I found an old Sharpe (1937) manual online at archive.org. Most of the data is obsolete, but I was wondering if I could use the data from the .38 S&W section to load into Starline .38 Short Colt brass (.358 bullet diameter) for use in a .38 special pistol? From my calculations, the difference in case volume is .3-.5 grains H2O, and if I seat the bullet just a little shallower, the listed internal pressures should be the same. I'm most interested in Bullseye and Unique data since those powders are still manufactured. Does anyone see a problem with this? Please let me know of any issues this might cause.

Attached Images

38sw.jpg (111.9 KB, 69 views)

That is basically how i work up loads for wildcat rounds. Find a case volume & bore that are sim. Start low & work up using a chrono.

__________________
NRA Cert. Inst. IDPA CSO

My approach to this would be to start with the .357 bullet you want to use. First, is it lead, plated, or jacketed?
The risk of sticking a bullet with a too-light load is greatest with jacketed, of course.
Then I'd take the recommended load of Bullseye from the old data, and compare it to modern data for a .38 spl. Then take the data for .38 short colt and compare.
If it is way too light by modern standards, or higher than the max for .38 short colt, I personally would not try it in my gun, due to risk of either sticking a bullet or, if higher than .38 short colt max, blowing out a case head.
If in between, with a lead bullet, I'd feel more confident in loading a few and getting out the chrono.

__________________
Science plus Art

The only problem I see with this is that there is virtually no data available for 38 Short Colt, and what there is doesn't list pressure, and uses very light bullets and low velocities. I'm sure they won't be too light, because I've loaded the minimum Trail Boss loads from Hodgdon, and they shot fine.

The cases are essentially cut down .38 special (per Starline), so they should be able to handle the 15000 CUP listed in the load data plus some. If I maintain the same internal volume as the .38 S&W, and start on the low end, the loads should be identical. I just wonder about differences between 1937 Bullseye and 2017 Bullseye.

The .38 Short Colt is essentially a rimmed 9mm. The case length and case volume are very nearly identical. There is lots of 9mm loading data. You can use that, especially if staying in the lower levels of target velocity. As mentioned by others, start low and work up.

As for the Bullseye powder, I had a 10 lb. keg gifted to me. It was a very old metal can with original powder. Probably from the 40s or 50s. I used up the whole thing over a couple of years and it shot the same as new Bullseye. Very accurate, correct velocity, worked the same in every way.

I would only be sure the old data compares favorably to new data if possible.
The data sheet itself is unique and interesting.
Jim

In regard to the unknowns mentioned above, just start low. Given what you have, it sounds like it will be fine, but play it safe.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Use any reloading data you can find for the .38 S&W. The .38 SC and the .38 S&W are for all intents identical. You can even fire .38 SC in any .38 S&W revolver. I like to shoot .38 LC in my .38 Special snubbies. The cases are shorter and therefore extract better than .38 Special cases.

Note: I'm still a pretty new reloader.

That was my first thought - as I recall, Hodgdon's Trail Boss instructions say to load it to 70% of case volume and then work up from there. The only limit is not to compress the powder. I'd bet a case filled 70-80% with Trail Boss and a mid to light weight lead SWC would be about right.

As for loading to 9mm specs, again I'm new to this, but 9x19 max pressure is 35000 psi, while .38 S&W is 14500. So while I guess you could use 9mm loads as a baseline, I'd start with very light loads.

Just use .38 Smith and Wesson data. Don't bother seating the bullet any different. You're overcomplicating a simple endeavor.

People have loaded .38 Special down to a grain and a half of BE without squibbing it.

The primary concern in what you're doing isn't trying to find a load that doesn't squib--it's reliably dispensing such a small charge of powder. While BE would be in the top 2-3 powders I would use for such a task (AA#2 being best, I think, due to its volumetric density and easy-flowing nature), it's still a challenge.

9mm data starts as low as 19k PSI, and .38 Spl--the gun that the .38 S&W / .38 Short Colt cases are going into--generally peaks out around 16-19k. And to be quite honest, a modern .38 Spl can handle more than where book data stops.

But there's really no point because we have plenty of modern .38 Smith and Wesson data to look at. And besides, if you're loading .38 Short Colt / .38 S&W, you're not concerned about max, which is where 9mm would get you.

I found this data today too. It's for .32 S&W Long, but some of the velocities rival that of .32 H&R Mag. 98 grain LRN going 1010 fps over Unique is 220 ft-lbs @ 15000 CUP. Bullseye isn't far behind either.

Do these numbers seem right to you guys?

Attached Images

32 S&W.jpg (118.0 KB, 18 views)

Regardless of the data, use a chronograph. No point in sticking a bullet in the bore with too light a load, like in the 500-600 fps range.

There is probably a disclaimer to use those in a strong gun. The Manufacturers answer is that we have better testing equipment today. The reality is I would not shoot those loads in my j frame. I think the H&R is underloaded because of the original guns but most of the data I have says 4.4 gr of Unique is an overload in that cartridge. It shoots OK in my Ruger.
I have several manuals from the 1940's and 50's but feel the data pages are best taped shut. get modern manuals or at least from the 80's and enjoy reading the rest.

__________________
Front sight and squeeze