.38S&W Questions...NEED SOME HELP

[TACC1]

I've been wondering about the use of 200 gr. bullets
as carry loads. It sounds like a really slow bullet from a snub barrel.
What I was wondering, was whether the 200 gr. bullets would be okay
in a top-break, such as a .38 DA Perfected. The barrel is 4-1/4", and
the bullet should have some decent velocity built up by the time
it exits the barrel.
Would the higher pressure involved with the heavier bullet
be too much for a top-break?
TIA for any thoughts and/or recommendations.
TACC1

 

[ArchAngelCD]

The bullet weight really has nothing to do with pressure for the most part. If you build the 38/200 rounds with published load data you can safely shoot it in any 38 S&W revolver in good condition. The SAAMI pressure limits on the 38 S&W are 14,500 psi, not very stout and that's because of the top break revolvers. The S&W revolver could handle much more pressure than the top breaks other than the Enfield No2 revolvers.

 

[TACC1]

Sounds like it's time to locate some heavy bullets.
Thanks for the input.
TACC1

 

[Delos]

Old 38 S&W top break loads?

You said 38 snub nose 200 grain. The larger 38 "special" was tried with 200 grain bullets long ago according to some article in one of the gun magazines about 45 years ago.
The British championed it because they were looking for a smaller frame gun after WWII, to replace the 455 Webley. Allegedly tests by them showed that "knock down power" was more dependent on the time the bullet spent traveling through the body. Slow bullets were claimed to be superior, according to them. (Wrong)

The velocity was so low it would not break a car windshield so police in this country gave up on it quick. All our tests (before hollow point bullets) showed the 38 special penetrated best with 158 grain bullets (if memory serves - someone will hopefully jump in on this).

Anyway you might want to read about the old 36 cal black powder revolvers (remember a 38 special is really .357 or 36 cal). I sorta think the old original 36 black powder revolvers were okay but 44 much better. I vaguely sorta remember the 36 doing 750 feet per second out of a 6 inch barrel (some black powder person here will correct me). They shot both round ball and bullet shaped mini balls before cartridges. I will make a wild guess and assume a round lead ball of 36 caliber would be about 80 grains?

I am taking the long way around in trying to say you are covering old ground. Lighter faster bullets do best within reasonable limits. You are talking about something that will shoot worse than a .32. A friend of a friend was shot by a 32 once and it did not penetrate his sternum. It knocked him out but did no real damage.

You might want to read about the old 38 long colt, the 38 smith & Wesson that you have, and the 38 special that was more competitive for police markets. The 45 dominated the military market for a very long time (late 1800's perhaps). Some nice 45 single then double action revolvers were sent to the Philippines during the insurrection. They solved the problems of the old 38 long colts poor stopping power.

Try the factory load first. There were a lot of good reasons for the original load. If you want to shoot a 200 grain bullet at low pressure buy a 44 special or 45 auto or long colt.

My Speer reloading manual number 12 (1994) warns against using any of its 38 S&W loads in a pre WWII hinged pistol (top break) unless it is a Webley. It has a few nice loads listed for 110 grain bullets for new revolvers. Fair loads for 148 and 158 for new revolvers.
It is fun to play with old revolvers, but not worth blowing up an old weak top latch into your face.
The National Firearms Museum: Smith & Wesson 38 Double Action Perfected Model Revolver

That is a nice looking gun made between 1908 and 1920. Please do not blow it up.

 

[Delos]

38 S&W reloading data

Here is some reloading data for 38 S&W

Reloading .38 S&W Page

Note that the second paragraph says lower loads with break top, only lead bullets.
(one load shows a 158 grain bullet going over 600 feet per second)

 

[TACC1]

I stand corrected! Thank you for setting me straight.
I occasionally carry a .38 S&W, with standard ammo.
Since I have more than one in top-break, and really good
mechanically, I wondered if they'd work with the 200 gr.
Since they might/will suffer from that idea, they'll stay at
the standard, store-bought, 145 gr.
These old guns, with more modern grips, are still
serving in their natural mode: protecting their owner. I won't
jeopardize that function for a whim.
Many thanks again! This was a learning experience, You
guys rock! Case closed.
TACC1

 

[walnutred]

For the last couple years my 38 S&W reloading tests have been with 126gn SWC bullets. I'm not ready for a summary yet but I think these smaller bullets in the 750-800 fps range give the best performanc in 38 S&W.

 

[Delos]

Fine little gun

I stand corrected! Thank you for setting me straight.
I occasionally carry a .38 S&W, with standard ammo.
Since I have more than one in top-break, and really good
mechanically, I wondered if they'd work with the 200 gr.
Since they might/will suffer from that idea, they'll stay at
the standard, store-bought, 145 gr.
These old guns, with more modern grips, are still
serving in their natural mode: protecting their owner. I won't
jeopardize that function for a whim.
Many thanks again! This was a learning experience, You
guys rock! Case closed.
TACC1

From what little I have read your 38 S&W is the latest and strongest of the top breaks. It was made in about the same time frame that the 45 auto, and 38 special was being developed using smokeless powder and no doubt better steels.

Someplace said that police gave up on it because of an incident where a guy was trying to take a policeman's revolver away and the latch opened up.

Some other article claimed that Jesse James (who began as horseback raider during civil war) preferred the top break 44 because it could be reloaded faster.

One of my favorite guns to shoot tin cans was a friends H&R 22 top break revolver. I wish I had bought one of those, back when they were new.
(Okay, I am out of words on that sweet little pistol)

 

[TACC1]

One of the factors in my interest, was the tightness of
the action. Something else that excited me was what
happened when I changed out the stocks from the
original hard plastic. It has j frame round butt stocks on
it now, and makes a world of differencce when shooting.
When/if I find another set of Improved I-frame grips, that's
where they're going. I don't want to trim these if I can help it.
TACC1

 

[kaaskop49]

TACC1: Many thanks for liking some of my replies. A 1968 article in GUNS magazine on 2" velocities gave the 200 gr. .38 Spl load 572 fps in a Chief's Special. I don't know what you carry in .38 S&W, maybe a Terrier(?), but I don't think the velocity would be much different. 572 fps seems awful feeble, I'm guessing the 200 gr. load worked better in 4" at a higher velocity.
The question is how can I remember this 572 fps figure from an obscure article from 1968!

 

[Delos]

If memory serves me

Perhaps the most important (to me) detail about bullet loading data involves staying in the pressure level. And heavier bullets require "less powder" to stay in the required pressure zone. (Less powder usually means less work done)

I was once fascinated by the old pine box penetration tests (1960's). In the photo's the box was long and skinny and topless. It was built so small pieces of pine (?) one inch thick (?) boards could be dropped in maybe an inch or two apart (?).

Anyway the 38 special had its best penetration at 158 grain bullet weight. Maybe 6 boards (?) with a 6 inch barrel.

The fascination was that the kinetic energy formula favored lighter bullets (square the velocity). But momentum (weight times speed) seemed more accurate. But ships go faster (penetrate water better) when long and skinny - so I had to read about sectional density.

But back then the speed boat hull design winning races was the Bertram (?) hull. Built with a general V shape with flat horizontal areas. (Think the overlapping side of a wood house - or Semi Wadcutter).

But then the hollow point bullets proved very good, and when following the kenitic energy formula - balanced by the bullet being long enough to grab the barrels rifling - and if traveling over about 950 feet per second (back then?).

So I am opinionated that little pistols work best with the original engineers calculations. The old 45 had the reputation for knocking down the enemy and planting flowers. Smaller guns saved many many lives, but did not plant flowers.

I think I just lost my train of thought? 45's will do that. But they have always been too heavy for me to carry very long.

The little Top Break revolvers are something a guy could carry on any mountain trail all day long. And cute enough to put on a wall (in a concrete basement).

 

[Papaboo]

May I add my 2 cents to this discussion

When I was working as a PO we carried .38 cal revolvers until they switched to Sig autos in 1992. Until then they tested and found the 158 gr, jacketed hollow points +P , they did best for taking out the bad guy. The hydrostatic shock dropped them with two or three well placed hits in the torso. When I was working we had a couple of justified shootings and the bad guy was down and out! I wouldn't mess around trying a big round for the sake of saying you are shooting this big round! You want big bullet, use a .45 jacketed hollow point 230 gr. What ever you use remember center mass does the job!
I use 158gr jacketed hollow points in my Model 60 2 inch Chief since 1975. Never had a problem and still shoot a tight shot group center mass! I also carry a Springfield XDS .45.