Snubby Carry Load. 357 or 38 +P

[white cloud]

I would hate to touch off a full throttle .357 in an automobile or my home without hearing protection.

 

[forrestinmathews]

Since the .38 folks demand to be treated as equals...which carry load do you have that expands to 0.60"and penetrates 15"?
You have two choices for functional carry ammo: Winchester 130 gr. PDX and Ranger +P.
They don't meet the 0.60" expansion. They can't penetrate 15" expanded either. Nothing in a 2" .38 is capable of doing that, but these loads are actually doing something to transfer their energy. And then we have the Hydrashok... laziest bullet in the West. It might as well have a gone to lunch sign on the front of it. The cholesterol involved might increase lethality.
I'm not asking for people to bow down to the .357 and cast aside their .38's. I'm asking for folks to be reasonable and appreciate their .38's for what they are: mild shooting, convenient, aesthetically pleasing, accurate and capable. I'm asking that they realize that while it's a great gun, it's not a .357 and it's not on the same level as a .357. They're different and size matters in both power and convenience.

 

[Walkingwolf]

I am reasonable, I carry anything from a .22 to a .45. No justification needed.

 

[TomkinsSP]

In my limited real-world experience humanoids struck by .38 s&w special wadcutters and semi-wadcutters ceased being threats upon being hit. I fail to understand why some threats would continue to be threats if hit by accurate fire from a .38 s&w special. Of course as the .357 remington magnum and .38 s&w special +p are 'faster' .38 specials they would also do the job, certainly no worse, maybe better, (I mean how much dead-er than dead can one be.) I also fail to understand how a humanoid hit with inaccurate fire (say in the glute or thumb) by a .357 would be more incapacitated than if hit by inaccurate fire from a .38+p or garden variety .38. Being more powerful I am certain the humanoid hit would sustain a greater amount of tissue damage, but I don't see how that translates into incapacitation with periphreal hits or how the greater energy transfer is meaningful in cns or cartio hits.
As a disclaimer I might add that with all due repect I think Dr. Roberts is doing a phenomenal job of measuring with great precision (I am sorry, here) the wrong variable. In my limited real-world experience hollow points fired from snubbies don't expand. Flat lead metplats crush and destroy tissue. Velocity is not as important as momentum. Expansion is irrelevant, the amount of tissue disrupted is significant. The placement of a projectile is paramount and no amount of expansion can correct poor placement. (Just my $0.02)

 

[forrestinmathews]

Well if we don't need expansion...we could just all shoot hydrashoks...Lord knows they don't expand. In my limited real world experience, you'd better like talking to the person you shoot or shoot a whole lotta bullets.

 

[nachogrande]

THE LATESEST WALYWORLD GUN RAG HOGWASH.

Since the .38 folks demand to be treated as equals...which carry load do you have that expands to 0.60"and penetrates 15"?
You have two choices for functional carry ammo: Winchester 130 gr. PDX and Ranger +P.
They don't meet the 0.60" expansion. They can't penetrate 15" expanded either. Nothing in a 2" .38 is capable of doing that, but these loads are actually doing something to transfer their energy. And then we have the Hydrashok... laziest bullet in the West. It might as well have a gone to lunch sign on the front of it. The cholesterol involved might increase lethality.
I'm not asking for people to bow down to the .357 and cast aside their .38's. I'm asking for folks to be reasonable and appreciate their .38's for what they are: mild shooting, convenient, aesthetically pleasing, accurate and capable. I'm asking that they realize that while it's a great gun, it's not a .357 and it's not on the same level as a .357. They're different and size matters in both power and convenience.

Making statements as "ABSOLUTES" is just ridiculous. Nobody since Steve McQueen in the blob has been attacked by gelatin. I'm leaning more & more towards the 38 special hard cast/ wide meplat/ flat nosed boolits, & they don't need warp speed to work well (on animals). Fabric clogging up HP's is a theoretical concern. At arms length/bad breath range, will it really matter? Maybe yes/maybe no, each individual case will be different. Who knows? I'm certainly not gonna tell someone else what they have to use.

 

[Walkingwolf]

Making statements as "ABSOLUTES" is just ridiculous. Nobody since Steve McQueen in the blob has been attacked by gelatin. I'm leaning more & more towards the 38 special hard cast/ wide meplat/ flat nosed boolits, & they don't need warp speed to work well (on animals). Fabric clogging up HP's is a theoretical concern. At arms length/bad breath range, will it really matter? Maybe yes/maybe no, each individual case will be different. Who knows? I'm certainly not gonna tell someone else what they have to use.

Is there way I can like this twice. I was beginning to think I was the only one to believe in personal choice.

 

[Ziggy2525]

...
As a disclaimer I might add that with all due repect I think Dr. Roberts is doing a phenomenal job of measuring with great precision (I am sorry, here) the wrong variable. In my limited real-world experience hollow points fired from snubbies don't expand. Flat lead metplats crush and destroy tissue. Velocity is not as important as momentum. Expansion is irrelevant, the amount of tissue disrupted is significant. The placement of a projectile is paramount and no amount of expansion can correct poor placement. (Just my $0.02)

My disclaimer is the only thing I'm an expert at is not being an expert at anything.

Been a while ago. I had read about a group of trauma surgeons that were making the point that they weren't seeing the JHP expansion in real human shootings for bullets that had been shown to expand totally reliably in ballistic gel. They suggested in real world shootings, 148gr wadcutters did as much damage in real humans as JHP's because the JHP's weren't expanding. They didn't seem to have the clout to overcome the "FBI says" lobby.

Since I'm not a trauma surgeon or a ballistics expert, I don't have a good way to judge which side is true. I can look and see some pretty smart, BTDT people aren't "all in" with the results from ballistic gel testing being the holy grail of bullet performance.

 

[forrestinmathews]

Try this on for size...I have recovered .380 and .45 hydrashok bullets from deer and I found that the majority of the bullets failed to penetrate through major muscle groups or failed expand no matter where they impacted. They looked similar to the gelatin recovered bullets for the .38 hydrashok 2" barrel.

I was going off the test data which was based on hollowpoints. Go ahead and cobble together any load you like and make it work. Talk about meplats and tissue disturbance to keep the .38 level with the .357 in your mind. Guess you need something to talk about since hollowpoint expansion isn't going so well.
I'd like to see a wad cutter load that had some oomph to it. I'm sure it will work fairly well and might even offer controlled penetration and some energy transfer.

 

[kthom]

"I'd like to see a wad cutter load that had some oomph to it. I'm sure it will work fairly well and might even offer controlled penetration and some energy transfer."

This one ain't too bad!
Standard Pressure Short Barrel Low Flash Heavy .38 Special Pistol & Handgun Ammunition

 

[ExcitableBoy]

Here's a real-life simile for you: Would you rather get smacked in the head with a baseball bat weighing 32 oz., or one weighing 40 oz., with each barrel-head swung at the same velocity? No helmet allowed.

Which one would be more effective in putting you to your knees?

 

[Walkingwolf]

Here's a real-life simile for you: Would you rather get smacked in the head with a baseball bat weighing 32 oz., or one weighing 40 oz., with each barrel-head swung at the same velocity? No helmet allowed.

Which one would be more effective in putting you to your knees?

Which one would make you stop doing whatever you were doing to get smacked? Or would you just keep doing it since it is only a 32 oz?

BTW I have both a 32 oz, and a 40 oz. sledge I don't think I would volunteer to get clocked with either one. Your mileage might vary.

 

[deadear dan]

If you value your hearing....notice my screen name. I would not be shooting 357 in a snubby.

 

[TomkinsSP]

Here's a real-life simile for you: Would you rather get smacked in the head with a baseball bat weighing 32 oz., or one weighing 40 oz., with each barrel-head swung at the same velocity? No helmet allowed.

Which one would be more effective in putting you to your knees?

Ah, but what if I can swing the 32 ounce bat 50 percent faster than the 40 ounce bat???

In all seriousness the same bullet fired from a max pressure .357 load will come out of the same length barrel faster than a max pressure .38 or .38 +p. Or you could shoot a heavier bullet at the same or a marginally higher velocity.

.357 is empirically more powerful than .38 +p or .38.

BUT DOES IT MATTER?

I have personally seen a half-dozen cadavers dead from 148 grain TARGET wadcutters.

Dead is dead, doesn't matter if you are run over by my 250 hp pickup truck or a 375 hp semi.

And a hit on the wrist of an assailant with a .357 is only going to be slightly less irrelevant than a hit by a .38.

 

[Mehutch]

In all my shooting life I shot maybe 50 38 specials, just does nothing for me. I am a maggie kinda guy. I love the 357 mag's power, control and usability. I carry a S&W 686-4 seven shooter in a 2.5" barrel. It works for me. I load it up with Gold Dot 135gr 357 magnum for the short barrel. It has 935 fps. Empties its energy in its target with six more on its way.

Do I feel lucky? ... damn right I do.

and my hearing is just fine.

 

[Kanewpadle]

To those that think the 357 is so much louder. You're wrong.


db Environmental noise
0 Threshold of hearing
10 Normal breathing
20 Rusting leaves
30 Whisper at 30 feet
40 Quiet street
50 Interior home noise
60 Conversation
70 Crowded restaurant
75 Kitchen appliances
80 City traffic
85 Hearing damage possible
90 Lawn mower
100 Chain shaw
120 Threshold of pain
120 Siren
134 .22 LR rifle
140 Jet engine at take-off
150 .410 shotgun
152 .22 LR pistol
153 20 gauge shotgun
155 .223 rifle
155 .25 pistol
156 12 gauge shotgun
156 .30-.30 rifle
156 .308 rifle
156 .44 Special revolver
157 .22 Magnum pistol
157 .45 ACP pistol
158 .380 ACP pistol
158 .38 Special revolver
159 .30-06
160 9mm Para pistol
163 .41 Magnum revolver
164 .357 Magnum revolver
164 .44 Magnum revolver

 

[Walkingwolf]

I load it up with Gold Dot 135gr 357 magnum for the short barrel. It has 935 fps.

I load my 38 special snub with 138 grain Bayou Bullets WC at 900 fps. Recoil is not bad, as well as muzzle flash, and decibels. I don't worry about the dumping, as long as the bad guy has holes deep in him,or her to stop.

To those that think the 357 is so much louder. You're wrong.

Actual they are louder, your own post proves it.

"For every 3 dBAs over 85dBA, the permissible exposure time before possible damage can occur is cut in half."

Dangerous Decibels >> How Loud is Too Loud?

 

[Ziggy2525]

A different way of saying what Walkingwolf said. A 3db increase doubles the power of the sound (and potential for hearing loss). A 10db increase doubles the perceived volume.

From the chart, a .357 has 4x more damaging sound pressure than a .38 Special (6db) and sounds 60% louder.

 

[Kanewpadle]

You guys are ridiculous. ANY gun you shoot indoors is going to damage your hearing IF you notice it.

 

[Ziggy2525]

Which part do you think is ridiculous? Understanding how the db sound pressure scale actually works. Understanding that sounds over 85db, including pistol shots, will damage your hearing whether you notice them or not. Or both?