Quote:
Originally Posted by stiab
I think most of the old ads significantly overstated the velocities on factory loads back then. I can't speak to published data from 1900, but the info from the factories in the 1960's and 1970's was surely exagerated. There is a thread on this forum from a year or so ago where several LEO from that era (including myself) expressed this opinion. That changed in the 1978/79 timeframe with the new testing requirements for revolvers ammo. This may be why for many years the Secret Service loaded their own ammo in the basement of the Treasury building in DC. Just my opinion.
|
Yes! As recently as the 1980's or so most of the published testing (velocity and pressure) was done in laboratory test barrels, frequently 10 or 12 inches in length and mounted in a closed-breach mechanism. In more recent years we have seen testing done with barrels down to 4", and in the case of revolver calibers these test barrels may be vented to simulate the barrel-cylinder gap typical to revolvers. Major differences in results!
When comparing results for .38 Special ammo fired in nominal 2" barrels the major differences are not in velocities, but in muzzle blast, muzzle flash, and recoil. Just not enough barrel length to achieve full ignition prior to the bullet exiting the muzzle. A load that may regularly deliver 1000FPS in a 6" revolver might develop less than 800FPS in the snub-length guns.
I have owned a S&W Model 37 Airweight Chief Special for many years. I use standard pressure .38 Special ammo exclusively. Any minor increases in velocity are not worth the added blast and recoil, in my opinion.