.38 Super a choice for self-defense?
- Thread starter gmarr
- Start date
RJM52,
Referring to post # _.
Sheldon and the pages of from here..."The 38 Super was not Created in 1929" are the best sources. Where I deviate from them I'm likely wrong. Seems I rounded 1260 fps up to 1300 in my memory.
In his book "Colt's .38 Automatic Pistols", Doug Sheldon says the following in "A Note on Ammunition":
"...When first introduced it was loaded to propel the bullet at the unheard of velocity of 1260 feet per second, a tremendous increase over existing revolver calibers loaded with black powder."
This was with a 130 gr. bullet from a 6" barrel.
"Colt's experienced problems with these high velocities and gradually over the years reduced the load requirements for cartridge manufacturers down to 1040 fps. The introduction of the 38 Super model chambering the exact same size cartridge allowed once again for increased loads up to 1300 fps."
The 1300 fps from the 1911 with it's 5" barrel. I emphasized the words here "once again" as Sheldon means they "once again" brought the load up to exceed 1200-1300 fps territory.
There are anomalies as have been mentioned though, in what the 38 acp was loaded to.
Thompson and LaGarde fired the 38 acp from a 1902 Military model (6" barrel) in their famous tests of 1904. They recorded, at the muzzle, 1107 fps with a 130 gr. UMC made jacketed bullet and 1048 with a lead 120 gr. bullet.
See here:
http://unblinkingeye.com/Guns/TLGR/TLGR2/tlgr2.html
The figures they give are for the lower loadings of the round.
Julian Hatcher in his 1935 book "Textbook of Pistols and Revolvers" give the 38 acp 1200 fps from a 5" barrel. (here maybe we see the difference between a 6" and 5" barrel, could be with some guns and ammo combinations that an extra 60 fps could be had.)
W.H.B. Smith in his 1948 "Book of Pistols and Revolvers" gives the 38acp 1300 fps from a 1911 and lists that as a high powered load not suitable in the older guns.
So there is some variation. This could be that not all the loads for the 38 acp were the same from different manufacturers. Could also be different loads for different tasks. If we read that the original load produced 1260 fps from a 6" barrel then why didn't Thompson and LaGarde try that out? Instead they used a round 153 fps less than the 1260 figure?
In a 1928 ad for the Colt Super 38 (1911 with a 5" barrel) gives the velocity as 1190 fps with a 130 gr. bullet. Close to 1200 fps. Add an inch to the barrel and we maybe get close to 1260.
A lot of manuals and advertisements don't always present precisely accurate info.
38Super .net notes that...
I note that the manuals that Colt sent out with their 1911s chambered in 38 Super list the round as the "38 acp". I have a manual from the 1980s that does so.
I think it's clear that the downloading of the 38acp did occur before the Super 38 model appeared. It was in deference to the weaknesses of the Model 1902 and the others. It's also clear, I believe, that there was more than one load for the 38 acp being produced. There is still some confusion.
that's more than I intended to say.
tipoc
Referring to post # _.
Sheldon and the pages of from here..."The 38 Super was not Created in 1929" are the best sources. Where I deviate from them I'm likely wrong. Seems I rounded 1260 fps up to 1300 in my memory.
In his book "Colt's .38 Automatic Pistols", Doug Sheldon says the following in "A Note on Ammunition":
"...When first introduced it was loaded to propel the bullet at the unheard of velocity of 1260 feet per second, a tremendous increase over existing revolver calibers loaded with black powder."
This was with a 130 gr. bullet from a 6" barrel.
"Colt's experienced problems with these high velocities and gradually over the years reduced the load requirements for cartridge manufacturers down to 1040 fps. The introduction of the 38 Super model chambering the exact same size cartridge allowed once again for increased loads up to 1300 fps."
The 1300 fps from the 1911 with it's 5" barrel. I emphasized the words here "once again" as Sheldon means they "once again" brought the load up to exceed 1200-1300 fps territory.
There are anomalies as have been mentioned though, in what the 38 acp was loaded to.
Thompson and LaGarde fired the 38 acp from a 1902 Military model (6" barrel) in their famous tests of 1904. They recorded, at the muzzle, 1107 fps with a 130 gr. UMC made jacketed bullet and 1048 with a lead 120 gr. bullet.
See here:
http://unblinkingeye.com/Guns/TLGR/TLGR2/tlgr2.html
The figures they give are for the lower loadings of the round.
Julian Hatcher in his 1935 book "Textbook of Pistols and Revolvers" give the 38 acp 1200 fps from a 5" barrel. (here maybe we see the difference between a 6" and 5" barrel, could be with some guns and ammo combinations that an extra 60 fps could be had.)
W.H.B. Smith in his 1948 "Book of Pistols and Revolvers" gives the 38acp 1300 fps from a 1911 and lists that as a high powered load not suitable in the older guns.
So there is some variation. This could be that not all the loads for the 38 acp were the same from different manufacturers. Could also be different loads for different tasks. If we read that the original load produced 1260 fps from a 6" barrel then why didn't Thompson and LaGarde try that out? Instead they used a round 153 fps less than the 1260 figure?
In a 1928 ad for the Colt Super 38 (1911 with a 5" barrel) gives the velocity as 1190 fps with a 130 gr. bullet. Close to 1200 fps. Add an inch to the barrel and we maybe get close to 1260.
A lot of manuals and advertisements don't always present precisely accurate info.
38Super .net notes that...
I note that the manuals that Colt sent out with their 1911s chambered in 38 Super list the round as the "38 acp". I have a manual from the 1980s that does so.
I think it's clear that the downloading of the 38acp did occur before the Super 38 model appeared. It was in deference to the weaknesses of the Model 1902 and the others. It's also clear, I believe, that there was more than one load for the 38 acp being produced. There is still some confusion.
that's more than I intended to say.
tipoc
OldMarksman
Staff
Very interesting.
How many of you remember when .38 Automatic and .38 Super Automatic cartridges appeared next to each other on store shelves?
How many of you remember when .38 Automatic and .38 Super Automatic cartridges appeared next to each other on store shelves?
g.willikers
New member
^^^
Neither one was ever very easy to find in our neck of the woods.
They were mostly a reloader's caliber.
One fellow who didn't reload gave up and made his .38 super into a 9mm.
Neither one was ever very easy to find in our neck of the woods.
They were mostly a reloader's caliber.
One fellow who didn't reload gave up and made his .38 super into a 9mm.
Is it a good choice for SD use...yeah it'll work providing you can find the ammunition for it in tough times, or can reload for it as I do for my two .38 Supers. Ammunition is expensive compared to most any other auto caliber, and it's been down loaded over the intervening years to 9mm levels. The original 130 gr FMJ at 1300 fps load is long gone.
Were I you, and had a choice, I'd opt for something a little more common: 9mm if you're recoil sensitive, .40 or .45 if you are able to handle those calibers...you'll be better served with far greater choices in gun frames, and SD loads in a variety of bullet weights. HTH's and before the flaming begins, YMMV, Rod
Were I you, and had a choice, I'd opt for something a little more common: 9mm if you're recoil sensitive, .40 or .45 if you are able to handle those calibers...you'll be better served with far greater choices in gun frames, and SD loads in a variety of bullet weights. HTH's and before the flaming begins, YMMV, Rod