K38 from 1957 and +P ammo?

[Wiregrassguy]

bczrx, note this bit of info from the Standard Catalog of S&W, 4th Edition:

1945: Cylinder heat treatment was eliminated for the .22 & .32 'I' frames, K-22, K-32 & K-38, and the .44 & .45 N frames, Oct. 12.

(Page 494).

Now, at this point in time, SAAMI had not created the +P classification or reduced the pressure rating of standard ammo. That didn't happen until the 1970's. So, S&W was not concerned about the pressure of commercial ammo being used in its guns because, engineering wise, they knew the final forging was sufficient to preclude metal failure without heat treatment. If S&W decided to reduce the fatigue failure of its metallurgy with the more powerful ammo at the time, why are we having this debate?

 

[rct269]

The bottom line of all this +P business is not as simple as when I lay it all off on the avarice and greed of the ammunition companies. It would have been a good idea for them----a good way to make more money all by itself, but there's more to it than that---there's our society. Our society has always been part bad guys and part good guys---predator and prey. At a point in time when the prey decided they'd had enough and decided they wanted to start carrying guns, there came to be a recognizable need, a market, for another type of ammunition----predator loads. I reckon there's been predator loads right along-----for the police. Our LEO's can confirm or deny that, but there's no denying the market for predator loads took a big jump up when a significant segment of our society started "packin'".

As an aside, I suspect the predator loads available to LEO's are a damn site better than +P's------at least I hope so.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[Jim Watson]

In 1937 Phil Sharpe showed, among many others, a .38 Special load with the factory 158 grain lead bullet and 3.5 grains Bullseye to give 910 fps at 15,000 (crusher) psi. Given as from a 6" barrel but not stated whether revolver or straight test barrel. Interesting column heading "Recommended by" Hercules; presumably they did the testing for Sharpe.

 

[Doug M.]

Whether or not one can shoot +p out of any given platform is a question of modest worth, even if one is a one gun person who needs to use it for all purposes. Placement with adequate penetration is critical; everything else is optional. When I carry/load my M66, I am perfectly happy with standard velocity .38 SWC. (And I have qualified with some duty .357 loads; it is not that I can't shoot that stuff.) I shoot better - more accurately, with better split times - and that bullet shape will do all one needs for the majority of my purposes. (Self defense is my main use - if I was hunting I would likely have a different view.)

 

[Narragansett]

Absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER about any aspect of the gun changed as respects your ability to use +P ammo---------although one might wonder why you'd want to.

What changed was the ammunition makers' satisfaction with their return on investment-----and the resultant desire to improve it. So----what to do?

How about something along these lines? "Let's put out another load----call it new and improved---or something implying a lot more power and charge more for it." Do you really think that would work? Well it wouldn't hurt, and it wouldn't cost anything worth talking about to try it."

And the rest, as they say, is history.

And speaking of history, you might want to study up a little bit about the performance of the .38 Special round over its lifetime----and pay particular attention to the 38/44 .38 S&W Special that came into being in the late 1920's-early 30's. THAT was a round to wonder about using in a K or J frame. S&W said it was okay, but they didn't recommend it----and they built an N frame especially for it.

And if you're wondering about materials---and heat treating and such, I have a copy of a March 1934 letter from D.B. Wesson, then Vice President of S&W which speaks to that. Suffice it to say the steel they were using then was good to go for ANY gun they were making at the time----WITHOUT any treatment (but they did treat the material used for the heavier calibers---took it from a tensile strength of about 80,000 lbs. (good enough for anything they made) to 130,000 lbs. because "--------we do very much prefer the greatly increased factor of safety----that treating gives.)."

All that said, the ammo companies are tickled to death that you'd ask about what you've asked about.

Ralph Tremaine

Just like the golf companies. Every year a newly designed club that is the magic wand appears. Forget about last year when you bought my 2000 set of Irons that I said were the best ever. This year's model is really the best.

Same thing with fishing lures. Designed to catch fishermen, long before they catch fish.

Just like all this boutique super duper defense ammo for 40 bucks for 20 rounds or more.

For me, I just use the standard round that is printed on the bbl. Why would I ever want to buy some of this 45 acp ammo that is super defense? There are a whole bunch of adversaries from ww1,ww2, Korea, Vietnam, and God only knows where else that are unfortunately not here to attest to the capability of a 230 grain hardball round that did not have +P on it.

Just my .02

 

[Truckman]

There are a whole bunch of adversaries from ww1,ww2, Korea, Vietnam, and God only knows where else that are unfortunately not here to attest to the capability of a 230 grain hardball round that did not have +P on it.

Just my .02

Add another 2 cents to that fortune...My license plate reflects my choice of magazine content when my Kimber is on my hip in its daily rotation slot......Ben

 

[Old Corp]

Just wish I'd been there the night the Big 3 ammo company engineers got together at a bar in the early 70's at a trade convention and came up with the '.38 +P Concept'.

Perhaps they knew, that long after they'd gone on to their reward, they would leave a lasting legacy of shooters with visible question marks over their heads.... Questions as to whether their non-barrel-marked-for +P .38 revolvers were about to turn into an activated claymore mine in their very hand, or cause spontaneous abortions in nearby mammals.

 

[Art Doc]

It will never stop, will it?

 

[Wiregrassguy]

No, Frank, it won't...

 

[Narragansett]

Add another 2 cents to that fortune...My license plate reflects my choice of magazine content when my Kimber is on my hip in its daily rotation slot......Ben

I like that plate!

 

[Truckman]

I like that plate!

The one on my Challenger read "FMJ 45" but after an accident I decided visibility out of that one was insufficient for me, and I sold it...I see out of the truck just fine!......Ben

 

[bczrx]

Thanks All!

There has been some great info to give me more of the technical side to explain the Yes or No on the issue of +P, and I appreciate that. Thanks!




BTW- I do realize this is not the first time this topic came up. Yet, I also looked through the "Notable Thread Index" for any link to a fairly conclusive thread on this topic, to save asking it.

I humbly suggest that whomever has the ear of the person who can add to that notable thread index should contact said person and suggest a thread [or two] about +P ammo and metallurgy, to be able to point it out.

Some may still ask the question in future, but others, like myself, would have scanned the equivalent of the FAQs page and found my answer without dredging it up again. We have to hope that there will always be new members finding us, to keep this passion alive and well in our country. We can't all just talk to those here 'since 2010' [or whatever] and not let anyone new in- or make them feel unwelcome because they ask a question but don't realize it was asked 4 times over the past 6 years. [again, or whatever].

A FAQ/Notable Thread link on that link would help us find it.

Just a suggestion.

 

[Wiregrassguy]

bczrx, Kudos to you for reading the FAQ and searching the Notable Threads Index for information. I must say that you are not typical of many posters on this and other questions that are routinely debated in the collector community. I also want to tell you that no one is upset with you for asking the question. The moans and groans are about the ensuing debate that never seems to come to a consensus that would allow for a definitive FAQ answer. Adding to this disagreement is S&W's official position that +P should not be shot except in model marked guns. This implies that model marked guns have more rugged engineering than older guns. This is ridiculous but is a politically correct way to CYA with SAAMI. Why is it ridiculous? Because most model marked guns had predecessors that were identical in engineering features but were not stamped with a model number. So, all of a sudden, these pre-model marked guns are somehow degraded and unable to withstand the rigors of +P ammo? Give me a break!


Whew! Thank you again for asking the question and allowing me to rant a little. I feel better now.

 

[stansdds]

I think you are fine to shoot 38 Special +P in your K-38 from 1957. I would avoid some of the boutique loads as some are pretty darned stout, closer to 38-44 than current 38 Special +P. Normally, I would recommend that if you really want a powerful self-defense revolver, sell the K-38 and buy a 357 Magnum, but I see you are in California, which limits your choices with firearms.