2400 in 38 special

[RDub]

Did you read the rest of this thread? Do you really think 2400 is a good choice of powder for loading .38 Special +P ammo??

The guy just asked a simple question... I shared what I got in testing 2400 in this application. It's not my first choice, but if it's all he has, it CAN be done until he gets something else.

 

[Dave T]

Do you really think 2400 is a good choice of powder for loading .38 Special +P ammo??

If you want to come close to the performance of the original +P (the 38/44) or the Buffalo Bore 158g load then yes, it is a pretty good choice. For something like the anemic +P loads most of the ammo companies offer today, probably not.

Dave

 

[ArchAngelCD]

The only reason I disagree with using 2400 is from personal experiance. I found it to leave a lot of unburnt powder when loaded within the SAAMI pressure limits for the .38 Special +P. The several times I tried it it left so many "flakes" they got under the ejector and I had to clean it out before I could close the cylinder properly.

 

[Dave T]

...within the SAAMI pressure limits for the .38 Special +P.

From what I've been told and read that is pretty much what the standard 38 Special used to be. I remember when the standard load for the 38 was a 158g bullet at 850 fps from a 4" barrel. I've seen some load data for +P that lists that level of performance. Pathetic!

Dave

 

[Sully]

From what I've been told and read that is pretty much what the standard 38 Special used to be. I remember when the standard load for the 38 was a 158g bullet at 850 fps from a 4" barrel. I've seen some load data for +P that lists that level of performance. Pathetic!

Dave

But dont forget that "+P" stands for "plus pressure"....NOT.."Plus performance".

 

[jbelder43]

I'm loading and shooting 11grs of 2400 under a Lyman # 358477 H.P in a K-38.

 

[Poohgyrr]

Besides the reloading manuals from back then, does anyone remember what else was published about these loads during those times?

I'm thinking of someone loading long nosed cast bullets in Special brass, in 5" M27 cylinders, and Unique vs 2400. I don't quite remember the mold, but it's well known.

 

[Paul5388]

5" M27 calls to mind Skeeter Skelton and his use of a 358156 seated in different crimping groves depending on whether it was .38 Special or .357 he was loading. He typically used 12.5 gr of 2400 with the bullet seated in the bottom grove in .38 Special brass. That would fit in the "short" M27 cylinder.

 

[olskool]

over the years i have tried 2400 several times in 38 sp. but accuracy is not been that good for me. i like 4.5 to 5 gr. of unique with 155 lyman hp. cast 50/50 soft lead and ww.

 

[1x2]

Do I have anything to add? Not at the moment. Nonetheless-

a couple years ago around here folks used to be excoriated for exploring the upper limits of any revolver's capabilities for velocity and energy. Invariably the retort was

"never mind what this gun will do, you should only shoot mouse-fart loads in it- and oh, by the way, if you want more velocity or energy, buy a bigger gun".

I'm liking what I'm reading around here lately!

Thanks.

 

[Erich]

1x2, you're all right!

 

[Poohgyrr]

5" M27 calls to mind Skeeter Skelton and his use of a 358156 seated in different crimping groves depending on whether it was .38 Special or .357 he was loading. He typically used 12.5 gr of 2400 with the bullet seated in the bottom grove in .38 Special brass. That would fit in the "short" M27 cylinder.

That's it, thanks. I couldn't remember the mold, but the 358156 seems to jog my memory. I do specifically remember Skeeter answering a question about him using 2400 vs Unique. I am sure Skeeter wrote that 2400 gave him better accuracy when reaching the velocity he wanted. I don't quite remember what else he wrote, but accuracy at velocity was the main reason, ifI remember right. He was real definite about this combination of results.