Bad Load? The .38 Special 158 gr. RNL

[Andy Griffith]

RNL bullets, at standard velocity need to be almost pure lead to be effective. Most all on the market today are much harder than they should be.

Why is the .38 RNL bullet maligned, when .36 round balls from a Colt Navy was reasonably effective for such a long period?
(Medical advancements aside)

If you are going to use LRN bullets for defense, make certain they are pure lead.

 

[kaaskop49]

Attn: 336A

That looks like late 40s or early 50s mfg. I'm not a collector, so I don't know the value, but they're worth shooting, if only to show how much hotter these original service loads were, as opposed to today's 158RN production. Enjoy them!

 

[nechaev]

I never tried the LRN ammo until a few months ago. I had purchased quite some time before that, as in about a year or two. Much to my delight the Magtech ammo performed flawlessly in my M10. I had some reservations about using it as I remember hearing something about bad primers with this ammo not to long ago. The ammo shot very well for me and was much cleaner than I expected, I think it would be a good field load for squirrel and grouse.

I have also taken to using the Lyman #358665 RNFP with some W231 it shots about the same as does the magtech although the bullet is slightly heavier. While it is true that the LRN has been surpassed as a SD it is accurate and I'd certainly use it if it were all I had.

I believe that Magtech as well as S and B have somewhat harder primers than most commercial brands. This only seems to be a problem if you had your trigger significantly lightened thus lowering the kinetic energy with which it hits. Repeat hits usually do the trick.

 

[YeshuaIsa53]

Those lead-eating condors may be eating our target loads into history. It happened with waterfowl ammo.

Never shot a .38 LRN in my life. Someone sold me a box of reloads at a range when my gun was new back in the seventies. They were 148 grain LWC, bullet seated inside the casing. Never saw anything like it before. Bought another box as I was leaving. That and the Model 14-3 were married, and they paint a pretty picture on paper. I may use something else for SD, or even a larger caliber or gauge, but why fix something if it isn't broken?

That's why I read this thread, so maybe I'll know what they are like.

Shot a deer with a 50 caliber smokepole and a round bullet one time, and stopped using them when the deer I shot in the temple woke up while I was kneeling next to it and ran off. Had to shoot it again. Scared heck out of me sitting alone in the dark. Hasn't ever happened again, though.

 

[Harkrader]

WOW!
What a GREAT thread!
I remember these arguments from the '70s.

I have only one thought, which may well be based on a faulty memory.

I thought I remember a defense of the RNL .38 Special that stated that during its hayday it had the best record of stopping the bad guys of any police round.

I'd like to know if anyone has evidence supporting or disproving that.

 

[Acebow]

The .38 RNL bullet/load is great for range work, and works OK on rabbit-and squirrel-size critters--sometimes--, and maybe even on possums and small coons. But there is a reason a lot of old cops consider them the original 'Cop Killer Bullet'. They just don't work good on people. And for those who have a few anecdotes on the bad guys who dropped on the spot with one shot to the big toe, there is a high ratio of 'didn't stop' to 'stop'.
That bovine-processed fertilizer nonsense of 'Are you gonna stand there and let me shoot you with it?' is what people smarter than me call a 'specious argument'; I've heard the same baloney about .25, .32, .380, .22, and other such nonsense. I'm not gonna stand still and let you run over me with a Yugo, either, but I won't recommend it as a good idea for daily transportation.
The RNL .38 load is not, and never was, a good choice for defensive duties. Just because a lot of chair-polishing office wonks made the line cops use it for way too long doesn't make it right.
Use it for what it's good for--poking little holes in paper, training new shooters who are leery of recoil, and maybe to dispatch the occasional small critter. But load your defensive gun with something that will be more likely to let you come back and tell the tale.

Then there's the scary silliness of using the Taurus Junk revolver with any .410 load, and thinking it's a viable choice for defensive purposes--but that's a whole 'nother thread. Acebow

 

[poordevil]

Sorry, i'm going to have to disagree. Have you ever seen the
footage of the shooting? I've seen the film clip of Ruby
shooting Oswald a few times on TV during documentaries
about the Kennedy assassination. After being shot Oswald
would have in no way been able to return fire in my opinion.
Remember also that Ruby was immediately grabbed by the
officers present, preventing more shots from him?

I found this picture of Oswald being shot. I agree the RNL is not the preferred load, but Oswald does not look like he is interested in fighting back.

https://s.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/F....com/2013/11/o-lee-harvey-oswald-facebook.jpg

 

[10ring]

Holy thread resurrection Batman!

Two years go by and the thread just picks up where it left off. I love it. The 158 gr RNL, on the other hand...no love there. If you gave me some I'd shoot it, and if it was the only thing I had available for law enforcement or defense, then I would use it because it was all I had, but otherwise it is simply uninteresting in light of what else is out there for defensive, hunting or target purposes.

Sure, plenty of people have been killed with it but you can say the same of just about any handgun cartridge.

 

[kaaskop49]

WOW!
What a GREAT thread!
I remember these arguments from the '70s.

I have only one thought, which may well be based on a faulty memory.

I thought I remember a defense of the RNL .38 Special that stated that during its hayday it had the best record of stopping the bad guys of any police round.

I'd like to know if anyone has evidence supporting or disproving that.

Just as there are more accidents involving, say, Toyotas, than there are with Lamborghinis, simply because there are more Toyotas on the road. The RNL was general issue with practically every PD so it makes sense that it was used more and perhaps stopped more BGs. It was the many failures involving repeated center-of-mass hits, however, that influenced cartridge development.

I read such a defense in a 1974 issue of the NYPD Spring 3100 magazine. It was written by a range officer/instructor from the standpoint of training the large number of officers for whom marksmanship was not a priority, and who could fire the .38 RNL more easily. Ease-of-use seemed to take priority over ballistic effectiveness.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

 

[rwsmith]

I don't know why....

I just don't like them. I prefer SWCs for general purpose because they make a nice hole in the target and have that flat nose just in case you want to kill something. For plinking who cares? I'd use square bullets for that.

I'm not sure if this works but cutting a good cross in the top of a RN is supposed to make a dum dum bullet that is a more effective killer. This may be true if the lead peels back.

PS These were called "cruciform expanding bullets" in the late 1800s as opposed to lead slugs with a hollow cavity. The bullet expands to the depth of the cuts in the nose.

 

[captainjohnsofd]

Many moons ago in a previous life I was an RN working in an urban Emergency Room. I had occasion to see frequent gunshot wound patients. Many were shot with the 158 LRN .38 Special ammunition issued by the city police department. Anecdotally many died and many others survived. Those who survived were affected by many other factors besides ammunition choice. Shot placement is paramount. Caliber is important but there were DOA's who had been shot with the .22 LR, .25 ACP, and .32 ACP. We received patients shot with the .45 ACP that survived. This was in the era before sophisticated EMS care, which boosted survival rates. The ambulance crews rendered basic first aid and rushed the victim to the hospital. Surgical intervention saved many. There were times when the surgical resident on duty would accompany a GSW patient to the OR with his finger in the hole in the victim's heart to stop the bleeding. What this boils down to is I don't want to be shot with anything, including a BB.

 

[bmcgilvray]

Hah! What a resurrected thread!

Going back and rereading my original post finds a spelling error nearly two years later as well as makes me wonder what in the world was I doing up at 4:30 in morning.

 

[Gamecock]

A round nose bullet in a revolver makes no sense to me.

 

[Doug.38PR]

If you do some research you will find how "Good" the 38 special was at stopping attackers, in the 1900's, when the United States entered the Philippines American War.

...

Actually that was the .38 Long Colt not the .38 Special. The .38 Special was an improvement over the lesser .38 rounds.

 

[Doug.38PR]

Personally, I like the .38 LRN. Not my first choice for self-defense (like the LHP) but shot placement is what counts ultimately.

I like using them for target practice as well as self defense in in the woods. (a large animal is where penetration comes in handy and a handloaded +P LRN round can do that even better than the LHP)

 

[kaaskop49]

A round nose bullet in a revolver makes no sense to me.

Not only to you! I believe it was Jan Stevenson in Pistols, Revolvers and Ammunition who described RN bullets as "a mindless transition from round balls."

I also remember reading that RN bullets would be safer to shoot if the revolver were out-of-time at the moment of ignition, but that may be foolish reasoning.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

 

[gen3guy]

I kinda miss those old leadheads. So much so that I recently purchased a box of new Federal 158 gr. RNL. They weren't the same. I was disappointed with their lack of accuracy. I don't remember the ammo of yesteryear being that inaccurate.

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

My biggest question about the 158 grain round nose bullets is Why 158 grain? Why not 160 grain.
This continues to haunt me. Ditto with 148 gr Wadcutters....why not 150 gr?????.
As far as bullet weights in my non magnum firearms, I adhere to the adage that "I like my bullets to be like me-heavy and slow".
Extra points for a large flat head.

 

[Acebow]

A general rule re: RNL v SWC, the latter is more likely to push through an obstruction (read: sternum or rib, maybe even skull, bone) than the former. The round nose, lead or copper jacket, has a tendency to deflect and follow the contour of such obstructions. IF a person just MUST use a solid lead bullet for defensive purposes, the SWC would be the better choice of the two. Same goes for hunting bullets.
Of course, that's like saying Tylenol is better than Aspirin for a fever, when penicillin would cure the ailment that's causing the fever. Acebow

 

[bmcgilvray]

For an alternate point of view, I cannot see any reason to use any form of jacketed bullet load in any non-magnum revolver cartridge for self-defense purposes. Jackets are hugely overrated yet they're something a generation of pistoleros has come to expect. Must ... have ... jackets ... on ... self-defense loads, as if the lack of a jacket renders a bullet an ineffectual choice.