Lightest Safe 38-SPCL. Charge?

[rwsmith]

Suffice to say

I like light loads too and have experimented with them.

In modern times though I would look to the cowboy action shooting loads because they advocate very light loads for minimum recoil and it's published, up to date info.

 

[Delos]

Lots of advantages

I like light loads too and have experimented with them.

In modern times though I would look to the cowboy action shooting loads because they advocate very light loads for minimum recoil and it's published, up to date info.

And if the lead bullet is sized to exact groove diameter of your revolver you have the best of all paper target worlds. Best accuracy, lowest pressure, best velocity for that powder charge. Easy on the ears with plugs and muffs.

Still there is the problem of sound pressure wave bone conduction to ears. Perhaps a WWI military helmet would be best for directing pressure waves away from forehead and upper skull. Maybe some pith helmets work a little?

I was once admiring the hard hats for heavy equipment operators that have the muffs attached to plastic hat. (After enough hearing loss and ear ringing you do not care what the young fashion police say).

(Oops, wandering off topic).

 

[rebel0994]

Physics don't matter! I believe the rumors! All kidding aside, I have loaded reduced charges from time to time,with no problems. I load mostly 2.7 of BE with a 148 DEWC for my normal range shooting, but that is because it is so accurate. But I wouldn't be afraid to drop down to 2.0 grains, or even a little less, should the need arise.

 

[stu1ritter]

It never happened.

In an issue of the American Rifleman some time in the early 1980's this was thoroughly investigated. The bottom line was that even if you could get "detonation" (you can't) there is simply not enough energy in 3 or so grains of Bullseye to blow up a revolver's cylinder. All revolvers blown up due to supposed charges of 2.5 to 3 grains of powder, were in reality from negligent loading of multiple charges, or from firing one of the loads while bullets or jackets left in the bore from a previous defective round were lodged in the barrel, or a combination of all of these factors.

A low charge of powder, in and of itself, WILL NOT DAMAGE YOUR REVOLVER.

Oh, and there is no such thing as "detonation" occurring in a 38 Special, or similar, cartridge; probably not in any rifle caliber either.

and as I remember reading that article the lower limit of Bullseye used was .7, repeat .7 grain, without detonation.

Stu

 

[Warren Sear]

My 1981 edition of the NRA handloading manual has a section in it named "Minimum Loads In Handguns; development and use of low-power .38 Spl. loads". I suppose I would get gigged if I posted the full article here, but anyone who wants a copy can send me a PM.

The author described his load development methods in detail. He used a 2" barreled S&W Chief's Special, 146 grain wadcutter bullets, and Bullseye powder. He found a load of .55 grains of powder reliably expelled all bullets from his gun's barrel, but he increased the charge to .75 grains as a margin of safety. This load gave a muzzle velocity of 195 fps.

The author said not to use this load in 6" guns. For a gun with a barrel of that length, he listed 1.25 grains of Bullseye, which gave a muzzle velocity of 272 fps.

Finally, he advised that these loads may not work properly in other .38 caliber revolvers, but the methods he provided are universally applicable, regardless of caliber.

So, minimal loads are safe.

^^^ To quote myself.

The only danger in reduced loads is getting a bullet lodged in the barrel. If you are going to play around with minimal loads, be positive that your bullets consistently leave the bore. Other than that, have fun and do not allow anyone to BS you with tales o' "detonation".

 

[Warren Sear]

I had this one that I posted from a thread about 2 years ago here in the Forum. I'm not near my books right now, so see if someone can verify it's correct. I will try to confirm later today, when I get to the bookshelf.


Lyman 45th edition Reloading Handbook for the #358101 75gr bullet.
Powder Start/grs. FPS Max/grs. FPS
Bullseye 2.0 607 3.0 788
Unique 3.0 577 5.0 842
SR7625 3.0 469 4.0 570

I just checked my Lyman 45th Reloading Manual, and yes, that information is correct.

 

[Warren Sear]

And if the lead bullet is sized to exact groove diameter of your revolver you have the best of all paper target worlds. Best accuracy, lowest pressure, best velocity for that powder charge. Easy on the ears with plugs and muffs.

Still there is the problem of sound pressure wave bone conduction to ears. Perhaps a WWI military helmet would be best for directing pressure waves away from forehead and upper skull. Maybe some pith helmets work a little?

I was once admiring the hard hats for heavy equipment operators that have the muffs attached to plastic hat. (After enough hearing loss and ear ringing you do not care what the young fashion police say).

(Oops, wandering off topic).

With cast lead bullets, there will be no measurable rise in pressure using oversize bullets. Assuming a safe powder charge and all other factors, if the loaded cartridge will chamber, the bullet is not too big and the cartridge will be safe to fire. Yes... I know. Best accuracy usually occurs with bullets sized somewhat larger than barrel groove diameter.

As for a WWI military helmet or pith helmets reducing sound level, I would like to be shown some evidence of how that works. Until then, I do not understand how this could be effective, unless you are holding the gun over your head when you shoot.

 

[Delos]

Slighly off topic - sorry

With cast lead bullets, there will be no measurable rise in pressure using oversize bullets. Assuming a safe powder charge and all other factors, if the loaded cartridge will chamber, the bullet is not too big and the cartridge will be safe to fire. Yes... I know. Best accuracy usually occurs with bullets sized somewhat larger than barrel groove diameter.

As for a WWI military helmet or pith helmets reducing sound level, I would like to be shown some evidence of how that works. Until then, I do not understand how this could be effective, unless you are holding the gun over your head when you shoot.

If you do not believe claims that the best velocity and lowest pressure is attained when your lead bullet is exact groove diameter, no skin off me.

Look in the mirror and see how much bone is above your eyes. And your forehead faces forward.
If you do not believe in the claim that that a lot of the sound we hear is by Bone Conduction (particularly behind the ears), there is a lot you should read. We are always still in the dark-ages on something. Eventually either all shooting ranges will require the use of silencers, baffle boxes, or motorcycle type helmets. Future shooters will read about all that we did not know.

I am way past the point of trying hard to win disagreements. I believe people should learn on their own. We all did. Most of my hearing loss was jet airplanes and missiles warming up nearby. Even for brief periods down an aircraft carriers catwalk one should muff up. We were sure it was no big deal.

Often people do everything wrong. Like the old WWI 455 Webley's that was at one time popular to convert to shoot the more powerful 45 acp. Going from a hollow base lead bullet to a higher pressure jacketed bullet sounded logical to some.

Others of us get to read about it and look at the pictures of the ones that blew up.

(That line from Kenny Rogers "The Gambler" Movie when the young gambler got off the train and did not return on time for train to leave "was he warned" - yes).

 

[Warren Sear]

OK... Well, I guess I've been put in my place. You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away and know when to run. And never let anyone pith in your helmet.

 

[Delos]

Different tools

OK... Well, I guess I've been put in my place. You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away and know when to run. And never let anyone pith in your helmet.

Actually I heard the German Helmets were better pith containment devices for foxholes and trenches.
American Helmets better to shave in.

Maybe the American WWI helmet gives the best ventilation while still keeping excess sunshine off of ears.

The American WWI helmet probably best for shooting from prone position. Probably can bend neck upwards better?

Except for the dark color. If only the dark military colors could reflect sunlight better? Dark colors can be 30 degrees warmer in direct sunlight.

Oops, we were talking reloading -- sorry.

Offhand do you know of any reason not to use standard crimp on 45 auto shells that you intend on shooting in 1917 revolver with half moon clips. (Everyone else is doing something different and I feel left out).

 

[rwsmith]

This has to be....

This has to be the funnest thread I've ever read. I hereby confer on it "The Crazy Thread Award".



Smokeless powder does not detonate, it deflagrates. The expanding volume of gas is subsonic. If it can be called an explosion at all it is a low-order explosion. If a quantity destroys a firearm it is due only to pressure, not a shock wave as would be in a true explosion.

The amount and speed of pressure generated is greatly changed by contained volume, airspace and several other factors such as starting temperature.

About powders like H110 that say not to reduce by more than 3% when other powder can reduce by about 10% or in some cases, more. Some powders ignite erratically at low pressures, which is likely to cause a squib even with what seems plenty of powder.

 

[Delos]

A Marine named Flag got demoted in rate?

Smokeless powder does not detonate, it deflagrates. The expanding volume of gas is subsonic. If it can be called an explosion at all it is a low-order explosion. If a quantity destroys a firearm it is due only to pressure, not a shock wave as would be in a true explosion.

The amount and speed of pressure generated is greatly changed by contained volume, airspace and several other factors such as starting temperature.
.

Hmm… De-flag-rates = burns violently (okay that will work at some level).

All powder being "sub-sonic" does not work for me just yet. Gotta chew on it first. At the end of the barrel the bullet is going as fast as it ever will. And the powder is pushing it until it is not, and then the bullet begins to slow down.

Therefore I protest and ask the court to consider that most bullets travel faster than sound and all civilian bullets are pushed by smokeless powder. (As opposed to rail guns using magnetism, and laser guns that create certain wavelengths of light and focus it well)

Where was I, oh yes, the powder pushes the bullet (often) to above the speed of sound so the expanding powder was doing something faster than sound. This must be one of those puzzle question/statements. (Heating air and it is expanding faster than sound - no that is part of combustion?)

We know the bullet begins to slow down when the powder is no longer pushing so it sounds likely the sound barrier is being broken inside the gun's barrel? (So now we need to deduce the speed of the flying parts when a gun explodes?) (Perhaps most of the energy was used up breaking the nice gun, so the parts only fly in direct proportion to how much bang was left - and inverse proportion to the story we get told at the pub).

I hope we are not going to get into the harmonics of a rifle barrel. I hope that has nothing to do with the sound barrier?

I give up. If you had a tube of marbles from here to the moon. And you pushed in another marble, a marble would come out on the moon instantaneously. So in some situations marbles could travel faster than bullets. Am I getting closer?

 

[Delos]

Back to the real world we see

A relative of mine once had a .22 and .22 magnum convertible ruger revolver with perhaps an eight (at least 6) inch barrel with a very very obvious bulge in the middle of the barrel. He bought it that way because it shot so good and was a fun talking point. You look down the inside of barrel with a light at the other end and see this very dark section. And it shot so nice and accurate you had to laugh.

Even a .22 magnum would probably be considered a reduced charge in a bigger gun? That barrel was thicker than most chambers of larger revolvers.

I am not yet comfortable writing off all reduced load handgun explosions as having been a previous bullet stuck in the barrel. A small charge has lots of ability to deform steel.

 

[Delos]

Moving off topic (must read or speculate about sound barrier inside a gun barrel)

I must move away from this "lightest safe 38 special charge" discussion and learn more about what happens inside gun barrels.

Okay, Deflagration is subsonic - and is not a Detonation.
Definition of deflagration in Oxford Dictionaries (British & World English)

I recall reading that Black Powder (properly called gunpowder I believe) is an explosive. Smokeless powder is not an explosive. (more reading needed).

But an excessive charge of either has blown up many guns, both rifles, and handguns.
(Neither one will make glass, let alone diamonds). (1950's Atomic testing north west of Vegas left glass caverns I have heard in radio talk show discussions).

But one point was made here that involved no shock waves from detonation in smokeless powder.
And that caused me to wonder about the speed of sound in air being different than water and metals different again. It sounds reasonable that the speed of sound is probably different in lead and copper. And does anything happen when the sound barrier is broken inside a gun barrel? If it caused a shock wave in the steel barrel how could we see it or measure it? Has anyone written about it? Not long ago there were discussions about barrel harmonics? For some reason people were cutting off inches of barrel to "tune it"?

I am not yet qualified to ponder a lead bullet with a copper jacket, exceeding the speed of sound, inside a gun barrel. But maybe it is one reason for jacket separation inside a barrel and I have just not read it yet.

 

[Delos]

Rules change

With cast lead bullets, there will be no measurable rise in pressure using oversize bullets. Assuming a safe powder charge and all other factors, if the loaded cartridge will chamber, the bullet is not too big and the cartridge will be safe to fire. Yes... I know. Best accuracy usually occurs with bullets sized somewhat larger than barrel groove diameter.

As for a WWI military helmet or pith helmets reducing sound level, I would like to be shown some evidence of how that works. Until then, I do not understand how this could be effective, unless you are holding the gun over your head when you shoot.

Even in the very loose chamber of a Glock? There are probably more than one reason they void the warranty if reloads are fired. We know the very loose chamber wins shooting dirty endurance competition. But I think your rule about "if it will chamber" might be out the window.

I might be wrong but I think the rules have changed.

And the ideal sound deflector for face bones might be a foam padded hockey mask. Your chin bone goes directly to your ears. Your cheek bone to your ears. Some day someone will figure it out and file the right patent. Or they will let us use some form of sound suppression.

 

[rwsmith]

Look this up

Hmm… De-flag-rates = burns violently (okay that will work at some level).

All powder being "sub-sonic" does not work for me just yet. Gotta chew on it first. At the end of the barrel the bullet is going as fast as it ever will. And the powder is pushing it until it is not, and then the bullet begins to slow down.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflagration

 

[Warren Sear]

Don't confuse De louse. He is still trying to figure out how something burning at a subsonic velocity can propel something else to super-sonic speeds.

 

[Delos]

Looking for the next logical step - to somewhere

Yes, I read a few of those definitions.
I am not sure who brought up the claim that a "shock wave" was needed for something to explode. Or who used the word detonate?

Even steam engine boilers blew up really regular, even after pressure gauges were invented. Then pressure release valves were invented (or maybe the release valve was invented first?)

Car gasoline engines bust holes in top of pistons from the knocking caused by premature ignition (spark plug firing before piston near enough to top, and ready for downward push).

I am not going to focus on the meaning of words just yet. When barrels are obstructed guns often explode.
Note that I am using the word explode and not detonate.
Explosion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As I get time I hope to read a few good articles about breaking the sound barrier. And perhaps articles on why bullet jackets get stuck in barrels.

Years ago I read that the airplane that caught up with and passed the speed of sound ran into its own sound waves traveling forward ahead of the plane. So now I am going off topic and trying to find any articles about breaking sound barrier inside a gun barrel. Is the crashing into forward moving sound waves enough to strip a jacket from a bullet inside a gun barrel? Does it expand the size of bullet or make barrel tighter by expanding the steel inward?

If I find anything I will start a new thread. Anyone knowing about old threads mentioning this please tell me.

Meanwhile I have stopped wondering about bullets with too much mass not moving fast enough for some powder burning rates. I accept the fact that the reloading manuals list the lowest charge sometimes for that reason.

 

[Delos]

Reasons for gun explosions? (wandering off topic)

Well as I assumed the speed of sound (therefore the sound barrier) is very different in copper and lead.
Speed of Sound

Naturally this is in meters per second.
Lead 1322
Copper 3560
Iron 5130
Air 343

So apparently this is meaningless because the sound barrier we are familiar with is so low in air as to have little to do with the metals and speed of sound in handguns?

Without doing a lot of conversions I note that the speed of sound in lead is the slowest and air is still 3.85 times slower than lead.

Unfortunately, searching the internet, the only interesting article on core separation inside a rifle barrel was from cutting the tip off of a military round. The copper jacket on full jacketed bullets is done backward from soft point and hollow point. Look at the rear end and you see mostly lead. So when a full jacketed bullet has its tip cut off, and is fired, the lead core can be blown out of the front of the jacket, in the barrel, leaving the jacket in the barrel. And the next shot can blow up the gun.
(like when someone is trying to make a cheaper military bullet into a soft nose hunting bullet)

Has this ever happened in a handgun? Obviously I am wandering off topic.

 

[rwsmith]

Are we being baited here??

Well as I assumed the speed of sound (therefore the sound barrier) is very different in copper and lead.
Speed of Sound

Naturally this is in meters per second.
Lead 1322
Copper 3560
Iron 5130
Air 343

So apparently this is meaningless because the sound barrier we are familiar with is so low in air as to have little to do with the metals and speed of sound in handguns?

I get the joke now.