Is this BS?

franzas

franzas

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2013
Messages
587
Reaction score
333
Location
Richmond, VA
A load from Underwood:

Technical Information
Caliber: 38 Special +P
Bullet Weight: 158 Grains
Bullet Style: Hard Cast Keith 21 BHN
Case Type: Brass

Ballistics Information:
Muzzle Velocity: 1250 fps
Muzzle Energy: 555 ft. lbs.
Click to expand...

38 Special +P 158 Grain Hard Cast Keith - Underwood Ammo

Has anyone bought this and clocked it? I find it hard to believe, considering some of the hottest 158s out there are Buffalo Bore at 1000+, depending on bbl length. I might believe this if they say the test gun is a 6 or 8 3/8" Model 14.
 
Register to hide this ad
1050 is still pretty stout for a 38 special, regardless of barrel length. That's about 2-300 fps more than most standard pressures, and about 150 more than the FBI load, likely tested in a longer barrel than 2".

I'll pick some up if I can find it.
 
I bet dollars......

I'll bet dollars to donuts that if I put these in my 2" snub I will not get even near the advertised velocity, especially being a 158 gr. bullet.

The thing is that they don't even SUGGEST what kind of barrel/gun they used in testing. Maybe a "10" Test Barrel" like some of my books. Or a T/C Encore/Contender with a 12" barrel and no cylinder gap.
 
Last edited:
I'm no expert. That said, I have some Underwood .38 LSWCHP in both standard and +P. It's hot for sure. No chrono here, but I've read on many forums where members have tested the ammo on chronos and their loads are both consistent and perform as advertised. Not saying that you'd get 1250 out of a J-frame, but from what I've read, when the math is all done their advertised speeds generally don't wind up as having come off 10" test barrels. I'd agree that BB is much easier to "believe" being that their documentation is much more accessible and complete.
 
JK-linux said:
I'm no expert. That said, I have some Underwood .38 LSWCHP in both standard and +P. It's hot for sure. No chrono here, but I've read on many forums where members have tested the ammo on chronos and their loads are both consistent and perform as advertised. Not saying that you'd get 1250 out of a J-frame, but from what I've read, when the math is all done their advertised speeds generally don't wind up as having come off 10" test barrels. I'd agree that BB is much easier to "believe" being that their documentation is much more accessible and complete.
Click to expand...

I've never bought Underwood stuff before, but I have also heard their numbers are pretty true. This load just seems a little above and beyond IMO.
 
franzas said:
I've never bought Underwood stuff before, but I have also heard their numbers are pretty true. This load just seems a little above and beyond IMO.
Click to expand...

It's peppy. I can't tell much difference between it and 158gr Blazer Brass .357 Mag loads out of my 65 or 19 or 28. The Underwood load is basically a .357 load (IMHO) when all is said and done. I don't reload, but I have to imagine that maybe other than powder or primers or case capacity doing this or that differently in 38 vs 357, it still takes x amount of pressure to drive y amount of weight at z amount of speed.
 
I don't think I'd fire much of that except in a .38-44 or a .357 gun. But it's a good sounding load if you want a SWC that'd probably penetrate well.


I could see carrying it if you might need to kill a bear or other large predator with a .38 or .357.


Bet it'd shake a J or K-frame .38 gun into premature cylinder endshake if shot a lot.
 
rwsmith said:
I'll bet dollars to donuts that if I put these in my 2" snub I will not get even near the advertised velocity, especially being a 158 gr. bullet.

The thing is that they don't even SUGGEST what kind of barrel/gun they used in testing. Maybe a "10" Test Barrel" like some of my books. Or a T/C Encore/Contender with a 12" barrel and no cylinder gap.
Click to expand...

Buffalo and Underwood don't do that. Whatever buffalo gets in a given barrel equivalent Underwood loads are bout the same
 
caleb4387 said:
Buffalo makes the same load bud. :)
Click to expand...

I hadn't seen that one before. Just looked it up:
➤ 1255 fps -- Ruger GP 100, 6 inch barrel, 357 mag.
➤ 1186 fps -- S&W Combat Masterpiece 6 inch barrel, 38 SPL (circa 1958)
makes sense for a 6+ bbl.

And equivalent to their FBI load out of a snubby:
➤ 1027 fps -- S&W Mod 642 (pre dash), 1 & 7/8 inch barrel, 38 SPL

Thanks
 
So, just because many of you weren't around when NKJNut and I were discussing "THE LOAD" (as Jessie dubbed the starting Speer #8 load for .38 Specials with 158-grainers and SR 4756 back when I started playing with it and discussing it here), let me state that it's certainly possible to throw 158-gr bullets at c. 1050 fps from a 1 7/8" J-frame. (The same load got around what the Underwood data claims from a 6".) Now, I don't know whether it's do-able within modern SAAMI pressure specs for the .38 Special cartridge (the Speer #8 pre-dated the modern pressure designations for the .38 Special and .38 Special +P) or even within those for .38 Special +P: our tested handloading certainly was generating more pressure than both present-day SAAMI specs.

I'm pretty experienced in loading for the .38 Special, but I am not aware of the abilities of the canister powders available only to major loaders. Perhaps there's some new canister powder that allows it. Just for kicks, someone could buy some of the Underwood ammo and have it pressure-tested (some powder makers will do that for folks they know). I have never shot the Underwood stuff and don't know anything about it: we were able get those results with over-the-counter powders and older published data (from before modern SAAMI specs neutered the Great .38 Special), but not under present pressure limits.
 
Last edited:
Erich said:
So, just because many of you weren't around when NKJNut and I were discussing "THE LOAD" (as Jessie dubbed the starting Speer #8 load for .38 Specials with 158-grainers and SR 4756 back when I started playing with it and discussing it here), let me state that it's certainly possible to throw 158-gr bullets at c. 1050 fps from a 1 7/8" J-frame. (The same load got around what the Underwood data claims from a 6".) Now, I don't know whether it's do-able within modern SAAMI pressure specs for the .38 Special cartridge (the Speer #8 pre-dated the modern pressure designations for the .38 Special and .38 Special +P) or even within those for .38 Special +P: our tested handloading certainly was generating more pressure than both present-day SAAMI specs.

I'm pretty experienced in loading for the .38 Special, but I am not aware of the abilities of the canister powders available only to major loaders. Perhaps there's some new canister powder that allows it. Just for kicks, someone could buy some of the Underwood ammo and have it pressure-tested (some powder makers will do that for folks they know). I have never shot the Underwood stuff and don't know anything about it: we were able get those results with over-the-counter powders and older published data (from before modern SAAMI specs neutered the Great .38 Special), but not under present pressure limits.
Click to expand...

On here I read about a load that was published in a magazine as a duplicate of the BB FBI load. It was sent off and pressure tested by SAAMI, within +P spec.

It was 6.3 gr of PP behind a softcast 158 gr LSWHP-GC. Obviously, it is not flash-suppressed, but it was said to clock 1000+ from a snubby.

My SD practice load is similar, 6.3 gr of PP behind a hardcast 158 gr RFFP. It clocks 980 out of my 2" 10-5 and 1100 out of my 4" 64-3. I haven't tested it in my 6" 14-3.

So yes, it's doable.
 
Referencing back to post #14 and SR4756,SR4756 is my hot/nuclear powder,always got surprisingly high chronographed velocities. I use it in 9mm,38sp,357M,40S&W,10mm,44sp,44M. It's been discontinued for a few years now,but I've been stocking up whenever I see it. For the revolvers,it acts like 2400 but cleaner.
 
I have yet to try Underwood ammo, but I CAN attest to the Buffalo Bore #20A 158 grain +P 38 Special LSWCHP-GC at 1025 fps out of my 2" (two inch) Model 60-7 as per my chronograph. I have verified this many times and it is no fluke! Consistent as hell and accurate also! I have never had any of the Underwood to test.
 
+1 with chief38. This is my carry load in my model 36. It isn't a load I practice with as it is stout and pricey, but I have faith in this as a personal protection load.
 
Be aware that a revolver is not a revolver whenever MV is considered. Owing to dimensional differences, especially in the barrel-cylinder gap, it is entirely possible to see 100-200 ft/sec spreads in average MV among different revolvers having identical barrel lengths and firing identical ammunition. Any published load's MV figures you see involving velocities obtained from revolvers should be considered as being only rough approximations. If you don't believe me, and if you have a chronograph, try it yourself and see. I've done it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
New Hornady "Backcountry Defense" DGH 10mm -- Solution for M&P 10mm issues?
Replies
14
Views
3K
Glockman4
G
L
Hard Cast and Bottle Necks
Replies
13
Views
434
mtgianni
M
Dump1567
.38 Special Ammo Velocity Comparisons: Historical vs. Modern
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
38SPL HV
38SPL HV
38SPL HV
Unique Powder - 38 Spl Chronograph Data
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
38SPL HV
38SPL HV
P
.357 Mag Pressure Signs: How Sticky is Too Sticky?
2 3
Replies
44
Views
2K
rockquarry
R

Latest posts

Back
Top