Snubby Carry Load. 357 or 38 +P

[Kanewpadle]

This purpose of this thread isn't about recoil but more so bullet performance. Let's assume you can the control the recoil of the 357 in a snubby. Would you carry that load? Or would you carry 38 +P?

I've heard many times that with the loss in velocity with 357 that you might as well carry 38 +P. But I simply refuse to believe that the 38 +P would perform better than the 357 even with loss in velocity. Maybe I'm wrong.

I also understand that much of this depends on the load and bullet design you choose. Depending on bullet design, faster isn't always better.

 

[4011]

More is not always better. I stepped down to 38 standard velocity. Better overal control of the J frame. I rather hit the target than scare it.

 

[Kanewpadle]

More is not always better. I stepped down to 38 standard velocity. Better overal control of the J frame. I rather hit the target than scare it.

I understand your point. But I'm not concerned about scaring anyone and for the purpose of this discussion bullet placement is a given. What's the real reason you chose standard?

 

[Sol-Invictus]

This purpose of this thread isn't about recoil but more so bullet performance. Let's assume you can the control the recoil of the 357 in a snubby. Would you carry that load? Or would you carry 38 +P?

I've heard many times that with the loss in velocity with 357 that you might as well carry 38 +P. But I simply refuse to believe that the 38 +P would perform better than the 357 even with loss in velocity. Maybe I'm wrong.

I also understand that much of this depends on the load and bullet design you choose. Depending on bullet design, faster isn't always better.

Depends on the individual gun. I usually carry 110 grain 357 in my snubs builts for it. I have a little mechanical steel plate target. 357 whips the plates up and around. 38+P barely moves them. Anyone who chooses +P due to no claimed energy difference in regular loadings versus 357 does not have real world experience.

If the choice is because of tolerable recoil issues, accuracy, or significant loss of follow up shooting for the individual then regular 38 or +P is a sensible choice.

Shoot and decide what works best for you.

Sent from my SM-T520 using Tapatalk

 

[mrchuck]

I carry a "snub" Smith&Wesson model 60 .357 five shot.

The .357 caliber is LOUD, kicks, and does exactly what it was designed to do. That is to kill,,,,not wound.
At the range target practicing with .357 rounds is not fun.
But when adrenaline kicks in instantly checking out a strange noise or a hold-up in your presence, the recoil is not a factor anymore.

 

[blues7]

Based upon the data and findings provided by Dr. Gary Roberts, I have settled on Winchester Ranger (Bonded) RA38B...130gr +P

Impressive results for both penetration and expansion out of short barreled revolvers.

 

[Ziggy2525]

.38 special vs .357 magnum in snubnose revolvers. Haven't watched it for a bit, but from a ballistic standpoint, IIRC, .357 is significantly better.

[ame="https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=27wDLjY5JSs"]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=27wDLjY5JSs[/ame]

 

[forrestinmathews]

In the snubnosed revolver it is always better ballistically to fire .357 rounds(more power). It is always better practically to reload with .38's(shorter and better clearnace of speedloaders).
Win 296 or H110 under a 125 grain Hornady XTP will take care of most problems that are walking and talking in short order.

 

[blues7]

You may also find the info provided by Lucky Gunner on this page of interest for comparison purposes.

It is specifically tailored to .38 and .357 ammo though the gel utilized is not the same as that used in the FBI protocol nor Dr. Roberts' testing.

That said, the penetration, expansion and images provided are interesting.

 

[rwsmith]

Ideally what I do.....

I shoot low end .357s that are stronger than any .38+P, but nowhere near the blast and recoil. People talk about the .38/40 and the 'FBI load' but with a .357 you can match these or make them a little stronger. They are useful, especially in a house. If I have a gun with a .38 +P in it, I don't feel under armed. If I ever have to pull a trigger, I'm not going to stop at one shot.

 

[Walkingwolf]

Ask somebody that has been shot with one for an honest answer.

Sorry that was snippy, but consider what a criminal thinks when s/he encounters a armed citizen. I don't think they care, and are scared at that moment. At least that is what convicts have said in studies, they fear the armed citizen.

 

[blues7]

Dr. Roberts on .38 and .357 from a 2" (specifically J frame):

Currently, the Speer Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP, Winchester 130 gr bonded +P JHP (RA38B), and Barnes 110 gr XPB all copper JHP (for ex. in the Corbon DPX loading) offer the most reliable expansion we have seen from a .38 sp 2" BUG; Hornady 110 gr standard pressure and +P Critical Defense loads also offer good performance out of 2" barrel revolvers...

...There is no reason to go with .357 mag in a J-frame, as the significantly larger muzzle blast and flash, and harsher recoil of the .357 Magnum does not result in substantially improved terminal performance compared to the more controllable .38 Special bullets when fired from 2" barrels...

... As always, don't get too wrapped in the nuances of ammunition terminal performance. Spend your time and money on developing a warrior mindset, training, practice, and more training.

 

[eb07]

I went through this exact question in my head so I went out and did some chrono testing on my own firearms:

In a nutshel, from my snubs:

The difference between the low end 38+p and the 357 magnum:
473 fps 315 ft lbs energy

The difference between the high end 38+p and the 357 magnum:
282 fps 204 ft lbs of energy

The follow up shots are easier and slightly faster with the 38+P but just as accurate

 

[Rpg]

My experience shooting critters with a handgun has convinced me that hard cast swc projectiles perform much better than projectiles designed to expand.

Folks enjoy reading ballistic tables and looking at ballistic gel tests. Unfortunately, folks imagine that these things are determinative of effectiveness. My experience suggests that reasoning is hyperbolic.

Muzzle energy overstates effectiveness because it overemphasizes velocity in a handgun. Momentum is a much better predictor of effectiveness in flesh and bone than muzzel energy.

Velocity is important only in that you need enough to obtain adequate penetration. Sacrificing bullet weight to obtain higher velocity is a fool's errand in my opinion.

I'm very skeptical about expanding bullets in handguns, particularly short barreled handguns.

I see no benefit in trying to squeeze more velocity from a short barreled handgun with 357 as opposed to 38 special.

 

[AZretired]

I carry one of 4 revolvers (M642, M638, M64 Snubby or a 3" 65). My load of choice is either the Remington or Federal 158 gr LSWC-HP +P. Its a proven stopper, mild recoil (faster follow-up shots) and works well in my 642 which is what I mostly carry.

Note: Todays +P rounds are not your Daddy's +P.

 

[old tanker]

I use .357 158 grain LSWC in my 640-1. In fact, I prefer the heavier bullet in all my .357 revolvers. The recoil is heavier but not as sharp, which is easier for me to control.

 

[vytoland]

if shot placement is a given.....a hard cast .38 special bullet will give the desired results.....

 

[colt_saa]

This purpose of this thread isn't about recoil but more so bullet performance. Let's assume you can the control the recoil of the 357 in a snubby. Would you carry that load?

Without Hesitation

I switched from carrying a Model 60 Chief's Special Target to the J-Magnum model 60 Chief's Special in the late 1990s just so I could carry 357 Magnum ammunition. The Remington 125 SJHP has been my favorite load for these revolvers for two decades now.

I have successfully qualified every time with the firearm over these years.

I've heard many times that with the loss in velocity with 357 that you might as well carry 38 +P. But I simply refuse to believe that the 38 +P would perform better than the 357 even with loss in velocity. Maybe I'm wrong.

The amount of loss in velocity is an internet myth.

I gathered the average chronographed velocities obtained with 5 Smith and Wesson model 60s, 640s and a 340 all fired on the same day. Two five shot strings were obtained from each firearm. All ammunition was from the lot #

357 Magnum Winchester 125 JHP averaged 1205 FPS
357 Magnum Remington 125 SJHP averaged 1199 FPS
357 Magnum Remington 110 SJHP averaged 1230 FPS

It was interesting to notice that the 110 SJHP was faster than the 125s only in this instance.

These real world numbers are several hundred feet per second over what the manufacturers each claim for their 38 Special +P loadings

BTW, those averages include data from a factory ported model Performance Center 640. If I tossed that out and only included the non-ported snubbies, the averages go up about 10 FPS

No it is not fun to shoot, but these revolvers were not designed for plinking or a day of target shooting. These revolvers were designed to save your butt when you walked into something you did not expect. Under those conditions, I want the most power I can handle in the most comfortable package to carry.

Obviously 357 Magnum in a J-frame is not for everyone, and that is fine.

So let's step up to a 2 1/2" Model 19/66 K-frames, those velocities go up a little bit except with the 110. Only three revolvers were used to obtain these averages. We go to 1264 FPS, 1263 FPS and 1203 FPS respectively.

If we take this to a 3" barrel (1 Model 60 Pro and 1 F-comp) the Remington velocities go to 1290 FPS for the 125 SJHPs and 1243 FPS for the 110 SJHPs. Again the 110s are slower. I did not have enough of the Winchester left on hand for these revolvers.

OK going to 3 1/2" we have two N-frames (Both PC revolvers). Here the Remington velocities go to 1370 FPS for the 125 SJHPs and 1338 FPS for the 110 SJHPs. These did have tight B/C gaps that probably accounted for the higher velocities more than the extra 1/2" of barrel did. The Big N-frame, even with the short barrel, is much more pleasant to shoot than the smaller revolvers.

Sticking with the N-frame, I had two 4" model 27s. The Remington velocities go to 1391 FPS for the 125 SJHPs and 1321 FPS for the 110 SJHPs on these.

Taking this to the 5 1/2" Model 627 (sorry I only had one). The Remington velocities go to 1422 FPS for the 125 SJHPs and 1367 FPS for the 110 SJHPs on this one.

Now if you want the 357 Magnum to REALLY perform we can go to my 18" 1892 lever action. The Remington velocities go to 2049 FPS for the 125 SJHPs and 1727 FPS for the 110 SJHPs in this example.

I wish I had more ammunition and more real world guns to include in my study. However you can see that the loss in a 2" J-magnum is not as great as the Internet would like you to believe.

 

[iPac]

I carry 357mag in my snub Python.

Homebrews of 140gr XTP over 15gr of 2400.

Not extremely hot, but clock 1100fps through the chrono out of my 2.5" barrel.

I haven't had the chance to clock my 38spl +P and +P+ rounds, but I'm sure they're not close to the magnums.

Now, I am young and have practiced a great deal with 357mag. The recoil and follow up shots are not an issue. I settled on a gun that can accurately shoot them without excessive recoil.

There will be times when 38spl or even +P aren't going to be adequate for the job. I would rather be prepared in that event.

 

[Lostaro]

If all else was equal of course I'd carry the more powerful round. Even if the .357 gave a only small bit of improvement over a .38+p...

Problem is, for me, all else is not equal. With hotter .357's I'm not nearly as accurate or fast with follow ups.

My only "snub" .357 is a 3" GP100, not a small gun, don't consider it a true snub. But I carry lighter .357's in it for control reasons.
I'm sure with me at the helm, control with an Airweight snub in .357 would suffer if heavy loads were used.

I have complete confidence in the .38spl being adequate for anything I can handle with just a handgun.