Solving the 38 Single Shot Accuracy Mystery

[glowe]

I have been struggling with a 38 Single Shot barrel I had acquired through a source that purchased a large lot of factory leftover stock years ago. These barrels had never been issued and were in the white without serial numbers, but had the proper barrel rib stamping for a Model of ‘91. I purchased a 10” barrel in, what was advertised as 38 S&W. This source had all calibers originally available at the time, but I knew that the 38 barrel was the most uncommon caliber out there, so I bought one.

I had a nice Model of 1891 factory target revolver, 38 S&W, that I had received from a SWCA member and thought that barrel would complement the revolver. After receiving the barrel, I blued it and, through the assistance of a few more members here, I acquired and/or made parts to install an extractor, sights, and put together the Single Shot. On my first trip to the range, plus several more, I could not come up with a load that would hit paper at 25 yards and very inaccurate at 50 feet (photo 1). Trying several different types of bullets, powders, and crimp styles, I saw no improvements. As I was cleaning the barrel recently, I noticed the chamber seemed quite deep, so measuring the chamber I found it to be much longer than a 38 S&W round. Now thinking it might have been bored out for 357 brass, I loaded up some 357 Mag cases with .360 bullets and they would chamber easily and still seemed short, plus there was no improvement at the range. Was about to give up on the SS barrel, but a very learned member here suggested that I check the chamber measurement and compare it to a 38/44 Target case. As it turns out, the chamber was exactly the same length as an old 38/44 Target round.

I acquired 50 rounds of 357 Remington Max and cut it down to just under 1.5”. Used a 158 grain gas check SWC. Interesting that those bullets from my mold are .361”, just what I needed. Added 3.2 grains of Unique and filled the case with Puflon. Velocity averaged 661 fps and accuracy improved dramatically at 15 yards. Now I am onto something here and look forward to loading more ammo to shoot at longer ranges with different powders and bullets to further improve accuracy.

Pictures are of the assembled set that I had shared when I first put together a case from an old silverware wood box (photos 2 & 3). The chamber shows no sign of ever being bored out (photo 4), so am wondering if it was something the factory may have played with during the production time of the 1st Model Single Shot? All I can say is the accuracy is much improved (photo 5).

Bottom line is that I might have the only 38/44 Target barrel out there, but tough to get a letter on a unnumbered barrel. Just another fun adventure with a S&W.

 

[rct269]

Well, if it wasn't something they played with---------they should have!!

I know (or think I know) there was a "gallery load" for the .32-44------round ball projectile. I've heard (but don't recall seeing it in any authoritative publication) there was also a "gallery load" for the .38-44, but no memory of the type of projectile. As you go forward with your short range work, you might want to try some round ball loads.

As an aside, at a point in time when I was testing (fooling around with) the throat length/accuracy question, I routinely produced six round groups of 1 1/2" at 25 yards (seated/two hands/rest/taking my time)---and every now and again groups you could (almost) cover with a quarter---with .45 caliber round balls. They work just fine, when you do your part.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[tlay]

Gary, nice group after all! Would a full wadcutter bullet give you better accuracy? I have better luck with my 38S&W with a HBWC than any other style.

 

[glowe]

At least I am headed in the right direction. I shoot lots of round ball, but in muzzleloaders. My limited experience with round ball in revolver calibers proved to be very good at close ranges, like a shooting gallery distance, but losing out at 20 plus yards. I do not have a wadcutter mold, but maybe I should buy a box and give them a try. Speer has a 148g WC that might be perfect to try next.

I still want to try fine tuning the SWC load I am using and have found that trying different powders, changing the depth of bullet seating, and amount of crimp can potentially improve groupings.

 

[rct269]

Under the heading of for what it's worth, there is no discernible crimp on factory ammo of the period-------case diameter is constant.

Bullet seating depth is such that the nose of the projectile is .041-.042" below the case mouth. The bullet is a round nose something----I have no idea what's under the round nose, although I'm betting that information is published somewhere-----Google almost certainly knows where.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[merl67]

Turner Kirkland recommended this as a way around for loading obsolete calibers when a proper bullet mould could not be found. At Least that is what I recall I haven't seen a Dixie catalog in years.

 

[lebomm]

Well, at the risk of sounding gushy, double extra COOL ! Please do keep us informed of your developments with this gun.

Larry

 

[rct269]

With an eye towards figuring out what this round nose bullet in the factory ammo may be, I weighed the round (Ohous triple beam balance--weighs in grams). The total weight is 15.2 grams. Do the math to convert to grains, weigh your cartridge case on your powder scale, do some more math, and you'll be close enough for government work.

Ralph Tremaine

Forget it----------Google S&W 3rd Model Target/38-44 reloading-------and feast your eyes!!

 

[glowe]

Thanks everyone for the comments and thanks again Ralph for the link! Unfortunately, winter has set in with a foot of snow and the range will soon be buried, but it gives me a chance to load up lots of test rounds while waiting for the first thaw.

I have been trying terms on Google every time I think about another term to use, but this has never popped up. I wonder why the author did not simply use a 38 S&W mouth expander die to do the job, since my Lee expander die opened up the mouth to seat the .361" SWC. After my first shots, the cases expanded to show the bulge that the author created with his case expander, but it gives me the thought that I may have reduced the diameter of the bullet by pressing them into a .357 case and now wonder if the initial firings were throwing a .357 bullet down .360 barrel? Anyway, I will certainly try some loads using that information. Problem is that the author did not tell us what granulation of black powder he used, which is very very important. He is quick to dismiss the dreaded smokeless powder, but neglects an extremely important piece of information. Priming, 4F, 3F, and 2F could be used with drastically different pressure results. Maybe I will look for an original BP round and take it apart to look for what powder was used?

 

[Jim Watson]

As I recall, the .38-44 Target bullet weight was 146 grains, same as .38 S&W but a blunter round nose shape made for seating submerged in the cylinder length case.

I shot this and that from 125 to 158 gr in my No 3 NM .38-44 and they were all good sound plinking loads. A hollowbase wadcutter shot well with smokeless. The very best it ever did was with a 146 gr RN bullet and Black Mag 3 fake powder. I think that was the only thing that powder was ever good for. I sold the gun to a collector before I got 'round to shooting real black in it.

Resize with a .38 Super sizing die so as to not undersize the case and squeeze down a soft bullet.

Henry Stebbins said the gallery load was a round ball all the way down on 5 grains of black. It was dirty and inaccurate, not worth fooling with. You might do better with nitro.

 

[Jim Watson]

Can't edit posts here, will add that most folks these days would use FFFg in a .38 but I have seen mention that the old timers used a bit coarser powder per caliber, maybe FFg.

And I was using trimmed .357 Maximum cases. They expanded to fit the chambers back to where the wall taper started and the Super sizing die did not take them back down too much.

 

[glowe]

Thanks Jim. My experience with BP is that the coarser the powder, the lower the velocities, so it makes some sense that 2F would yield the lowest velocity/pressure, but 3F should be the go to granulation to start off. BP fouling will not be an issue with a single shot and clean-up should be easy, so I will definitely give it a try along with some mild smokeless loads. Now off to find a 38 caliber round ball . . .

 

[rct269]

I'm wondering (more than a little bit) about the short case shown in the Google link--------for the gallery load. That makes no sense at all!!

The whole point of the 38-44 cartridge was the case is the same length as the cylinder------zero throat---or as close to zero as you can get in a revolver. The use of a short case defeats the purpose---------entirely!!

Ralph Tremaine

 

[red9]

"I've heard (but don't recall seeing it in any authoritative publication) there was also a "gallery load" for the .38-44, but no memory of the type of projectile." (Ralph)

Here it is. I picked these up at the Manassas VGCA show. The lead nose appears rounded (round ball?), set back about .8" into the case. Doesn't leave much room for powder.

Bob

 

[rct269]

"I've heard (but don't recall seeing it in any authoritative publication) there was also a "gallery load" for the .38-44, but no memory of the type of projectile." (Ralph)

Here it is. I picked these up at the Manassas VGCA show. The lead nose appears rounded (round ball?), set back about .8" into the case. Doesn't leave much room for powder.

Bob

Now these cartridge cases are full length (1 7/16" plus whatever for the rim), right? That makes a whole lot more sense than the short cases we see in the Google link article. And there is NO DOUBT these are gallery loads-----says so---right on the box!!

Ralph Tremaine

And these are U.M.C. products---same as my (full power) loaded rounds---all two of them.

 

[glowe]

. . . The whole point of the 38-44 cartridge was the case is the same length as the cylinder------zero throat---or as close to zero as you can get in a revolver. The use of a short case defeats the purpose---------entirely!! . . .

I definitely experienced the bad effects of RN bullets jumping a large gap in the chamber when shooting my single shot with 38 S&W cases. I think what happens is that the bullet is upset upon firing and goes into rifling crooked or canted, resulting in poor accuracy. That cannot happen with a round ball, so jumping the gap should not make any difference when shooting round ball. Also, when you get down to low powder charges, you need a filler to take up the extra space, so a shorter case as Bob shows makes sense.

I experienced this issue first hand when I bought a Uberti Sharps in 45-70. I read that you need to experiment with loads, powders, and bullets until you find what works in your rifle. After many failed attempts at accuracy, I was about to give up until I decided to measure the chamber. The gun barrel is stamped with 45-70, but the chamber measurement turned out to be 45-90 from the factory. The chamber was over a 1/4" too long for a 45-70 and after switching to 45-90 I now have a tack driver with just about any load I stuff into the chamber - go figure.

I agree, however, that the right thing to do would be to seat the round ball against the powder in a standard 38-44 case, pushing it as deep into the case as needed to compress the BP.

 

[ol777gunnerz]

.38 barrel

Gary, is the bottom of the chamber milled flat to fit a 3rd model Perfected as well as your 1st model revolver? I have one that is identical to yours, but in 32 S&W. Like yours, no serial numbers on it, but bottom is milled flat, I have used it on a 1st model of 91 as well as a 3rd model Perfected, also with less accuracy than the .22 barrels on both. I have seen a couple others like mine in photos, does anyone know if S&W milled them before selling when decided to sell them off?

 

[glowe]

Gary, is the bottom of the chamber milled flat to fit a 3rd model Perfected as well as your 1st model revolver?

If I am not mistaken, the 3rd Model was the only barrel where the base was milled flat. Mine has the rounded base and the Model of '91 barrel stamping. If yours does not have that stamp, it would have been made for the Perfected, but if it is an early barrel, it could have been done by a gunsmith or anyone else including the factory. Only a close comparison with a serial numbered Perfected barrel will tell you if it is a factory job or a home repair.

 

[rct269]

I definitely experienced the bad effects of RN bullets jumping a large gap in the chamber when shooting my single shot with 38 S&W cases. I think what happens is that the bullet is upset upon firing and goes into rifling crooked or canted, resulting in poor accuracy. That cannot happen with a round ball, so jumping the gap should not make any difference when shooting round ball. Also, when you get down to low powder charges, you need a filler to take up the extra space, so a shorter case as Bob shows makes sense.

I experienced this issue first hand when I bought a Uberti Sharps in 45-70. I read that you need to experiment with loads, powders, and bullets until you find what works in your rifle. After many failed attempts at accuracy, I was about to give up until I decided to measure the chamber. The gun barrel is stamped with 45-70, but the chamber measurement turned out to be 45-90 from the factory. The chamber was over a 1/4" too long for a 45-70 and after switching to 45-90 I now have a tack driver with just about any load I stuff into the chamber - go figure.

I agree, however, that the right thing to do would be to seat the round ball against the powder in a standard 38-44 case, pushing it as deep into the case as needed to compress the BP.

"---------so a shorter case as Bob shows makes sense." I am 99% certain Bob's showing us full length cases. BOB-------speak up.

"That cannot happen with a round ball, so jumping the gap should not make any difference when shooting round ball." Yeah, but it does!!

My fooling around with throat length/accuracy issues went like this: The weapon---a Ruger Old Army (cap and ball). The load-----20 grains of FFF (measured, not weighed), somebody's greased wad (Uncle Mike's maybe), and a .457" Speer round ball. The ball in this load seats DEEP within the chamber-----LONG throat. This load produces approximately 4" six shot groups at 25 Yards. Skip to the final load: Powder----same. Wad----same. Bullet-----same. In between the powder and the wad is 20 grains of corn meal (to take up space) The ball in this load seats at the chamber mouth-----zero throat. This load produces 1 1/2" groups all day long---interrupted now and again by groups you can almost cover with a quarter when I do every thing right. The interim loads with 5, 10, and 15 grains of corn meal show an almost linear progression from lousy groups to merely SUPERB groups.

Now, in your case, the round ball leaves a case whose inside diameter is less than that of the chamber. Accordingly, it (the round ball) has room to rattle around on its way to the rifling----and rattle around it will. In my case, the round ball has NO room to rattle around (never mind the throat length), so the throat length shouldn't make any difference----------but it does!! Now, I have no idea what happens to your round ball while it's rattling around---but something happens---and it's worse than nothing. It is the way of things.

As an aside for you black powder shooters, the corn meal makes for outstanding fouling prevention (built in scouring powder maybe). The test I conducted (that described above) consisted of six shots fired with no corn meal, followed by 24 more with varying amounts of corn meal----followed by an unknown number (a bunch) more with the 20 grains of corn meal load. Now, lest there be any misunderstanding, the gun was dirty when I quit, but the bore was no more crudded up than if I'd been shooting smokeless. The exterior of the gun was considerably cleaner than if I had been using no corn meal---and there was no fouling which interfered with the function of the gun---it was still as smooth as silk!

Ralph Tremaine

 

[glowe]

I have no intention of using shorter brass and I do have Puflon to use as a case filler, but I may be buying a box of corn meal for my black powder loading.

The box label shows an image of a shorter brass case, but who knows if the label is to scale or not. Measuring the diameter and the length equates to 1.3" case length, or about the length of a .357 Mag.