2" vs. 3" ballistics- .38 Special J-frames

[Texas Star]

Several years ago, I was able to get an engineer at Federal to test both snub and three-inch S&W M-60's with their 129 grain Hydra-Shok JHP round.

The snub gave 865 FPS, and the three-inch delivered 936 FPS. That's an added 71 FPS for the longer barrel.

In the 1970's, Lee Jurras wrote to me that he got 995 FPS from his 110 grain Super Vel JHP in a snub, and 1,050 FPS in the longer gun.

A three-inch gun also balances differently, and allows a full-length extractor rod stroke. It has a longer sight radius. And it is easier to find a three-inch gun with adjustable sights, if you want a small trail gun.

 

[David Sinko]

Frankly, I used to hate the 2" J Frames for all kinds of reasons. Then I bought one with Eagle Secret Service grips and my whole attitude changed. Those grips single handedly transformed my opinion of these little revolvers and have greatly increased their shootability and effectiveness in my hands. I admit that I have been wrong about these guns for many years and have been wrongfully scorning them. I personally feel that a 2" gun with the right grips is far more versatile than any 3" gun and can be hidden much more easily, which to me is what these guns are all about. If a bigger, heavier 3" gun is what you feel is best for you, then I wouldn't disagree with your choice. If I'm going to carry something in a holster though, it's going to be my 4" 625. To me, a J Frame is a hideout gun and a 2" gun with the right grips is surprisingly shootable and comfortable. I was very ignorant about this for many years until the right set of grips set me straight.

As far as the ballistics go, I would never choose an extra inch in J Frame barrel length just for a perceived increase in performance, if you can manage the 2" gun.

Dave Sinko

 

[opr1945]

1. Please excuse my ignorance, but what is a

"full lug gun"?


2. Is the 3 inch gun any more accurate than the 2 inch version?


thanks,
opr1945

 

[OKFC05]

Originally posted by opr1945:
1. Please excuse my ignorance, but what is a

"full lug gun"?


2. Is the 3 inch gun any more accurate than the 2 inch version?


thanks,
opr1945

1. The round part under the barrel (lug) goes all the way to the muzzle instead of stopping after the front cylinder lock.
2. While the inherent mechanical accuracy of the 3" barrel may be slightly greater, the human accuracy is enhanced by the better sights and longer radius, comparing a 442 to an adjustable sight 60, both of which I have.

The 442 is a superior pocket gun, while the 3" 60 rides easily in a holster. "You pays your money and you makes your choices."

 

[pmbiker]

The barrel length issue is one that I just recently dealt with. I found a really nice 36-1 a year or so ago, thought it would make a good companion to my other j-frame. I have an older 36 snub that was my fathers back-up piece when he served with the Ohio HP.

Bought it, took it home to clean, lube, etc and just loved the way it felt, looked and carried. Took it to the range, shot like a dream, 158gr. LSWC shot to the sights at @20-25ft and I was able to hold a decent group with it. Just one nagging factor, that 3" barrel. Yea, you get added velocity, good balance, longer sight radius blah, blah, blah. The only problem is that it wouldn't do anything my 2" can't do and the 2" has one ace in the hole, summer pocket carry. In the end I decided it was too big to be a little gun and too little to be a big gun, traded for a sweet 4" 586 no dash. Now I've got my big gun and my little gun and neither are having an identity crisis.

 

[bhk]

Heck, if I were to have only one J-frame it would have a 2" barrel. If I could have only two revolvers (any size) total, one would be a 2" J-frame and the other a 4-inch K or L frame. But nobody is limiting me to one or two revolvers. For J-frames, I use a 2" for pocket carry and 3 inchers for everything else I want a j-frame for. If I need a larger revolver - well, I have those too.

 

[Erich]

With the exception of pocket-carry, the 36-1 is every bit as easy to carry as a 1 7/8" gun, and it definitely is easier to shoot and hits harder. I carry it hiking up Bear Canyon, stoked with THE LOAD which throws a 158-grain TVB hardcast LSWC at 1185 fps from the 3" tube. That's cooking with gas, amigos.

(The 1 7/8" guns do about 100 fps slower with THE LOAD.)

 

[Guest]

The 'Old' "Rule of Thumb" was something like 50fps per inch of barrel length. In practice; I think this holds fairly true until you get out the point where there isn't any more powder to be burned in the cartridge case.

Frankly, I doubt the critter on the receiving end will notice much difference one way or the other as long as you put the bullet where it belongs in the first place!

 

[Cruiser RN]

When my brother was on the NYPD they were testing rounds that would by design not lose velocity when used in the sub nosed off duty and backup revolvers.What became of that is the Speer Gold Dot 135 grain copper jacketed hollow point in 38+P.This round did not lose velocity and had excellent results in actual duty shootings.I use that round in my Model 640 with a 2 1/8th inch barrel......God Bless.....Mike

 

[Texas Star]

Originally posted by Erich:
With the exception of pocket-carry, the 36-1 is every bit as easy to carry as a 1 7/8" gun, and it definitely is easier to shoot and hits harder. I carry it hiking up Bear Canyon, stoked with THE LOAD which throws a 158-grain TVB hardcast LSWC at 1185 fps from the 3" tube. That's cooking with gas, amigos.

(The 1 7/8" guns do about 100 fps slower with THE LOAD.)

Erich-

With all due respect, and I do acknowledge that you are one of the brighter bulbs here, that load doesn't sound like you're "cooking with gas."

Sounds more like you're cooking with rocket fuel. That exceeds the old .38/44 load, and is definitely in .357 teritory...in
a .38 J-frame gun! Wow...

T-Star

 

[casingpoint]

This from one of the dimmer bulbs on the shelf who cooks with cow patties...the 135 grain 38 Special Gold Dot was found by Speer to do 1040 fps in practice from a four inch barrel. Needless to say, the Speer engineers were quite surprised as this exceeded the calculated velocity. So from an 1.88 inch barrel at 860 feet, it loses 180 fps, the equivalent of 85 fps reduction in velocity per one inch of barrel reduction.

Note you can get more increase in velocity (130 fps) by going to the 135 grain 357 MAG Gold Dot from a 1.88 inch snub than with the 38 Special Gold Dot delivered through a three inch barrel.

 

[Guest]

I suppose I could step back a bit and remind everyone that each and every "firearm" is going to be just a bit different and so what is true for one won't always be true for the next one down the production line. Also, when taking Velocity readings many things need to be taken into consideration. Which breaks down to say the same thing - every "firearm" is different and no two loads are going to do exactly the same thing in two different guns.

 

[BUFF]

Originally posted by opr1945:

"Is the 3 inch gun any more accurate than the 2 inch version?"

No, as long as there is sufficient barrel length to impart the needed spin to the bullet with the rifling to stabilize it in flight, the barrel length isn't mechanically important for accuracy.

So, the longer gun isn't more intrinsinctly accurate, but the longer barrel gives you a longer sight radius, making sight alignment more precise, and the bit of extra weight may make it hold a bit steadier. It thus may be easier for the shooter to shoot it more accurately.

I have bolted numerous 2 inch J frame S&W's into a Ransom Rest and have been flat startled by how well some 2 inch Model 36's and 60's shoot when you take the human factor out of it.

 

[grzy22]

Just wondering, is there any significant advantage to the extra 1" of barrel length on my Chiefs Special versus the Bodyguard?

You may find your 2" has a higher velocity with a given load than your 3". The advantage to the 3" is that extra 1' of sight radius in my book. The only downside to the 3" is you may find it more difficult to carry in a pocket or ankle holster.

 

[G-Mac]

Originally posted by grzy22:The only downside to the 3" is you may find it more difficult to carry in a pocket or ankle holster.

Not an issue to me at all. I carry the 3" 36-1 in a Galco FL160B leather belt holster...

 

[pmbiker]

Originally posted by G-Mac:
Not an issue to me at all. I carry the 3" 36-1 in a Galco FL160B leather belt holster...

And there lies my only beef with the 3" j-frame. The best way to carry it is in a belt holster, but if I'm strapping on leather might as well make it a 3-4" k frame. Just my opinion.

 

[Texas Star]

Originally posted by casingpoint:
This from one of the dimmer bulbs on the shelf who cooks with cow patties...the 135 grain 38 Special Gold Dot was found by Speer to do 1040 fps in practice from a four inch barrel. Needless to say, the Speer engineers were quite surprised as this exceeded the calculated velocity. So from an 1.88 inch barrel at 860 feet, it loses 180 fps, the equivalent of 85 fps reduction in velocity per one inch of barrel reduction.

Note you can get more increase in velocity (130 fps) by going to the 135 grain 357 MAG Gold Dot from a 1.88 inch snub than with the 38 Special Gold Dot delivered through a three inch barrel.

I fail to see the reasoning here. What would happen if you fired the .357 load in a three-inch bbl.?

That would be a more fair comparison, surely?

 

[Guest]

I find that particularly in the "J" Frame; that the 3 inch and especially the Heavy Barrel 3 inch, simply balances better. And, generally the sights are of the newer style that is s bit bigger and easier to pick up quickly - if I'm using the Sights.

And, since I long ago out grew the idea of "carrying" any handgun without a holster, even if it is a pocket one then this isn't an issue for me either.

 

[NFrameFred]

Put me down in the column for J frame carry for convenience without a holster. If I'm going to wear a holster I'll go with something bigger, K frame, 1911 or whatever.

One size does not fit all, but personally, the advantage of the short barreled J frames to me is the trade off between the smallest thing I can most easily conceal that packs the most punch. I like the 3" J's, but don't personally find them more concealable than K frame snubs.

And like the man said, the little one in your pocket is 100 times better than the big one back home in the safe when you need one in a hurry . . . .

 

[bhk]

Originally posted by NFrameFred:

I like the 3" J's, but don't personally find them more concealable than K frame snubs.QUOTE]

True, but they sure are lighter.