Did I mess up passing on a 38/44?

[DARE]

I have never heard of accuracy problems from firing .38 Special in guns chambered for .357 Magnum.
I would venture a guess that people that own .357 Magnums fire more .38 Special than Magnum loads.
I think that was the idea behind the .357 Combat Magnum. Bill Jordan considered it the best law enforcement firearm. Smaller and lighter than the N Frame. His idea was that cops would practice with .38 Special and use Magnum ammo for duty.

 

[rct269]

I had one of each (pre/post-war) in my collection. They were sold within the last three years or so along with the others, and fetched $2200 (pre-war), and $1625 (post-war)---and it had the funky finish ("Satin Blue").

Ralph Tremaine

 

[rct269]

The accuracy problems encountered by shooting .38 Specials in a 357 Magnum will jump right out at you if you shoot as well as a machine rest. Don't sweat the small stuff otherwise!

Ralph Tremaine

 

[Retired W4]

Absolution.
.

Forgiveness. Father I have sinned.

I had a HD with a HP cylinder rigged up. I worked well. Don't know what it took to do it.

Then there is this gem I was out bid on. Came with original box. I always wondered who got it.

 

[A10]

The answer is always yes.......

 

[gmborkovic]

Mr. Muley, not a rev. guy. What is a frame lug and how do you replace?
Or cut it.

 

[DARE]

Ralph, another thought about .38 Special in a .357 Magnum.
When you ordered your Registered Magnum you chose what ammo you wanted it sighted in with. Could be .38 Special or .357 Magnum. Would be surprised if S&W offered that option knowing that the .38 Special would not be accurate.
Registration No. 14 went to Charles Hopkins of the Western Cartridge Company. He helped in the development of the .357 Magnum cartridge. No. 15 went to John M Olin Vice President of Western Cartridge Co. Both of those guns were sighted in with the Western .38 Super-X Special cartridge.

 

[SS336]

Well Rob, I think it's Obvious you should have bought it.

If you had the cash it could have been a great deal. Just rubbing salt in the wound by now. Sorry.

 

[rct269]

When it comes to accuracy/group size shooting .38 Specials from a Magnum cylinder, there are two problems (both of which can be overcome by handloaders----by loading .38 Special loads in Magnum cases).

The problems:

1. The shoulder sitting whatever it is (1/10-1/8") in front of the .38 Special case mouth.

2. The increase in throat length facing a .38 Special round in a Magnum cylinder.

So what's the effect of these problems?

Accuracy/group size is all about the bullet emerging from the bore in as pristine condition as possible. Any/all damage done to the bullet before it gets out, and on its way is bad news---a little or a lot. I alluded to this earlier with mention of a machine rest---and therein lies the proof of the pudding. Pretty much anything you want to know about bullets/loads/crimps, or any and all other aspects of any given round of ammunition is going to be learned with the use of a machine rest-----which costs less than pretty much any gun in your stash.

So---chamber shoulder problem: It's an obstruction faced by a .38 Special round in a Magnum cylinder. The bullet is going to be damaged (a little or a lot) when it passes by.

Increased throat length problem: The increased length makes for more time/distance for the .38 Special bullet to accelerate on its way to the barrel---more than if fired from a .38 Special cylinder. Given that, the bullet is going to skid/slide further in the barrel before the rifling gets a hold on it---inflicting damage not found when firing it out of a .38 Special cylinder---a little or a lot.

If/when you'd like to see the comparative impact on accuracy, get yourself a machine rest----and you will done get yourself "edumacated" pretty damn quick!! Shoot some .38 Special rounds from a .38 Special revolver---then shoot some from a 357 Magnum revover---and BEHOLD!!

The very best part of fooling around with a machine rest is learning how REALLY good your guns are-------and learning just how far you have to go to shoot them anywhere near as well. I've met a few humans who can shoot (almost) as well as the machine rest---as in "Close, but no cigar!!"

Ralph Tremaine

And speaking of throat length, I learned that lesson a looooooooong time ago with a Ruger Old Army (cap & ball):

I fired 5 different loads: The first with powder/lubed wad/ball. That load seated DEEP within the chamber (maximum throat length). I fired from a rest, seated, two hand hold with a rest, at 25 yards. The result was a 4" group.

Next, same load but with 20 grains of corn meal added as a spacer. That load seated with the ball flush with the chamber mouth. The result was a group covered by a quarter---one ragged hole!

The other loads were in between, with 5/10/15 grains of corn meal; and the results were almost linear between quarter size and 4".

I rest my case!

 

[rct269]

And I didn't respond with any degree of specificity to DARE's comment about what S&W would do/not do vis-a-vis sighting in RM's with .38 Specials-----------and I, as well as he know they did that. (I was more than a little bumfuzzled with one of mine---1 of 15 shipped to the Indianapolis P.D.--care of LT. S0&SO---Director of Training---and sighted in at 25 yards with .38 Special Wadcutters.) HUH?!!!!

Anyhow---it seems to me "sighting in" means they set the elevation and windage such that the rounds would impact at point of aim at whatever distance. I don't recall any mention of accuracy/group size or provision of test targets speaking to accuracy/group size.

I have a Colt Special Combat Government Model---those put together by their Custom Shop. It came with a test target, showing a ragged one hole group at whatever the range was. Same church, different pew, having decided everybody should have at least one custom gun, I bought a new Colt Government Model, covered it with money, and sent it off to Wilson Combat, with instructions to "Build me a Master Grade.". It too came back with a test target showing a ragged one hole group----pretty much the SAME size, and at the SAME distance!!

I figured there was a lesson there. Here are two more or less identical guns performing essentially the same. I wonder how come one of them cost a bunch more than the other one did? Well the Wilson gun was prettier, but that came at a pretty fancy price. Oh well. Live and learn? Naw---I'd probably do the same thing all over again.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[Muley Gil]

And I didn't respond with any degree of specificity to DARE's comment about what S&W would do/not do vis-a-vis sighting in RM's with .38 Specials-----------and I, as well as he know they did that. (I was more than a little bumfuzzled with one of mine---1 of 15 shipped to the Indianapolis P.D.--care of LT. S0&SO---Director of Training---and sighted in at 25 yards with .38 Special Wadcutters.) HUH?!!!!

Anyhow---it seems to me "sighting in" means they set the elevation and windage such that the rounds would impact at point of aim at whatever distance. I don't recall any mention of accuracy/group size or provision of test targets speaking to accuracy/group size.

I have a Colt Special Combat Government Model---those put together by their Custom Shop. It came with a test target, showing a ragged one hole group at whatever the range was. Same church, different pew, having decided everybody should have at least one custom gun, I bought a new Colt Government Model, covered it with money, and sent it off to Wilson Combat, with instructions to "Build me a Master Grade.". It too came back with a test target showing a ragged one hole group----pretty much the SAME size, and at the SAME distance!!

I figured there was a lesson there. Here are two more or less identical guns performing essentially the same. I wonder how come one of them cost a bunch more than the other one did? Well the Wilson gun was prettier, but that came at a pretty fancy price. Oh well. Live and learn? Naw---I'd probably do the same thing all over again.

Ralph Tremaine

Most likely the LT wanted a revolver for target shooting.

 

[rct269]

The Lt's gun (and all the rest) were 5" NICKEL)---which was the why of I went after it---with Humpback hammers yet---and the auction catalog said "Original finish". The finish was all frosty. That came off in short order with some Bronze Wool and oil, and the "Original finish" underneath looked like new---as did everything under the sideplate. Reaction #1 was the Lt's gun wasn't used for target shooting---it was used as ballast in his sock drawer. Then, as I was taking it apart, and came upon 5 (FIVE!!) little bitty stars; well hidden here and there, I decided the "Original finish" was of the #2 variety-----and it was flat gorgeous!! That's the only gun I ever passed along----and came to wish I hadn't.

Gary Garbrecht gave the very best advice of any: "Ralph, I don't know if that gun's been refinished or not; but Ralph, that's a nickel Magnum! You need to take that home, and put it on the shelf." So I did---for awhile.

Then what I thought was good sense prevailed, and I sold it. I was wrong about that good sense.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[mtgianni]

Most likely the LT wanted a revolver for target shooting.

Or he had access to a ton of free wadcutters.

 

[Muley Gil]

Or he had access to a ton of free wadcutters.

Back in the '90s, I bought a 4 5/8" New Model Ruger Blackhawk .45 Colt/.45 ACP convertible to replace the OM .45 Colt that got away from me. I was a LEO at the time & had access to free .45 ACP ammo.

Guess which cylinder came to live in my Ruger?

 

[Iggy]

My favorite old timers.

38/44 and it's little .22 brother

Post war models ain't too shabby.