Model 36 and Plus P Ammo

IIRC Elmer wrote about 500 38/44s in a new "Airweight Chief Special" with no reported issues. I fired a cylinderfull of factory 38/44 in a Mod. 60 in 1978. Have no wish to repeat the exercise, but the revolver is still mine. The J frame is tougher than generally thought.

Regards,

Tam 3
 
Good Morning:
I never have and never will use Plus-P ammo in my weapons.
I from the "Old School" that if you want/need more power-go to a larger caliber.

If you are OLD SCHOOL you should look up what a standard 158 grain load was in the 40's/50's/60's and then compare it to 158+P load of today.
 
Last edited:
Hardly a scientific study, but Elmer Keith put several thousand rounds of .38 Heavy Duty loads through one of the early .38 Special Chiefs with no detectable adverse effect. Those loads were far closer to .357 Mag loads of today than the current +P stuff. I wouldn't fret +P at all.
 
Depending on the brand of ammo, +P cartridges may give you a little better stopping power but the difference isn't much. I use standard pressure 38 specials in my model 36. I am sure the bad guy won't know the difference. I use Hornady 38 special 110 gr Critical Defense which delivers the same muzzle energy as Remington 38 special 125gr +P. One is rated as standard pressure the other +P but the ballistics are basically the same.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I stay away from +P ammo in the older J frames. Yes, they can handle it in limited doses, but since there are a lot of excellent standard defense loads in .38 Spl., I don't see any compelling reason to add any additional stress to my Js.
 
Personally, I stay away from +P ammo in the older J frames. Yes, they can handle it in limited doses, but since there are a lot of excellent standard defense loads in .38 Spl., I don't see any compelling reason to add any additional stress to my Js.

As Will Carry points out above many standard loads are the same as +p loads. It depends on the manufacturer. There are no + p loads that will hurt any model since numbered models came out in 1958. If fact many loads are down graded since the 60's. No + p load doing 850 to 950 feet per second is going to hurt any S&W revolver.
 
For many years S&W stated that +P was safe in steel framed Model Marked (as in Model 36 in the yoke cut) revolvers. It was understood that heavy loads would cause wear to be accellerated somewhat. I qualified with +P loads out of my 36-1.
Here it is loaded with original SuperVels
IMG_2582.jpg


The brass cases are 10 guage & 8 guage for size comparison.
 
Last edited:
So in 1943 158 was 850 fps. Today most makers say that's a +P load.


During World War II, some U.S. aircrew (primarily Navy and Marine Corps) were issued .38 Special S&W Victory revolvers as sidearms in the event of a forced landing. In May 1943, a new .38 Special cartridge with a 158 grains (10.2 g), full-steel-jacketed, copper flash-coated bullet meeting the requirements of the rules of land warfare was developed at Springfield Armory and adopted for the Smith & Wesson revolvers.[18] The new military .38 Special loading propelled its 158 grains (10.2 g) bullet at a standard 850 ft/s (260 m/s) from a 4-inch (100 mm) revolver barrel.[18] During the war, many U.S. naval and marine aircrew were also issued red-tipped .38 Special tracer rounds using either a 120 or 158 gr (7.8 or 10.2 g) bullet for emergency signaling purposes.[18]


"In 1956, the U.S. Air Force adopted the Cartridge, Caliber .38, Ball M41, a military variant of the .38 Special cartridge designed to conform to the rules of land warfare. The original .38 M41 ball cartridge used a 130-grain full-metal-jacketed bullet, and was loaded to an average pressure of only 13,000 pounds per square inch (90 MPa), giving a muzzle velocity of approximately 725 ft/s (221 m/s) from a 4-inch (100 mm) barrel.[19][20] This ammunition was intended to prolong the life of S&W M12 and Colt Aircrewman revolvers equipped with aluminum cylinders and frames, which were prone to stress fractures when fired with standard .38 ammunition. By 1961, a slightly revised M41 .38 cartridge specification known as the Cartridge, Caliber .38 Ball, Special, M41 had been adopted for U.S. armed forces using .38 Special caliber handguns.[20] The new M41 Special cartridge used a 130-grain FMJ bullet loaded to a maximum allowable pressure of 16,000 psi (110,000 kPa) for a velocity of approximately 950 ft/s (290 m/s) in a solid 6-inch (150 mm) test barrel, and about 750 ft/s (230 m/s) from a 4-inch (100 mm) revolver barrel.[21][22] The M41 ball cartridge was first used in .38 revolvers carried by USAF aircrew and Strategic Air Command security police, and by 1961 was in use by the U.S. Army for security police, dog handlers, and other personnel equipped with .38 Special caliber revolvers.[22] A variant of the standard M41 cartridge with a semi-pointed, unjacketed lead bullet was later adopted for CONUS (Continental United States) police and security personnel.[20]

A request for more powerful .38 Special ammunition for use by Air Police and security personnel resulted in the Caliber .38 Special, Ball, PGU-12/B High Velocity cartridge.[21] Issued only by the U.S. Air Force, the PGU-12/B had a greatly increased maximum allowable pressure rating of 20,000 psi, sufficient to propel a 130-grain FMJ bullet at 1,125 ft/s (343 m/s) from a solid 6-inch (150 mm) test barrel, and about 950–980 ft/s from a 4-inch (100 mm) revolver barrel.[21] The PGU-12/B High Velocity cartridge differs from M41 Special ammunition in two important respects—the PGU-12/B is a much higher-pressure cartridge, with a bullet deeply set and crimped into the cartridge case.
 
Last edited:
Grip/Stock?

I have a Pre Model 36 and my gunsmith told me to fire all the 158 grain ammo I wanted in it but to stay away from the 125 grain +P's as they could damage the revolver. He said I could shoot just enough +p's in it to determine the POA and then carry them but he also said not to shoot a lot of them.
SWModel36newgripsLeft.jpg
I am presently looking at M36 and M37 for CC. I am not a fan of the tiny magnas that typically come on these and I am looking for alternatives. Yours are beautiful and look very functional. Would you mind sharing the manufacturer. Thank You
 
Back
Top