I am under the impression that the .38 S&W round takes a back seat to a .38 special. If that is the case why were they produced as late as they were? I own a 32-1 in a 2" and my model 36 does all the 32-1 does and more.
Terrier purpose vs .38 special
- Thread starter fourb20
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
I don't know much about this, but it could be that they were produced a lot earlier than they were sold. Might as well continue to catalogue them until they all sell. For those who wanted a small revolver, they weren't really obsolete until the early fifties.
Supply and demand. Some folks liked the older .38 S&W round.
Look at how long they made rifles in .257 Roberts. Then came the .243 and the .25/06. But still they made the Roberts. Some people like the tried and true. "My uncle shot a million deer with a .257." "My uncle killed 2 robbers with a .38S&W." If it works, don't fix it.
Alk8944
US Veteran
Plain and simply S&W produced them because people wanted guns in that caliber and would buy enough of them to make it profitable.
Similar to your question, S&W continued to produce top break revolvers in .38 S&W clear up to about 1940, years after the K-Frame solid frame revolvers were introduced. Same reason, there was still a demand. Why? I have no idea!
Similar to your question, S&W continued to produce top break revolvers in .38 S&W clear up to about 1940, years after the K-Frame solid frame revolvers were introduced. Same reason, there was still a demand. Why? I have no idea!
Last edited:
Ivan the Butcher
Member
When made on the "I" frame, The Terrier (2") and Regulation Police (4" Sq. Butt) were considerably smaller and lighter than the 1905 (K-Frame)!
38 Special +P is what did away with the 38 S&W! The I-frame could handle the extra pressure, but most of the then up to 85-year-old top breaks were suspect with the +P idea! Buffalo Bore makes a round like that, but it is a hand full. The FN produced 38-200 load for BSR K-Frames is almost that hot. I won't shoot it in my Safety Hammerless (1896), But I will in my Regulation Police (1920).
Getting good quality Factory Ammo in 38 S&W is hard to come by. Everything now is loaded down for the first Black Powder 38 S&W's in the 1880 era! I load soft lead wad-cutters (146 grain) in 38 S&W brass to 725 fps The same overall length as the 146 grain LRN and get very good penetration and expansion. That load I use in all my Top Breaks (3 brands all double-action, circa 1900+/-)!
Colt made their snubby, The Detective Special, in both 38 Special and 38 Colt New Police (Actually a 38-200 by another name!) They also made the Banker's Special in 32 Colt New Police (a 32 S&W long case with the 117 grain 32-20 bullet). The 32 Colt New Police load is my non-target/SD/Hunting load in my 30-1. Also good for teaching girls that are afraid of "Big Scary 38s"!
Ivan
38 Special +P is what did away with the 38 S&W! The I-frame could handle the extra pressure, but most of the then up to 85-year-old top breaks were suspect with the +P idea! Buffalo Bore makes a round like that, but it is a hand full. The FN produced 38-200 load for BSR K-Frames is almost that hot. I won't shoot it in my Safety Hammerless (1896), But I will in my Regulation Police (1920).
Getting good quality Factory Ammo in 38 S&W is hard to come by. Everything now is loaded down for the first Black Powder 38 S&W's in the 1880 era! I load soft lead wad-cutters (146 grain) in 38 S&W brass to 725 fps The same overall length as the 146 grain LRN and get very good penetration and expansion. That load I use in all my Top Breaks (3 brands all double-action, circa 1900+/-)!
Colt made their snubby, The Detective Special, in both 38 Special and 38 Colt New Police (Actually a 38-200 by another name!) They also made the Banker's Special in 32 Colt New Police (a 32 S&W long case with the 117 grain 32-20 bullet). The 32 Colt New Police load is my non-target/SD/Hunting load in my 30-1. Also good for teaching girls that are afraid of "Big Scary 38s"!
Ivan
cgt4570
Member
Didn't some major PD's arm their female officers with the .38 S&W quite late?
I reload for 38 S&W. I have a 1966 Terrier, an Enfield No. 2, Mk 1* and two BSR K frames that I shoot with these reloads. I don't shoot the reloads through my top breaks too often.
I found that Fiocchi makes a 38 S&W FMJ round that has a bit of zip to it.
I found that Fiocchi makes a 38 S&W FMJ round that has a bit of zip to it.
SGT ROCK 11B
Member
Maybe in the smaller Departments. In the 1970s and 1980s I knew a few female officers who carried .32 caliber snubnose revolvers as BUGs or when working inside.
Years ago, my gunsmith showed me an older .38 Terrier with a de-horned hammer that he had worked on. The action was very slick and the shorter frame/cylinder made a great pocket gun. When I asked him about the .38S&W chambering, he replied it was "miles ahead of a .25."
Kaaskop49
Shield #5103
Kaaskop49
Shield #5103
rednichols
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,745
- Reaction score
- 8,490
Without this being a direct response to the OP's question, few people realise that the J frame Smiths in .38 Spl and the K frame Smiths in .357 Magnum and the N frame Smiths in .44 Magnum were the direct result of WW2 tech improvements. All introduced in the 1950s, these models were made possible because during the War, 'induction hardening' was perfected; allowing the smaller frames and cylinders to stand up to the Magnum pressures.
From that emanated the aluminium framed J frames, during the USAF trials of the '50s; and the M39 for same (and the Colt Commander). It turned out that the aluminum cylinders of the J frames were still not strong enough and were replaced by steel.
It is a myth, thoroughly debunked, that the K frame .357 was created for Bill Jordan as his 'dream gun'. Instead the revolver was well underway before Smith execs approached him, and they were already calling it a 'dream gun'. It came out of the Combat Masterpiece in .357 project for the FBI, encouraged by the couple who operated Evaluators Ltd as a Marines family.
From that emanated the aluminium framed J frames, during the USAF trials of the '50s; and the M39 for same (and the Colt Commander). It turned out that the aluminum cylinders of the J frames were still not strong enough and were replaced by steel.
It is a myth, thoroughly debunked, that the K frame .357 was created for Bill Jordan as his 'dream gun'. Instead the revolver was well underway before Smith execs approached him, and they were already calling it a 'dream gun'. It came out of the Combat Masterpiece in .357 project for the FBI, encouraged by the couple who operated Evaluators Ltd as a Marines family.
I got started with the caliber because dad left me an Enfield Mark 2*. I have a top break or two, a 32-1, a BSR, and a regulation police . I saved every casing I ever bought and probably have 800 rounds of new and reloads. I like shooting guns in that caliber.
Robert
Robert
.455_Hunter
Member
It's really rather amazing how much smaller an I-frame Terrier is compared to a modern J-frame snub. Of course, that all goes out the window if you have to replace the wooden service or magnas with some oversized monstrosity grips. Sure, it's not a hard target penetrator, but the .38 S&W has excellent soft target penetration. Using the current "custom" sources for the 200 gr Super Police loading, you can put 1000 gr of bullets on target in under two seconds with a gun barely larger than a LCP.
Not bad!
Not bad!
Those old I frames were just a nice sized small revolver. As noted a good bit more compact than later things.
.38SuperMan
Member
I have a 32-1 2” and reload down to soft shooting plain old enjoyable shooting rounds. I plink with it so high velocity means nothing to me as it’s all about enjoyment. I shoot 32 S&W Long the same way and for the same reason. Also it’s a nostalgic cartridge that makes it fun as well.
The question has already been well-answered, but one point that hasn’t been mentioned is that the fact that the Model 32 exists at all demonstrates S&W’s recognition that the .38 S&W was quickly becoming obsolete.
As has been said, the I-frames are tiny—marvelously so. The only reason to bump the Terrier up to J-frame size would be to simplify production while retaining the rapidly decreasing .38 S&W-shooting market share.
As has been said, the I-frames are tiny—marvelously so. The only reason to bump the Terrier up to J-frame size would be to simplify production while retaining the rapidly decreasing .38 S&W-shooting market share.
Outpost75
Member
Yes. Also common use in Eastern Departments for admin, court security and other low risk assignments where users wanted a lighter gun.
Last edited:
I have a regulation police in .38 s&w. Mine was first year production. I would say itsca lot of punch in a small gun. Not to derail things anyone remember the 9mm federal? Kind of a modern 38 s&w in my oponion.
Outpost75
Member
Problem with 9mm Federal was that it would chamber in flimsy .38 top-breaks and blow cylinders. Withdrawn quickly.
My 33-1 is a favorite woods walker.
