Is .38 Special Really Down-loaded?

[Alk8944]

A frequently made assertion is that current .38 +P is really loaded no heavier than standard loads before the +P specification was applied to the cartridge. I happen to have (had) several boxes of W-W (Western box) 158 Gr. RNL Lubaloy ammunition which was my departments issue ammunition. It was manufactured not later than 1973, probably slightly earlier, and has been in my possession since 1973 or early 1974. It has always been stored under controlled conditions in the house, and the temperature has not been lower than 60+ to not over 100 degrees, and that rarely, if ever. It is in new condition, with even the Lubaloy plating bright.

I have often wondered how its' velocity would compare to the published data for this cartridge. From the box(es), "Muzzle Velocity 855 ft./sec. Muzzle Energy 255 ft. lbs." Today I finally had a chance to take several (8) fairly representative revolvers which are roughly contemporary to the ammunition. All were fired the same day, ca. 65 degrees, elevation 5200'. Chronograph, Oehler 35P. All were 12 round samples, except as noted, as average velocity is all that was of interest. Here are the results by barrel length:

712 fps 2" M 10-5
703 fps 2" M 12
717 fps 3" M 60-4
782 fps 4" M 14-2 (Dayton)
805 fps 5" 1948 M&P
738 fps 6" 1948 K-38
792 fps 6" M 10-4
798 fps 6" M 28-2 (8 rds, last of box)

Previously shot data, same ammunition:

770 fps 6" M 28-2 (same gun as above, 6 rds)
733 fps 6" 1948 K-38 (same gun as above, 6 rds)

Old R-P 158 gr. LRN

683 fps 2 1/8" 640-1 (Nov 1995, it was cold! 18 rds)

Now, some 158 LSWCHP +P (FBI load):

821 fps 2" M 12-3 (Winchester)
821 fps 2" M 12 no dash (Federal, same revolver as above))
(Note, these were shot on different days, but velocity was identical)

945 fps 6" M 10-5 (Federal)
929 fps 6 1/2" Outdoorsman (Federal)
936 fps 6" M 10-5 (Winchester)
(Temp 50 degrees, all 6 rd samples)

Honestly I don't recall when I first heard the term +P for any caliber, but am reasonably sure it was not until after 1973. I was one of the people responsible for procurement of new ammunition for our department in 1974, and do not recall seeing this designation in any manufacturers lists at that time. I feel safe in believing the ammunition (W-W) in the first set was made before +P was available, and definitely when crusher testing was still the norm. It should be easily seen from these results that there is a great deal of difference between 1970s pre-+P ammunition and currently loaded +P. In only one case did the older ammunition exceed 800 fps in any barrel length (5"), but the +P of the same weight the velocity was never below 800 fps, even in the 2" guns, and well over 900 fps in all longer barrel lengths shot.

Maybe one day I will find some current 158 LRN factory ammunition to compare with the 1970s stuff shot today. I'll let everyone know then!

 

[Steve C]

It is nice to see some real world ballistics of older ammo.

There's lots of internet nonsense about the "old loads" being hotter across oll loads.

If you looked at the manufacturers published ballistic charts in the 70's before the SAAMI +p level was established there was always higher velocity ammo available equivalent to the current day +P that was called police loads or Hi Speed. All the velocities for the .38 spl where measured from a 6" barrel and likely a test barrel. No one had chrono's in the 70's except the manufacturers as electronics was very expensive so who could compare what they said vrs real world guns.

With ammo for the most part things haven't changed much for the calibers available then and now though except maybe more truth in product advertising.
From the 1972 Guns and Ammo Annual

 

[Texas Star]

I wonder what the .38 Special and others gave back in the pre-WWII years.

 

[125JHP]

Nice Job and good report - thanks for doing it.
also for the G&A chart.

Take a look at that 180gr 44 Mag..... 2005 fps what were they smoking ? - oh yeah, this was from the 70's ... I think I know what

for that matter, look at the 357 Mag - 1400 to 1690 fps. I don't have facts in front of me but that seems a tad bit more than today's offerings.

The rest look about the same or less than currently available.

 

[Mike6735]

Great work ALK8944- the question you raise was long overdue and it looks like you have made your case. However, do these 1970's rounds you tested degrade at all over the many years you have kept them in what seems like ideal storage, losing some velocity?

 

[M29since14]

Thanks for that. The continuing controversy over +P/no-such-thing-as +P will not be stopped by your info, but it confirms my personal suspicions.

I have always been amused by how many ballistics experts there are in the world who cannot claim to have ever spent a day in an actual laboratory. It is one thing to have theories and discuss them privately amongst friends, but something else again to make a bunch of rather bold public statements based on... nothing.

 

[Texas Star]

Keep in mind that those 1970's velocities were achieved in longer pressure barrels, and modern revolver ammo is measured in shorter, vented barrels, more like revolvers with barrel/cylinder gaps in mind.

Also, some of those figures were for Super Vel ammo, no longer made and known to be really hot.

Modern ammo is not necessarily weaker, except in some loads, like 125 grain .357. The velocities are just measured differently.

 

[Alk8944]

Great work ALK8944- the question you raise was long overdue and it looks like you have made your case. However, do these 1970's rounds you tested degrade at all over the many years you have kept them in what seems like ideal storage, losing some velocity?

Mike,

Obviously this is something we can never know for certain, but it is unlikely that there has been noticeable degradation. This is the reason I want some current production from Winchester to make a comparison.

And Texas Star's question: " I wonder what the .38 Special and others gave back in the pre-WWII years."

It is difficult to say, particularly since it is unusual to find quantities of 1920-1930s ammunition of known provenance and storage conditions which can be documented, and that anyone would be willing to shoot just for curiosity. What I can tell you is what the performance level of original 1899 era .38 Special was when loaded with black powder.

A couple of months ago I became sufficiently curious as to load some original charge black powder rounds, within limitations of modern components. Those limitations are, obviously, that no black powder specification primers are available, and have not been for 80 or so years. The second limitation is the lack of any old-style solid head brass, what is usually referred to these days as "Balloon Head". As a result case volume simply is not available to load black powder to approximately the same compression as with the old type case. I did load enough rounds to chronograph a reasonable sized sample. Here is the result:

Gun was 1904 4th change M&P ca. 1917 5"

Original charge, 18.0 gr. FFFg G.O.I., and the RCBS 38-158 RN cast about 12 Brinnell. W-W nickel case, WSP primer, seated to cannellure. Velocity for a 15 round sample averaged 702 FPS.

Second was the final black powder charge of 21.5 gr. FFFg, F-100 primer, Lyman 358665 RNFP. Average velocity 798 FPS for 30 round sample.

And, finally, what is presumed to be the original Smokeless load, 3.6 gr. Bullseye. This was used with Lyman 357446 SWC that is 157-158 gr. from my mould. Same gun as above, average velocity 814 FPS for 20 rds. A second string was fired in a 10-4 6", with average velocity for 20 rds of 844 FPS.

How much effect the modern solid head case and primers had on results is open to conjecture, but overall it would appear original .38 Special velocities would have run in the 700-850 FPS +/- depending on barrel length. This very closely fits average velocities from this batch of 1970's Western 158 RNL Standard pressure ammunition, and fired in the same, not just similar, guns.

Shooting black powder for this last set was a real pain! Using the bullets I did the charge holes had to be cleaned after every cylinder full as there was enough fouling that it was difficult to load the gun until cleaning was done!!!!!!!!

 

[moxie]

Thanks. Agree the old stuff wasn't all it was cracked up to be. The chrono doesn't lie.

 

[Pointblank2U]

This standard pressure load from Hornady is my solution to the problem, (I like 158 grainers):