Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Ammunition-Gunsmithing > Ammo
o

Notices

Ammo All Ammo Discussions Go Here


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-16-2016, 02:40 AM
Ky Farmer Ky Farmer is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Maysville, Kentucky
Posts: 10
Likes: 1
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag

I have a question about the three loads.
I think in ascending power it would be standard.38 special, .38+p, .38/44, then .357mag.
I know .38/44 was the father of .357 and was presumably only safe in n frame, and later magnum revolvers.
But how does it compare to .38+p?
I'm not looking to cook up some hot ammo or anything like that I was just wondering if there was any comparison of the +p to the old heavy load .38/44
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #2  
Old 02-16-2016, 02:53 AM
kaaskop49 kaaskop49 is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Demon-class planet
Posts: 7,404
Likes: 29,169
Liked 8,461 Times in 3,772 Posts
Default

Without dragging out old tables, I seem to recall that the mfgrs claimed 1090fps for 158gr .38/44 factory ammo. As to comparing it to .38 +P, there have been different "generations" of +P. The LE Handgun Digest of 1977 or so showed 158gr +P LHP loads clocking 1014fps from a 4" Model 10. Latest factory tables have the modern version of this load clocked at appr. 870fps in 4".

I remember these original 158gr LHP .38s. In a 4" K-frame, they were a handful. Today's version in the same gun feels more like the old service loads, much less imposing.

It's hard to really answer your query accurately. Let me stop before my coach turns into a pumpkin.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Like Post:
  #3  
Old 02-16-2016, 06:18 AM
alwslate alwslate is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 6,607
Likes: 3,693
Liked 7,176 Times in 2,998 Posts
Default

The real comparison between 38 spl +P and the 38/44 would be loads
with a 158 gr lead bullet. Published ballistics aside, there is quite a
bit of difference in the actual performance of the two. Velocitys of
factory 158 gr LHP +Ps will be around 900 fps or a bit less out of a 4"
revolver. 38/44 loads with a 158 gr lead bullet would average around
1100 fps out of 5" revolver. Most factory +P loads today are not
particularily hot. I have seen magazine articles on reloading 38 spls
where the author was able to easily beat factory +P chronographed
velocities with handloads that did not exceed standard pressure
limits.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #4  
Old 02-16-2016, 08:57 AM
walkin' trails walkin' trails is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,173
Likes: 1,771
Liked 548 Times in 311 Posts
Default

Most of the +p+ loads I can think of in .38 Special used lighter bullets, i.e. 110 grain Treasury load. The heaviest bullet weight I've seen in that factory loading was the 147 grain Federal Hydra Shok, which is only clicking around 900-950 fps, from what I've heard. Nevertheless, it didn't seem like it had any more kick than a 158 grain LSWCHP in +p. I've read some hype that the 38/44 was pushing 1200.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #5  
Old 02-16-2016, 10:29 AM
OKFC05 OKFC05 is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,158
Likes: 3,605
Liked 5,199 Times in 2,172 Posts
Default

The rise of modern liability concerns coupled with electronic pressure gages, better chronographs, and lifetime warranties on guns has resulted in the reduction of a lot of loads used in "the good old days."

For one thing, the electronic pressure gages showed the copper crusher technique missed the pressure peaks on many loads, and such loads were way over SAAMI standards. Secondly, we learned that many overloads did not produce the fantastic speeds claimed.
And we have become intolerant of the early revolver destruction common when hot overloads were routinely used in revolvers chambered for .38.

The availability of j frame revolvers chambered for .357 has rendered all the .38 overloads obsolete, and the simple solution to "a hotter .38" is to buy a .357 and choose from several available loadings with various MV. In my case, there are small .357 revolvers that stand up to the recoil far better than my hand does.
__________________
Science plus Art
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
  #6  
Old 02-16-2016, 11:32 AM
Ky Farmer Ky Farmer is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Maysville, Kentucky
Posts: 10
Likes: 1
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Thanks,
I'm intrigued by the hot .38's and the development of the .357 mag.
i don't think there is as much writing out there about the .357 magnum development as the .44 magnum, but it seems like an interesting story
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #7  
Old 02-16-2016, 12:02 PM
Homie Homie is offline
US Veteran
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 776
Likes: 577
Liked 273 Times in 181 Posts
Smile

You might find the book "MAGNUM The S&W .357 Magnum Phenomenon" by Timothy J. Mullin has what you're looking for.
__________________
Good shooting.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #8  
Old 02-16-2016, 12:33 PM
Groo01's Avatar
Groo01 Groo01 is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: central ohio
Posts: 1,385
Likes: 949
Liked 826 Times in 488 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ky Farmer View Post
I have a question about the three loads.
I think in ascending power it would be standard.38 special, .38+p, .38/44, then .357mag.
I know .38/44 was the father of .357 and was presumably only safe in n frame, and later magnum revolvers.
But how does it compare to .38+p?
I'm not looking to cook up some hot ammo or anything like that I was just wondering if there was any comparison of the +p to the old heavy load .38/44
Groo here
The 38-44 high speed was used in the N frame [ that is the 44 part]
later S&W proofed All the 38spec guns for this load,even the 5 shot ones
and published same. [better steel I guess]
Remember that most people did not shoot as much as we do now
and light loads for practice was the norm.

Last edited by Groo01; 02-16-2016 at 12:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #9  
Old 02-16-2016, 12:54 PM
DWalt's Avatar
DWalt DWalt is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: South Texas & San Antonio
Posts: 33,483
Likes: 236
Liked 28,949 Times in 14,015 Posts
Default

See: 38/44 original ammo specs.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-16-2016, 01:15 PM
Nevada Ed's Avatar
Nevada Ed Nevada Ed is offline
US Veteran
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Reno Nv
Posts: 13,376
Likes: 3,183
Liked 12,712 Times in 5,669 Posts
Default

The 38-44 by S&W was from a large frame 44 that started around 1931.

The load was designed around a 38 case but the head stamp was changed to 38-44
for the higher pressure loads that did around 1125 fps with a 6.5" barrel.

In 1935 S&W came out with the .357 Magnum that had a longer case that had even higher fps
and at a much lower price..............The "Outdoorman" was no longer King of the hill.

Most old 38's were on a K frame, while the "Hot" loads were on the heavier frames for the 44 and 357 loads back in the mid 30's. All ammo was good to go with the exception of the "Hi-Vel" ammo that was usually only for the LE people.

Todays 38 special from a 4" does 890 fps but there is data out there that before ammo got rated with PSI and CUP and getting safer to use..........it did around 950 fps.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-17-2016, 12:40 PM
drummer007 drummer007 is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 158
Likes: 32
Liked 107 Times in 48 Posts
Default

Depends on the particular 38 Special +P loading.

I would think that the Buffalo Bore 158 gr LSWCHP-GC 38 Special +P is probably the modern day +P equivalent to the old 38/44. In my revolvers, using my chronograph, my results are as follows:

Model 60 2&1/8th" barrel avg. = 1035 ft/sec
Model 66-4 2&1/2" barrel avg. = 1070 ft/sec
Model 66-4 4" barrel avg. = 1155 ft/sec
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Like Post:
  #12  
Old 03-08-2019, 05:58 PM
38SPL HV's Avatar
38SPL HV 38SPL HV is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 957
Liked 949 Times in 419 Posts
Default

If only Buffalo Bore made a 1,100 FPS load (6 inch) as the standard 38-44, their 158 gr +P is too harsh on my arthritic hands out of a J frame!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #13  
Old 03-09-2019, 10:53 AM
Dave Lively Dave Lively is online now
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 780
Liked 1,363 Times in 649 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OKFC05 View Post
The rise of modern liability concerns coupled with electronic pressure gages, better chronographs, and lifetime warranties on guns has resulted in the reduction of a lot of loads used in "the good old days."
It wasn't so much better chronographs as more affordable ones that made the difference.

When I first started shooting and reading about guns in the early 80s magnum rifles got a lot of press coverage. When it go to the part of the review where the author chronographed ammo out of a real gun it usually started with "While the manufacturer undoubtedly achieved the listed velocity out of a pressure test barrel in my rifle . . .". And then it went on to list velocities substantially less than advertised.

I am not discounting the other factors you listed. Ammo was loaded hotter in the past, sometimes too hot. But I think companies inflating velocity numbers to sell more ammo and new cartridges was a big part of the problem. With cheap chronographs, YouTube and the rest of the internet they cannot get away with that anymore.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #14  
Old 03-09-2019, 12:46 PM
DWalt's Avatar
DWalt DWalt is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: South Texas & San Antonio
Posts: 33,483
Likes: 236
Liked 28,949 Times in 14,015 Posts
Default

The other MV issue is what gun you fire. There is very little MV consistency among different revolvers using the same ammunition, even those having identical barrel lengths. Most factory MV information is obtained using some lab test barrel, not an actual revolver. One of the older Speer reloading manuals has a fairly detailed discussion about the inconsistency of MVs obtained from different revolvers.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-09-2019, 12:48 PM
stoneke stoneke is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Klamath Falls, OR
Posts: 149
Likes: 4
Liked 190 Times in 45 Posts
Default

Drummer007's velocities are similar to mine with the Buffalo Bore 158 38 +P.
In 35 degree conditions I chronoed 1057, 1053, 1037 fps with a 3 inch model 65. Recoil was slightly less than the Speer 135 gr .357. I consider the recoil of both above rounds to be manageable in the K frame. Great personal defense rounds.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #16  
Old 03-10-2019, 11:52 AM
Texas Star Texas Star is offline
US Veteran
Absent Comrade
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 20,362
Likes: 24,260
Liked 16,154 Times in 7,408 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ky Farmer View Post
Thanks,
I'm intrigued by the hot .38's and the development of the .357 mag.
i don't think there is as much writing out there about the .357 magnum development as the .44 magnum, but it seems like an interesting story

Your first post was correct. But modern Plus P ammo vares in power with the maker and the load.

To get .38-44 class performance in a factory load today, Buffalo Bore lists its Heavy .38 Special Plus P.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-05-2019, 01:18 PM
boatbum101 boatbum101 is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Pensacola,FL
Posts: 1,720
Likes: 4,198
Liked 998 Times in 536 Posts
Default

With modern pressure testing many of the old loads that were shot for eons have been deemed unsafe . Lets start with the BB 20A 38 +P I've shot these in 3 different 3" M65's & they're head & shoulder above any +P load from the big 3 . I would not shoot them from a J frame even a 357 . 38/44 loads are all over the place depending on which data you go with . Elmer's original load with his designed 358429 is NUCLEAR & if one insists I'd only shoot it from a 357 Ruger . I do shoot a grain less of the same powder / bullet from my pre 23 ODM & get an honest 1300fps with a 173gr bullet . Now compared to modern 357 loads that's stout . Before it was discontinued I also used SR4756 with the same bullet @ 1200fps also a pretty stout load . I like 12.5grs of 4227 with same bullet & get an honest 1150fps from a 6.5" barrel pre 23 . It's easier on the 65 year old gun & does everything I need with very good accuracy . Modern 357 loads are a shadow of the older ones & then again a load I'd shoot in a Ruger BH I won't shoot in a S&W regardless of frame size . Your guns , your choices .
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-06-2019, 09:09 PM
GoDevil Man's Avatar
GoDevil Man GoDevil Man is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 136
Likes: 79
Liked 130 Times in 61 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stoneke View Post
Drummer007's velocities are similar to mine with the Buffalo Bore 158 38 +P.

In 35 degree conditions I chronoed 1057, 1053, 1037 fps with a 3 inch model 65. Recoil was slightly less than the Speer 135 gr .357. I consider the recoil of both above rounds to be manageable in the K frame. Great personal defense rounds.
I'd agree regarding subjective recoil of BB's FBI +p vs. Winchester silvertip 145gr .357. Out of my 4 inch 65, recoil was very similar. Winchester slightly stronger. Maybe. That Buffalo Bore +p is stout stuff. On the same outing, I let my wife's niece compare the Buffalo Bore FBI versus Remington's version out of her newly purchased trade in model 10. She didn't like Buffalo Bore, so I gave her a cylinder full of Remington's to take home with her for her house gun.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-06-2019, 10:45 PM
shouldazagged shouldazagged is offline
Absent Comrade
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 19,336
Likes: 53,737
Liked 38,386 Times in 11,801 Posts
Default

Buffalo Bore's standard pressure .38 158 gr. LSWCHP-GC clocks just about identically to the older Remington +P FBI load I carried for years. Since then the Remington stuff has been loaded lighter, and the chronograph seems to confirm that.

BB tests their ammo in actual revolvers, both 2" and 4" barrels, and their advertised velocities seem to be accurate. I use the standard pressure load in a J-frame, and have loaded it in K-frames as well.

There's a lot of suspicion that their +P rendition is over-pressure by a goodly margin, but they advertise that the standard pressure stuff is safe in any S&W revolver.
__________________
Oh well, what the hell.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-07-2019, 12:17 AM
6string's Avatar
6string 6string is online now
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Upstate, SC
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 3,094
Liked 4,737 Times in 1,517 Posts
Default

The development of all these cartridges has to be taken into consideration with the propellants contemporaneous to their respective eras.
Handloaders were adopting propellants originally intended for, what we would consider, small capacity varmint cartridges such as the 22 Hornet and 218 Bee.
DuPont had their #80 powder that was soon superceded by the faster SR powders. And, of course, 2400 was the "new kid on the block"....
My point being, these powders had a burning rate and loading density that was unintentionally ideal for load development that led to the emergence of the magnum revolvers.
The development of the 30 Carbine really opened things up, propellant-wise!

Talking about the relative velocities of these historic rounds makes more sense when the propellants are added to the equation.

And, then we have projectiles...
Lead bullet loads are inherently lower pressure than the equivalent jacketed load, all other things being equal.

Lots of fun to think about, and useful stuff for sensible reloaders.

Jim

Last edited by 6string; 04-07-2019 at 12:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-07-2019, 01:14 AM
rwsmith's Avatar
rwsmith rwsmith is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: (outside) Charleston, SC
Posts: 30,918
Likes: 41,503
Liked 29,156 Times in 13,783 Posts
Default The L frame......

The L frame is a great compromise that can take full .357 without the additional size and weight.
__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-07-2019, 03:29 AM
shawn mccarver shawn mccarver is offline
SWCA Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,908
Likes: 3,513
Liked 6,729 Times in 2,620 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ky Farmer View Post
I have a question about the three loads.
I think in ascending power it would be standard.38 special, .38+p, .38/44, then .357mag.
I know .38/44 was the father of .357 and was presumably only safe in n frame, and later magnum revolvers.
But how does it compare to .38+p?
I'm not looking to cook up some hot ammo or anything like that I was just wondering if there was any comparison of the +p to the old heavy load .38/44
You have the order of power correct.

The 38/44 pushed a 158 at about 1100 fps.

S&W introduced it in the N frame.

Colt, on the other hand, certified its Police Positive for the 38/44 and that is the revolver selected by the FBI when the agency got around to issuing handguns. A memo at the time mentioned that the Bureau adopted the 38 over the 45 Auto because of the power of the 38/44 round with the then new Keith (Elmer Keith) bullet (semi-wadcutter with sharp cutting shoulder).

S&W briefly certified its M&P snub for the 38/44, but that didn't last long.

If you want to know what the 38/44 feels like without shooting collector grade original cartridges, get a box of the Buffalo Bore "Outdoorsman" cartridges. They work fine in the J frames, but "you don't have to get in front to figure out that it just went off."

From the BB website:

"This load is safe to shoot in all 38SPL and 357 magnum firearms of modern design that are in normal operating condition. In the super lightweight alloy revolvers (around 11-12 oz.) the bullet will not jump crimp under recoil provided you do not subject an unfired round to more than 5 or 6 firings. In all steel guns, even short barreled ones, crimp jump is not an issue as the all-steel snub nosed revolvers are much heavier than the alloy versions."

I have used it in the 642 without incident. It is not fun, but it is nice to have a heavy load that will penetrate deeply if you have a close encounter with something needing a deep driving brain shot when hiking in the woods and you desire to be only discreetly armed.

You have to use a 4 inch barrel to get the velocity they did in 1930, but in the 2 inch you still get an honest 1,025, give or take.

In 38 Special, I like 3 loads for serious work: Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel, the 158 LHP +P "FBI Load," and the BB "Outdoorsman."
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-17-2019, 01:12 PM
Tim357 Tim357 is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Arizona
Posts: 72
Likes: 281
Liked 89 Times in 39 Posts
Default

The SAAMI pressure for std .38 is 17k psi, for +P is 20k psi. So if a company loaded a round with 16,900 psi it would be a std load. If they loaded a round at 17,100 psi it would be considered +P. The actual difference in performance would be nil. Now, if companies load like BB to max +P pressure of 20k psi, there is noticable difference in performance.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-17-2019, 02:23 PM
old tanker old tanker is offline
Member
.38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag .38 +p vs .38/44 vs .357 mag  
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fort Knox, Kentucky
Posts: 1,446
Likes: 5,757
Liked 3,663 Times in 1,012 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn mccarver View Post
...The 38/44 pushed a 158 at about 1100 fps...S&W introduced it in the N frame...

Colt, on the other hand, certified its Police Positive for the 38/44 and that is the revolver selected by the FBI when the agency got around to issuing handguns.
Are you sure?? I think(?) it was the Official Police that Colt said was suitable for the .38-44. The Police Positive Special was a bit lighter than Smith's M&P in that era.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:18 AM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)