38/44 vs. 357 Magnum

aterry33

aterry33

Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
1,037
Reaction score
28
Location
Charlotte, NC
So other than the longer .357 cylinder, what were the differences in the Heavy Duty/Outdoorsman and the .357 magnums?
 
Register to hide this ad
As far as I know the cylinders are the same length. A number of the old HDs and Outdoorsmen had the chambers bored out to take 357 cartridges.

Dave
 
Dave T said:
As far as I know the cylinders are the same length. A number of the old HDs and Outdoorsmen had the chambers bored out to take 357 cartridges.

Dave
Click to expand...

I agree with Dave's info. It is my understanding that the case length was set to insure that the .357 loads would not fit into weaker 38 spl. guns such as the older M&Ps and weaker guns made by other gun makers in .38 spcl.
 
tbury said:
I agree with Dave's info. It is my understanding that the case length was set to insure that the .357 loads would not fit into weaker 38 spl. guns such as the older M&Ps and weaker guns made by other gun makers in .38 spcl.
Click to expand...

So basically, there is no real difference between the 38/44 and the 357 other than the chambers are not bored to take 357s?
 
.38special and .357magnum have the same bore. It's the length that's different.

Same lead. Even the primers are the same. But you really want to use small magnum primers on .357mag

I shoot .38special wad cutters in my .357mag all the time or bulk .38special because it's usually a good bit cheaper.

Also, .357mag uses different powder if I'm not mistaken.

I personally would never by a .38special revolver unless it was a smoking hot deal. Not all are +p rated and all .357mag revolvers can shoot all .38special ammo from wad cutters to +P to +P+.
 
Not all .357 mag loads use mag primers. Only loads that use slow burning powder need mag caps.

The old HD's were nearly as powerful if not equal to todays .357 loads as it has been watered down.
 
inFALable said:
Not all .357 mag loads use mag primers. Only loads that use slow burning powder need mag caps.

The old HD's were nearly as powerful if not equal to todays .357 loads as it has been watered down.
Click to expand...

Yeah, for our wad cutters we don't use the small magnum primers. We save those for good stuff. :D
 
I recall reading somewhere that the prototype .357s were built on Outodoormans with special heat treatment. The hottest .38/44 ammunition was probably at current .357 Magnum levels, so who knows if this was necessary; the story about making the .357s longer to not allow loading into an M & P (or even scarier, an 1889-1903 Colt DA .38 service revolver) makes sense.
 
murphydog said:
I recall reading somewhere that the prototype .357s were built on Outodoormans with special heat treatment. The hottest .38/44 ammunition was probably at current .357 Magnum levels, so who knows if this was necessary; the story about making the .357s longer to not allow loading into an M & P (or even scarier, an 1889-1903 Colt DA .38 service revolver) makes sense.
Click to expand...

True, but I think S&W aficionados sometimes forget that Colt did make a large frame (the New Service and Shooting Master) and a medium frame (the Official Police) that were approved by Colt to shoot the 38/44. In addition, the New Service and Shooting Master were offered in 357 Magnum once that round came out. Colt introduced a medium frame 357 36 years before S&W came out with the L-Frame. Colt's 41 frame (later called the I-Frame) was the basis of the "Colt 357" in 1954, which was later renamed the "Trooper 357." A year later the Python was introduced, which was a Trooper 357 with an underlugged bull barrel and a higher level of fit and finish. The Python was in effect Colt's "Registered Magnum" from a quality standpoint.

Here's a Colt Shooting Master 357, which is roughly the same size as the N-Frame S&W 357:
ColtSM1.jpg
 
I am a little late on this, but from the 1937 catalog: .38/44 Outdoorsman with a 6 1/2-inch barrel (only cataloged option, but some "McGivern" models have a 5-inch barrel) weighed 41 3/4 ounces, .38/44 S&W Special with a 158 grain bullet had a muzzle velocity of 1125 fps, barrel had no rib (post-war model had one that is grooved) and top strap is plain, cost was $45.00

".357" Magnum with a 6 1/2-inch barrrel (length was optional between 3 1/2 inches and 8 3/4-inches) weighed 45 ounces, top strap was finely checked as was the barrel rib, charge holes in cylinder have recessed head space, hammer with concentric grooves to improve function, Magnum ammunition with a 158 grain bullet had a muzzle velocity of 1515 fps (probably in a barrel of 8 3/4 inches in length), cost was $60.00 and a wait of six weeks or more, but worth the wait.

Bill
 
My 38/44 Super Police has more than 1/8 left in the cylinder when loaded...Does this mean if a .357 WILL fit into the cylinder, that it can handle the pressure of the Magnum load?
I am just curious, I have not yet purchased .357 to test this theory, but if a .357 is only 1/8 inch longer than current .38 loads....I think I have the room for it. Everything else about this gun seems modified...I wonder if it was modified to accommodate a .357 load.
 
Nightowl said:
Does anyone know how accurate the muzzle velocity figures are for the .38 and .357 listed loads of the 1930's?
Click to expand...

Believe it or not they had chronographs back then. Crude by our standards (based on a ballistic pendulum) but they were able to measure the velocity of their ammo.

Dave
 
I have read up alot on the .38-44 since I used to own one. The old .357's that first came out could easily smoke the current loads (I blame J-frame .357's) at 158 grains moving at 1,500 fps. But as far as the guns there really isn't a great deal of difference between the two.
 
As far as I understand, the .357 came about because people were loading .38hv in small frame .38 Spc, and for liability reasons, S&W decided to add the length so they would be unable to chamber in a standard .38. I understand that the .357 was developed in an Outdoorsman, and the loads were essentially to mimic or edge slightly the existing .38-44HV load, however from what I have read (being born in 1981, I for some reason have no firsthand experience with original .38-44 loads) there was not as huge a difference between the .38-44 and the .357 as there was between the .38S and the .357.
In addition, some of the older .38 Spc revolvers had long for caliber cylinders, and could chamber the .357 with no modification. Even today there are a number of "Hillbilly Magnums", where people will bore out a .38Spc to take the .357 length cartridge. Not a good idea, if you particularly attached to your hands.
 
Sage advice from my grandfathers and my father, and any other oldtimer that was at the range when i was a kid : " If it aint stamped on the barrel dont put it in there"
 
The model 27 is heavier, than a 19 or 66, (K frames), yet the K frames have a longer clyinder than the 27. Anyone want to tackle that?
Personaly I think it was partialy a marketing idea. Now I dont know about the heat treating idea, but I really think reaming out a HD clyinder to .357 would be safe as it had been sucessfully done many times they tell me. Now days, it would be dumb though, from a collector/money standpoint.
 
Senecap,
When S&W decided that they needed a round and handgun that would pentrate bad guys with bullet proof vests and armored vehicles, they looked at the 38 SPL which had basically been loaded with the same amount of smokeless powder as blackpowder. The heavy loads they used from Elmer Keith apparently blew up K frame M&P guns so they looked at the 3d model .44 and figured that if you bored that big cylinder with .38 holes as opposed to .44, you had a lot of steel to take the increased pressure. They added the barrel shroud like the .44 and the 38/44 Heavy Duty was born. The 38-44 ammo was listed at 1150FPS which is probably close to todays factory 357. This ammo was for only the large frame guns. I was fortunate to pick up 3 full boxes of 38-44 ammo at Tulsa this weekend.
Hope this helps,
Bill
 
Last edited:
One reason the Model 19 and other K frame magnums have a longer cylinder is for strength. Notice how much less of the rear of the barrel is unsupported on the Magnums than on the non-Magnums designed after the original .357. I think S&W's engineers may have been (correctly) concerned about strength in this area when they designed the Combat Magnum. Also, notice that the other Magnums developed by S&W, the .41 and .44, also have less of the rear of the barrel exposed/longer cylinder, even though they are N frame guns.

The S&W counterbored chamber cylinders are actually all longer than the non-counterbored cylinders on the rear of the cylinder, too. The difference is minor, the thickness of the cartridge rims. If you have sequential dash numbers of the same model of S&W, where the second gun doesn't have a recessed chamber cylinder, measure both. The newer one will be shorter. 'The shorter' part is the rear of the cylinder.
 
GLL said:
Steve brought this transitional Outdoorsman to me at Tulsa a couple years ago. It had been converted to .38-44 "Magnum" probably in the 40's !

Jerry

orig.jpg
Click to expand...

Sorry I'm a little confused by your description, but what do you mean by "converted to .38-44 magnum"? Are you saying it was modified to take the .357, as the Heavy Duty and Outdoorsman were designed from the get go for the .38-44 High Velocity round, they were simply stamped, though, as .38 S&W Special Ctg. Or is there some modified magnum .38-44 round I haven't run across yet?
 
senecaap:

You missed a quote on the "Magnum". The .38-44 cylinder will not chamber a .357Magnum round unless it is reamed a bit longer. A couple of my own guns were modified by previous owners to accept the .357 cartridge. .38-44 brass and .38 Special brass are identical length and differ only in the head stamp. It is just an example of one of your "Hillbilly Magnums" ! :) :)

Jerry
 
S&W has always made it clear that a special chrome-nickel (their phrasing) steel was used in .357's, and they also had additional heat treatment.

I am rather concerned that this thread may lead some to bore out a .38-44 and regret it. Moreover, they'd ruin a collector's gun. Just buy a .357 or sell the .38-44 to a collector and get one.

Of all places, I'd have thought that this board would be full of members who'd know better than to re-chamber a .38. :rolleyes:

Modern 158 grain .357 JHP ammo often beats 1,200 FPS in a four-inch revolver barrel. I'm almost sure that those 1510 and 1550 FPS loads were obtained in pressure barrels of a bit over eight inches. That probably also applied to 1450 FPS postwar ammo.

Recent .357 ammo is loaded lighter because of K-frame Magnums, not J-frames, which are Johnny-come-latelys in .357.

T-Star
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JHW
  • Locked
Sold/Withdrawn Smith Wesson Model 19-3, 15-2, 66-4, and 586-1
Replies
4
Views
2K
wheelyfun66
wheelyfun66
Flygas
  • Locked
SOLD Registered Magnum and McGivern Model .38/44 Outdoorsman 5”
Replies
4
Views
2K
mchom
M
ddeanjohnson
  • Locked
WITHDRAWN -- Collection reduction: 40 guns (15 S&W + Colts, etc.)
Replies
26
Views
11K
ddeanjohnson
ddeanjohnson
ddeanjohnson
For Sale WTS: 15 guns -- all offers respectfully considered -- collection liquidation
2
Replies
37
Views
23K
fredcoyote
fredcoyote
ddeanjohnson
  • Locked
WITHDRAWN. WTS: Collector downsizing-- 26 collector handguns
Replies
10
Views
7K
ddeanjohnson
ddeanjohnson

Latest posts

Back
Top