38/44 ammo question

[jeffrefrig]

What modern cartridge does one shoot through the 38/44? Is it .38 spl, .38 spl + p, .357 mag? Or all of the above? This sounds like an interesting revolver, as the heavier frame would take a lot of the "kick" out of a .38 spl. compared to, say, my Model 10-8. And is there a modern model equivalent? Please excuse my ignorance, and thank you in advance. Jeff T., PGH PA

 

[murphydog]

It will easily handle any factory .38 Special load, including the infamous + P (many current factory loads of which are not particularly powerful). Many were reamed to shoot .357 Magnum without ill effects back in the day, but there are plenty of .357 revolvers available now if you want to do that, and that is the reason no one makes large frame .38 Specials any more .

 

[jeffrefrig]

murphydog

It will easily handle any factory .38 Special load, including the infamous + P (many current factory loads of which are not particularly powerful). Many were reamed to shoot .357 Magnum without ill effects back in the day, but there are plenty of .357 revolvers available now if you want to do that, and that is the reason no one makes large frame .38 Specials any more .

Yes, that makes sense. It's just something I wanted to learn a little about. I bought an inexpensive (cheap but reliable!) .357 mag a while back so I can shoot the cheaper .38spl and the .357 mags through it. So many calibers, so little time!!! Thank you. Jeff T., PGH PA

 

[Dave T]

If you want to know what the original 38/44 loads were like, get a box of Buffalo Bore "Heavy +P 158g 38 Specials". They are a 158g @ 1125 fps. It makes the +P loads of today look like wimps.

Dave

 

[Jack Flash]

That raises an interesting question. What were the ballistics of the original 38/44 load? Did it use a 158 grain bullet?

I know I could just google this stuff, but we're talking about it here and I would like to know what others who have studied this round have to say.

 

[DWalt]

Original .38-44 (not .38/44) ammunition used several types of 150 grain and 158 grain bullets. Muzzle velocity was advertised as being in the low 1100 ft/sec range, but of course that would depend on the specific revolver it was fired from. On cartridge boxes it was usually identified as .38 Special "Hi-Speed" (Remington), "Super Speed" (Winchester), or "Super-X" (Western). Factory production ceased in the early 1970s, as .38 Special "+P" sort of replaced it. It is easy to duplicate the original factory loadings by reloading. 2400 powder is the propellant normally recommended in the older handloading manuals.

Back in the day, .38-44 ammunition was not considered to be dangerous for use in any .38 Special revolver, but the recoil effect would obviously be greater in lighter revolvers. Undoubtedly, many shooters used it in whatever .38 Special revolvers they happened to have, not just those owning .38/44 N-frame revolvers.

 

[Jim Watson]

1939 Stoegers shows Remington .38-44 as a 158 lead bullet at 1125 fps in 6". .38 Colt Special High Velocity is listed separately with same ballistics, but with the deadly Colt Special flat pointed bullet.

Strangely, Winchester only claimed 1075 fps in a 7.5" test barrel for their .38 Special Superspeed.

As for guns, only the S&W Heavy Duty, Outdoorsman, and Magnum are listed for .38-44, but Colt shows everything from New Service down to Detective Special as accepting .38-44.

 

[Texas Star]

About 1967 I wrote to S&W about using .38-44 ammo in Model 10 and 15 .38's.

Salas Mgr. Fred Miller replied that it was safe, but that it'd shake the guns loose much sooner if I shot a lot of it. He advised buying a .38-44 or a .357 if I'd use a lot of the Hi-Velocity load. I didn't specifically ask about older guns, but def. would not fire it in guns made before cylinders were heat treated, beginning in late 1919.

If you buy an old .38-44, use normal .38 ammo unless you need added power, then use that hot Buffalo Bore load or other Plus P ammo.

The only reasons to buy .38-44 guns are collecting and nostalgia. Otherwise, buy a good M-27 or M-28 and have full .357 capability. Or, get a stainless .357!

 

[BigBill]

Ditto above,,
The s&w n 38/44 n frame revolver is in the middle of the 38 caliber evolution. It’s after the 38 special yet pre 357 magnum. It’s actually the for runner to the 357 magnum. I can’t see reaming it to fit a 357 magnum cartridge. She’s a piece of s&w development history. I say shoot 38 specials out of it and enjoy it. I wouldn’t push its limits.

In my younger crazy tool time Tim Allen days I was a shoot the max load out of it. Look at the purdy flames lol. Well I’m way over that stage of my life now for sure. That’s human evolution I guess. I shoot for accuracy now.

 

[DWalt]

Lengthening .38/44 chambers to accept .357 Magnum ammunition was not an unusual practice, and it apparently was not unsafe, as I have never heard of a .38/44 so modified failing - there is a lot of metal around those chambers. However, in a high-condition .38/44 HD or Outdoorsman, it would have a negative effect upon collector value, but not so much for a run-of-the-mill shooter grade revolver. I believe all such chamber conversions were done outside the S&W factory, as it is a very simple procedure for any gunsmith having a .357 chamber reamer to perform. Or for that matter, about anyone with access to a .357 chamber reamer.

I have a ca. 1952 .38/44 Heavy Duty with elongated chambers. While I have not fired a great number of .357 rounds through it (as I normally use .38 Special), I have fired enough .357s to convince myself that it will not turn into a hand grenade. If I had a .38/44 with .38 Special chambers, I would not modify them. If I had a .38/44 with elongated chambers which was not in collectible condition, so much the better.

 

[Jim Watson]

Yeah, keep your reamers away from my Outdoorsman.

A friend once said "I have decided to sell my Heavy Duty, do you want it?"
I said "Sure."
He said "OK, as soon as it comes back, I was having it reblued."
WHAAT!
You got it, it came back well rounded, blurred, and with a spiffy custom purple sideplate. I ran away.

 

[Kinman]

Back in my early days of shooting, which only go back to the 60's with handguns the hottest thing going was "Super Vel" . I have heard some rumor that someone is trying to revive the name and is talking about reproducing like velocities. I remember shooting an old P-08 Luger and having trouble finding ammo that would function properly, a friend recommended Super Vel and although I found it expensive I never had any problems with it as far as function, it was definitely hot and Lugers prefer a hotter round. I can only imagine that the Super Vel .38 special round would have been on the order of the new +P+, which if you want something hot in a .38 off the shelf that's what you want to look for +p+. I have found the Buffalo Bore .44 spl. "Man Stoppers" to be a very stout load in a snubby M24, accurate as can be expected as well.

 

[Jack Flash]

Good to hear this information. So I guess Buffalo Bore round is very similar, as far as exterior ballistics go anyways.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

The only reasons to buy .38-44 guns are collecting and nostalgia. Otherwise, buy a good M-27 or M-28 and have full .357 capability. Or, get a stainless .357!

I say shoot 38 specials out of it and enjoy it. I wouldn’t push its limits.

Put those two thoughts together and you have summarized the concept.

 

[boatbum101]

I have one that I'd call a high shooter grade ( 95% ) still unreamed . With a grain less of 2400 than Keith's original load & same bullet he designed I get 1300fps from it's 6 1/2" barrel & can hold the 10 ring of a B-8 25yd target . Nowdays that's considered 357 performance . The gun is in excellent mechanical shape & as such can handle it . The vast majority of the time I shoot the same bullet with same charge of 4227 for a bit over 1100fps & a tad better accuracy . Discontinued SR 4756 was also very good for same type of load . I'd be hesitant to shoot these loads from a K frame .

 

[DWalt]

Some years back, there was a member who lived in Mexico. He wrote that .38/44 revolvers were very popular among those who were allowed to own handguns. This was because they were chambered in .38 Special. Any larger caliber (.357) is illegal in Mexico. He said that many legal shooters down there loaded .38 Special cases to .357 ballistics, as that was still legal. I don't think he said what that load was or how Mexicans get their hands on reloading components.

 

[Texas Star]

Good to hear this information. So I guess Buffalo Bore round is very similar, as far as exterior ballistics go anyways.

Yes, but the Buffalo Bore bullet is superior to those offered in ,38-44, unless penetration is the goal. I think the BB bullet is a hollow point that should offer good expansion. It is probably very effective on men, coyotes, cougars, and other soft skinned targets.

 

[Texas Star]

I have one that I'd call a high shooter grade ( 95% ) still unreamed . With a grain less of 2400 than Keith's original load & same bullet he designed I get 1300fps from it's 6 1/2" barrel & can hold the 10 ring of a B-8 25yd target . Nowdays that's considered 357 performance . The gun is in excellent mechanical shape & as such can handle it . The vast majority of the time I shoot the same bullet with same charge of 4227 for a bit over 1100fps & a tad better accuracy . Discontinued SR 4756 was also very good for same type of load . I'd be hesitant to shoot these loads from a K frame .

I think burning rates of some powders have changed since Elmer published those loads. Be careful: use modern loading manuals.

 

[Kurusu]

Just remember that the .357 magnum was created to avoid chambering an over the top .38 loading in any other S & W revolver than a large frame.

 

[Warren Sear]

I think burning rates of some powders have changed since Elmer published those loads. Be careful: use modern loading manuals.

Allowing for normal lot-to-lot variations, the powders burn the same as always, but your admonition to use modern loading data still applies.

A good deal of older manuals have significantly heavier loading data than what you will find today. That is because in the old days the loads were "developed" by guesswork ("signs o' pressure"), or copper crusher method (which can be accurate, but did not give pressure readings in actual P.S.I., although that was unknown at the time). A lot of load data was not pressure tested at all.

Data that has been developed since around the late 1990's almost always uses piezo transducer method. It was quickly discovered that the old loads were loaded way hotter than realized, and loading manuals were adjusted accordingly.

But the powder burn characteristics have not changed for a single powder AFAIK.

 

[paplinker]

Just finding a empty prewar box of 38-44 ammo is proving to be very difficult. Been looking for over a year.

Would this be likely because of reloading or that it was only a nine year window for the prewar HD-OD ?

 

[DWalt]

You are correct, .38-44 boxes under whatever name are very seldom seen today. I have one early Western Super-X box (full) put away somewhere that I bought maybe 15 years ago. I always look at gun shows but don't find any. The same applies to early (pre-WWII) .357 Mag boxes. I have one of those also (Remington, also full), likewise put away somewhere. A pre-WWII box of Remington .38-44 ammunition will look very much like that shown below, except for the caliber. Note the R prefix to the index code in the lower RH corner, which was used during the pre-war period. After the war, the R prefix was dropped.