Why not Elmer Keith that 38 special

[AlHunt]

Perhaps because he said this, as in a direct quote.

"With the better metallurgy in pistols today, why can't you do the Elmer Keith and load the 38 to 357 velocities" He came to this question after looking at a picture of the revolver in a magazine.

Now lets see here. The only way to load a 38 special to 357 mag velocities with most bullets is to load a 38 special ABOVE 357 mag pressures.

Then later on he said this in reference to others.

"Oh well, like I said above, every man's gotta know their limitations. I know mine but, still like pushing the envelope a little every now and then."

Perhaps his posting style invites some contentiousness?

Why would it? He posed a question.

So, split hairs over "to 357 velocities", maybe "near", maybe less powder in a smaller case will develop pressures and velocities near what he's talking about? I don't know.

But I do know that becoming condescending and nasty is entirely optional. It's maybe not a bad conversation to have. Seems to be plenty of evidence that a fair number of modern 38 SPL revolvers will handle .357 pressures.

Maybe we all need a new revolver chambered in 38 Special Super Max? More useless things have been foisted on the public.

 

[IAM Rand]

Just WOW, didn't think this would be such a hot topic. Seems to be very polarizing. Seems like most missed the reason the thread was started. It wasn't to blow up a 38. I guess most people aren't fans of Keith either.

Life goes on, and so do the complainers.

 

[rosewood]

Good thing Elmer Keith didn't have the internet, he would have never experimented with his load development because of all of the naysayers. And we would have never gotten the .357 mag.

Rosewood

 

[IAM Rand]

At this point I am not sure what I can say to try and clarify my original point. Everyone is caught up in either trying to chastise me for being reckless with reloading or they are of the same mind with loading hotter.

You are overthinking my original point and I am not sure there is anyway to expand on what I was trying to say to make the doomsayers understand. Please, powers that be, just shut this thread down. It went off the rails several pages ago. It is not worth continuing down this rabbit hole when all people want to do is criticize when they don't understand the original point.

 

[IAM Rand]

Okay, don't close it yet. Thank you Alk8944. He linked to an article that I feel is apropos (going down the French road again).

All About The .38 Special +P and .38 Special +P+ – RevolverGuy.Com

Kinda looks like I wasn't the first one to think about loading the 38 hotter. Things that make you go hhhhmmmmmmmmm.

 

[IAM Rand]

Thom 44, why am I not surprised. Still missing my point. Oh well, I tried.

 

[IAM Rand]

Lol you dont have a point other then "Hey, i bought a 38 special, how do i make it more powerful"

Your riding the other end of the curve of the dudes on multiple forums who mock, deride, insult, and harress people who purchase, say a 454 casull, and ask how to make softer recoiling ammunition for it

Wrong and wrong. That wasn't my point and my attached article made my point better than I could but, no matter what I do, you are either failing to get the point of the original post or you just want to ride me as being some kind of a reckless fool that just comes here to start #$^*. This is furthest from the truth.

(Taking a deep breath)I will try one more time. I read the article in the NRA mag that was talking about a new 38 Special. Seeing that gun manufactures are still making the 38, and presuming that they are making them better than older versions, I felt that you could reasonably make the 38 reloads more powerful just as Keith did. The article backed me up on that regard. There are ammo manufactures out there that are already making +P and +P+ ammo for the 38. Since this is the reloading area of this forum I kinda figured it would be appropriate to bring up this subject here. Obviously people still want the 38 Special so why not boost up the ammo you reload.

You would have thought that I was criticizing the bible or the government or something like that. I thought I was making an astute observation but, I guess to you and others thought I was making a foolish observation. At this point I guess that making a horse drink might be an easier task so I give up. You and the others that think I am being reckless will believe what you want. Good on ya. At this point I am done hitting my head against this wall.

 

[IAM Rand]

the issue that is most apparent is that you admit you were PRESUMING that the new revolvers are built to a higher standard in strength than before. That is not the case at all. They are built to meet the needs of the idea/design.

Simply reading the user manual would have shown that the new guns, are not that strong and durable as we would liek to think. I am reminded of an old thread on a forum, either cast bullets or thefiringline. A guy had issues with a jframe in 357 magnum. He ended up being told by sw customer support that
The jframe in 357 magnum is only expected to last 3,000 rounds of 357 magnum ammunition, OR 5,000 rounds of 38 special / +p before the frame has stretched to the point the gun cannot be repaired. Bear in mind this is on a gun from a company with a blanket warranty of "50 years, or 50,000 rounds at 1,000 rounds per year"

Thanks Cliff

 

[murphydog]

Opinions expressed and noted. Thread closed.