevant.
3) The shots are not particularly challenging, as the violence is close.
4) I don't care if my gun will run 2k rounds without maintenance. I've never fired more than 2 in a for real situation. I clean and lubricate about every 500 rounds or so.

You change the question when you ask if ammunition technology has changed since the '80s. Yes. Today we have better options than hollowbase wadcutters loaded backward, etc. But you eliminated those advancements in ammunition when you eliminated +P as an option. There's a difference in "is there better ammo" and "is there better ammo in the narrow criteria I'm allowing". Which is yet another reason I've called you several times on what you say you value vs what you actually value.

In real short terms, you are worried about low reward criteria at the expense of high reward criteria. Then justify it as "numbers game". The good news, it probably will never matter. You're not likely to be in a gun fight, you're not likely to face a dedicated opponent, and you're not likely to have the differences in tissue destruction matter. If, however, you do, then a more damaging first shot is significantly more important than ease of reload, split times, etc. The first good hit is the single best predictor of the eventual winner of a gun fight. It's not 100%, of course, but of any single variable it's the most important (well, once the fight starts so not counting avoidance, etc.)