K frame and +P rounds

[roaddog28]

Hi,
I agree with SaxonPig and others that the +P round is not as hot as it used to be. I shoot for practice mainly 158g round nose target rounds. But because I believe everyone should practice with their SD/HD rounds I practice with all of my 38 specials including my pre-model years with +P rounds. I have owned or own now several pre-model 38 special revolvers and all of them have many round of +P rounds put them. My HD round is Buffalo Bores LSWCHP 158gr +P. I believe this is the hottest factory round rated at +P available. My M&P 38 special, combat masterpiece 38 special and my chiefs 38 special all have seen this round and just not a few. So far I don't have any wear issues on the revolvers and lockup is tight and timing is right on. In conclusion I believe the +P round is overdone and I also believe the paragraph in S&W manual is lawyer driven to protect S&W from lawsuits.
Regards,
roaddog28

 

[Dave T]

To reinforce what S-P was saying about the loading manuals, I was recently comparing the 44 Special loads from an old (1970) Lyman manual to a new (2009 printing) Lyman Pistol & Revolver manual. The starting load in 1970 for a 245g cast bullet and 2400 powder was 12g. Fast forward to 2009 and 12g of 2400 with the same 245g cast bullet is the Maximum load.

I got into a lengthy discussion on Handload.com over this wide disparity. My contention that the lawyers were to blame was taken to task and I was told the testing equipment back then wasn't that good and 2400 has changed since then. I side with Saxon-Pig on this one. The wimps have taken over.

Editing note: Guess it's a function of getting older. I realized after posting the above that the 12g load discrepancy I mentioned was with the 44 Special, not the 38 Special. I corrected it above and it still goes to the point Saxon-Pig was making.

Dave

 

[tocohillsguy]

Not sure if it's the engineers, lawyers, or the accountants, but I think it makes economic sense for a manufacturer to suggest the use of ammo that is going to stress the gun the least, and thereby minimize warranty claims and kaboom personal injury claims. Seriously, what's to be gained by a manufacturer suggesting a user push the gun to the max?

 

[bmcgilvray]

I'm glad this thread came up again. "+P" ammunition can be successfully used in Smith & Wesson M&P revolvers made before the assignment of the model numeral "10" in 1958.

For how long...

no one knows.


How they could fail?

Let us count the ways.


I recently dusted off the chronograph to revisit a fairly extensive selection of .38 Special ammunition, both factory loads and handloads in 38 Special revolvers in each of five different barrel lengths I have on hand. I also tested some Buffalo Bore +P 158 grain ammunition (really amazing stuff, Buffalo Bore) and some SuperVel but may post the results over in the ammo section.

Here's some data for the revolver with the 5-inch barrel.


Handload: 158 grain round nose lead /3.8 grains Bullseye

MV 804 fps
ME 227 ft./lbs.
ES 51
SD 20

Independence 130 grain FMJ round nose

MV 888 fps
ME 228 ft./lbs.
ES 32
SD 9

Remington 148 grain hollow based wadcutter

MV 727 fps
ME 174 ft./lbs.
ES 20
SD 7

Winchester +P 158 grain lead SWC-HP (in gray box)

MV 922 fps
ME 298 ft./lbs.
ES 69
SC 26

Winchester +P 158 grain lead SWC-HP (in older white box)

MV 949 fps
ME 316 ft./lbs
ES 72
SD 32

Remington +P 158 grain lead SWC

MV 964 FPS
ME 326 ft./lbs.
ES 72
SD 32

Sellier & Bellot 158 grain FMJ flat point

MV 778 fps
ME 212 ft./lbs.
ES 36
SD 13


This 5-inch M&P was made before 1958. With a serial number of 502XX it was made long before that time in about 1904. Its finish has seen better days. In fact, it could be charitably described as ugly. There is little investment tied up in it and it has no value. Its outstanding mechanical condition and clean bore is positively antithetical to its surface condition. It has languished in the bottom of the Smith & Wesson collection for some time.

I've been threatening to put the old M&P to the test for some time but wanted to chronograph the results. I don't have a lot of common sense but did limit the test to only lead bullet loads. The old revolver was also not tested with Buffalo Bore.

It appears to have come through the tests with flying colors and is none the worse for the wear. It fired a total of 30 rounds of +P 158 grain ammunition. Of course the very next round could have opened up the cylinder but I suspect it wouldn't have. Most +P ammunition is a tempest in a tea pot, Buffalo Bore and SuperVel not included. A small benefit is gained by use of +P, especially in the heavier bullet weights, but it is no terror.

Primers appeared normal and extraction was effortless. Of the entire test conducted that afternoon, only the SuperVel exhibited any flattening of primers. This wasn't bad but did occur to some extent in all of the revolvers.

Of the +P lineup tested, only the gray and white Winchester 158 grain loads and the Remington 158 grain loads were tested. All others were kept out of the old M&Ps cylinder.

 

[Art Doc]

I wonder how old those 158 +Ps are? At over 900 FPS they are hotter than current offerings.

 

[Jack Flash]

I enjoy reading SP's comments on this subject since he obviously has done a lot of research and analysis before arriving at his conclusions. Others have a different opinion, and the reader can decide for himself.

Referring back to the original post, I would say I look at it like this. Would you hesitate to drive a car because you may eventually wear out the tires? If you want your guns to be museum pieces, you may want to refrain from firing them at all.

A revolver may "shoot loose" if it is fired a lot. Any mechanical device is subject to wear and breakage when it is used. I have some guns that are collector-grade, and a lot more that are shooters. It doesn't horrify me that some of the shooters may have to go to a gunsmith or back to S&W for repairs at some point, any more than it horrifies me that I may need new brakes installed on my truck periodically.

 

[bmcgilvray]

I wonder how old those 158 +Ps are? At over 900 FPS they are hotter than current offerings.

Perhaps the 5-inch barrel has something to do with it. I'll post the rest of the test over in the ammo section so differences in velocities between the barrel lengths may be seen.

I was thinking the gray (silver?) box of Winchester was current. The white box dates from about 1980. The Remington 158 grain +P is late vintage. I've heard that the Remington stuff gives a little more velocity and it seems to be so.

 

[woodsltc]

I enjoy reading SP's comments on this subject since he obviously has done a lot of research and analysis before arriving at his conclusions. Others have a different opinion, and the reader can decide for himself.

Referring back to the original post, I would say I look at it like this. Would you hesitate to drive a car because you may eventually wear out the tires? If you want your guns to be museum pieces, you may want to refrain from firing them at all.

A revolver may "shoot loose" if it is fired a lot. Any mechanical device is subject to wear and breakage when it is used. I have some guns that are collector-grade, and a lot more that are shooters. It doesn't horrify me that some of the shooters may have to go to a gunsmith or back to S&W for repairs at some point, any more than it horrifies me that I may need new brakes installed on my truck periodically.

Jack Flash, very good analogy IMO .........I certainly agree!!

Don

 

[sw282]

si----------

 

[bmcgilvray]

Did you chrono the Super Vels?

http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/144598-some-38-special-chronograph-tests.html

 

[Armyphotog]

Super Vel. Haven't heard that name in a while. Back in the sixties, we were restricted to Model 10's with 4-inch heavy barrels. To beef up our protection a few of us carried Super Vel ammo. Never knew the stats on it, but mostly fired regular ammo on the range. A buddy of mine who shot all Super Vel had to have his gun overhauled eventually. It was some awsome ammunition.

 

[Art Doc]

I was surprised to see the Super-Vel 110 load only ran 981 FPS. I would have expected more. Oh well.

BTW- I once ran some 110s up to 1405 FPS from a 4" M&P but they shot so low as to be useless. I also think the 110 is a tad light and prefer the 125 which I load to a clocked 1,100 from 2" revolvers.

 

[Texas Star]

Perhaps the 5-inch barrel has something to do with it. I'll post the rest of the test over in the ammo section so differences in velocities between the barrel lengths may be seen.

I was thinking the gray (silver?) box of Winchester was current. The white box dates from about 1980. The Remington 158 grain +P is late vintage. I've heard that the Remington stuff gives a little more velocity and it seems to be so.

In trials of Gold Dot ammo in snub and three-inch barrels, the 125 grain JHP (NOT the later Short Barrel 135 grain one) clocked at or well over 900 FPS in published tests.

I don't find the figures cited for the five-inch bbl. for the 158 grain lead HP to be at all far off. In fact, I'd have expected slightly higher velocities. But I think that shooting Plus P in that old gun is risky. I sure wouldn't use Buffalo Bore in it.

S&W started heat-treating .38 cylinders in about 1919, and they wouldn't have done it, had they not seen a need. They were a tight-fisted company. Colt had better metallurgy, and their .38's were tougher, but they don't suggest Plus P in those old guns!

How expensive is Buffalo Bore lead HP ammo? Is it in boxes of 50, or fewer? I've never seen it in person, but think it might make a nice urban combat round for newer .38's and .357's.

T-Star

 

[imakmst]

How expensive is Buffalo Bore lead HP ammo? Is it in boxes of 50, or fewer?

Midway USA, Buffalo Bore Ammunition 38 Special +P 158 Grain Lead Semi-Wadcutter Hollow Point Gas Check Box of 20, $24.99

 

[Texas Star]

Midway USA, Buffalo Bore Ammunition 38 Special +P 158 Grain Lead Semi-Wadcutter Hollow Point Gas Check Box of 20, $24.99

Thanks! High, but one wouldn't shoot a lot of it, once he knew how it performed in his guns...I like the idea of a gas check on lead bullets at those velocities.

Has anyone here clocked that ammo in their guns?

T-Star

 

[Rob1109]

Thanks! High, but one wouldn't shoot a lot of it, once he knew how it performed in his guns...I like the idea of a gas check on lead bullets at those velocities.

Has anyone here clocked that ammo in their guns?

T-Star

In a 2" 642 and LCR it is damned EVIL! I guess my hands/wrists simply aren't strong enough. Someone on another site chronographed it at 1020 from a 2". BB uses Rim Rock gas checks with a B/N of 5 (very soft).

 

[bmcgilvray]

Thanks! High, but one wouldn't shoot a lot of it, once he knew how it performed in his guns...I like the idea of a gas check on lead bullets at those velocities.

Has anyone here clocked that ammo in their guns?

T-Star

http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/144598-some-38-special-chronograph-tests.html

 

[daa9mm]

To reinforce what S-P was saying about the loading manuals, I was recently comparing the 44 Special loads from an old (1970) Lyman manual to a new (2009 printing) Lyman Pistol & Revolver manual. The starting load in 1970 for a 245g cast bullet and 2400 powder was 12g. Fast forward to 2009 and 12g of 2400 with the same 245g cast bullet is the Maximum load....

The powders made today may not be as potent as the powder thirty 40 years ago.
In the same type of powder pressure curves can vary quite a bit from one batch to another, much less decades apart.
Manufacturing processes have changed and late, current reloading data should be used.

 

[Art Doc]

Not my experience. The old loads perform today exactly as they did 40 years ago. It's the lawyers causing the change, not the composition of the powder.

 

[john traveler]

In reply to saxon pigs statement that S&W guns made before the model markings and after the model markings are no different, I disagree.

For a couple of generations, S&W used a mild grade of automotive-quality steel in the frame and barrel forgings of the M&P. During WWII production, steel shortages pushed this almost to the elastic limit, and an unknown quantity of revolvers were made with steel that did not quite meet designers specifications. During the several generations that the K frame M&P was made from 1899 to the 1950s, the standard .38 Special bullet material was lead or copper-plated lead.

With jacketed bullet improvements and high velocity loadings starting in the early 1960s, barrel damage was reported by police department armorers in the form of cracked forcing cones, and stretched frames. Ask any old-time police armorer how often he saw barrel damage and bulged cylinder locking cuts. You might be surprised.

The steel changes by S&W in the late 1950s was apparently in response to the gun damage from firing high-performance jacketed ammunition.

The USAF tests at Eglin Air Force Base in early 1970s suggested a similar finding. Of the thousands of M10 and M15 .38 Special revolvers in USAF inventory, a significant percentage had developed excessive headspace, b-c gap, and gone out of time. Many bullet-in-bore failures were reported due to the excessive b-c gap problems. Many of the guns had been through repeated rebuilds and refurbishments. The standard ammunition since after WWII was the M41 130 grain RNJ load, supplemented by local purchase of HP ammo for guard duty use. There were also experiments in seating the 130 RNJ bullet deeper and loading it to higher velocities and conversion to 9x19 NATO caliber.

The conclusion of the study was that the .38 Special revolvers in USAF inventory were rapidly approaching the end of life cycle, and that a new 9mm semiauto pistol was needed.

If anything, the USAF experience with wearing out the tens of thousands of .38 Special revolvers with scheduled qualification and marksmanship training should be a clue that even "wimpy" +P loads take their toll.