.38 SW Cartridges

[Rambler42]

Searched for an answer to this question but didn’t find a definitive answer, which is probably due to my search skills. I am sure the truth is out there. It has always been my assumption the ‘modern’ .38 SW cartridges are the equivalent to the old black powder cartridges even though they are loaded with smokeless powder. I use them in my later model top breaks with no problems. When I buy an earlier model, and it is just a matter of time, can I use the same cartridges or will I need to find a source of black powder .38 SW?

 

[murphydog]

The active users of older top-breaks may chime in, but I suspect a mechanically sound .38 S & W top break of any vintage can handle the mild regular factory ammo made today, even though it is smokeless.

 

[BMur]

Oh Boy, that subject is going to stir up a lot of “ opinions”!

 

[leonardocarrillo]

Hola,yo utilizo en mi Safety Hammerles 2° modelo municion Magtech,que es la unica que consigo en mi pais(Argentina),y no tengo ningun inconveniente.
Entiendo que los fabricantes de municiones que tienen en produccion al .38 S & W saben que van a ser usados en armas viejas,incluidos los top-breaks,y no se van a arriesgar a tener una demanda legal.
Lo importante tambien es que el arma se encuentre en buenas condiciones para ser usada.
Perdon que escribo en español pero no hablo ingles.
Gracias.

 

[cgt4570]

The short answer is, yes, you can probably shoot modern light smokeless loads in your early top breaks without any issues. I do.
The longer answer is that black powder loads of equal velocity stretch the pressure peak out over a longer period of time than modern smokeless loads. Theoretically your gun will see higher peaks with modern loads and could shoot loose after many, many rounds.

 

[raljr1]

I shoot modern 38 S&W ammo in my old top breaks. I think it unlikely that anyone would shoot these old guns enough to do any damage to them with modern ammo. If you want to shoot thousands of rounds of 38 S&W (and I don't know why anyone would, considering that you can buy 38 specials for about half), I suggest getting a more modern pistol in that caliber.

 

[Rambler42]

I shoot modern 38 S&W ammo in my old top breaks. I think it unlikely that anyone would shoot these old guns enough to do any damage to them with modern ammo. If you want to shoot thousands of rounds of 38 S&W (and I don't know why anyone would, considering that you can buy 38 specials for about half), I suggest getting a more modern pistol in that caliber.

Good Advice! I will not shoot them that often, but it is nice to know I can when I want.

 

[BMur]

Yeah, the problem really is that it’s a different era that we are talking about. Nobody seems to respect that truth. The Black powder era was never standardized regarding bore or bullet dynamics. Where as the Modern era of Smokeless powder introduced a Standardized era because smokeless is not forgiving for errors made by hand loaders Or folks not doing there homework prior to pulling the trigger. Also, the Black powder era was explicitly 100% lead bullets. The modern era introduces a vast amount of hardened bullets that will increase pressure to a critical point when discharged in an antique with wide and tall black powder type rifling and lower grade steel. So honestly to say it’s OK to use smokeless in an antique is simply not enough information. We must be very careful to chose a precise load and 100% lead Bullet to make sure we do not introduce a significant pressure spike! Many modern 38 S&W loads are made for modern swing out cylinder revolvers that chambered this cartridge. They are made of much better quality steel and can sustain over twice the CUP or PSI that the antique can not. Also you will find modern bullets in this caliber that are hardened by the use of Moly, tin mixed in with the lead or Lubaloy. Using these bullets in the antique with smokeless powder will introduce a spike in pressure in the first milliseconds after the trigger is pulled which the antique was never designed to sustain. I personally never use smokeless in my Antiques. I use black powder or substitute. Besides it’s more fun to shoot them and loading your own cartridges is part of the hobby in my opinion.

 

[murphydog]

Hola,yo utilizo en mi Safety Hammerles 2° modelo municion Magtech,que es la unica que consigo en mi pais(Argentina),y no tengo ningun inconveniente.
Entiendo que los fabricantes de municiones que tienen en produccion al .38 S & W saben que van a ser usados en armas viejas,incluidos los top-breaks,y no se van a arriesgar a tener una demanda legal.
Lo importante tambien es que el arma se encuentre en buenas condiciones para ser usada.
Perdon que escribo en español pero no hablo ingles.
Gracias.

Hello, I use in my Safety Hammerless 2nd model Magtech ammunition, which is the only one I get in my country (Argentina), and I have no problem.
I understand that all the munitions manufacturers that produce 38 S & W know they're going to be used on old weapons, including top-breaks, and they're not going to risk having a legal lawsuit.
The important thing also is that the weapon is in good condition to be used.
Forgive me, I write in Spanish but I do not speak English.
Thank you.

 

[Patbar]

I read once that when smokeless powder was introduced in cartridges originally created for blackpowder, the manufacturers of these cartridges lightly reduced the caliber of the bullets in order to leave a small gap between the bullet and the bottom of the rifling, so permitting part of the gas to escape.
This was made to avoid any accident caused by the use of smokeless cartridges in old guns designed for blackpowder.

 

[Wiregrassguy]

S&W published a notice in their catalog around 1907 that says they warrant their guns to not fail even with commercial smokeless cartridges.

1907: Smokeless powder guarantee was issued by Smith & Wesson stating that factory loaded smokeless powder was safe for use in their guns.

(SCSW, 4th Ed., Page 493).

 

[glowe]

You know, there is the Chicken Little approach and then there is testing and observation using research and data. Whichever approach used is up to you. Bottom line is that the "sky is not falling" for me. Remington, Winchester, and some European ammunition manufacturers are great sources for purchasing 38 S&W ammo. They only use soft lead bullets, and all I have ever tested are loaded below the original BP rounds.

I have been able to test almost all calibers that span the BP to smokeless eras, and have kept my information for future reference. The test results for 38 S&W ammo gives me a strong opinion that current standard loads are actually loaded with pressures below original BP loads.

First, soft lead is quite easy to determine, since a fingernail test will determine soft lead and all I have ever purchased will easily mark. Also, one can test a spent bullet and compare with known pure lead bullets and I have never found any differences.

Second, tested velocities show a large and consistent difference between original BP an smokeless factory loads. Averaging velocity tests on both original BP loads and current standard 38 Special commercial loading yields about a 20% to 30% reduction in velocities using "modern" ammo.

Remington 145g LRN Factory BP. . . . . . . . . 748 fps
Remington 145g LRN Factory Smokeless . . . 537fps
Winchester 145g LRN Factory BP. . . . . . . . . 685fps
Winchester 145g LRN Factory Smokeless. . . 615fps
PPU 145g LRN Factory Smokeless. . . . . . . . 599fps
Reloads 145 LRN 15g 4F BP . . . . . . . . . . . .720fps

Always using the same S&W 38 DA, 5" barrel revolver for tests over the years, give a relative account of felt recoil. BP offers a consistently higher felt recoil than smokeless. Higher felt recoil and 20%+ slower velocities, help me make the decision that current smokeless loads provide less pressure and stress on the gun than original BP. Add in the near infinite possibilities of reloading with lighter bullets and different powders, you can definitely come up with even lower pressure loads that will still punch round holes in paper. Don't get me wrong, there is at least one manufactured round out there today that should not be shot in a top-break revolver. There have been reports of a manufacturer loading ammo capable of over 1000 fps, but I have not seen it, so know what you are buying. Safe thing is to stick with standard 145g RN ammo from Remington, PPU, Fiocchi, and Winchester.

Third, steel yield strengths in the late 1800s were far more than adequate to withstand the pressures of 38 S&W loads made today or over a hundred years ago. Besides, it is not so much the strength of steel that dictates the maximum pressures for a top-break revolver, but rather their basic design using a hinged frame and a small top-latch limits pressures. Solid frame revolvers are much stronger and can withstand more pressure, but ammunition manufacturers still design for the top-break as the standard because people are still shooting top-breaks and liability issues will always remain the driving force in their design and production.

Lastly, steel yield strengths are often used to say that steel made in the late 1890s and early 1900s was far inferior to that available by say WWII era. Totally untrue and mostly irrelevant to this discussion. By the 1890s, high grade steel was available in yield-strengths of 50,000 psi and steel from the WWII era increased to 60,000 psi. Considering the fact that 38 S&W top-break revolvers maximum pressures were 13,000 psi, you can draw your own conclusions.

I always supply the caveat that any 100+ year old S&W can break shooting any type of ammo, but if the revolver is in fine mechanical condition, it will be most likely springs, internal parts, etc. that can fail, not the revolver itself. I always advise new shooters that parts for these vintage guns can be a real challenge to find. Having shot thousands of rounds of 38 S&W through dozens of S&W top-breaks over the last few decades gives me great comfort in grabbing the next one in line and heading for the range today. I have to say that no broken parts in any of these little beauties yet.

 

[BMur]

I agree with Patbar,
We can have a closed minded, tunnel vision approach with an extremely basic evaluation of one singular type firearm. Or we can perform a focused study of not only Smith & Wesson firearms manufactured during that era and we will see the insane dynamic of the Black Powder industry of that time. The concept is that we "ALL" stay safe shooting these antiques. If we perform an in depth study of various firms that were competing with Smith & Wesson we will actually see first hand the NON Standardized Era that the Black Powder Era was. By the way Smith and Wesson did participate in the reduction in size of bullets for this caliber. They went from .360 to .358 as a standard for the .38 caliber with the introduction of the .38 special in 1899(smokeless Era begins) and remained at that size bullet into the smokeless era. 3 distinct bullet changes took place with the .38 S&W. All were an improvement in lubrication and overall reduction in diameter to meet the "safety" requirements at the introduction of the smokeless era. The industry became Standardized and they were most definitely spooked by smokeless powder use in the older guns. Often you will see the common label on the early 1900 boxed guns that state: "This firearm is not designed for use with smokeless powder". That's the manufacturer talking not me.
What I have found and published in my book is that various firms would seek a singular vendor during the black powder era to manufacture a cartridge for their specific firearm( engineered to match). Example: Colt would seek out U.S. Cartridge Co. Remington would seek out Union Metalic Cartridge Co. Neither cartridge would match the other. Slight differences in bullet weight and significant differences in "diameter" are proven when studied. Why did they do this? My opinion is because they used black powder and the engineers knew black powder was not critical to exact bullet size.
Smokeless is "totally different". I have closely examined various antiques in .38 caliber from various firms and the bore and groove diameters are all over the grid. As low as .348 in Forehand and Wadsworth to the more subtle S&W at .360 in 38 caliber S&W. You punch a .358 hardened or even 100% lead bullet through a topbreak with a .348 groove diameter and smokeless load and the topstrap will disappear. So you can "try" different cartridges through your antique and "see" and record what happens or you can simply use black powder and enjoy the experience. Or if you insist on smokeless you must do your homework and mic the bore both groove and land diameter and "bullet" match your findings with a 100% lead bullet and very light smokeless load. We don't rely on "dumb luck", with the black powder era. We rely on matching each and every firearm to the 100% lead bullet. You might be at the range shooting your Smith and some poor fella next to you has a Iver Johnson or a Forehand and Wadsworth and see's you shooting smokeless. Decides to try one in his antique and BA BOOM! because his gun has a much different groove diameter. Not because its a cheap gun. This is how we ALL stay safe and enjoy our antiques. Not just one of us getting lucky shooting random modern smokeless loads without checking the bore to bullet matching.(required for antiques) Pure dumb luck the gun didn't come apart.

 

[BMur]

38 S&W bullet transition

If anyone is interested the below photos depict the transition of the 38 S&W bullet from the Black powder Era to Early Smokeless.

• The first photo is from Smith & Wesson circa 1879 and depicts the early outside lubricated bullet having no grease grooves within the case and a soft wax lubricant on the conical lead bullet. This round was the introduction of the cartridge for the Baby Russian SA Model 1. When found(rare) the bullet measures .360 in diameter.
• The second photo is the transition bullet first introduced as an improvement having inside lubrication now within the case with and additional crimp groove. This photo depicts the later variation that transformed the original .360 bullet to the early smokeless .358. Earlier black powder variations of this bullet were .360.
• The 3rd photo is the final transition of the .38 S&W that took place after 1902 having 2 lubrication grooves and the crimp groove. By this time the industry standard for all 38’s was .358. When loaded all 3 bullets look identical when the cartridges are standing side by side but they are obviously not the same.
• The final photo proves that even Colt conformed to the Smokeless industry standard and changed the old 38L and 38 Short Colt to .358.

 

[sigp220.45]

These old guns didn't just get put on a shelf when smokeless came out. I'll bet most of the old black powder era guns soldiered on with the newer loads with nary a problem.

I posted once on another forum about a blackpowder frame Colt SAA .44/40 that my boss brought in for me to look at. I posted some pics, told a bit of the history of the gun, including that my boss's uncle had shot the thing regularly in the past 50 years, that the uncle's Dad has shot it regularly prior to that, and said we'd be shooting it with some factory cowboy loads at our next qual session.

Of course, I was piled on by experts who said it should NEVER BE FIRED with smokeless loads, completely ignoring the fact it had been fired hundreds or thousands of times with smokeless factory loads and was still in fine shape.

Currently loaded .38 S&W loads are exceedingly mild, and I shoot them regularly in my old guns.

 

[glowe]

The measured bore diameters in post 1900s 38 S&W revolvers in my collection were the same as pre-1898, at .361", not 358". Trying just about everything with reloading this caliber over the years, I have reloaded trimmed 38 Special cases and they expand substantially in the cylinder when fired in post 1900s guns, with some cases splitting. 38 Colt in the late 1800s and 1900s was not the same as 38 S&W and have little relevance to a S&W revolver, except for the US Army Model 1899 revolvers chambered in that caliber.

Every one of my 38 S&W revolvers had a .360" - .361" cylinder throat diameter from the 38 SA to 1920s top-breaks. They were never manufactured for .358" bullets.

If some manufacturers, out of convenience, loaded 38 S&W with .358" bullets, so be it, but accuracy would have been dismal. I have tried standard .357" 38 Special bullets in the past and could never obtain any degree of accuracy with a bullet that was too small for the bore.

 

[BMur]

Single Action Army

With all due respect, the Single Action Army has got to be without a doubt the most altered and copied gun out there. I knew this collector that walked around the shows with a guage attached to his belt because “he” could not tell visually if the gun was reworked. He had several hundred in his collection. Also, the “ black powder frame “ as it is called by collectors actually did not represent the change to Smokeless. Black powder frames are found well into the Smokeless era of the late 1890’s. Not to even mention the very common swap performed by simply changing the barrel and cylinder from a Smokeless gun to a black powder frame. “ Extremely common with the Colts. Even caliber changes are Extremely common! Post 1890 Colts the barrel and cylinder did not have serial numbers on them so really the only way to confirm your SAA is original in caliber is to obtain a factory letter. We are only scratching the surface on that Colt!!

 

[sigp220.45]

With all due respect, the Single Action Army has got to be without a doubt the most altered and copied gun out there. I knew this collector that walked around the shows with a guage attached to his belt because “he” could not tell visually if the gun was reworked. He had several hundred in his collection. Also, the “ black powder frame “ as it is called by collectors actually did not represent the change to Smokeless. Black powder frames are found well into the Smokeless era of the late 1890’s. Not to even mention the very common swap performed by simply changing the barrel and cylinder from a Smokeless gun to a black powder frame. “ Extremely common with the Colts. Even caliber changes are Extremely common! Post 1890 Colts the barrel and cylinder did not have serial numbers on them so really the only way to confirm your SAA is original in caliber is to obtain a factory letter. We are only scratching the surface on that Colt!!

Huh?

The Colt was lettered and correct, but I think you’re missing my point.

People tend to think of guns as a product of the time they were made, not an item that has been used through the years. When smokeless began to replace blackpowder cartridges those guns continued to be used. They didn’t explode. Some cartridges, particularly the .38 S&W, are intentionally loaded down in deference to the many old guns out there.

 

[BMur]

My personal favorite load for my “ Shooter” Antique 38 S&W double action 3rd model that has no finish but excellent action and matching numbers that dates to the late 1880’s? Is the .358/ 105 grain semi- wadd cutter with 10 grains of goex FFFG black powder, CCI small pistol primer, soft lubricant, and heavy case crimp with the bullet seated to the top of the bullet skirt? That round is dead on at 10 yards. I never chrono’d the round but I would guess it’s in the mid 500fps. So I don’t see a slightly undersized bullet to groove diameter causing significant inaccuracies. But I do see a slightly undersized bullet introducing gas cutting or blow-by that definitely reduces pressure! I think that was the industry’s concept at the turn of the century.

 

[BMur]

Im sorry but I can’t agree with that position. Perhaps if we are talking specifically about Smith & Wesson’s? In 38 S&W caliber only? I can Agree. But there were many guns that chambered that cartridge in The Black Powder Era and they most definitely did come apart with smokeless loads because if you actually read my previous post? The groove and land diameters were grossly undersized! Please read my posts.