Yeah, weight don't mean nuttin'. The manufactureres use a different alloy for +P brass that is lighter/stronger, and they thin some areas of the case to add to other areas to strengthen. Yep, that's the ticket...
Case Differences
- Thread starter Krell1
- Start date
Rule3 thanks for posting the information. I don't claim to have all the
answers regarding case strength. I know that Brian Pearce suggests
using +P or +P+ brass when loading heavy 38spl loads and in my
opinion he has to be one of the most knowledgeable gun writers ever.
I know that all brass cases are not created equal and some last for
many loads and some split on the first firing. I guess the best way
to resolve the issue would be to load some heavy loads in a variety
of cases, fire them and repeat until some fail. If you're motivated.
I'm not.
answers regarding case strength. I know that Brian Pearce suggests
using +P or +P+ brass when loading heavy 38spl loads and in my
opinion he has to be one of the most knowledgeable gun writers ever.
I know that all brass cases are not created equal and some last for
many loads and some split on the first firing. I guess the best way
to resolve the issue would be to load some heavy loads in a variety
of cases, fire them and repeat until some fail. If you're motivated.
I'm not.
I do not load +P 38 special at all. If I want a big boom I load 357 Mag.
What month/ issue is this article in.??
I certainly can not say anything about it without reading it.
What month/ issue is this article in.??
I certainly can not say anything about it without reading it.
David R
Member
I do not load +P 38 special at all. If I want a big boom I load 357 Mag.
What month/ issue is this article in.??
I certainly can not say anything about it without reading it.
Rule3 Rule3 Rule3, how many times I gotta remind ya?? Read
read read. If you read all of my first post and the others you
would have noticed that I said #290, the current issue.
Maybe in your haste and excitement over another chance to
jump on one of my posts you just kinda forgot to actually
read it. Ya think? Actually you did comment on the article
without reading it . Reading is a wonderful pastime and will
lead to many relaxing hours learning new things. Try it and
I promise you'll thank me some day for suggesting it and
opening your eyes to a wealth of information.
forestswin
Member
I subscribe to the downloadable version, and the most recent issue on their website is April/May 289.
What's up with that?? Is the print version out ahead of PDF??
What's up with that?? Is the print version out ahead of PDF??
S&WIowegan
US Veteran
Aw heck...reading's just for chumps that don't already know everything!!
forestswin
Member
Wow didn't know I could quote myself
Anyway, called Wolfe and June/July #290 will be available this afternoon
Wow didn't know I could quote myself
Anyway, called Wolfe and June/July #290 will be available this afternoon
Yep, you can even argue with yourself or the Fencepost too!
I checked Barnes and Noble yesterday and they did not have the issue. About 20 other Gun Rags though.
They actually have books there too.
gwpercle
Member
Krell1,
For what you are doing, mid range loads, the short answer is NO, there is no significant difference....not anything that's dangerous or would hurt general accuracy. If loading for bullseye competition matches then segregating cases would possibly help scores. I guess it just depends on how anal/ obsessive/compulsive you are as to how far you want to take the segregation thing .
Keep an eye out for those pesky 45 acp's with small primer pockets....I do segregate these.
Gary
For what you are doing, mid range loads, the short answer is NO, there is no significant difference....not anything that's dangerous or would hurt general accuracy. If loading for bullseye competition matches then segregating cases would possibly help scores. I guess it just depends on how anal/ obsessive/compulsive you are as to how far you want to take the segregation thing .
Keep an eye out for those pesky 45 acp's with small primer pockets....I do segregate these.
Gary
handejector
Staff member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 31,153
- Reaction score
- 48,455
I have NO clue what current brass is like, but I will relay a fact that I am absolutely certain of:
The 38 Special +P+ Q Loads from the 70s and 80s pictured below definitely had very different brass. It had thicker walls. The walls of the case were so thick that those cases created a problem for commercial reloaders back then, which was-
A double ended wadcutter seated flush or near flush would create a bulge at the base of the bullet that would actually prevent chambering in some guns and force you to push firmly to seat them in other guns.
Commercial reloaders of the era solved the problem by developing and installing a final sizing die in their Ammo-Load machines which mildly sized the loaded rounds at the last stage on the machine.
This is first hand data- what I actually witnessed, NOT heresay.
Attachments
05CarbonDRZ
Member
Yes, the 110 Treasury load and the FBI loads are brutal.
These are discussed in the notable thread section of Duplicating the BB load.
To clarify some things. I went to my LGS and obtained this article by Mr Pearce.
It is not an article but a question and answer section.
A reader wrote about duplicating 357 loads in 38 special brass.
Much was said about the development of the 357 Mag from the older 38/44 handguns and tests by Elmer and others.
He then goes on to give some loads (which I will not post here) using H110 and Magnum primers he essentially reduced the 357 Mag load by a few grains for the 158 JHP and some lead bullets.
He states "...approaching 357 Mag performance and PRESSURE"
Not 38 +P.
He does give a load and pressure for a lead Kieth bullet with a load of H110 to achieve pressures of 5% below factory loaded 357 Mag ammo, current max of 36, 000 psi (note SAAMI and SPEER say it is 35,000PSI)
Which raises a question of who is correct on pressure? Mr Pearce or SAAMI?? (disclaimer, the specs may have changed while I am writing this.)
So using his "number" that is 34,200 psi.!! Using 5% less than 35.000 it is still 33,251psi.
As we have already learned the MAX for +P 38 Special is 20,000 PSI
Mr Pearce "recommended using +P or +p+ brass and only using it once or twice and that brass varies even within the same brand". Of course it does, everything manufactured does. He mentions he has seen case separate. OK, so have I.
With these kinds of pressures I have no doubt.
With these excessive pressures I personally think it is unnecessary. If you need that kind of power use a 357 Mag. In a defensive J frame you can only get so much velocity from a 2" barrel.
Based on what I read he is exceeding 38+P pressure standards by a lot and if loaded to these pressures yes, 38 special brass would probably blow, but it is not intended for this!
No manual that I have shows a load of H110 or anything approaching this type of load in a 38 special. Nor do the manuals indicate using +P brass for +P loads
Even Nuclear Speer #8 does not come close?
So if one wants to load near 357 Mags in 38 special of any brand or headstamp based on his few paragraphs in a magazine, then go for it.
These are discussed in the notable thread section of Duplicating the BB load.
To clarify some things. I went to my LGS and obtained this article by Mr Pearce.
It is not an article but a question and answer section.
A reader wrote about duplicating 357 loads in 38 special brass.
Much was said about the development of the 357 Mag from the older 38/44 handguns and tests by Elmer and others.
He then goes on to give some loads (which I will not post here) using H110 and Magnum primers he essentially reduced the 357 Mag load by a few grains for the 158 JHP and some lead bullets.
He states "...approaching 357 Mag performance and PRESSURE"
Not 38 +P.
He does give a load and pressure for a lead Kieth bullet with a load of H110 to achieve pressures of 5% below factory loaded 357 Mag ammo, current max of 36, 000 psi (note SAAMI and SPEER say it is 35,000PSI)
Which raises a question of who is correct on pressure? Mr Pearce or SAAMI?? (disclaimer, the specs may have changed while I am writing this.)
So using his "number" that is 34,200 psi.!! Using 5% less than 35.000 it is still 33,251psi.
As we have already learned the MAX for +P 38 Special is 20,000 PSI
Mr Pearce "recommended using +P or +p+ brass and only using it once or twice and that brass varies even within the same brand". Of course it does, everything manufactured does. He mentions he has seen case separate. OK, so have I.
With these kinds of pressures I have no doubt.
With these excessive pressures I personally think it is unnecessary. If you need that kind of power use a 357 Mag. In a defensive J frame you can only get so much velocity from a 2" barrel.
Based on what I read he is exceeding 38+P pressure standards by a lot and if loaded to these pressures yes, 38 special brass would probably blow, but it is not intended for this!
No manual that I have shows a load of H110 or anything approaching this type of load in a 38 special. Nor do the manuals indicate using +P brass for +P loads
Even Nuclear Speer #8 does not come close?
So if one wants to load near 357 Mags in 38 special of any brand or headstamp based on his few paragraphs in a magazine, then go for it.
Last edited:
The reader asked his question for a specific reason; unobtainable
357 brass. Brian was in no way advocating loading 38 spls to near 357
pressure levels in 2" J frames or any other 38 spl. He was just trying
to give the reader an answer to his specific question; how to obtain
near 357 performance in his 357 MAGNUM REVOLVER during this
difficult time when 357 brass is very hard to locate. Read Rule3, read.
357 brass. Brian was in no way advocating loading 38 spls to near 357
pressure levels in 2" J frames or any other 38 spl. He was just trying
to give the reader an answer to his specific question; how to obtain
near 357 performance in his 357 MAGNUM REVOLVER during this
difficult time when 357 brass is very hard to locate. Read Rule3, read.
David R
Member
Similar threads
