It makes sense if it's your primary carry gun or in a class. I've done a class each with my 642 and 49 with ~200 rounds fired in a day. If you have decent grips and don't just stand there and burn through your ammo as fast as possible, it's not a big deal.
Can I shoot +P ammo in my Model 36?
- Thread starter gila_dog
- Start date
SGT ROCK 11B
Member
Well I am intrigued. Can you post the Lesson Plan?
I put Hogue and Pachmayr shock absorbing grips on my 'J' frames. One is an alloy mod 38, so I don't shoot +P in it, but even standard ammo is painful to shoot. The mod 36 feels good with any ammo.
Since I attended those classes as a student, I obviously don't have the lesson plans for them.
The first one I did was by Greg Ellifritz, his Snubby Revolver for Concealed Carry class. This link goes to his main page; he doesn't have a separate page for that class. The class description is on the right, towards the bottom. I used my 642-2 with a handload that pushed a 125-grain plated FP to ~820 fps, basically the same velocity as factory 130-grain loads.
The second one was taught by Wayne Dobbs, his Compact Carry Revolver Skills class. I used my M49 with a handload using a coated 138-grain wadcutter that was a hair faster than factory wadcutters.
Both instructors are retired police officers and experienced trainers. Both classes were excellent.
I agree with your logic. However, you'd think that with the abundance of short-barrel .38s, capable of firing +P ammo, that ammo manufacturers would be making that ammo with fast-burning powder. Who says that .38+P is tailored to 4" barrels instead of 2"?
kbm6893
Member
Do they still allow off duty revolvers? 1992 was the last duty revolver but off duty revolvers were allowed until 1996, I believe. In 2018, the hundred or so guys still carrying duty revolvers were forced to get the 9MM.
AJR337
Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2019
- Messages
- 338
- Reaction score
- 677
While I'm not suggesting that this is an endorsement from S&W to shoot a steady diet of +P ammo in a Model 36, I thought it was interesting that the factory thought it was OK to install a +P marked barrel on my 36-2 (made in 89) that I sent in for service recently. I'm assuming they wouldn't do that if they had any concerns about shooting +P in the 36.
^^^That's what a carry gun is supposed to look like! 
walkin' trails
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2006
- Messages
- 1,286
- Reaction score
- 695
I don’t know of any Model 36s, or other Js blowing up b/c of factory loaded +p ot +p+ ammo. Federal and even some state/local agencies were running those hot loads they Js when they became available even though S&W didn’t approve. The biggest threat to the gun is increased wear and/or broken parts. Possibly stretched frames. I’ve come to discover that fixing an older S&W is not cheap anymore b/c S&W has changed action parts over the years. So probably the best advice is to”at your own risk.”
I’ve used +p reloads in my model 60 wearing pacs. One star do not recommend 
SGT ROCK 11B
Member
What I was saying is that the Course has a Lesson Plan consisting of Learning Blocks. After a Course you should practice the Learning Blocks in the following months. After a Course the Instructor pointed out your weaknesses or in your Self Critique you know what you need to work on.
So after doing a full course in January. I may do one or two Learning Blocks from the Course in February as well as a Qualification Course. Then in March, two Learning Blocks and so on and so forth. Because Training doesn’t end after a Course maintaining the Skill Set. Jeff Cooper had Handouts for you to take home and train/shoot on your own.
I am retired for a long time but I know a bunch of Instructors and might have taken the TTT and SET Certification Courses with them.
Outpost75
Member
Still common for UCs, white shirts and admin to carry a revolver. S&W several decades ago produced contract quantities of 642s without the Hillary Hole now distributed all over California among smaller municipal depts who piggybacked on the buy. LOTS of retired LE still fire annual requals with them.
Outpost75
Member
Dec. 1984 FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Tactical Revolver Course. You can download the whole issue in .PDF 14MB.
Google is your friend.
Last edited:
My model 36 has eaten standard pressure 158 grain SWC loads for years. It hits pretty close to point of aim with them. I normally keep some standard pressure hand loaded 157 gr wadcutters (Matt's Bullets) in it all the time. But I've been watching youtube videos of gel/denim testing showing how wadcutters blow right thru and keep on going, meaning that they aren't dumping all their power inside the target. They may do more damage than SWC, round nose, ball, or unexpanded hollow points, but they still waste a lot of their power by over penetrating. So... I've seen some youtube videos where various factory loaded hollow point bullets are used. Most of them fail to expand at the velocities that can be achieved using normal pressure, or even +P ammo. Some of this is because the denim fills up the hollow point so it can't do it's job. But Hornady's 110 grain FTX +P ammo expands reliably. The main question I have with them is, will they hit the point of aim? If so, great. If not, then I think I'd better stick with the WC ammo. The only way to answer this question is to spend $40 on a box of this ammo and see where it hits.
After all the answers to this thread I'll not worry about the safety and wear and tear on my gun with +P ammo. If it hits point of aim I'll start keeping it in the revolver. But I won't shoot much of it, cause it's too expensive.
After all the answers to this thread I'll not worry about the safety and wear and tear on my gun with +P ammo. If it hits point of aim I'll start keeping it in the revolver. But I won't shoot much of it, cause it's too expensive.
IT is safe to do so but why would you want to?? It doesn't offer any advantage over standard velocity and pressure loads that are available today. I've been shooting gel to the FBI protocol for a living for a long time. The ammo company I work for is even trying to phase out +p ammo. The only reason it still exist is because there are Uninformed LE agencies that still spec it. +p came about to try and get maximum terminal performance out of existing bullets. Modern bullet construction and designs are getting outstanding terminal performance at standard velocities and pressures, so the need for +p really doesn't exist anymore.
Interesting. What currently produced HP ammo is getting 12"-18" of penetration with expansion out of calibrated ballistic Gel? I like the Fed. Hydra-shok deep based on the testing I've seen, but was wondering what other ammo also performs well? I'm in the HP camp over WC's. But many WC fans just don't believe you can get 12+ inches of penetration and expansion consistently out of a 2" (or 1.88") barrel.
thinklikeido
Member
I have 2 snubbies, mod 38 and a ruger and I can't figure out why anyone would want to shoot +P ammo out of them. The gain in velocity is very minimal so why bother. Half the powder from the 2inch barrel dosen't even have time to burn much less the added blast.
Cartwright Jones
Member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2023
- Messages
- 48
- Reaction score
- 94
FEI, +P ammo is just another industry money-grab taking advantage of consumers, most of whom don't have a way to velocity check ammo, certainly no way to pressure test ammo, and no awareness that modern powders can deliver +P equal results with lower chamber pressures than standard pressure loads using different powders! On top of which, an added 2,000 psi is a far cry from anything close to frame busting, cylinder-exploding pressure! The industry standard for "proofing" modern revolvers is around 40-50% over standard pressure. If we use the SAAMI standard 17,000 "average psi" that means ALL .38 special revolvers (certainly those from reputable makers) are engineered to handle 23,800 - 25,500 "average psi". Even if one added a rigidly defined "2,000 psi" to the baseline, +P ammo would only rise to 19,000 psi which is still well below the maximum AVERAGE pressure the gun is built to survive. Any gun that is sensitive to being "blown up" with a piddly 2,000 psi increase in average pressure should not be on the market - and isn't.
No matter if S&W or anyone else publicly rates a .38 for +P, they should ALL stand up to it without a problem, and without ANY doubt, if an alloy J-frame can handle +P loads, so too can ANY steel frame, and more specifically, it's the CYLINDER that's got to contain the the pressure and they're all heat treated to meet the same standard. As for frame damage or even reduced life of a steel J-frame due to breech face thrust, the difference between standard and +P is insignificant, especially in all bullet weights below 158 grains.
The +P scam is no different than the JHP cash grab. For decades, the .38 special was known as a reliable "man-stopper" using plain old 158-200 grain lead - usually swaged ROUND NOSE lead bullets, with SWC noses being preferred when available. Of course swaged lead slugs are ideal for sub-magnum loads, crimp on a gas check and they work pretty well in some magnum loads! Swaged lead slugs are fairly soft - not unlike the old pure lead balls of C&B yore and readily deform upon impact and as they plow through muscle, fat, and bone. All one need do is revisit the video clip of Oswald being popped by Jack Ruby to know a .38 special to the abdomen ain't no joke! Even today, many experienced shooters choose to carry 158 grain lead SWC in their J-frame - when they find it, or load their own, over all these expensive, ultra-light, reduced recoil "+P" loads that don't even come CLOSE to the chamber and breech pressure exerted by a standard .38 LRN!
This reminds me of the industry deliberately downloading 9mm ostensibly because of the all the foreign made pistols "flooding the market" after WW2 by as much much as 100 fps on average, then, years later, along comes - you guess it, +P ammo loaded back closer to European mil-spec, but still decidedly less potent that military loads. The excerpt below is taken from an April 23rd, 2019 American Rifleman article:
"In our tests in 1985, XM882 propelled a 124-gr. round-nose FMJ out of the 5" barrel of an M9 at an average of 1273 f.p.s., delivering 446 ft.-lbs. of energy at 15 ft. Using an Oehler Model 43 and firing the new ammunition out of a 4.7"-barreled P320-M17, M1152 with the 115-gr. bullet was at 1326 f.p.s. and 449 ft.-lbs. of energy, while the M1153 (147 gr.) clocked 962 f.p.s. with 302 ft.-lbs., both at 15 ft."
THIS is the ammo every 9mm handgun is "built to handle" yet 95% of OTC commerical 9mm ammo barely breaks 330 ft-lbs. of energy. No wonder the 9mm is disdained as being "weak" and ineffective. The difference between an impact speed of 1,150 fps versus 1,326 fps is far more relevant to terminal effectiveness than iffy hollow point expansion versus a flat nose FMJ carrying a supersonic shockwave into the wound.
No matter if S&W or anyone else publicly rates a .38 for +P, they should ALL stand up to it without a problem, and without ANY doubt, if an alloy J-frame can handle +P loads, so too can ANY steel frame, and more specifically, it's the CYLINDER that's got to contain the the pressure and they're all heat treated to meet the same standard. As for frame damage or even reduced life of a steel J-frame due to breech face thrust, the difference between standard and +P is insignificant, especially in all bullet weights below 158 grains.
The +P scam is no different than the JHP cash grab. For decades, the .38 special was known as a reliable "man-stopper" using plain old 158-200 grain lead - usually swaged ROUND NOSE lead bullets, with SWC noses being preferred when available. Of course swaged lead slugs are ideal for sub-magnum loads, crimp on a gas check and they work pretty well in some magnum loads! Swaged lead slugs are fairly soft - not unlike the old pure lead balls of C&B yore and readily deform upon impact and as they plow through muscle, fat, and bone. All one need do is revisit the video clip of Oswald being popped by Jack Ruby to know a .38 special to the abdomen ain't no joke! Even today, many experienced shooters choose to carry 158 grain lead SWC in their J-frame - when they find it, or load their own, over all these expensive, ultra-light, reduced recoil "+P" loads that don't even come CLOSE to the chamber and breech pressure exerted by a standard .38 LRN!
This reminds me of the industry deliberately downloading 9mm ostensibly because of the all the foreign made pistols "flooding the market" after WW2 by as much much as 100 fps on average, then, years later, along comes - you guess it, +P ammo loaded back closer to European mil-spec, but still decidedly less potent that military loads. The excerpt below is taken from an April 23rd, 2019 American Rifleman article:
"In our tests in 1985, XM882 propelled a 124-gr. round-nose FMJ out of the 5" barrel of an M9 at an average of 1273 f.p.s., delivering 446 ft.-lbs. of energy at 15 ft. Using an Oehler Model 43 and firing the new ammunition out of a 4.7"-barreled P320-M17, M1152 with the 115-gr. bullet was at 1326 f.p.s. and 449 ft.-lbs. of energy, while the M1153 (147 gr.) clocked 962 f.p.s. with 302 ft.-lbs., both at 15 ft."
THIS is the ammo every 9mm handgun is "built to handle" yet 95% of OTC commerical 9mm ammo barely breaks 330 ft-lbs. of energy. No wonder the 9mm is disdained as being "weak" and ineffective. The difference between an impact speed of 1,150 fps versus 1,326 fps is far more relevant to terminal effectiveness than iffy hollow point expansion versus a flat nose FMJ carrying a supersonic shockwave into the wound.
Except for the Model 12.
Which is why I mentioned that it must have a steel or stainless steel cylinder and frame.
