Colt 70 Series 1911 38 Super

"And yes, 9x23 can be run from a loosely chambered Super but HOT .38 Supers should not be run from a 9x23 because the .38 Super is a straight walled case and the 9x23 is a tapered case like the 9x19. It will cause Super brass to stretch at the head and eventually fail. "

Sez who? While my really hot loads (around 1500+ ft/sec) are all in 9x23 Win or 9x23 Starline SuperComp cases, I've fired no small number of hot reloads (around 1300-1350 ft/sec with 124 grain FMJ 9mm bullets using AA#5) in .38 Super brass, and never had anything close to a case failure. And I use .38 Super reloading dies for everything - both .38 Super and 9x23 brass, even though I also have a set of 9x23 Win dies. So basically, everything I fire is either a rimmed or rimless .38 Super. And I've been doing this since the mid-1990s. Regarding your first sentence, I would not use a 9x23 case in any .38 Super barrel with semi-rim headspacing, only a barrel with case mouth headspacing. As I earlier said, my .38 Super EAA Witness handles 9x23 loads like it was made for them. But the EAA .38 Super barrel headspaces on the case mouth.
 
Last edited:
Candrews86 said:
Picked this one up a while back, doesn't look to have been shot much if any at all.

15gouoz.jpg

315nxht.png

160dc2u.png
Click to expand...

Nice, I don't know why, but would really like a .38 Super 1911 myself. I do enjoy my 1911 in .40 S&W. Bob
 
DWalt said:
"And yes, 9x23 can be run from a loosely chambered Super but HOT .38 Supers should not be run from a 9x23 because the .38 Super is a straight walled case and the 9x23 is a tapered case like the 9x19. It will cause Super brass to stretch at the head and eventually fail. "

Sez who? While my really hot loads (around 1500+ ft/sec) are all in 9x23 Win or 9x23 Starline SuperComp cases, I've fired no small number of hot reloads (around 1300-1350 ft/sec with 124 grain FMJ 9mm bullets using AA#5) in .38 Super brass, and never had anything close to a case failure. And I use .38 Super reloading dies for everything - both .38 Super and 9x23 brass, even though I also have a set of 9x23 Win dies. So basically, everything I fire is either a rimmed or rimless .38 Super. And I've been doing this since the mid-1990s. Regarding your first sentence, I would not use a 9x23 case in any .38 Super barrel with semi-rim headspacing, only a barrel with case mouth headspacing. As I earlier said, my .38 Super EAA Witness handles 9x23 loads like it was made for them. But the EAA .38 Super barrel headspaces on the case mouth.
Click to expand...


Layne Simpson....gun writer and USPSA Championship shooter. He had several articles on using 9x23s in .38 Super and then having those barrels rechambered for 9x23... Also he was talking about non-ramped barrels. Are your barrels ramped?

And yes, I am only talking about headspace on the case mouth barrels.

Not saying it won't work as the three barrel TALO above had a very tight XSE barrel rechmabered to 9x23 and I don't bother switching it out when shooting Supers...but if I was shooting factory or handloaded hot Super would change back to the original very tightly chambered Super barrel that will not accept 9x23 rounds. That barrel will not even take a Super reload with the slightest of bulge...

Bob
 
les.b said:
Chief...you're a Texan, and the 38 Super used to be one of the favorite go to guns of the Texas Rangers!! It should be a requirement that every Texan own one!!

I'm really happy with mine, but I'm glad I reload, as ammo is sometimes hard to find. I just use plain old 9mm bullets, whatever I have handy, and work up an appropriate load.

Best Regards, Les
Click to expand...


Les-


I think the Rangers are more known for carryng fancy .45's, but I met a game warden who wore a .38 Super.


When the gun appeared in 1929, Colt hawked it for shooting into cars, where the .38 Special was failing.


Of course, the Super soon scared the .38-44 out of the bushes over at S&W's factory.
 
Last edited:
Just for the record, the SAAMI specs for the .38 Super chamber is a base diameter of .3890+0.004" (.3890-.3894) and a cylindrical diameter of .3872+0.004" (.3872-.3876)

The SAAMI 9x23 Win chamber spec has a base diameter of .395-.007" (.388-.395) and a mouth diameter of .381-0.007" (.374-.381).

As I earlier said, I have two carbide die sets - Lee for .38 Super and RCBS for 9x23 Win. Back in 2009, I did some tests to see just what case dimensions resulted from both FL dies. I resized and measured several fired (in a .38 Super chamber) 9x23 cases in both with the following results:

Lee (for .38 Super) - Base diameter .382" (ahead of the extractor groove), body diameter .378" (full length)

RCBS (for 9x23 Win) - Base diameter .385"(ahead of the extractor groove), body diameter .373" (full length)

No significant dimensional differences, so essentially either die set could be used for either caliber. I just have a preference for the Lee dies, so that's what I use. Both produce a case with an easy fit into a SAAMI .38 Super chamber. Or in a SAAMI 9x23 chamber.

I have no idea what the actual chamber dimensions in my guns might be.
 
Last edited:
"In modern terms, for the non-reloader, does 38 Super really offer much over Plus P 9mm?"

Back in its days of peak popularity, there were no 9mm+P loads. A .38 Super factory load driving a 130 grain FMJ bullet at +/- 1200 ft/sec was indeed superior to commercial 9mm loads of that time. And certainly better than any .38 Special load, with the possible exception of the .38-44. To say nothing about the fact that the only 9mm pistols available in the 1930s and 40s were generally WWI and WWII Browning P-35s, Mauser C96s, Lugers and P-38s. I remember reading some story Elmer Keith wrote about loading the .38 Super to muzzle velocities over 1400 ft/sec (which can still be done today).
 
Texas Star said:
First , I want to credit Jim Carmichel for writing about the .38 Super headspace issue. I think he did that in a book, and in either, Rifle or, Handloader.


This is a problem that Colt should have corrected by, say, 1935!
The gun was introduced in 1929, and it should have soon been apparent that something was wrong!


In modern terms, for the non-reloader, does 38 Super really offer much over Plus P 9mm? With the .357 SIG filling the niche that .38 Super was designed for, do we now need the old Super? If it was actually loaded hotter, to original specs, I'd say it had its merits. But I don't think modern .38 Super factory ammo really gives 1300 FPS, and don't think it's even now "listed" to do so. A good 9mm Plus P round will reach or exceed 1200 FPS. Most factory loaded Super ammo is probably no hotter, if that.


That doesn't mean that I'd forego buying a nice .38 Super like the OP's here. I like the Colt, and on a fairly recent gun like his, I'd have the barrrel re-chambered to headspace right. On my prewar .38 Super Match with fixed sights, that'd be a problem with a now very expensive collectors' gun.


I still think a Super would fulfill the need that a HS chum's dad bought his Super for: protection when hunting bear in New Mexico, as a backup gun to his rifle. He wanted a sidearm just for wear in bear country, just walking around, too. A FMJ .38 Super bullet of 130 grains appealed a lot to hunters then. Some carried Supers as defense against lions and tigers, too. The deep penetration of that bullet was the attraction. Even Elmer Keith respected that and 9mm penetration.


The series 70 Colts had a collet bushing that sometimes broke a finger on the bushing. But a modern Colt has the traditional solid bushing, and is no problem in that regard. Especially if they make the Super in stainless, it'd be a fine outdoors gun, although it might need the usual work done to accurize Govt. Model Colts. Across the board, I think CZ-75B and Beretta M-92FS pistols in 9mm will outshoot a Colt in either .38 or .45. I've never shot a Colt 9mm, but it'd have the same design faults of the gun in the other calibers.


Is today's .38 Super mainly just for nostalgia buffs? What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

NOT! I shoot 9 mags of 45 every week. And after that, I put the 1911s in 45 away and I get out one of my supers and have a nice relaxing session with 6 mags of 130 gr. Oh what a relief.
 
Texas Star said:
Les-


I think the Rangers are more known for carryng fancy .45's, but I met a game warden who wore a .38 Super.


When the gun appeared in 1929, Colt hawked it for shooting into cars, where the .38 Special was failing.


Of course, the Super soon scared the .38-44 out of the bushes over at S&W's factory.
Click to expand...

Texas, you're a pretty good researcher, but the Super was pretty popular with Rangers, (as we see in the museum at Waco) even if outnumbered by the .45's.
Super was also highly prized by Mexican cops, and I still see one now and then amongst the brass federales and state comandantes.
 
For reasons I don't entirely understand, the .38 Super has always been very popular south of the border. It also has close cousins in foreign pistols chambered for the the 9mm Steyr and 9mm Bergman-Bayard (AKA 9mm Largo). Which cartridges also can generally be fired in .38 Super pistols.
 
DWalt, I bought my first Super around 1970 or so and guess the conclusions I've reached reference the Super 38 and 9X23 Winchester are similar to yours. My Colts will not chamber 9X23. My current and previous Kimber would, as will my STI. In fact, the chambers in these guns seem to be closer to 9X23 dimensions, rather than 38 Super. I've also used 38 Super dies to resize 9X23 will no ill effects.

I suspect the Super was popular South of the border due to prohibitions on "military" calibers. If I read the English translation of a section of Mexican gun law correctly, the Super too has been illegal there since the early '70s.
 
Last edited:
Two of my three "Esupers":

jmoorestuff002.jpg

Weird how the grip safety, pins and hammer on the Pre-WWI pistol at top have retained their finish better than the frame. Doesn't look that extreme whilst viewing w/Mk.I eyeball. (Swartz safety equipped to boot!)

None pristine looking but all pre-1960's. One Post WWII being "fat barreled", the other "thin barreled".

Biggest complaint is two of the three don't shoot where the sights look. And the one that does is the worst for group size.

Keep thinking to get a modern version, just haven't stumbled across the right one yet!

BTW, my .38 Autos have groove sizes right at 0.360". Old Winchester ammo had bullets that were a close match, but all the shootable Remington I've ever found had 0.355" bullets. Not so good! But using .38 bullets in my reloads helps. Generally, the .38 Autos have been more accurate (and well regulated, sight-wise) than the Supers.

Having a "NIB" '70 Series would be wasted on me! Pretty though it may be.
 
Last edited:
jaymoore said:
Two of my three "Esupers":

BTW, my .38 Autos have groove sizes right at 0.360". Old Winchester ammo had bullets that were a close match, but all the shootable Remington I've ever found had 0.355" bullets. Not so good! But using .38 bullets in my reloads helps. Generally, the .38 Autos have been more accurate (and well regulated, sight-wise) than the Supers.
Click to expand...

My very first .38 Super pistol, back in the late 1960s, was a Spanish Llama "Extra" (barrel marked Cal. 9mm/38), basically a M1911 copy. There has always been a debate as to whether it was intended to fire both 9mm Largo and .38 Super ammunition, but I still put a lot of .38 Super rounds through it, also some 9mm Largo which was fairly cheap on the surplus market back then. I had a lot of fun with that Llama and was pleased with it. I found it shot better groups when I used 158 grain .357 lead bullets, even though they are little heavier than standard. Another gun I wish I had kept.
 
This Colt Super 38 is SN 8920, and dates from the second year of production. It hasn't been fired much, but with the headspace on the rim it is somewhat less acurate than current production. Needless to say, with a Colt of that period the workmanship is exquisite.
 

Attachments

  • L1060081.JPG
    L1060081.JPG
    107.7 KB · Views: 18
  • L1060083.JPG
    L1060083.JPG
    108.5 KB · Views: 19
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top