38 special Buff Bore For selfdefense?

I carry the load referenced in the OP in my steel frame j-frame S&Ws. Fired from a Model 60 or a Model 36, the load, to me at least, isn't nearly as punishing as a full-house .357 in a 2.5 inch Model 19. The load shoots to point of aim at 10-12 feet from my 2" and 3" j-frames. Both published velocities from BB and from a couple of other independent sources that I trust puts velocity at just over 1000 fps from the 2" guns, and 1100 fps from the 3" guns. To me, that load makes .38 special a very viable self defense load. Game changer, in other words.
 
Here are the results I got firing into shredded rubber mulch...yeah, I know it's not ballistics gel, but I can cheaply compare bullets...and re-melt the lead for my own cast bullets.

May22011carddump-164.jpg


I have switched to the Federal 140 grain Barnes out of my .357 snub. Here is the video of me testing two .380 rounds, and since I had enough of a block of gel...I tested the Barnes in a 357 snub...penetrated all 17" of gel, AND 1" of bone, exploding the bone throughout the wound channel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l6vrb4Z-Lk
 
I personally would find that BB round to be a bit "kickish" through an lightweight for my liking.

I am not a fan of 158g bullets in a 38 snub - they need more pressure, or at least more barrel to get moving fast enough.

My choice would be (and is) Speer's 135g GDHP SB (short barrel). Potent round, and low flash.
 
has there been any real improvement over the Remington 158gr. LHP +p? all the ballistic test data seems to show that different loads do the same thing.

what is doing this same job for less money? nothing that I see.

what is doing the same job with less recoil? nothing that I see.

the Remington "FBI" load just plain works even in snubbies.

I do not work for Remington.
 
well the worry is not about overpenetration at all. its about sufficient penetration of a projectile when it expands. Some loads perform better then others when fully expanded.
 
I like the heavy stuff. Especially in snubbies. 158gr - you pick the manufacturer. Don't forget about Double Tap Ammo. Their ammo is just as good, if not better than Buffalo Bore, IMO.
 
For their price, you would think that they would be gold-plated!

For those that choose the old school 'FBI Load', i.e., 158 grain LSWC-HP, whether by Remington, Winchester, or Federal, that load has been a workhorse, ever since it's inception, and has worked in snubnose, and standard service revolvers. However, it IS a PLUS-P load.

There are those of us, who choose NOT to shoot anything PLUS-P, because it has worked for so long, before the idea of PLUS-P ammunition was around.

The loads that are chosen are:

1. A standard 148-grain full, either DEWC or HBHC wadcutter. Plainclothes policemen carried these in their duty snubs since the 1950's. The federal Civil Defense program, issued S and W Model 15's loaded with these. There is no hollow point in the design, therefore, there is no need to accelerate the bullet to a point where it would mechanically 'fail' on impact. The bullet is at maximum width, even when at rest inside the shell casing. Unlike a round nose bullet, it does NOT 'push' material out of the way, as it passes through, but acts as a 'cookie cutter' would, instead. The recoil is the least of any load shot in a .38 Special revolver, allowing quick return on target for a second shot. Muzzle flash is quite less, as is the noise volume. They are accurate to a distance of 50 yards, and still employed in major competitions today.

2. A standard non-hollow point 158-grain semi wadcutter. They have a truncated nose, which gives a smaller forward meplate (same velocity, more force, on a smaller impact point), and also a shoulder, as the full wadcutter is designed to have. A little more in the same terminal mechanics as the wadcutter, and a little more weight and accuracy. Same low flash, lower noise, lower recoil.

It is my understanding, that the whole hollow point business, is somethiing that you 'have to vote on it first, then see if they work as advertised'.

With either a full wadcutter, or a semi wadcutter, they work as they are designed, without having to 'structurally fail' to 'work'.

Lastly, for those that cannot handle the recoil produced by PLUS-P ammunition, or a physical condition, that would not be conducive to such an explosive load, the wadcutter and semi wadcutter loads are the best choice.
 
I like the heavy stuff. Especially in snubbies. 158gr - you pick the manufacturer. Don't forget about Double Tap Ammo. Their ammo is just as good, if not better than Buffalo Bore, IMO.

Have to disagree with you. I've chronographed both brands. Buffalo Bore always comes very close to or exceeds their published velocities. Double Tap has always fallen short of what they claim, and that includes their +P 158g SWC-HP in 38 Special.

Dave
 
robert1811 said:
Who here (if anyone) carries Buffalo bores 158 grain heavy load. The one I'm looking at is.....

Heavy .38 Special +P Ammo - 158 gr. L.S.W.C.H.P. --G.C. (1,000fps/M.E. 351 ft.lbs.)

I was wondering if the 38 could move fast enough to merit going with a HP. Or should you just stick with a simple wad cutter and add some +P to it? Is anyone afraid of a 38 really over penetrating?

I also wanted to know if anyone has any experience with the recoil of shooting this bad boy out of a 642 or some comparable Airweight snub.

Please let me know what you think. What your experience is and what you like to load.
That load is WAY TOO POWERFUL to shoot in Airweight®/ULTRA-LITE® guns! It is best utilized in 4" barrel, steel frame, 38 Special or 357 Magnum revolver. A far better choice for your Airweight® Mdl 642 is the Buffalo Bore® 38 Special Standard Pressure 158gr LSWCHCGC. It was specifically developed for lightweight 38 Special snubbies. It has all the velocity & knockdown power of the famous Remington® 158gr LSWCHP +P FBI load(#R38S12) w/o the excessive recoil & muzzleblast. I use this load in my snubbies and it is highly accurate.
 
Last edited:
I was looking into the Buffalo Bore last month and bumped into the Double Tap. It sounded quite a bit better. Then I started reading multiple reports of it recording much lower velocities than advertised, whereas the Buffalo Bore gave the advertised velocities.
 
Back
Top