Shot 500 rnds of hot 38/44s today

[Peter M. Eick]

I went to the range and brought out my favorite shooter 38/44 Outdoorsman and had some fun with 500 rounds of 38/44. They were Herco and 4756 reloads and had a bark to them. Roughly 1200-1250 fps with 158's out of the Outdoorsman's.

No targets or pictures today since the paper was really damp (nearly 2" of rain last night) so when I took them down the ripped terribly. I can't wait to get rid of these cheap paper targets I bought from Midway a while back.

I find that shooting a 38/44 whether it is an Outdoorsman or a Heavy Duty always brings a smile to my face. You don't get beat up like you can with 500 full house 357 Magnums, but you don't get bored like you can with 500 38 Specials. The 38/44HS round is just right for me. Fun to shoot, accurte and enough power that you know you are doing something yet not so bad as to promote bad shooting technique quickly.

Toward the end I started having fun trying to shoot the stems of the tall weeds and cut the heads off at about 50 yards. Since the range was flooded it was easy to see where the bullet hit and adjust accordingly. If I did my part I could usually cut one down in two or three shots.

So to all you 38/44 owners, lets get out there and bang away with them this weekend. They are too much fun to sit in the safe.

 

[jsfricks]

I've been wanting to load up some original 38/44 loads to run though my 30's HD but haven't had the time. Retirement can be time consuming at age 50!

 

[Texas Star]

I went to the range and brought out my favorite shooter 38/44 Outdoorsman and had some fun with 500 rounds of 38/44. They were Herco and 4756 reloads and had a bark to them. Roughly 1200-1250 fps with 158's out of the Outdoorsman's.

No targets or pictures today since the paper was really damp (nearly 2" of rain last night) so when I took them down the ripped terribly. I can't wait to get rid of these cheap paper targets I bought from Midway a while back.

I find that shooting a 38/44 whether it is an Outdoorsman or a Heavy Duty always brings a smile to my face. You don't get beat up like you can with 500 full house 357 Magnums, but you don't get bored like you can with 500 38 Specials. The 38/44HS round is just right for me. Fun to shoot, accurte and enough power that you know you are doing something yet not so bad as to promote bad shooting technique quickly.

Toward the end I started having fun trying to shoot the stems of the tall weeds and cut the heads off at about 50 yards. Since the range was flooded it was easy to see where the bullet hit and adjust accordingly. If I did my part I could usually cut one down in two or three shots.

So to all you 38/44 owners, lets get out there and bang away with them this weekend. They are too much fun to sit in the safe.

What kind of pressures are you getting with those velocities?

Have you tried Keith's load, also used by Skelton? I understand that it is now considered to be a .357 pressure round, pushing 1200 FPS. Skelton said it killed well, and I think he took a pronghorn and some deer and javelina with it. I presume you know this load with 2400 powder? I'd just as soon not post the load in public, as burning rates of some powders have changed.

You made good points, but in defense of the .357 Magnum, it was never intended as a shoot- 500- rounds- the- same -day gun. It is a KILLING gun, intended for added power when you want that for situations that might require the added power. Some people want to shoot .357's 'way too often and wear the gun out much sooner than sane use would suggest is prudent. That's especially so with K-framed examples. That's like taking your car on the road and driving all the time at 120 MPH!

Keith felt that his .38-44 load was a very good combat round in the M-19. I think he was right. Actually, I suspect that a good .38-44 load will do 90% of what any reasonable .357 load will do. That's especially true at usual handgun ranges. But apart from a fairly new ctg. from Buffalo Bore, no such ammo is factory loaded! Some of us don't reload and some police departments don't allow handloads.

Peter, I know that you have many .38-44's. Which is your favorite for actual use, and why? If I had one, I'd want a postwar one with special order high polish blue. But I can't think of why I'd buy one instead of a M-27 or M-28? Same basic gun, same bulk, but the .357 has the option of added power.

When the Combat Magnum arrived, that further limited sales of the .38-44, and it died on the vine. I have trouble understanding the recent veneration that some here have for the .38-44. I'll take a M-66 over it any day, with added power option and stainless construction. But if I could get .38-44 class loads in factory form, I sure see the value in them for many uses.

I know that Elmer Keith used to blow blue grouse out of trees with his .38-44. Do you know which ammo he used? I'd think full loads at that level would damage a lot of meat. Wouldn't std. 38 Special loads work, with a SWC bullet, if needed?

 

[6518John]

I went to the range and brought out my favorite shooter 38/44 Outdoorsman and had some fun with 500 rounds of 38/44. They were Herco and 4756 reloads and had a bark to them. Roughly 1200-1250 fps with 158's out of the Outdoorsman's.
.

Peter isn't 158 grains at 1200-1250 FPS as hot as many commerical .357 magnum loadings? And great post--love reading about one of these beauties being shot.

John

 

[jsfricks]

I have trouble understanding the recent veneration that some here have for the .38-44. I'll take a M-66 over it any day, with added power option and stainless construction.

To me it's just having something that's no longer available, something the police requested so they could have more stopping power, and is just a neat overall gun. If I were to have one to carry, then yes, a 66 or something equivalent would probably work much better. But as an "accumulator", I'll take my 38/44 any day.

 

[DWalt]

"Peter isn't 158 grains at 1200-1250 FPS as hot as many commerical .357 magnum loadings?"

The factory 158 grain .38/44 load back in the 1930s was advertised at a MV of 1115 ft/sec (depending upon barrel length - I think most manufacturers used 5" for their data). The early .357 loads with a 158 grain bullet were listed at 1510 ft/sec from an 8-3/4" barrel. So yes, there was definitely a significant difference in MV, even in the same length barrels.

Lyman reloading manuals from the 1950s gave charges of 12.5-13.5 grains of Hercules 2400 as the standard .38/44 158 grain load (1100-1200 ft/sec). No other suitable powder was given in their data.

 

[tlay]

Why does anyone want a $250,000 Ferrari? Or a $1,000,000 Picaso? Or maybe a 70 Dodge Charger! Do we need a car that can do 180 mph? Personally I think it is in the beauty of the design. The curves of a Reg Mags cylinder, or how a high horse powered motor sounds. When you hold some of these older Smiths in your hand and maybe even open them up and marvel at the mechanics you have to believe in heaven!!!

 

[6518John]

"Peter isn't 158 grains at 1200-1250 FPS as hot as many commerical .357 magnum loadings?"

The factory 158 grain .38/44 load back in the 1930s was advertised at a MV of 1115 ft/sec (depending upon barrel length - I think most manufacturers used 5" for their data). The early .357 loads with a 158 grain bullet were listed at 1510 ft/sec from an 8-3/4" barrel. So yes, there was definitely a significant difference in MV, even in the same length barrels.

Lyman reloading manuals from the 1950s gave charges of 12.5-13.5 grains of Hercules 2400 as the standard .38/44 158 grain load (1100-1200 ft/sec). No other suitable powder was given in their data.

DWalt--Thank you so much. Absolutely fascinating. I was talking primarily in terms of current/modern 158 grain loadings. I was just looking at that Ballistics 101 web site under .357 and it is amazing the difference between modern loadings and what you mention above. The historical knowledge on this forum is amazing.

John

 

[tops]

I have never owned a 38/44 but I have shot a truck load of hot .38 Spec. 158 gr. SWC, 15 grs. 2400 will do 1194 FPS with a 6 in. Python. My mentor accidently shot the engine of his red belly Ford with that load and it knocked a hole. Larry

 

[05CarbonDRZ]

I love shooting my 38/44's as well,They are really fun.If you do not hand load they are not really worth while as you can't buy factory 38/44 Ammo.I load 11.5-12.0gr of 2400 under a Extreme plated 158gr bullet,Plenty of punch.

 

[beagleye]

Nice post, nice thread.

What you said about shooting 38-44s is just exactly how I feel. I feel the same about 44 special with the skeeter load. Just right. 7x57, just right.

and the instant feedback of the wet range, that can't be overstated as a useful devise. I have had that same experience shooting in a thin layer of snow over mud, that really dials it in.

 

[alwslate]

Lots of varied opinions on the 38/44. I have a couple of 4" 38/44 HDs
and to me it's just all about the gun. A fixed sight 4" N frame is a
great revolver. They don't have to be hot-rodded just because you can.
Since I own several 357s I really don't see the point in "38/44 loads"
either. I don't plan to load 38 spl ammo any hotter than +P for any of
my 38s whatever the frame size. My 38 spl plinking loads work in any
gun from J frame 38 to N frame 357. Shooting hundreds or thousands
of high pressure loads will take it's toll on any revolver and there won't
be any more 38/44s coming from S&W any time soon. But that's just
my opinion. Bottom line is do whatever makes you happy.

 

[beagleye]

Lots of varied opinions on the 38/44. I have a couple of 4" 38/44 HDs
and to me it's just all about the gun. A fixed sight 4" N frame is a
great revolver. They don't have to be hot-rodded just because you can.
Since I own several 357s I really don't see the point in "38/44 loads"
either. I don't plan to load 38 spl ammo any hotter than +P for any of
my 38s whatever the frame size. My 38 spl plinking loads work in any
gun from J frame 38 to N frame 357. Shooting hundreds or thousands
of high pressure loads will take it's toll on any revolver and there won't
be any more 38/44s coming from S&W any time soon. But that's just
my opinion. Bottom line is do whatever makes you happy.

My HDs shoot high with lighter loads. Maybe thats my grip, I don't know.

 

[wbraswell]

jsfricks, that is one fine, handsome looking HD.

 

[6518John]

jsfricks, that is one fine, handsome looking HD.

Looks brand new. Far nicer than most of my new guns.

 

[6518John]

Retirement can be time consuming at age 50!

Years ago my uncle retired at 50. I went over to pick him up to go fishing a couple of weeks later. My aunt was looking at the help wanted section of the classified ads. I ask her, "Aunt Joan, are you looking for a job?" She replies, "Yes John I am--for your UNCLE!"

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Lots of questions so I am sure I will miss a few.

First off, the velocity. I have original 38/44 ammo that I have chronoed.

This is the 38/44 ammo that was chrono-ed.

6.5" 1198+ 1057- 141e 1121m 82s
5.0" 1131+ 1002- 129e 1079m 71s
4.0" 1069+ 739- 330e 1010m 103s (one bad round)

So out of a 6.5" it did an average of 1121 fps but I suspect it would have done more like 1150 FPS when fresh. So what I have done is loaded up 38/44 ammo and then chrono-ed it through the same guns that I did this testing. Basically I loaded them up to get to 1150 FPS out of the 6.5" 38/44 Heavy Duty.

What is interesting is that in certain 38/44 Outdoorsman's (like this one) they go faster. Why? Who knows but the same ammo that will basically duplicate the performance as shown in original ammo in 3 different guns tends to run fast in the outdoorsman's. This particular gun they run about 1220 fps give or take. Odd that they are 70 fps fast but hey, don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

Note that in the 30's S&W would advertise the 38/44 S&W Special ammo would do 1226 FPS out of a 8 3/4" Registered Mag while real 357 Magnum ammo did 1512 FPS on the same advertisement. My testing of original ammo with a 8 3/8" pre-27 came in a bit slower but 1515 is my easy to remember target for full bore 357 Magnum ammo. If you want to wimp out to the current SAAMI spec of roughly 1200 and shoot 38/44 ammo great. More power to you. I chose to match the original specs because other than my Python, I own no small frame 357's so it is moot to me.

I am not using Keith's or anyone's special load using 2400. I am using Speer 8 (first edition) commonly referred to as "the magic book of spells". My load is actually below the starting load shown in Speer 8 for a 158 LSWC and near the starting loads in Sierra 1 (although using jacketed data for lead is not a good idea). Besides even for me, 2400 is too precious to use in 38/44's when Herco and SR4756 are still available (I have 48 lbs of 4756 unopened still).

My favorite shooter 38/44 Outdoorsman is this one:

It is a postwar glossy, with target hammer and trigger and football cutout target grips. I suspect it is a custom order gun because it is very nice. To me though it is a great shooter. (50 shots at 15 yrds by the way).

Why not a pre-27 or pre-28? I have a bunch of them but I have a rule. Don't put the wrong ammo in a gun and carbon up the cylinders. 38's belong in 38/44's and 357 Magnums go in 357 Magnums. Also, if I shoot a mag, it tends to be a full power load. 14.5 grns of 2400 to 16.0 grns of 2400 depending on if it is an S&W or a Ruger Redhawk. (Now there is a gun that is overbuilt, I consider it the Outdoorsman of the modern era ie: the Ruger Redhawk 357 Magnum).

I don't know what load Keith hunted with. I am not a hunter (much) so I tend to just gloss over those articles.

I see there are several more questions about my loads being too hot. You can get to real 38/44 velocities easily with 2400, 4756, Herco, longshot and marginally with unique (a bit spiky for my liking at full power). My brass will fall out of the gun with the lightest tap of the extractor. I figure I am matching actual velocities of real 38/44 ammo in real 38/44 guns with suitable powder. Am I wildcatting it? Yes to an extent but since real 38/44 ammo has not been made in say 50 years, what is a guy going to do?

Great pictures of a very nice heavy duty. Excellent gun, I would be proud to have it in my collection.

Why a 38/44 over a 66? Why get a 66 over say a Ruger Redhawk 357 magnum? I shoot loads that I won't even mention in public out of my Redhawk and it just laps them up. It is all about what you like and want to do with the gun. The 66 is a stainless gun and while very nice, it lacks the soul of the 38/44. To me stainless guns are tools, you might as well buy the biggest and the best stainless you can get because they will be beat upon.

Alwslate makes a good point. I "hot rod" my 38/44's because I am matching original ballistics as measured. It does not fit the current paradigm of the round in context with the wimped down 357 magnum so there are issues that each individual has to work. I figure if I am going to shoot a 38 special it might as well be out of my 38's, 38/44s out of 38/44s and 357 Magnums out of a 357 Magnum. It is just what I like to do.

So the brass is in the tumbler, the press is setup for 38 Supers (130 grns @ 1300 fps with 4756) so I need to finish them and remake the 38/44's for next time.

To all the 38/44 guys. Lets get shooting!

 

[ironhead7544]

A 158-173 gr cast swc at 1100-1200 fps or so makes a sweet all around load for plinking or hunting the appropriate sized game animal. I dont think it will hurt the 38-44 at all. Many were rechambered to 357 Magnum.

 

[Texas Star]

A solid reply, although I don't see my stainless guns as just work tools. They're beautiful, too. And I must say, I would never buy a Redhawk in .357. Even as a .44 Magnum, it's as heavy as a small boat anchor, while the S&W M-66 is far handier for daily wear, and I wore mine daily for over 20 years, unless I had the day off at work.

My heaviest .357 now is a GP-100, four-inch barrel. I love it. My SP-101 will fire .357 ammo, but I don't do it often, unless there's a real need. The gun will take it, but my hand is reluctant. I found the 2.5-inch M-19 with service stocks to be as much as I want to handle with .357 ammo. The M-66 has a four-inch bbl. and Pachmayr Presentation grips, although I occasionally swap them for Uncle Mike's. One day, finances may allow buying an identical gun and I'll have Pachmayrs on the original old friend and put the Uncle Mike's on the newcomer.

I sense that your use of handguns is quite different from mine. But your results would overlap with the interests of many here, whether they just do recreational shooting or use those loads to kill villainous humans, snakes, or deer or pigs at suitable ranges. I want an outdoors handgun to be able to kill an alligator, as they occur in many prime fishing waters here and can be aggressive. Some will also want an effective shark gun. I was quite impressed by Skelton taking a pronghorn with a .357 and I think he may have used that .38-44 load that I mentioned. He must have been a master stalker or had a good blind where they'd wander past. My idea of a pronghorn gun is a .270 rifle!

I' m intrigued that you load .38 Super. Is your gun a Colt, and does it headspace on the ctg. mouth or on the small semi-rim? I had a prewar .38 Super Match (fixed sight version) with a superbly smooth action (hand honed, I'm sure, which was a feature that Colt offered in the 1930's) and I loved it. Except that it wouldn't shoot for sour grapes! It 'd turn in eight - inch groups at just 25 yards. I replaced it with a Browning Hi-Power, which was far more accurate, if not quite as hot.
But you surely know that modern 9mm Plus P is about as hot as current .38 Super factory ammo.

Later, Jim Carmichel wrote a good article in, "Handloader" about the cause for the Super being so erratic is that Colt was chambering the barrels to headspace on that tiny rim. If the barrel was altered to chamber on the case mouth as with most auto pistol cartridges, the problem vanished. I think the SIG-Sauer P-220 always did chamber on the case mouth and a pal who had one in .38 Super said that it was quite accurate. I've heard that current Colt barrels do headspace that way.

I hope that you'll favor us with a later thread about your .38 Super loading. And thanks for publishing the chrono info on the original .38-44 ammo. I was quite eager to see that. I'd be a little hesitant to load that hot in .38 cases, lest I mistakenly load the ammo in a Chief's Special or an old M&P, if I owned one. I'd sure use only one brand of brass and limit it to those hot rounds.

I'm pretty sure that you'll see premature cylinder endshake from shooting that ammo that often, even in an N-frame .38. It sure happens with .357 ammo in M-27's, if they're shot enough. But those are your guns and that's how you derive enjoyment from them. Thanks for posting the results. They are interesting to anyone who might want hunting or defense loads for an N-frame .38, although most would use that level of power less frequently.

Your photos are quite good, an added bonus.

 

[Dave T]

Since the "38 Caliber" ammo I shoot any more is either my carry ammo from Buffalo Bore (38 Special +P 158g SWCHP-GC) or my 38-44 hand loads that duplicate the BB performance, I feel obliged to add a couple cents worth.

As several have said, the original 38-44 does about what the politically correct and lawyered up 357s sold today do. And as such are adequate for about anything you want to do with your 38 bore revolvers. As Peter alluded to, I find standard (today they call them +P, LOL) 38 Specials kind of boring. 357s are too loud and expensive and the 38-44 (158g @1100-1150 fps) is just perfect. Also like Peter, I don't own any K-frames so the 38-44s get shot in either L-frames (I have 2 chambered for the 38 Special) or N-frames.

If you're afraid of wearing out your revolver then don't shoot it. I seriously doubt if 1 in 100 posting here on the S&W Forum shoot enough out of any one gun to "wear it out" prematurely.

For this size bore (.357") I think the 38-44 is the ideal level of performance and personally wish the factories (besides BB) would re-introduce it. On second thought that wouldn't make any sense as that's what 158g 357s are doing now. (smile)

Dave