Factory 38 Spl 158 gr RNL vs SWC

[Classic Radio99]

I use 148gr. lead target full wadcutters, not only for the ballistic effects, but because it's relatively low recoil and relatively low cost. This allows me to get lots of practice with this round, which is very important.
Although bullet performance is important, shot placement is really what matters. I don't want to have any bad shooting habits, and I want to accurately hit what I'm shooting at. Low cost, low recoil ammunition helps with that.
And the finest bullet ever made won't work if it just goes whizzing by. "I'd rather be missed by a big bullet than hit by a small one", or something to that effect.

 

[jupiter1]

RNL bullets have been in use since the introduction of .36 caliber revolvers. Those revolvers were praised for their effectiveness as fighting handguns at the time. I have not found any historical references regarding requests to bring back .58 single shot muzzle loading pistols because of .36 revolver ineffectiveness.

Prior to the 1960's, I don't think that there was much dissatisfaction with the .38 other than auto body penetration of swaged soft lead bullets. That was addressed by the introduction of round nose metal capped bullets and high speed pointed metal piercing loads.

I think many of the gun magazine writers set the tone for .38 RNL and 9mm hate back in the day. That undermined the confidence of some.38 users and started the larger vs. smaller bore arguments that continue to the present.

 

[transit]

RNL bullets have been in use since the introduction of .36 caliber revolvers. Those revolvers were praised for their effectiveness as fighting handguns at the time. I have not found any historical references regarding requests to bring back .58 single shot muzzle loading pistols because of .36 revolver ineffectiveness.

Prior to the 1960's, I don't think that there was much dissatisfaction with the .38 other than auto body penetration of swaged soft lead bullets. That was addressed by the introduction of round nose metal capped bullets and high speed pointed metal piercing loads.

I think many of the gun magazine writers set the tone for .38 RNL and 9mm hate back in the day. That undermined the confidence of some.38 users and started the larger vs. smaller bore arguments that continue to the present.

Reasonable.

But, I think it's fair to observe that, at the time of the .36/.38s introduction, to be shot at all was nearly a death sentence; infection, etc.

People did not want to be shot.

When one was shot in the past, one tended to cease one's actions. There are few records of actors with multiple rounds in them, continuing to fight. Wounded people fell to the ground and awaited care. This occurred on the battlefield, as well as on the street. Not always, but generally.

Today, the primary reason that murder rates are down is the extreme effectiveness of EMS, and of Emergency Room medicine, not because fewer people get shot.

Accordingly, in modern times, people are far more willing to fight on, since, on being shot, they are not overwhelmed with the knowledge that they have been killed.

I don't suggest that modern people "know" that this is what guides their thoughts, or think about it specifically, but I think it impacts them anyway. Getting shot today generally does not mean that you die.

Therefore, I suggest that the objective effectiveness of the projectile is more important today than it was in eras past.

 

[Rule3]

Reasonable.

But, I think it's fair to observe that, at the time of the .36/.38s introduction, to be shot at all was nearly a death sentence; infection, etc.

People did not want to be shot.

When one was shot in the past, one tended to cease one's actions. There are few records of actors with multiple rounds in them, continuing to fight. Wounded people fell to the ground and awaited care. This occurred on the battlefield, as well as on the street. Not always, but generally.

Today, the primary reason that murder rates are down is the extreme effectiveness of EMS, and of Emergency Room medicine, not because fewer people get shot.

Accordingly, in modern times, people are far more willing to fight on, since, on being shot, they are not overwhelmed with the knowledge that they have been killed.

I don't suggest that modern people "know" that this is what guides their thoughts, or think about it specifically, but I think it impacts them anyway. Getting shot today generally does not mean that you die.

Therefore, I suggest that the objective effectiveness of the projectile is more important today than it was in eras past.

Which then leads to this "debate"


Psychological Stops are grossly underrated.


and on and on and on......................

 

[max503]

Hope you don't mind if I share an OT story.
I knew a guy who was shot by a cop, with a snub nose.
Randy was drunk. He left the bar and got his shotgun and went back in. Randy told me he walked in and an off-duty cop said, "Randy Don't Make Me Kill You". Then the cop shot him. Randy said he remembers passing out. Randy said he still had the clothes he was wearing when it happened. I don't know how much time he spent in jail for that. I didn't know him real well and he wasn't an easy person to talk to. This would have happened in Bushnell, IL back in the late 60's or early 70's.
Randy's neighbor was a friend of mine and they told me this story while we were having a beer in the neighbor's yard. My friend, the neighbor, said it happened and I believe him.

 

[bmcgilvray]

Round nose .38 Special

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOx_tTQlEfY[/ame]

 

[ContinentalOp]

Because assassinating someone who's just walking by is the same as shooting a violent attacker intent on harming you...?

People keep confusing lethality with stopping a deadly threat.

 

[Old cop]

I had to use my issued .38 three times (I’ve posted this before). Twice w/the round nose and once w/the hollow points, all 158 grain. The first time the suspect was dropped w/one round. The second time four rounds failed to stop him and my last incident the old FBI +P hollow point dropped the suspect w/three rounds. My take away is shot placement is what really stops people and no two incidents are alike.

 

[LPD256]

I carried some Super Vels in the 70’s. My Dad and his buddies did some reverse wadcutter testing in the 60’s for fun. And. I finally carried 158 grain jacketed .357. The one pictured we retrieved from a pile of dirt to check expansion. Hollow points were actually forbidden at one point because they were considered “too deadly”. Of course I didn’t pay attention to that rule. I’m back to Super Vels in my 638.

 

[jupiter1]

Because assassinating someone who's just walking by is the same as shooting a violent attacker intent on harming you...?

People keep confusing lethality with stopping a deadly threat.

It sure did get his attention...

 

[bmcgilvray]

Because assassinating someone who's just walking by is the same as shooting a violent attacker intent on harming you...?

People keep confusing lethality with stopping a deadly threat.

OK.

Thank you so much for clearing that up. I won't again become confused in future over this topic just because of your post here today.

 

[LCC]

During the 70's I captained offshore sportfishing boats. One of my fellow fleet captains, a hulk of a man named Don, was a Silver Star holder from Korea.
One day a few of us were having an after work beer, and I asked Don how he'd earned the medal.
Don stood up off his bar stool, pulled of his usual wool shirt and then his t-shirt, displaying 2 large cratered entry wounds the size of large lemons across his chest, and matching exit wounds on his back.
"The fu#$%%^ Go$#% had us pinned down with a machine gun, just chewing us up, so said F#$% this, grabbed a BAR off some sum bitch who'd been killed, and charged the emplacement firing on full auto. Next thing I know I'm waking up in a hospital a month later, minus half a lung, some other ****, and a bunch of ribs. Turns out I knocked out the gunners before I went down."

Some folks get switched off with a single .22 round, whereas Don survived two machine gun rounds. Gotta think placement counts at least as much as ballistic variance.

 

[stansdds]

Shot placement and just how amped up, either on adrenaline or drugs, the assailant happens to be are key factors in stopping the fight quickly. Sever the spinal chord, a pretty small target, or destroy enough of the brain and the fight will be over. Take out the heart and it will be over quickly. Rounds through other organs will require some time before blood pressure drops enough to incapacitate.


Unless you take out the central nervous system or heart, the one shot stop from that magic bullet may not materialize.

 

[Boxlock]

RNL vs LSWC, I don't think it makes a lot of difference. Maybe, just maybe the SWC will track straighter in flesh, who knows.
Place either where it counts and it doesn't make that much difference.
Though I just placed another order for 38 Spl. LSWC even though I have a lot of LRN.

 

[rockquarry]

When LEO's were carrying .38 revolvers, the 158 LRN was known as the "Widow Maker".

Not because it worked, but rather because it didn't.

The "widow maker" moniker may be nothing more than something with little fact basis but often-repeated for a long time, so long that many assume it's a fact. For decades, the 158 gr. lead round nose .38 Special load was the only one commonly available to law enforcement and everyone else.

There is certainly no reliable definitive data available for the past hundred years or so, but it's quite likely more bad guys and others met their demise through the use of such a standard .38 Special load.

 

[chief38]

158 grain RNL is likely to enter and exit a body unless bone is hit and without striking a vital organ, might not cause immediate incapacitating damage. There will also be consequences about where that bullet winds up if it exits. 158 LFN are marginally better as they have more surface area to transfer energy to the body. Marginally better, but not much. Neither will expand. In the past, many LEO's called them "widow maker" bullets.

Personally I would use those bullets (and I do) ONLY for target shooting and practice. In today's ammo world, there are much much better choices. Modern bullets have way more energy, will expand quite well and a much less chance of exiting a body and going stray.

 

[Sgt. Buzzard]

Went OTJ in '73 we were issued 1 model 10 and 18 rounds of 158gr. LRN. The bullets did bounce off windshields, maybe make it through side glass and rarely car doors. They sucked! Simple as that. Then it was 158gr. SWC they weren't quite bad. Made people bleed more and better on door and windows, windshields maybe 50/50. Do you feel lucky?

At the time wadcutter were popular because they worked better with decent placement, especially so out of D/S or J frames.

JHP's pretty much changed everything. Then +P's now +P+. You like the idea of 158gr. LRN, that's cool, go for it.

BTW, in '73 the PD also ran the ambulance. I stopped counting when I zipped up my 125th. body bag. I now use hot 148gr. wadcutters with JHP in speed strips for reloads in my J frame. A product of my environment.

 

[Greyman50]

Yesterday at the range, my pet 38 Spl. handload that I’ve used for 40+ years and some factory 158 grn half jacketed Fed. 357 mags. Double action at 15 yards.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

The "widow maker" moniker was just an excuse for poor shooting. One shooting I am aware of the LEO at seven feet* shot the bad guy's left foot and the other five were misses. The bad guy got his fatal shot off, I think, because the LEO did not move. You got to get off the "X".

Any bullet that hits the bad guy's foot will not stop him from hopping away or unfortunately shooting back.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

View attachment 707881
Yesterday at the range, my pet 38 Spl. handload that I’ve used for 40+ years and some factory 158 grn half jacketed Fed. 357 mags. Double action at 15 yards.

Nice shooting. I would guess 3.5 grains of Bullseye behind a 158 grain LSWC.