.38 Special +P limits in reloading manuels

[Doug.38PR]

My largest .38 Special gun is a Colt Official Police (which was rated for the .34-44) and Colt, of course straight from the colt's mouth, can handle +P. I'm not looking to turn my .38s into super .357 Magnums, just like to cook up a few "full potential" handloads that exceed across the counter loads (though I wouldn't mind a few .34-44 loads for the OP for woods carry)
Below that is a S&W M-15 K frame and below that is a Colt Detective Special.

I have Speer LSWC 158 gr. What is the benefit of lasercast? Do they lead the barrel less than other types of lead bullets?

Also, this brings up another point, I seem to recall my reloading manuels saying to only use their reloading data for THEIR bullets and nobody elses....does this mean I have to go get a reloading manuel for every bullet I plan to load in my gun? (or is that just legal jibberish to prevent being sued by fool?)

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I like reloading manuals so I buy a bunch of them and yes I tend to use data from the correct company. I may jump vintages, but generally the same manual.

Lasercast is known for hard bullets. And when I mean hard, I mean harder than any other bullet out there type of hard cast lead. If you can match the bullet to your gun, then you get virtually no leading which has been my experience even when you go really really fast. I have driven lasercasts up to 1800 fps with my 357 maximum and not leaded yet. So to answer your question, in general the answer is yes which is why I buy so many lasercast bullets.

Are they better then speers? Yes unless you are loading plinker loads. Speers are swaged and soft, dirt soft so if you drive them hard they lead heavily. Hard in terms of speer is 800 fps range or more in my opinion. I won't use them at all as I hate the leading but then again, I don't load cowboy loads at 350 to 400 fps. There the swages speers may be absolutely perfect.

I will give you this advice though. I would not shoot any of my 38/44 loads through any of my Colt D frame guns. I believe the Official police morphed into the detective special and diamondback. No way would I put what I was shooting out of a heavy duty down one of those thin cylindered guns.

 

[Doug.38PR]

I I believe the Official police morphed into the detective special and diamondback. .

Please explain this statement? The Police Positive is the same D frame as the Colt DS and Diamondback. The Official Police is on a larger E or I frame (the same frame as the .357 Magnum Python or Trooper and the old New Army .41 Long Colt)

No way would I put what I was shooting out of a heavy duty down one of those thin cylindered guns.

exactly why I'd be unsure about my K frame M-15 (I think the cylinder is thicker than a D frame Colt....but still too close for comfort)


Pictures I've looked at for lasercast look an awful lot like what Buffalo Bore uses (which would make sense as their .38 +P LHP supposedly go between 1100-1200 ft per second out of a 4 inch barrel)

 

[GyMac]

Pictures I've looked at for lasercast look an awful lot like what Buffalo Bore uses (which would make sense as their .38 +P LHP supposedly go between 1100-1200 ft per second out of a 4 inch barrel)

I've read that BB uses Rimrock bullets, and I don't believe that LaserCast makes a HP.

 

[Doug.38PR]

I was basing my theory on eyesight. What I saw on google search of lasercast looks like buffalo bore as both lead bullets look almost sliver

 

[Erich]

Just FWIW, I've chrono'd the exact same loads from the same gun with a mess of similar hardcast (including Lasercast) and swaged bullets, and I've consistently gotten more velocity from Tennessee Valley Bullets hardcasts. I don't know why that is, but Jessie says it's the lube he uses (and I'd imagine the hardness is tailored pretty well to the purpose). Might just be my guns at my altitude, but it's consistent: TVB hardcasts give me better velocity than others.

 

[TSQUARED]

Okay, it's said that out of a 4 inch barrel, .38 Special +P 158 gr bullets in FACTORY ammo gets you about 890 ft per second.
I checked my reloading manuels, a Speer manuel and a Hornandy manuel.

Hornandy doesn't even have a +P section and none of their powders take you past 850 ft per second.

Speer's maximum for +P is between 905-1037 ft per second. I think the hottest powder listed is Power Pistol (don't see 2400). That sounds pretty impressive....until I saw it was tested with a 6 inch barrel, which would reduce the results out of a 4 inch barrel well below factory ammo. Pretty pathetic....I've always heard reload powders are better than what factory dumps in those cartridges.

I know the manuels say "Maximum means just that, don't go beyond it" and I wouldn't dream of advocating anything dangerous...but...isn't that a little weak?

The W-W 14th Ed. reloading manal list maximum 38 Special +P loads with 158 gr. LSWC at 860 fps with W-231, and 910 and 915 fps with W-571 and W-540 respectivbely.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Doug, I was not aware that the Official police rought is equal to the python. I thought they were just like the police positives that are the same size as a diamondback.

Live and learn. I guess that is why I consider Colts to be shooters and S&W's are for collecting.

Regarding a lasercast manual. If you want one, order 5000 bullets or more and type "manual" in the rebate code space and you get a manual. Well worth the investment. Check with them to make sure the code still works though.

 

[Doug.38PR]

The frame sizes are large to small as follows:
S&W N frame (.38-44, M-28, 27, etc.)
Colt I/E frame (Official Police, Trooper, Python, etc.)
S&W K frame (M-10, M-15, M-19, etc.)
Colt D frame (Detective Special, Police Positive, etc.)
S&W J frame (M-36)


Interesting how S&W came out with an matching E/I frame size when they released the L frame 586/686 to compete with the Python in the 1980s. It is hard to believe the Official Police and the Python are the same gun. The Python just has so much bulk on it that makes it look bigger

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Since you are going to use the bullets for "heavy" loads you will probably do well with Lasercast bullets. Bullets that are too hard can lead as badly or worse than bullets that are too soft. Like said above toy have to load the right bullet for the application you are developing. If you use a Lasercast bullet at target/Cowboy velocities and pressures you stand a good chance of leading the barrel.

I push soft bullet to 800 fps. I push bullets that are 12 BHN up to 1000 fps. Over 1000 fps to 1200 fps you really only need a 14 BHN bullet and up to 1800 fps I use a 18 BHN bullet but of course you can use a 22 BHN bullet like Lasercast.

 

[Jellybean]

In cases like that you have to do a little detective work for yourself. If the load data tells you the pressures being generated are only 17,200 psi at the max load you know you have some room to add a little powder without exceeding the pressure limits. OR, find an older manual to verify what you are thinking about increasing...

Warning, this is only a suggestion. If you are not comfortable using data that isn't published, don't do it.

Is this advice dangerous? Totally, absolutely and positively yes! (But it has nothing to do with the older manuals statement.)

When you look at a load source for a cartridge that has a max of 17,000 psi for example, and you see a load like 7.2 grains of powder X gave 15,500 psi that does not mean you have some wiggle room to add a few grains of powder. It means that when the testers went to 7.3 grains the pressure went over the 17,000 maximum limit. When powders get near their maximum density per available load space they can behave very erratically by jumping pressures up extremely high with even a small increase in charge. This, and the quoted statement above, are the reasons some load data sources will not print pressures.

If you want to make handloads that are equal to +P factory ammo the first thing you need to do is chronograph some factory +P ammo out of your firearm. The ammo factories usually use the same kind of test equipment that the reloading manuals do so they will advertise velocities that your gun will never get, just like the loading manuals. Or just compare the data in the load manuals against the factory specs. for a rough estimate, but understand you aren't getting it in your firearms.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

In cases like that you have to do a little detective work for yourself. If the load data tells you the pressures being generated are only 17,200 psi at the max load you know you have some room to add a little powder without exceeding the pressure limits. OR, find an older manual to verify what you are thinking about increasing...

Warning, this is only a suggestion. If you are not comfortable using data that isn't published, don't do it.

Is this advice dangerous? Totally, absolutely and positively yes! (But it has nothing to do with the older manuals statement.)

When you look at a load source for a cartridge that has a max of 17,000 psi for example, and you see a load like 7.2 grains of powder X gave 15,500 psi that does not mean you have some wiggle room to add a few grains of powder. It means that when the testers went to 7.3 grains the pressure went over the 17,000 maximum limit. When powders get near their maximum density per available load space they can behave very erratically by jumping pressures up extremely high with even a small increase in charge. This, and the quoted statement above, are the reasons some load data sources will not print pressures.

If you want to make handloads that are equal to +P factory ammo the first thing you need to do is chronograph some factory +P ammo out of your firearm. The ammo factories usually use the same kind of test equipment that the reloading manuals do so they will advertise velocities that your gun will never get, just like the loading manuals. Or just compare the data in the load manuals against the factory specs. for a rough estimate, but understand you aren't getting it in your firearms.

First of all it's not advice, it's a discussion and I clearly said, "Warning, this is only a suggestion. If you are not comfortable using data that isn't published, don't do it." So, I really have no idea what the hell you're talking about. I did not give dangerous advice to anyone! You really should be careful what you accuse someone of doing!

 

[Jellybean]

Wether it's bad advice or a stupid suggestion isn't going to make a bit of difference to anyone that thinks you have the slightest clue of what you are talking about.

Maybe someone will 'karma' you a box of tissues until you can man up and admit your mistake.

 

[fredj338]

Is this advice dangerous? Totally, absolutely and positively yes! (But it has nothing to do with the older manuals statement.)

When you look at a load source for a cartridge that has a max of 17,000 psi for example, and you see a load like 7.2 grains of powder X gave 15,500 psi that does not mean you have some wiggle room to add a few grains of powder. It means that when the testers went to 7.3 grains the pressure went over the 17,000 maximum limit. When powders get near their maximum density per available load space they can behave very erratically by jumping pressures up extremely high with even a small increase in charge. This, and the quoted statement above, are the reasons some load data sources will not print pressures.

If you want to make handloads that are equal to +P factory ammo the first thing you need to do is chronograph some factory +P ammo out of your firearm. The ammo factories usually use the same kind of test equipment that the reloading manuals do so they will advertise velocities that your gun will never get, just like the loading manuals. Or just compare the data in the load manuals against the factory specs. for a rough estimate, but understand you aren't getting it in your firearms.

As always, it depends on the powder used. Some powders spike at the top, some continue to build pressure in a linear fashion. SO going over published data a bit, will depend on the powder used. It can be done safely, but I would never do it in the 38sp, but happily in a 357mag using 38sp+P loads.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Wether it's bad advice or a stupid suggestion isn't going to make a bit of difference to anyone that thinks you have the slightest clue of what you are talking about.

Maybe someone will 'karma' you a box of tissues until you can man up and admit your mistake.

Not to beat this but why would I admit a mistake when none was made? I don't know what got in your shorts but I hope it leaves you quickly because this is ridiculous!

 

[125JHP]

HA Funny you should mention Massad Ayoob, I just got through reading one of his "no handloads for defense" articles.

How often do you know to change reloading manuels? I mean if powders periodically change...how do you know when your Blow-it-out-your-muzzel or Big Bang reloading manuel is outdated? 2 years? 10 years? 20 years?

Here is my story of this exact situation this past week...

I got a new P-290 and wanted to test it with a variety of ammo. I haven't shot 9mm much at all over the last 8 years or so, preferring 40 & 45 in my auto feeders. So I go digging in my stocks and come up with some 124gr JHP I loaded sometime back in the 90's. The box was market HOT!!! in red letters. fair warning. During testing I often mark down how far the cases are ejected, as a rough estimate of the power being exerted on the frame. Most factory ammo was falling 3-5' from the gun. These babies were being thrown 16'~20'. Now that got my attention. I shot several of these out of the 3913 and the new P290, recoil was noticeable but not that unusual for a "HOT" or +P type load.

So I get home and look up the loading... 7.5 of AA5 (DO NOT USE THIS LOAD). I look in my latest AA booklet and see the max for this weight bullet is 6.4 gr! Now I know I don't overload by that much - something else must be amiss, so I go looking back in my load books and finally I find the 1989 AA load booklet where there is a little pencil dot next to the listing showing this exact load as max. In my search I also find a note saying that I called AA back in 2000 and asked about this and was told at the time it was OK in modern guns like my 5906. I recall that I had used that 1989 manual all thru the 90's and had just gotten a new 2000 edition when I discovered the change, prompting my call to AA. Since then, I have acquired a 1994 AA load book and see that the charge reduction was made then. I emailed AA again last week to see if it was safe to shoot. This time however, they told me that their data shows the load is pushing 44,000 psi, a bit more than what is safe and suggested I not shoot it even in modern firearms. I have since disassembled all of them so I can reuse the components. I did find 2 out of 700 with no powder in the case, another eye opener and probably a kaboom story averted.

After reading all these stories claiming how the lawyers caused the load data to be reduced, I don't think I completely believe that. After comparing several manuals from different eras I think that about 1999 the test labs had switched from CUP to PSI measuring standards and found the old loads were well above SAMMI pressure standards (which by then they had all agreed to follow) so in the interest of safety and conformance, the loads were reduced.

According to AA data, the above load is 8,000 psi above Max and about 2000 psi above purported +P+ (if there is such a thing). It is getting dangerously close to 9mm Proof loads ( which my searches indicate can range from 49,000 to 54,000 psi, depending). Then there is the issue of battering the gun (maybe in another post)

Does that mean the old loads will now blow up your gun? not necessarily, after all many had been using that old data for decades without mass blowups. It does mean your that much closer to critical limits and have a lot less of a safety factor to compensate if there is a mistake. You might be one of those lucky people that can take it right up to the max limit with no ill effects, then again, maybe your not. Only you can decide that.

So yeah, updating your load manual frequently is a good idea if you are trying new loads all the time. Once you settle in to some favorites that work for you, then its not as important. With the on-line manuals from the OEM's its easy to get the latest data but not so easy to check where you got it from 20 years down the pike.

A similar thing happened in the auto industry octane was reduced, speed was reduced engines got smaller and seat belts became mandatory.

 

[125JHP]

I have to support ArchAngelCD. I didn't read it as giving advice to do something, it appears he was just pointing out that between a published load and the established +P pressure limit, there is a little wiggle room should one wish to play there. He was saying that the older manuals can offer some clues but its still your interpretation that will get you into trouble or not.

Jellybean was also right in pointing out that often the next .1gr of powder exceeded the pressure standard at the test lab, so they stopped as they should. One thing not said was the target pressure standard they were trying not to exceed. If it was standard pressure, then OK, but in the case of +P like the thread was discussing, then I think there is a little room to play, but how much is anyone's guess without a pressure lab.

What he has to say about duplicating factory loads is also good advice as to how to start, but since they have non-canister powders available it may be hard to duplicate them without consulting some of those older load books and throwing your hat into the ring....

There are a lot of other factors that come into play. Powder speed has already been mentioned but another is OAL. Loading as long as possible can help reduce pressure in some instances, but velocity may follow.

If you decide to go down this road, just be aware this is a dangerous sandbox to be playing in. If something goes wrong, don't blame anyone else but yourself. If you start getting nervous about what your doing, have the sense to stop.

 

[Cricker]

I've often thought that I could safely exeed +P loadings a bit as I will be shooting them in a .357. However, I could as easily load down a .357 load to the same velocity. With the second option I do not have to worry about someone stuffing an overpressured load into my pre-15.
Current load data from any one of the manufacturers is most certainly reduced from previous publications and all will tell you to use the most current data available. But, I still find myself using older data that has worked well for me in the past. I see no need to reduce a load that has proven safe for me over the long haul.

 

[Rule3]

The whole +P issue is so overblown anyway (no pun intended) Especially in snub nose revolvers. You can't change the laws of physics. So out of a 1-7/8" barrel how much is there to gain? Just more wear and tear on the gun and your hand ,recoil flash, bang. Is that extra 50 to maybe 100fps going to matter at 5-10 feet in the over all scheme of things?

I find +P 45 Auto ammo ridiculous. A regular 45 is not sufficient??

 

[Erich]

Sounds like a man who needs to shoot more critters. And maybe study those laws of physics a bit more.