Post war N frame 38 Heavy Duty & 357 ammo

[Tmnguuyen]

Happy new year all.

Something interesting came up during my time off from work for the holidays. Someone asked me if the cylinder for my 38 spl HD is shorter than the regular 357 in a 27 or 28. It turns out the cylinders are all the same between the 27, 28 and HD. I have MR73 in 38 special and it is the same situation. The chamber lengths are the same. In the MR73 case, i can't put the 357 round in the chamber but on the HD however both 357 and 38 spl seat flush.

I think the cylinder dimensions are the same make sense to keep the tooling cost down but what the point then to have a 38spl only version. What significant difference and advantage in a gun that don't have dimensional differences? Love to hear your expert opinions and comments.

Thanks

 

[Jim Watson]

Is that the New HD or a period gun that has been rechambered?

The rationale for a .38 Special version of a model regularly available in .357 Magnum might be for a chance of better accuracy with chambers of case length.
Or it might be a matter of public policy, most companies have made .38s for government agencies that do not want the publicity of issuing an "elephant gun."

 

[Tmnguuyen]

Is that the New HD or a period gun that has been rechambered?

The rationale for a .38 Special version of a model regularly available in .357 Magnum might be for a chance of better accuracy with chambers of case length.
Or it might be a matter of public policy, most companies have made .38s for government agencies that do not want the publicity of issuing an "elephant gun."

The HD is period correct and unaltered. Interesting take on the public perception and policy.
Not sure what you mean with the case length, isn't it less accurate with a short case since there is a longer bullet jump?

Thanks

 

[murphydog]

An unaltered .38/44 Heavy Duty or Outdoorsman should not fully seat a .357 (cylinder bores would be .135" too short). If your HD does it has been altered, a common modification back in the day.

 

[Tmnguuyen]

An unaltered .38/44 Heavy Duty or Outdoorsman should not fully seat a .357 (cylinder bores would be .135" too short). If your HD does it has been altered, a common modification back in the day.

Thanks, this has to be the explanation. My HD is a 5 screws with matching numbers even on the stocks. I'm was under the impression that it is unaltered until today. I looked at the frame to see if there is any stamping indications of a reworked but none found. The gun went back to S&W for a standard polish and blue job. The cylinder now has a plum color.

 

[hkcavalier]

A gun the size of a H-D as "only" a .38 Special does seem really odd to us in this day and age. Even back in the 1950s it was a bit anachronistic. One reason the postwar H-Ds and Outdoorsman models aren't too common. I had an unaltered 5" example that I sold off last year, though I still have the very hot +P+ ammo that I bought specifically for the gun. It'll probably leave the muzzle of my 686 or 27-2 one of these days.

 

[Retired W4]

.357 conversions were fairy common with the Heavy Duty. This one has a Highway Patrolman cylinder installed. I believe. I sold this one several years ago. I wish I had it back.

 

[Tmnguuyen]

.357 conversions were fairy common with the Heavy Duty. This one has a Highway Patrolman cylinder installed. I believe. I sold this one several years ago. I wish I had it back.

So beside reaming out the chamber, installing a 357 cylinder is the other option it appears. Are there other mods, fittings required to safely shoot .357 out of the HD? Barrel and forcing cones should be left alone i suspect.

Thanks

 

[Retired W4]

In the case of my HD, the work was done by a previous owner so I really don't know what all had to be done to it. I do know that it was a great shooting revolvers.

 

[murphydog]

So beside reaming out the chamber, installing a 357 cylinder is the other option it appears. Are there other mods, fittings required to safely shoot .357 out of the HD? Barrel and forcing cones should be left alone i suspect.

Thanks

Yes, the cylinder would need to be different but everything else with an N frame .38 Special does not need alteration.

 

[rct269]

Reaming the .38 Special chambers of a 38-44 Heavy Duty or an Outdoorsman to accept 357 cartridges was a common practice---and an entirely safe one. The heat treating of the cylinders produced an elastic limit/strength of 130,000 lbs.

Then there's the fact Sharpe was give an Outdoorsman to use as a test mule for his development of the 357 Magnum cartridge---and some of his experimental loads terrified Wesson, and were WAY beyond the pressures of the final load. His test mule Outdoorsman kept right on keeping on!

Ralph Tremaine

AND--------the .38 Special loads intended for use in the Heavy Duty and Outdoorsman were not your everyday .38 Specials at 950 fps at the muzzle-----up from 870 fps a few years earlier---and WAY up from the 755 fps from today's fodder. They were known as .38/44 S&W Specials, and came out at 1226 fps.

What's even more amusing is the fact today's +P load makes for 890 fps-----really hot stuff, and certainly worth the extra cost---right??!!

 

[Tmnguuyen]

With too much time on my hands, I took out my pre 28 and tried to swap the cylinder with the HD. No bueno, they do not interchange, fun experiment though. This may be one of the reasons why there are matching SNs on the cylinder, frame and barrel. I guess, if someone want to make the conversion then reaming the chambers would be the simplest. Fitting an 357 cylinder seems to be very involved.

 

[rct269]

With too much time on my hands, I took out my pre 28 and tried to swap the cylinder with the HD. No bueno, they do not interchange, fun experiment though. This may be one of the reasons why there are matching SNs on the cylinder, frame and barrel. I guess, if someone want to make the conversion then reaming the chambers would be the simplest. Fitting an 357 cylinder seems to be very involved.

There's no romance or secret stuff involved in the numbering of the several bits and pieces of any given gun. The guns were finished (blue/nickel) in pieces-----each piece in a fixture along with the same pieces from a bunch of other guns in the same oven (for blue)/tank (for nickel) at the same time. It's worth noting all these pieces were fit to what I'll call the parent frames---AND any piece fit to a piece fit to a frame-----the front sight blades on targets for example. After finishing they're off to assembly---and all those numbered pieces need to get back together on the same frame to which they were fit to begin with.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[Muley Gil]

With too much time on my hands, I took out my pre 28 and tried to swap the cylinder with the HD. No bueno, they do not interchange, fun experiment though. This may be one of the reasons why there are matching SNs on the cylinder, frame and barrel. I guess, if someone want to make the conversion then reaming the chambers would be the simplest. Fitting an 357 cylinder seems to be very involved.

A pre M28 cylinder is longer than a .38/44 cylinder, due to the recesses for the cartridge heads.

 

[alwslate]

I have two post war 38/44 HDs that date to around 1956. Both are still .38 spl only. Since I also have model 28s and 27s I will never alter my original HDs. S&W isn't making any more of them. Many today prefer loads with 158 gr cast SWCs of around 1,000 fps in their .357s. Easily achieved with +P .38 spl loads.

 

[BC38]

I've always been curious about the difference between a 38/44 HD and a 357 magnum cylinder. I've never had a chance to compare them side by side since I've never actually held a 38/44 HD in my hands.

Everything I've read here (and in multiple other threads) indicates that a 38/44 HD cylinder is the same length as a 357 magnum cylinder, so all that is required for shooting 357 magnums out of a 38/44 HD is reaming the chambers of the 38/44 HD deep enough to accept the longer 357 magnum cases.

My question about the 38/44 HD is in regards to being recessed. Everything I have read indicates that the only N-frame cylinders that were recessed were the ones originally chambered for the 357 magnum loads.

If that is correct, and the 38/44 HD cylinders are NOT recessed, then they would have to have a larger recoil-shield to cylinder face gap than the recessed 357 magnum cylinders.

So, if that is correct, AND the cylinders of both revolvers are the same length, that must mean that the 38/44 HD cylinder is set further forward in the frame, requiring a shorter barrel extension into the frame window, and therefore a smaller gap between the front of the cylinder and the frame window than the 357 magnum revolvers.

It seems that would be necessary make up for the smaller gap between the rear of the cylinder and frame window? The interesting thing is that this is the exact opposite of newer revolvers where the 38 special and 357 magnums are built on the same frame, and the 38 specials have a shorter cylinder and a LONGER barrel extension into the frame window to make up for the difference in cylinder length.

Or am I missing something here?

 

[Muley Gil]

It seems that the specs for the +P .38 special cartridge loaded with 158 grain bullets comes to 890 fps, at least from two of the major ammo companies (Remington & Winchester). That is almost the same as the OLD standard .38 special specifications-158 at 860.

Some of the smaller ammunition companies do offer hotter 158 grain +P loads.

Please see the chart below:

38 Special Ballistics Chart | Ballistics 101

 

[Muley Gil]

I've always been curious about the difference between a 38/44 HD and a 357 magnum cylinder. I've never had a chance to compare them side by side since I've never actually held a 38/44 HD in my hands.

Everything I've read here (and in multiple other threads) indicates that a 38/44 HD cylinder is the same length as a 357 magnum cylinder, so all that is required for shooting 357 magnums out of a 38/44 HD is reaming the chambers of the 38/44 HD deep enough to accept the longer 357 magnum cases.

My question about the 38/44 HD is in regards to being recessed. Everything I have read indicates that the only N-frame cylinders that were recessed were the ones originally chambered for the 357 magnum loads.

If that is correct, and the 38/44 HD cylinders are NOT recessed, then they would have to have a larger recoil-shield to cylinder face gap than the recessed 357 magnum cylinders.

So, if that is correct, AND the cylinders of both revolvers are the same length, that must mean that the 38/44 HD cylinder is set further forward in the frame, requiring a shorter barrel extension into the frame window, and therefore a smaller gap between the front of the cylinder and the frame window than the 357 magnum revolvers.

It seems that would be necessary make up for the smaller gap between the rear of the cylinder and frame window? The interesting thing is that this is the exact opposite of newer revolvers where the 38 special and 357 magnums are built on the same frame, and the 38 specials have a shorter cylinder and a LONGER barrel extension into the frame window to make up for the difference in cylinder length.

Or am I missing something here?

The OVERALL length is the same, from the front of the cylinder to the ratchet teeth.

 

[alwslate]

It seems that the specs for the +P .38 special cartridge loaded with 158 grain bullets comes to 890 fps, at least from two of the major ammo companies (Remington & Winchester). That is almost the same as the OLD standard .38 special specifications-158 at 860.

Some of the smaller ammunition companies do offer hotter 158 grain +P loads.

Please see the chart below:

38 Special Ballistics Chart | Ballistics 101

Brian Pearce, Handloader magazine 10-2016 #304. Pressure tested +P loads for 158 gr cast SWCs that do not exceed the 20,000 psi limit for +P. 6.0 grs of Longshot or Power Pistol or 5.8 grs CFE pistol easily exceed 1,000 fps.

 

[DWalt]

All I can say is that I have a ca.1954 HD that some previous owner had converted to chamber .357. That was a simple DIY job to perform, it just required a .357 cutter. Even though I have not fired large numbers of .357 cartridges in mine, there have been no issues in doing so. Unless a HD is in very high and otherwise original condition, I do not consider having lengthed chambers to be a serious defect in an average condition HD.