Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Revolvers > S&W Revolvers: 1961 to 1980
o

Notices

S&W Revolvers: 1961 to 1980 3-Screw PINNED Barrel SWING-OUT Cylinder Hand Ejectors WITH Model Numbers


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 07-25-2010, 01:26 AM
Armyphotog Armyphotog is offline
Member
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Tupelo, MS
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 3
Liked 68 Times in 43 Posts
Default

Super Vel. Haven't heard that name in a while. Back in the sixties, we were restricted to Model 10's with 4-inch heavy barrels. To beef up our protection a few of us carried Super Vel ammo. Never knew the stats on it, but mostly fired regular ammo on the range. A buddy of mine who shot all Super Vel had to have his gun overhauled eventually. It was some awsome ammunition.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 07-25-2010, 09:01 AM
Art Doc's Avatar
Art Doc Art Doc is offline
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The kidney of Dixie.
Posts: 10,509
Likes: 49
Liked 13,408 Times in 3,290 Posts
Default

I was surprised to see the Super-Vel 110 load only ran 981 FPS. I would have expected more. Oh well.

BTW- I once ran some 110s up to 1405 FPS from a 4" M&P but they shot so low as to be useless. I also think the 110 is a tad light and prefer the 125 which I load to a clocked 1,100 from 2" revolvers.
__________________
No life story has happy end.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 07-25-2010, 05:40 PM
Texas Star Texas Star is offline
US Veteran
Absent Comrade
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
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 bmcgilvray View Post
Perhaps the 5-inch barrel has something to do with it. I'll post the rest of the test over in the ammo section so differences in velocities between the barrel lengths may be seen.

I was thinking the gray (silver?) box of Winchester was current. The white box dates from about 1980. The Remington 158 grain +P is late vintage. I've heard that the Remington stuff gives a little more velocity and it seems to be so.
In trials of Gold Dot ammo in snub and three-inch barrels, the 125 grain JHP (NOT the later Short Barrel 135 grain one) clocked at or well over 900 FPS in published tests.

I don't find the figures cited for the five-inch bbl. for the 158 grain lead HP to be at all far off. In fact, I'd have expected slightly higher velocities. But I think that shooting Plus P in that old gun is risky. I sure wouldn't use Buffalo Bore in it.

S&W started heat-treating .38 cylinders in about 1919, and they wouldn't have done it, had they not seen a need. They were a tight-fisted company. Colt had better metallurgy, and their .38's were tougher, but they don't suggest Plus P in those old guns!

How expensive is Buffalo Bore lead HP ammo? Is it in boxes of 50, or fewer? I've never seen it in person, but think it might make a nice urban combat round for newer .38's and .357's.

T-Star

Last edited by Texas Star; 07-25-2010 at 05:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 07-25-2010, 05:45 PM
imakmst's Avatar
imakmst imakmst is online now
Member
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Northeast TN
Posts: 497
Likes: 1,582
Liked 326 Times in 154 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Star View Post
How expensive is Buffalo Bore lead HP ammo? Is it in boxes of 50, or fewer?
Midway USA, Buffalo Bore Ammunition 38 Special +P 158 Grain Lead Semi-Wadcutter Hollow Point Gas Check Box of 20, $24.99
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 07-25-2010, 05:50 PM
Texas Star Texas Star is offline
US Veteran
Absent Comrade
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
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 imakmst View Post
Midway USA, Buffalo Bore Ammunition 38 Special +P 158 Grain Lead Semi-Wadcutter Hollow Point Gas Check Box of 20, $24.99
Thanks! High, but one wouldn't shoot a lot of it, once he knew how it performed in his guns...I like the idea of a gas check on lead bullets at those velocities.

Has anyone here clocked that ammo in their guns?

T-Star
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 07-25-2010, 05:56 PM
Rob1109 Rob1109 is offline
Member
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 138
Likes: 2
Liked 11 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Star View Post
Thanks! High, but one wouldn't shoot a lot of it, once he knew how it performed in his guns...I like the idea of a gas check on lead bullets at those velocities.

Has anyone here clocked that ammo in their guns?

T-Star
In a 2" 642 and LCR it is damned EVIL! I guess my hands/wrists simply aren't strong enough. Someone on another site chronographed it at 1020 from a 2". BB uses Rim Rock gas checks with a B/N of 5 (very soft).
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 07-25-2010, 06:13 PM
bmcgilvray's Avatar
bmcgilvray bmcgilvray is offline
SWCA Member
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,353
Likes: 10,447
Liked 6,092 Times in 1,249 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Star View Post
Thanks! High, but one wouldn't shoot a lot of it, once he knew how it performed in his guns...I like the idea of a gas check on lead bullets at those velocities.

Has anyone here clocked that ammo in their guns?

T-Star
Some .38 Special Chronograph Tests
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 07-25-2010, 06:16 PM
daa9mm daa9mm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave T View Post
To reinforce what S-P was saying about the loading manuals, I was recently comparing the 44 Special loads from an old (1970) Lyman manual to a new (2009 printing) Lyman Pistol & Revolver manual. The starting load in 1970 for a 245g cast bullet and 2400 powder was 12g. Fast forward to 2009 and 12g of 2400 with the same 245g cast bullet is the Maximum load....
The powders made today may not be as potent as the powder thirty 40 years ago.
In the same type of powder pressure curves can vary quite a bit from one batch to another, much less decades apart.
Manufacturing processes have changed and late, current reloading data should be used.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 07-25-2010, 07:07 PM
Art Doc's Avatar
Art Doc Art Doc is offline
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The kidney of Dixie.
Posts: 10,509
Likes: 49
Liked 13,408 Times in 3,290 Posts
Default

Not my experience. The old loads perform today exactly as they did 40 years ago. It's the lawyers causing the change, not the composition of the powder.
__________________
No life story has happy end.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 07-25-2010, 07:41 PM
john traveler john traveler is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: west coast
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Liked 55 Times in 34 Posts
Default

In reply to saxon pigs statement that S&W guns made before the model markings and after the model markings are no different, I disagree.

For a couple of generations, S&W used a mild grade of automotive-quality steel in the frame and barrel forgings of the M&P. During WWII production, steel shortages pushed this almost to the elastic limit, and an unknown quantity of revolvers were made with steel that did not quite meet designers specifications. During the several generations that the K frame M&P was made from 1899 to the 1950s, the standard .38 Special bullet material was lead or copper-plated lead.

With jacketed bullet improvements and high velocity loadings starting in the early 1960s, barrel damage was reported by police department armorers in the form of cracked forcing cones, and stretched frames. Ask any old-time police armorer how often he saw barrel damage and bulged cylinder locking cuts. You might be surprised.

The steel changes by S&W in the late 1950s was apparently in response to the gun damage from firing high-performance jacketed ammunition.

The USAF tests at Eglin Air Force Base in early 1970s suggested a similar finding. Of the thousands of M10 and M15 .38 Special revolvers in USAF inventory, a significant percentage had developed excessive headspace, b-c gap, and gone out of time. Many bullet-in-bore failures were reported due to the excessive b-c gap problems. Many of the guns had been through repeated rebuilds and refurbishments. The standard ammunition since after WWII was the M41 130 grain RNJ load, supplemented by local purchase of HP ammo for guard duty use. There were also experiments in seating the 130 RNJ bullet deeper and loading it to higher velocities and conversion to 9x19 NATO caliber.

The conclusion of the study was that the .38 Special revolvers in USAF inventory were rapidly approaching the end of life cycle, and that a new 9mm semiauto pistol was needed.

If anything, the USAF experience with wearing out the tens of thousands of .38 Special revolvers with scheduled qualification and marksmanship training should be a clue that even "wimpy" +P loads take their toll.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 07-25-2010, 08:49 PM
Art Doc's Avatar
Art Doc Art Doc is offline
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The kidney of Dixie.
Posts: 10,509
Likes: 49
Liked 13,408 Times in 3,290 Posts
Default

How many rounds did those guns fire? How well and often were they cleaned? There is evidence to suggest that carbon build up in the cone can cause cracking. From the description they were falling apart fast. Like disintegrating. Like... when has this ever happened before with any group of guns? I am always suspicious of the sole example. Was the government aware of the ****** materials being used? They shut down other gun manufacturing during the war for quality issues, why were these passed through?

A nebulous date like "the late 1950s" won't do. I have never seen any proof that model marking indicates the beginning of better, stronger S&Ws. If anyone has such documentation I want to see it to prove my assumption incorrect. Otherwise, I stand by it.

BTW- Here's one of those war production M&Ps made of inferior materials. Has shot countless thousands of rounds including 500 Remington +Ps and 600 of my own +P+s (125@1,150 FPS). Looks like Hell, but mechanically it is perfect after all that.





PS: The barrel was replaced due to a bulge 1" back from muzzle caused by firing with an obstruction. I still have the original barrel and the cone is fine.
__________________
No life story has happy end.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 07-25-2010, 09:22 PM
john traveler john traveler is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: west coast
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Liked 55 Times in 34 Posts
Default

"I am always suspicious of the sole example."

You just contradicted your own argument. The WWII production M&P you stated as having fired 500 +P rounds and another 600 hot handloads is your sole example of durability of that speciment when subjected to your "testing" of +P ammunition. It may (or more likely may NOT) represent typical WWII M&P production. At any rate, the durability of ONE specimen does not provide any statistically useful data on the Million or so WWII era M&P revolvers that were made.

If you compare your personal results with ONE revolver to that of the Eglin Air Force study, it does not withstand examination. Their study involved TENS of THOUSANDS of M10 and M15 revolvers, many, many MILLIONS of rounds service ammunition fired, and hundreds of documented firing malfunctions including failure to fire from excess headspace, bullet-in-bore obstructions, and documented rebuild cycles.

The point I was trying to make, was that the M10 M&P design proved itself dependable and durable for several generations when only mild lead bullet ammunition was available. When the jacketed high performance .38 Special ammo started becoming popular, problems developed to the point that S&W had to change their manufacturing and materials. No, I do not have the engineering change order (ECO) that documents when S&W made the changes. Industry insiders may have that. Or the company historian would have it, if he chooses to release it.

The whole point of the Eglin AFB study was that it was the first major study that documented the wear patterns and projected life cycle of service revolver sidearms. As strange as it may sound, even the Army and the Navy never accumulated as much data as the Eglin study, and those services used .38 Special revolvers to arm aviators for several generations.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 07-25-2010, 10:01 PM
daa9mm daa9mm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaxonPig View Post
Not my experience. The old loads perform today exactly as they did 40 years ago. It's the lawyers causing the change, not the composition of the powder.
Are you saying that lawyers did the testing and reported the velocities for the same loads differently in reloading manuals 40 years apart?
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 07-25-2010, 11:20 PM
Art Doc's Avatar
Art Doc Art Doc is offline
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The kidney of Dixie.
Posts: 10,509
Likes: 49
Liked 13,408 Times in 3,290 Posts
Default

"Tens of thousands of guns" and "many, many millions of rounds" would indicate that each gun was fired multiple hundreds of thousands of times.

No wonder they wore out...
__________________
No life story has happy end.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 07-26-2010, 10:41 AM
amd6547 amd6547 is offline
Member
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North Coast of Ohio
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Liked 117 Times in 55 Posts
Default

And yet, all I ever read from USAF vets who used the Model 15, is how much they loved them and enjoyed shooting them, how badly they want one now....The only complaints I ever read are about the pathetic 130gn FMJ ammo.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 07-26-2010, 12:31 PM
bmcgilvray's Avatar
bmcgilvray bmcgilvray is offline
SWCA Member
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,353
Likes: 10,447
Liked 6,092 Times in 1,249 Posts
Default

There must have been two different loadings for that 130 grain FMJ ammunition as all I've ever heard about it was how pathetically weak it was. Any I've ever personally encountered was wimpy in the extreme. A revolver would die of boredom shooting that stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 07-27-2010, 12:06 AM
stiab's Avatar
stiab stiab is offline
US Veteran
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Land of the Free, NC
Posts: 988
Likes: 3
Liked 84 Times in 41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaxonPig View Post
"Tens of thousands of guns" and "many, many millions of rounds" would indicate that each gun was fired multiple hundreds of thousands of times.

No wonder they wore out...
Mathmatical fact check: 10 thousand guns could fire 10 million rounds by doing only 1 thousand rounds each, not "multiple hundreds of thousands" as you say. I don't know how many guns there were, or how many rounds were fired, but purely from a mathmatical standpoint the other poster's numbers could be achieved without each gun being fired hundreds of thousands of times.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 07-27-2010, 12:21 AM
john traveler john traveler is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: west coast
Posts: 1,486
Likes: 0
Liked 55 Times in 34 Posts
Default

I don't believe that there must have been more than one power level of the 130 grain FMJ M41 round. It was standardized as military issue after WWII, and remained so until it obsolescence in the late 1980s.

Incidentally, this was the round that caused the failure of the aluminum cylinders in the USAF M13 Lightweight Revolver, and resulted in its withdrawl from service.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 07-27-2010, 05:09 AM
NE450No2 NE450No2 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,095
Likes: 7
Liked 469 Times in 278 Posts
Default

Good info.

Many years ago I bought a bunch of the 130gr 38 Military ammo.

It seemed like a low power load to me. I think I still have some left I will try and shoot some in a few days.

Also what are the thoughts on the Federal 38 Special High Velocity [+P+] 147 gr Hydra Shock JHP ammo. Federal's product number P38HS2G?
For Law Enforcement use only.

I know several agencies, including some Federal Govt. Agencies issue, or issued, this ammo. Their Agents used it even in 5 shot S&W's.

The recoil does not seem to be any greater than the 158gr Lead HP +P.

Has anybody actually chronoed this ammo in their guns?
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 03-22-2019, 07:02 PM
jonnyringo jonnyringo is offline
US Veteran
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 126
Likes: 3
Liked 16 Times in 3 Posts
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Doc View Post
There are differing opinions on this subject. Naturally, I think I have the correct one.

1. Factory +P is loaded well below maximum allowable chamber pressure. It is not a "hot" load. The typical +P is a 125 JHP at 925 FPS. Big whoop. A good target load in my opinion. The whole "+P" thing is marketing hype. I hear stories of a friend of a friend's gun shooting loose with +P but since this load is so mild, and so far below allowable pressure, I have a hard time understanding how this is possible.

2. Many folks use the model number as a guide, as in, if it has a model number stamped on it then +P is OK. But what is different about the first gun with a model number and the last without it? Nothing. No changes were made in the design or materials. They are the same gun save for the presence of the model number.

I use the year 1930. This is not a hard and fast date but is my best estimate. Prior to the middle 1920s the tempering of steel was an imprecise science. The Titanic may have sunk due to improperly tempered hull plates that tore open under pressure from the collision. I figure that if I use 1930 then I am safe.

Alloy or steel frame, J or K frame, I have no concerns whatsoever about factory +P (which is not a hot load anyway, remember) in a S&W made after 1930. Below is a 1942 Military & Police Model that was already well worn and much used when I got it. It is pictured with the 500 rounds of Remington +P and some of the 600 rounds of my own +P+ (125@1150 FPS) that I fired through it to see if anything would happen. It came as absolutely no surprise to me when nothing happened at all.

I think +P is all hype and unworthy of all the hand-wringing. Others will issue dire warnings about +P. You do what makes you happy.


After recently buying several .38 Special K frames I felt the need to post and say I like the cut of your jib.

Last edited by jonnyringo; 03-22-2019 at 07:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 03-22-2019, 07:50 PM
flagman1776's Avatar
flagman1776 flagman1776 is offline
Member
K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds K frame and +P rounds  
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 2,000
Likes: 2,515
Liked 1,682 Times in 703 Posts
Default

I also used SuperVels as duty ammo "back then". I have always used S&W's official statement in the 1970s that model marked K frames were safe to use +P ammo in. As originally loaded, +P did run higher pressures than standard loadings.
Times have changed. I don't believe recent +P loadings generate pressures above the specs. Could it be because of improvements in power or bullets? Maybe. Could it be because ammo makers corporate lawyers run the show now? You tell me.
I'll tell you that when I switched my duty gun from a 4" M19 (-3) to a 4" M66-1 that the SuperVels cratered the primers & locked up the M66.
__________________
NRA LIFE
Reserve Officer 9yrs
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
357 magnum, 940, beretta, chamber pressure, chronograph, colt, detective, endshake, fiocchi, gunsmith, j frame, k frame, k-frame, military, model 10, model 19, model 28, model 37, model 60, n-frame, outdoorsman, remington, smith-wessonforum.com, snubnose, winchester

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
X frame calibers v.s. other big bore rounds sandmansans S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 13 03-13-2016 05:58 PM
What is the life of an N Frame .357 in rounds? dwever S&W-Smithing 7 11-30-2011 10:23 AM
357 Mod 586 - cylinder won't pivot into frame after 20 rounds garysarah S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 14 08-01-2010 06:59 AM
How many +P rounds in your J frame thumbs Concealed Carry & Self Defense 11 04-03-2010 11:19 PM
A lightweight J frame with 6 rounds. Rule3 Smith & Wesson - The Wish List 23 08-29-2009 07:03 PM

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 01:19 PM.


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