.38 Spl +P and old standerd .38 spl.

[Doug.38PR]

it has been my understanding that .38 Spl ammo from 30-50 years ago is idential in pressure to .38 Spl+P ammo made today.
If this is the case, then all talk about "+P is unsafe to shoot in your gun" or even "+P will cause accelerated wear on your old gun" is nonsense.
This being the case, why do Colt and S&W insist on these two above quotes? Of course you could say "lawsuites" but since their guns of old were rated for pressure equal or more to that of modern +P seems that alone would cover them in court (if a courtcase could ever come up)

 

[Doug.38PR]

it has been my understanding that .38 Spl ammo from 30-50 years ago is idential in pressure to .38 Spl+P ammo made today.
If this is the case, then all talk about "+P is unsafe to shoot in your gun" or even "+P will cause accelerated wear on your old gun" is nonsense.
This being the case, why do Colt and S&W insist on these two above quotes? Of course you could say "lawsuites" but since their guns of old were rated for pressure equal or more to that of modern +P seems that alone would cover them in court (if a courtcase could ever come up)

 

[walkinghorse]

Not trying to be a smart ass on this subject, but it has been covered ad-infintum, and sometimes some acromony comes out.

One of the favorite debate subjects. lots of popcorn emoticons come out.

Multiple forums....Saxonpig has done a lot of research and reported extensively on this, search under his name.

Also check the CCW, reloading, and ammunition sections.

 

[Doug.38PR]

Oh of course. The subject of the use of +P in old guns and such in one way or another has come up multiple times in different ways and in different contexts. I have participated in many of them and read many of them
As you said, it is one of the favorite topics on the threads.
The more something gets brought up, the more you learn.
As you said, pop the popcorn and let the discussion begin

 

[Biggus]

I suspect an answer won't be straightforward. Old ammo was tested in CUP, which isn't a linear measurement, and doesn't compare directly to PSI.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Originally posted by Doug.38PR:
it has been my understanding that .38 Spl ammo from 30-50 years ago is idential in pressure to .38 Spl+P ammo made today.

I don't think so.

If this is the case, then all talk about "+P is unsafe to shoot in your gun" or even "+P will cause accelerated wear on your old gun" is nonsense.

Yeah, but it's not the case. .38 Spl was and is made with various peak pressures. Nowadays. you can sometimes get a vague idea of the pressure by noting the presence or absence of a +P headstamp. Couldn't do that before.

This being the case, why do Colt and S&W insist on these two above quotes? Of course you could say "lawsuites" but since their guns of old were rated for pressure equal or more to that of modern +P seems that alone would cover them in court (if a courtcase could ever come up)

Check the threads and find references to older guns (pre-316648) and aluminum guns that have been damaged by use of hot ammo. Also, S&W seem to constantly refer to model-numbered guns as some sort of a cutoff, so I suspect that there were some differences around that time, even though I don't know what they were.

 

[Doug.38PR]

Well, I had an individual sell me some old .38 Spl 158 gr ammo from the 1950s or 60s. I have yet to have the means or time to do it myself, but he claimed to have fired such loads and they clocked at something like 900 ft per second, just a tad over modern +P ammo of the same length.
Granted this is just hearsay, but still, it is what the individual claimed, take it or leave it. I await the chance to try it myself.

 

[danski]

Doug .38PR,

The standard .38 Special loads in the "old days" were much like they are today but a high energy .38 was created for law enforcement in the late 1920s for use only in N-frame revolvers, not K-frames. The guns were/are called .38/44s as was the ammo oftentimes.

From these extra power .38s came the .357 in 1935, again only in N-frames.

It wasn't until the metallurgy was changed in the mid-50s that so-called Plus P was authorized. The manufacturers were quite wary
about overloads and while the K-frame might not fly apart, it most certainly with use stretch in the frame and perhaps cylinder.

When the Model 19s came out, .357 ammo wasn't always readily available but some handloaders, such as Skeeter Skelton, in a sense recreated the .38/44 Special by seating the bullets a little less deeply and adding powder.

Or so I believe.

Dan

 

[Doug.38PR]

but the old ammo that I possess is not listed as .38-44, it's simply .38 Spl. Colt even considered their Official Police and even their Police Positives and Detective Specials (which were D frame, even smaller than the K frame) rated for the .38-44.

 

[Jellybean]

Doug, is it possible the guy you bought them off of was lying, or maybe shot them out of a carbine?

 

[danski]

Doug .38PR,

Please do whatever you think is right.

Dan

 

[DHENRY]

Jerry,
Great point and great pictures!
Another point many miss is the advent of 'detuned' ammunition since the 1960's, and all the 'one world' standards that made .38 spl., 9 mm and .357 magnum loads somewhat less potent than they had been earlier.
Having had the opportunity to fire all three calibers 'back in the day' during the 1950's, I can tell you that one of two things has happened:
1) All my senses have declined a great deal
- or -
2) The perceived recoil really is measurably less now.
Don

 

[gold40]

I don't understand why anyone wants to take the chance of damaging their older S&W's with +P ammo.

Maybe its OK? Maybe Not? Why take the risk?

JERRY

 

[Doug.38PR]

Jellybean,
You're right. It is possible. But then again, maybe it isn't. I have no reason to doubt him. Just stating it for whatever it's worth.

The idea that "you can't compare specifications from th 40s to that of today because they didn't use the same means" isn't exactly true. If for no other reason that you can take old ammunition that people have stashed or stored away from back then and test it now using modern means OR take the bullet out of the cartridge and measure the amount of powder they used back then to that of today. There are ways of knowing.

danski,
In practice, I don't generally put a steady diet of +P ammo through any of my guns if for no other reason that it is a waste of money to use more expensive ammo for target practice. Then again, when shooting things in penetration tests, that is another story.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

This discussion could go on and on, but I think the simple approach is to go to the facts. I have a 1937 copy of Phillip B. Sharpe's complete guide to handloading. In it he posts loads and velocities.

For example, on pg 409, for a 158 grn lead bullet, he lists unique as 6.6 grns for a veloicty of 1130 with a 6" revolver barrel and 20,900 psi from Dupont. This is the top load and today would be considered a mild 357 magnum load and certainly beyond and 38 special load.

My standard of 5.0 grns of Unique with a 158 is listed at less then 1000 fps because he jumps from 4.5 grns 870 fps to 5.4 at 1000 fps.

Now jump to speer 14, pg 883, 158 grn lead 5.2 grns of Unique 919 fps with a 6" barrel. Wow, that is darn close to 5.4 grns at 1000 fps.

Now hop to pg 876, 4.7 grns of unique with a 158 lead gets you 815 fps. Pretty darn close to the 4.5 grns at 870 from sharpe in 1937.


So my conclusion? Unique has not changed much in nearly 80 years no matter what the skeptics say. Load performance has not changed in 80 years no matter what the skeptics say.

What has changed is that today we know that 20,000 psi "piezo" means a lot higher pressure then 20,000 psi "copper crusher" did. Thus the SAAMI in my opinion is fixated on the number 20,000 (or whatever it actually is today) and not the actual performance of what a 20,000 psi "copper crusher" load actually did.

How else can you reconcile the fact that I can generally take most of the older loads, replicate them with modern powders and achieve similar velocities as quoted from "back in the day".

Just my two cents worth.

 

[danski]

Peter M. Eick,

In that 1937 Sharpe manual, does it give the type of revolver that was used?

I think the point that started this discussion was whether is was OK to use the hot .38 loads of yesteryear in the K-frame sized guns. There was no doubt that in the N-frames the hot .38s were OK as was, of course, the .357.

Smith & Wesson I believe has always counseled against use of +P loads (really the older loads from the '30s which in some cases were even hotter than +P of today) in K-frames and smaller that were built before 1955.

Of course a +P will not disintegrate an older K-frame but the fear exists of stretching the older frames and making the old, fine guns pieces of junk.

Dan

 

[rk22]

Be carefull shooting any full power load in any older gun because the gun is "old". A gunsmith friend of mind who has about 60 years of being a gunsmith has always said to me about buying an older firearm "it's not so much about the wear of parts but the "stress" the metal has taken over time". The stress on metal is the factor. For what it's worth. Richard

 

[deadin]

I knew an old gentleman that shot highbase duck loads in his damascus barreled 12 Ga. He never had any problems. Would I do it? Even in his shotgun? No Way!
You pays your dime and you takes your chances.
You probably wouldn't have a catastrophic failure, at least right away, but you will stress the old steel.
If you want to do it to your guns, just let me know so I can move down to the other end of the
firing line.

 

[Doug.38PR]

Well that pretty much goes without saying about any gun, new or old if enough stress is on it. Then again, if it is an "old" gun with little to moderate use then it should be fine. How many of us in here have been shooting "old" guns for years?

 

[deadin]

How many of us in here have been shooting "old" guns for years?

All depends on how much I value the "old" gun.
If it's designed for BP. I shoot BP. If it's a valuable gun, I don't shoot it. There are too many that aren't valuable that I can shoot,and even those I shoot with mild loads. If I want to shoot full loads, I use a modern gun.