Ok, forget the Denim..........

If they DID make the bullet harder..........
and LOWERED the fps................

there are a bunch of Moron's working for Remington !!

Might as well just shoot the Solid SWC target load and save the money.

Well, I wouldn't give up on the new HTP just yet. The stories of the new alloy being harder are anecdotal. As for the recorded velocities, the HTP and Express loadings seem to be virtually identical.

Once I can afford a box or two of HTP LHPs, I figure I'll do an unscientific "fingernail test" as I still have boxes of the previous version.

If the bullets are indeed made of a harder alloy, though, I'd have to agree with you. Why would Remington go and ruin a time-tested winner?

Can you tell us just a little about this? What is the nature of the disadvantages???

357 mag is quite a powerful round. Even out of a 2" tube it still have enough velocity and energy to do serious damage.

__________________
_It was love at first shot_

I can no longer shoot Magnum ammo at all due to arthritis; but apart from loss of velocity, in any short-barreled revolver blast and muzzle/cylinder gap flash is considerably magnified. A while back I was shooting +P .38 Special stuff from a J-frame at an indoor range, and the guy in the next bay came over and asked if I was firing a .357. I can guess what it would have been like if I had.

And then there is the reduction in recoil-absorbing weight with the short barrel.

I really can't imagine shooting a gnat-weight .357 snubby. And don't want to. But of course several people will jump in here and say it's not a problem for them and they rather enjoy it...

Just call me El Wimpo Viejo.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

Horses for courses, right?

Sometimes, less really is more. Count me as one of the "wimps" who isn't especially fond of touching off full-house .357s in a snub.

* excessive recoil = slow follow up shots
* extremely loud from short barrels
* lengthy muzzle flash and temporary night blindness
* accelerated wear and loosening of small frame guns
* actual velocity of most Factory .357's in 2" guns are less than that of the Buffalo Bore Heavy +P 158 grain LSWCHP-GC .38 Special offering which is an honest 1040 fps. from my 2" Chief's Special M60-7.

I know this is an older thread, but has anybody out there chronographed this load recently?

I think one single chrono test from a .357 revolver with a 6" bbl isn't what we need. I think it would make more sense to do a test from 2" .38 special snub nose bbls and 4" .38 special service revolver barrels.

Once the weather starts to warm up, I am going to get a chronograph and will be testing this new load from both my Model 642 2" bbl and my Model 64 with a 4" bbl.

SGAmmo sold out of RTP38S12 before I could get my hands on any of it. I made up for it by purchasing several 50 ct. boxes of the Speer GDSB load while it was still available.

Count me as someone who'll be looking forward to your test results. I'd also be especially interested in knowing for sure whether or not they're using a harder lead alloy.

YES! I luckily also snagged some of those 50 round boxes too. I think I got them on Target Sports USA, paid all of $0.54 per round, beats that $1 plus these rounds sell for in the 20 rounds boxes!

The older loads were chrongraphed at 700 fps with the standard pressure 158 gr RNL and 800 fps from the 158 gr SWCHP +P load. Both from a 4 inch barrel. You will find that a 50 fps difference between most guns with the same barrel length is normal.

I have seen some lots of the 158 gr SWCHPL +P load go up to 940 fps in a 4 inch. The factories dont always use the same powder so this is normal. Get a chronograph to test your ammo.

I saw a test done some years ago and shown in a loading manual. They used six identical guns with six inch barrels in 357 Magnum. There was up to 200 fps difference between the guns with the same factory ammo in various loads. There was no general rule between the revolvers. They were fast and slow with different loads.

I'm ordering some of this ammo and will test it and post results. Bumping the thread so it's easier to find next week; plus maybe someone has some new experience in the meantime.

Several comments on various issues that have popped up in the thread:

1. All the commercial ".38 Special FBI" loads, past and present are limited to the SAAMI .38 Special +P pressure spec adopted in 1974.

There are indeed +P loads that are marketed or viewed as being the FBI load, but the original 1972 FBI load exceeds the SAAMI maximum pressure spec for "+P" ammunition. Meaning the original FBI load would be what we'd call a "+P+" load running in the neighborhood of 23,000 psi to generate between 1014 fps and 1090 fps (depending on whose original data you read) in a 4" barrel.

Given that, I've never understood why people swore by the "old" Remington FBI load, given that it wasn't even close.

2. The OP compared the old Remington load with the new recognition load, but even the old Remington load in a 6" barrel is at least 50 fps short of the old load in a 4" barrel (1014 to 1090 fps versus 964 fps).

Obviously with a velocity of only 872 fps, the "new" Remington load falls even farther behind.

3. There are comments to the effect that reports of harder lead are anecdotal. As noted above, unless the bullet is soft lead, you'll get penetration but not expansion. I wouldn't worry about anecdotal evidence - he simple fact is that if you can't easily dent the bullet with a fingernail it's way too hard to reliably expand at the velocities in question.

4. Buffalo Bore's Heavy .38 Special "+P" ammo exceeds the old FBI load in terms of velocity. They indicate the following on their site:

S&W mod. 60, 2 inch- 1040 fps (379 ft. lbs.)
S&W mod. 66, 2.5 inch- 1059 fps (393 ft. lbs.)
Ruger SP101, 3 inch- 1143 fps (458 ft. lbs.)
S&W Mt. Gun, 4 inch- 1162 fps (474 ft. lbs.)

You'll note all of the above revolvers are models designed for .357 magnum loads.

It's still soft lead, and they use a gas check to control leading.

If you're looking for something that is at least equal to the old 1972 law enforcement only FBI load, BB's Heavy .38 Special is the only game in town.

5. The .357 Magnum, when loaded with slow burning powders for longer barrels is not all that efficient in a 2" barrel. You'll get lots of muzzle flash, lots of muzzle blast and lots of unburnt powder in your face, but you won't get an awful lot of velocity, particularly with the lighter 125-130 grain bullets often used in 2" revolvers.

I've found however that with a powder like Unique I can get 1250 fps in a 2" barrel with a 125 grain XTP. That's about 150 fps over a .38 Special +P load and worth the effort with minimal increase in muzzle flash. It also recoils a lot less than a load with ice the weight of slow burning powder, give that the exit velocity of the propellant gas is about 3 times the velocity of the projectile, and it adds significantly to the recoil even at the same projectile velocity.

Boy, this is an old thread - resurrected. Anyway, I'd just like to again bring attention to the M27 with which I tested these with was a 6" barrel. The results out of my 2" Chief's Special with the NEW Remington HTP's was about 750 - 760 ft/sec average.

Here's my results from this morning:

Remington .38 Special +P 158 Lead Hollow Point HTP:
36-7 with 1-7/8" barrel, 10 shots, 789fps avg.
442-1 with 1-7/8" barrel, 10 shots, 777fps avg.

Extreme spreads and standard deviations were nominal.

The lead appears soft and easily deformed. Minor thumbnail pressure easily and visibly marks the bullet--the lead clearly pushed aside. I don't have a hardness tester, but I would guess these are quite soft.

My 36-7 is now loaded with them.

I just tested this with denim (4 layers) and 4 jugs of water with schreded newspaper.

Old lot of Remington was 99FPS faster and mushroomed nicely from my Charter Arms 2" as well as my 6.5" ruger blackhawk.

New stuff... it did mushroom, but, not as much and did NOT make it through the 3rd jug from either revolver.

My handloads with Speer 158gr LSWCHP, Starline +P brass, and Ramshow Silhouette powder and Federal small pistol primers... only 35FPS faster than the old lot from Remington and mushrooms out of all 38/357 revolvers I own.

Weights on the new stuff are nearly .5 grains less than older lots.

Is this a box of the old FBI loads? They came from a woman whose husband was LE. Semi-wadcutter hollow point stuff. All the cartridges are well kept and like new. I'm thinking the box is from the late 1970's but not sure.

Attached Images

IMG_0159.jpg (74.4 KB, 201 views)

__________________
Dr. B

DocB:

I'd put money on the old box you posted being faster than current production ammo even from the same Company. A few years ago I sent back 6 boxes of the newer production Winchester "FBI Load" because they were producing velocities in the LOW 700 range and find that totally unacceptable! Winchester agreed, sent me a letter (mumbo-jumbo excuses) and a refund check. It would be interesting if you could test and post the results of the old stuff.

For .38 special SD/HD work I no longer use (haven't in 5 years now) products from the Big 3 Ammo Companies and instead use either Buffalo Bore HEAVY 158grain +P LSWCHP-GC and or Speer's Short Barrel 135 grain +P JHP, the later being better for lighter weight guns. From 2" barrels they produce a consistent 1025 fps and 860fps respectively, perform consistently, are extremely accurate and to date I have NEVER had any FTF from either the BB or the GD.

Any one try Underwood's version?

I've not had the opportunity to test Underwood ammo yet and in fact haven't even seen any around here. Truthfully I've been so happy with the BB Heavy and the Speer GD, I've not been actively looking for a new SD cartridge in .38 Special.

Federal® does not; but Winchester® does, load# X38SPD...
• http://www.winchester.com/Products/h...es/X38SPD.aspx

I use both of Buffalo Bore®'s 38 Special 158gr LSWCHCGC, standard pressure (#20C/20) and +P version (#20A/20); in my snub nose 357 & 38 Specials. The +P verson for my steel frame 357 & 38 and standard pressure for my Airweight® and Ultra-Lite® guns.

__________________
David
CW3 USA (Ret) 1968-1990

Because they can... (borrowed from ST: Voyager)

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

P.S. Forgive me, but I wonder where this excessive blast and muzzle flash from snub magnum barrels comes from? I often shoot mags loads in snubs indoors and I notice no excessive flash (there is a blast, but tolerable.). Nothing blinding me or preventing a double tap. People write the same thing about .22Mag in High-Standard derringers, deafening muzzle blast! Excuse me? Really? Please...

Yes, but Win. hasn't loaded those in several years since their move in late 2010 and then the Great Ammo Panic. The same goes for their .44 Spcl. ST load. I sent them an e-mail and they said maybe later this year. I haven't seen a box since 2012!!

Didn't know that, thanks for the update.

__________________
David
CW3 USA (Ret) 1968-1990

I haven't seen any LHP .38sp ammo in my locale in quite some time. I used to find Impact branded FBI loads- which chrono mid 900s in my four inch K38, but it's been a while since those were common.
Currently, my snubby .38sp is loaded with BB +p 158gr, which does a solid upper 900fps in the 442-2. I also use their Barnes 110gr +p in a 1.41" bbl Taurus View, it's moving along too pushing 1100fps in that gun.
The only HTP Rem ammo I've tried over the chrono was their 230gr jhp in a 5" Kimber and 5" M1917 S&W, both were slowish.

I had just ordered a box of the Remington 158 grain +P LSWCHP when I came across this thread. It arrived yesterday and I took it to the range today to chronograph. Chronograph was at 10' and the velocities are uncorrected. Here's my results for 5 rounds:

4" S&W model 15
High - 890
Low - 865
Average - 879

3" S&W model 60-15
High - 838
Low - 835
Average - 836

Hey, Kaas! I only just saw this now. Sorry about that.

The "full house" magnum loads use slower-burning powders optimized for firing from longer barrels. When you fire them in a magnum snub, you get a lot of sound and fury from the unburnt powder that hasn't had a chance to burn completely.

In the case of Remington Golden Saber or Speer GDSB, they use flash-retardant powders designed to burn more completely in the shorter barrels they're likely to be fired from. Just my experience. Oddly enough, though, I can't say I've ever noticed excessive flash from the Winchester White Box 110 gr. load. Never fired the 158 gr. Gold Dot or CCI Blazer 158 gr. JHP from anything shorter than a 4" barrel, so I can't say anything about those.

Has anyone done a proper gel test with this new load? I have to say right now, if Remington were a person on fire I wouldn't even piss on them. The FBI load is dead as of September 2015. THANKS BIG GREEN!!!!

Very late 70s/early 80s. I have several identical boxes. Just CAN'T stop using this vintage ammo in my J-frame .38s. Have enough that I don't have to buy anything "newer and (not) improved."

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

I'm not especially pleased with Remington's business decision either, but it may not be "dead" yet. As I've said before, if the reports of harder alloyed bullets are to be believed and the velocities have been reduced, it should still work fine from barrels of 3" or more. We just no longer have it as a viable option for snubs.

Kaaskop,

Do you remember when exactly Winchester changed the bullet alloy in response to leading complaints from some PDs? I know that when it was first introduced in the early 70's, the bullets were much softer.

Great thread.
sometimes zombies are good lol.

I'm still wanting to see a proper gel test, from a snubbie, with properly calibrated gel etc,etc before condemning the HTP as useless.

That being said, i'm in negotiations right now with the mrs to allow me to spend money on some ammo.

I wish I could justify spending so much for a 20 round box of ammo that the Buffalo Bore brand asks, but as of now I'm looking for a box of Gold Dots, having made my mind up that the 135gr is a better bet then 125gr in a snub, thats what I'm after.

__________________
Israel Has The Right To Exist.

I wish you were in the market for Speer's GDSB load sooner! SGAmmo had an unprecedented amount of it in stock recently, in the LE 50-count packaging no less, for about $28 a box. I had to really "sell" my wife on my idea to purchase several boxes of it, so I can emphasize with your plight.

Like you, I'm not willing to condemn the new HTP LHP round until we have hard evidence of its terminal effectiveness. In fact, short of buying a bullet hardness tester and pulling bullets from Express and HTP rounds, we may never have a "scientific" answer. I'm admittedly skeptical about the reports of reduced velocities based on "real world" chronos of the previous version from snubs, but the stories of harder alloyed bullets (e.g. "not as easily dented with a fingernail," "bullets have a lighter, 'frosted' appearance," etc.) give me pause for concern.

Be that as it may, if Remington really has "pulled a Winchester" by utilizing a harder alloy for ease of manufacture, the load should still work just like it always has in barrels of 3" and up. Absent conclusive proof, however, I personally am still hesitant to trust the new HTP in snubs based on what I know about Winchester's Super-X version. As Heinlein once quipped, "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch." Remington had to make a change somewhere to allow the lower price point, and the bullet composition is a prime suspect.

As I understand it, there has been alot of noise being made about advancements in ammunition technology as of late, up to and including the FBI declaring that such advancement has been good enough to rectify the 9mm in its ever so esteemed opinion.
Thing is, all these advancements most certainly have had effect on the entire ammunition manufacturing world.

Now,I'm not an engineer and I don't even load my own ammo,but-

Is it really a bridge too far to speculate that such advancements have resulted in the ability to produce a different, yet still effective, FBI load for less?

Perhaps a cheaper to produce or whatever powder?

Maybe even manufacturing techniques, such as incorporating more automation to the process of making the older express line, have reduced costs?

I have no clue, but that's my optimistic speculating on the matter until I see definitive proof -a scientific, repeatable terminal test- on the HTP FBI load before I am absolutely convinced one way or the other.

The good news is, that even if it fails, and mushes up into a wad cutter, its STILL better, IMHO, then a JHP that fails to expand.

__________________
Israel Has The Right To Exist.

I wonder if messaging Remington about this new change would be a waste of time? My guess is probably yes. I might have to call them.

Those are all reasonable speculations, and you kind of have to look at all online ammo discussions with a healthy degree of skepticism.

Heck, for those who swear by 3" barreled carry guns (and there are a signifigant amount of people who'll sing their praises, I myself am one of them), the new HTP LHP is better than ever because they now have an FBI load with the Remington name behind it for a value price.

Since I currently only own and carry snubs, however, and have documented evidence of what a harder alloyed LSWCHP will do when fired from short barrels, I'm reluctant to embrace this new load from Remington.

A reasonable conclusion. A bullet with a rounded ogive will not crush as much tissue as the meplat of the full wadcutter shape. It's still not as efficient at creating permanent wound channels as a properly expanding JHP, but it's still an improvement.

I embraced the newer GDSB load for pragmatic reasons, not necessarily because I think "newer is better." My stock of the older Express version is very finite, and I do make a habit of "rotating" my carry ammo periodically. Once my four remaining boxes are gone, they're gone. If evidence bears out that this new HTP can be trusted just as much as its predecessor from snubs, you can be assured I'll start buying it in earnest. For now, I'm staking on another proven load that seems to also "work" very well on the street despite its shortcomings (reduced sectional density; has difficulty meeting the 12" penetration minimum, and when it does, it does just barely; has occasionally failed to expand in IWBA testing).

Exactly, I completely agree!

I keep my steel 36-7 loaded with 158 HTP and my Airweight loaded with 110 DPX. Very reliable expansion from Barnes bullets. It also recoils much less, which is worth pursuing in an airweight. Makes for a slightly lighter carry too, half ounce lighter for 5 rounds.

For those who care (I am one that does,) HTP ammo is very clean shooting. Seriously cleaner than Gold Dot.

Just thought I'd post this link, since it's pertinent to the discussion:

Crime Lab Innovates Gelatin Tests

It's quite an entertaining read. I nearly spit my cereal out this morning trying not to laugh from the following excerpt:

Also of interest are the 10-round averages for each tested load. I may have to eat my joking remarks about the "golden age" of .38 Special velocities. An honest 951 fps from a period 4" barreled K-38 is pretty darn impressive.

Back in the 1970's, the Winchester box had the letters MS on it. I had to call Winchester in East Alton, IL to learn what they meant. It was Maximum Service. At the time, I think they listed the ammo at 1090 FPS.

It had a good street rep.

I avoid ALL Remington products now, as they have poor QC reps. I've kept an M-870, but it was bought about 10 years ago. I'm really disappointed in how Remington handled the dangerous trigger issue on M-700 and earlier rifles, too. That was a real black eye for the firearms industry, and the media has exploited it.

I load Speer Gold Dot 125 grain .38 in four - inch and longer barrels and their 135 grain GD in snub and three-inch barrels. I have some 158 grain lead SWC-HP Plus P from Federal, load No. 38G, that is probably 15 years old. I'd load that if penetration was a real need, as on larger animals. Same for where thick winter coats might be a factor in shooting someone.

I'm eager to learn more about Buffalo Bore, but it costs a LOT and not all dealers stock it. What I've seen on the Net suggests that their ammo is very hot but safe. That heavy Plus P round should be a good defense load and capable of taking most smaller animals like raccoons and even deer. It's better than the old .38-44 round. I'm impressed, but has anyone here shot any live animals or people with it?

I imagine that the reason for the denim layer test is because so many people now days wear Denim of some sort and is a popular "constant" to shoot through for bullet testing. If one was looking for a common dress material to fit the bill, what is more common than Denim??

Close. From a scientific perspective, four layers of 16 oz. unstarched denim make for a more consistent test barrier with less potential variables than the assembled set of clothing used in the FBI "heavy clothing" protocol. While the IWBA test may produce more consistent results, it's still overkill from a real world standpoint, and its FBI counterpart is equally effective at weeding out bullets that aren't robust expanders.

Groo here
This might be a reason to shoot "mid-range"357s from a snub.
You might get FBI load specs.

"Despite having been discussed multiple times over the past two decades, there still appears to be a great deal of misunderstanding about the four-layer heavy denim cloth test.

The four layer denim test is NOT designed to simulate any type of clothing--it is simply an engineering test to assess the ability of a projectile to resist plugging and robustly expand. FWIW, a senior engineer at a very respected ammunition manufacturer that supplies ammunition to many of the largest LE agencies in the Nation has commented that bullets that do well in 4 layer denim testing have invariably worked well in actual officer involved shooting incidents.

For additional information, you may wish to review Duncan MacPherson's seminal article on the topic: “Improved Handgun Ammunition” published in the old journal of the International Wound Ballistics Association, Wound Ballistics Review, Volume 3, Number 3, 1998; pp. 12-21."
- DocGKR

Well at least they chose a product that is worn my most these days........

Let's disregard the "four layers of 16 ounce denim," substitute "winter clothing," and go from that perspective.

The older Remington FBI load performs fine in the FBI "heavy clothing" test, from a 3" barrel at least.

I forget the average recorded velocities, but I believe they were in the mid to upper 800 FPS range.

I think that Remington is pushing its new ammo over the lead SD ammo.
I went to two sites and both had six SD loading .....
only one was the lead FBI loading, all the others had a jacket.

Lead may be getting phased out...?

The tree huggers and bird watchers are gaining on us.

On 03 January 2016 I wrote to Buffalo Bore about their enhanced "FBI Load." While I believe information I requested to be important for me to strongly consider buying that ammunition for EDC, apparently Buffalo Bore does not. OR answers present a less than favorable perspective on the ammunition. There has been no reply.
*************
Dear Sirs:

I shoot Remington's +P 38 Special 158-grain LSWC-HP "FBI Load" in my S&W 640-1 (357 Magnum, 2.125-inch barrel). I was recently informed of your SKU: 20A/20 Heavy .38 Special +P Ammo - 158 gr. L.S.W.C.H.P. - G.C. ammunition.

At 25 yards how closely will your enhanced FBI Load's point of impact correspond with my Remington FBI Load while I use the same point of aim?
***
Your blurb on your FBI Load describes extreme expansion with about 14 inches of penetration in human flesh.

- What are penetration-expansion results when "winter clothing" fronts the flesh?

- What are penetration-expansion results when conventional clothing plus a typical "cheap" room-to-room door fronts the flesh?
***
Please describe how effectively your FBI Load is sealed. Upon request or special order, may I obtain your FBI Load in nickel plated brass rather than unplated?

Underwood makes the same thing a beat cheaper

I found a box of winchester fbi loads in a pawn shop that were at least 20 years old. I wish i hadnt shot them all up. Thry were definetly hotter than;any of the remington loads ive shot. Havent tried the newer winchester loads yet

An excellent thread. Thanks for all the information.

I was on the verge of ordering a handful of boxes of the new HTP rounds when I saw this information. My carry revolvers are all 2" and I just don't know if the new stuff is what I am looking for.

I had been carrying the Golden Saber load. Wanting to step up the weight a bit, I finally settled on the 135 grain, short barrel Gold Dot. That load seems to have a good track record and should be available for some time to come. The drawback is price. At 60ish cents per round, I can't practice with it as much as I'd like. The price of "progress" I guess.