Informal Range Report, .38SPL 200g W-W Factory Load

L

LouisianaMan

New member
Thanks to a kind donation of 12 rounds, I was able to fire some factory-loaded Winchester-Western .38SPL ammo with a 200g LRN bullet earlier this week.

Temp 83 degrees; rounds loaded and fired w/o effort to seat powder against either bullet or primer.

1.Colt Detective Special, 2" bbl.
2. Velocity: Lo: 595.2 ; Hi 620.7; Avg 604.5; ES 25.52; SD 9.38.
3. POI at 15 yards: +4.5" ; L 1.25"

I also fired a single round through my Ruger 4" bbl. at 681.4fps; POI was + 2 1/8"

I'm saving a single round for this weekend, when I'll have the obligatory shootout with 6 milk jugs! I'm presuming it will penetrate less than the handloads I discuss below. . . .

OBSERVATIONS: Old threads on this and other forums indicate factory velocities for the old "Highway Patrol" loading were 770fps (prob. 6" bbl or test bbl.) Another source indicated a factory 200g round was rated at 730fps. An older Lyman manual gave reloading data that stated a "factory duplication" load gave 703fps. The ammo I tested seems most consistent with the last-named round, as my 4" bbl. clocked only 22fps slower, albeit with a single shot that is statistically inadequate. The 2" D.S. averaged almost exactly 100fps slower than this claimed factory duplication load, however, so that seems consistent for a snubbie.

Thanks to Superhouse 15 for his support of "scientific inquiry"! Special thanks also to Mike Irwin for researching his sources for me.

I have now loaded my own 200g LRN (358430) & LSWC-K (Mt. Baldy) bullets to 750fps from my 4" guns, and will see what the LRN gives me in the snubbies. Previous chrono work shows the LSWC-K at 718fps. Will also make some penetration tests with this "speedier" LRN, which I'll post after we can drink milk and shoot the jugs!

I recently shot a 200g LRN at 663fps from a Colt D.S. 2" bbl., and it penetrated 5 jugs (30" of water) at a range of 10 feet. After going through 3 jugs in a straight line, it deviated downward a bit into the 4th, then significantly into the 5th. It came out the back side of the 5th near the very bottom (i.e. total downward deviation about 4") and eventually scooted under the bottom of the 6th jug hard enough to crack it and cause it to leak out! The slug itself was under the 6th jug front edge. . .very clean indeed!

My previous tests with the LSWC-K at 718fps (2" snubbie): penetrated all 6 jugs and struck nose-first into a 2" x 12" placed behind the last jug, knocking a hole in the board up to the bullet shoulder, then falling out onto the ground while knocking down the 15" long board. Bullet path was arrow-straight, exiting through the tape on the back side of the sixth jug at same relative location as it struck the first jug. All caps remained intact. First two jugs failed at the circular "dimple" molded in the side; all others bulged the dimple outward without causing it to fail. After impact, the row of taped-together jugs toppled over and fell off the two 2"x4" boards I'd placed them upon.
 
Last edited:
Mike,
I know the feeling. . .I wind up emailing myself reminders from work to home, from home to work, etc. Something seems wrong with that! :eek:

Anyway, I'll be glad to get whatever you can send, whenever you can send it. I am awaiting a group mold (358430) from Lee, but nobody can tell when it might arrive.
 
Your tests duplicate what we did about 30+ yrs ago with the same round. There were many then who claimed the 200 gr in a 2" for backup was the best stopper. We barely got 600 fps and usually velocities were 550 or so.
That rd didn't earn the nickname "widow maker" for nothing. It wasn't a performer on the street.
 
The factory ammo in this weight range was woefully underloaded, and the round-nose configuration didn't make it a penetrator of hard objects.

FWIW, I've used less-than-max published load data (with 2400) of the time period to get 195-gr RNL bullets doing 855 fps from my Detective Special. That ought to be reasonably penetrative and perhaps make the best showing if I were to use my snubs on hikes up Bear Canyon behind the house.
 
Interesting, this is opposite...

what the British forces considered when they developed the .38/200 round for WWII.

Its the ols S&W .38(short round) loded with a 200gr and same(?) velocity, they thought it a good manstopper.
 
Unfortunately for the British, the .380/200 round didn't really live up to expectations, especially after they changed the bullet configuration, making it lighter by about 20 grains, adding a full metal jacket, and making the round nose longer with a nose profile.
 
From what I've read, the British Army's original bullet configuration was flat-nosed and made of very soft lead. I'll dig around in my military small arms books to see if I have photo of the original ammo; Mike, have you run across a photo of that bullet?

I doubt whether any lead is soft enough to deform at 600fps, unless it hits bone. Anybody know how soft they must have cast it? Cast Performance makes a premium LFN (see http://www.castperformance.com/Detail.bok?no=7), but it's hardcast for hunting purposes.

I should be able to shoot milk jugs tomorrow with my last remaining factory round, so "stay tuned"!
 
The original British loading for the .38/200 cartridge was a 200grn JSP at about the same 600-650fps as the old 262grn .455 Webley Mk. II round. Through their testing, the Brits decided that this loading was roughly an equivalent stopper to the old .455 round which had performed satisfactoraly (even at 650fps, the all lead .455 bullets routinely deformed). The jacketed softpoint ran afoul of the Hauge Convention, however, and was thusly changed to a 178grn FMJ running in the mid-700fps range. The FMJ loading was the only one to see extensive service and gave less than exciting performance.
 
Ditto to what DonP said. Also I recall what Charlie Askins wrote about a belly gun-you put it against your opponent's belly and pull the trigger. AFAIK the FBI's findings-"10 feet, poor light, 2.7 rounds" still hold.
McBride, in his book "A Rifleman went to War said the Germans' 9MM Lugers "lacked wallop"
so I suppose this is another argument in favor of the "Big Bore" school ala Jeff Cooper.
 
Back in about 1969 or 70 I was at a firing range near Tampa (Oldsmar area?) and a Tampa cop and I were done with targets for the day and were talking guns and ammo. He pulled out this BIG lead round, and said "This is what we use of the street. This is the one you want when you've got to stop somebody, believe me." It was a 38 Special 200 grain round nose. They didn't have the +P designation back in those days but I imagine it was what we today would call a +P round. He said he'd dropped one BG himself with one and knew several other officers who'd had similar success. I assume he'd bagged his BG with the 4" Smith he was carrying. I believed this guy. I pegged him as a WWII or Korean vet who'd been with the Tampa PD for quite a while. No BS about him at all. But styles change. A couple of years later I bought a snub nose Charter Arms Undercover 38 Special. I tried to find a box of 200 grain bullets like that guy'd had and they were nowhere to be found. All I could find were 158 grains or lighter. It wasn't many years after that, that the "magic 9's" came in vogue and light fast hps became all the rage, even for 38 Specials. But I think that Tampa cop who'd "been there and done that" knew exactly what he was talking about. I always thought that 200 grain bullet he was using would have made a fine snub-nose round. Six gallon jugs of water is pretty good penetration from a 2" barrel, I'd say.
 
Thanks for the anecdotes & other feedback. One of the things I find intriguing about the .38SPL/200g combo is its history in our country and also its British "cousin," the .380/200. I taught history for 6 years at West Point, and always enjoy the historical perspectives on firearms & ammo. If anyone knows on-line sources showing the Brit tests of the 1920s, please let me know.

It's also interesting that their eventual modification of that round (wt. & bullet config) reduced its perceived effectiveness drastically. Reminds me of the US Ordnance foul-up when they changed the powder on the 5.56mm ammo in the 1960s (from ball to flake, I think. . .) & created a host of unintended consequences. (And yes, I was an Ordnance Ammo officer for 24 years, albeit in a later era! Since my training was in conventional ammo but my experience in nuclear ammo. . .well, let's just say I don't have any 8" or 155mm nuclear-capable SD/HD ammo at home!)

Another intriguing point is the apparent existence of several different power levels in the 200g load, to include the factory load I chrono'ed above & the stronger "Highway Patrol" loading which claimed about 770fps or so. The Highway Patrol load should give even more penetration than the factory load I tested, and its very blunt, slightly rounded bullet profile is probably a somewhat more effective wounding agent than the sharper LRN configurations, albeit not as efficient as the LSWC-K.

Since three of my five .38SPL-capable revolvers are Colts/clones, I feel good about loading them with the standard-pressure LSWC-K & practicing with the LRNs. For simplicity's sake, I load the same rounds in my Rugers, too, and don't feel poorly-armed at 750fps 4" and about 720fps snubbies. . . .Controllable, no flash, lots of penetration. Wouldn't hesitate to shoot through a sofa or leather chair if I had to, and don't need to penetrate cars. Not what I'd choose in an apartment complex, but great for my rural home I think.

As promised, I plan to shoot milk jugs tomorrow with my last factory round. Eventually, I'll post penetration test results for (1) factory load with snubbie; (2) LRN handload with snubbie & 4"; and (3) LSWC-K handload with snubbie & 4". Maybe it's time for me to buy a bunch of gallon jugs of *water* in the name of science! Either that or buy my own dairy herd. . . .
 
I vaguely remember a magazine article which was about an informal test of several handgun rounds, one of which was a 200gr .38 special. Their main target was an automobile. I remember that the 200gr bullet would not penetrate the windshield and barely penetrate the door panel metal.

I have seen an autopsy photo of a woman who had been killed with a 200gr .38 spl bullet. The bullet entered her left arm penetrated it and entered her torso, traversed the torso, puncturing both lungs and the heart; and came to rest under the skin of the torso on the right side.

It seems this bullet has trouble penetrating hard stuff, but plows through soft stuff.
 
I happen to have a small stash of .38/200 ordnance ball ammo manufactured by FN Herstal. I havent done any tests with them though.



Pictured with Winchester 146gr .38S&W ammo

imgp3913.jpg
 
Last edited:
I remember reading magazine articles years ago about the poor performance of 38's, including reports that they "wouldn't penetrate a car's windshield". Those articles were somewhat misleading though because most people who didn't know much about guns thought they referred to 38 Special ammo, when in fact, they almost always referred to 38 S&W's (or some other weak sister from the 38 clan). A 38 S&W round was a considerably less powerful round than a 38 Special was, so to try to compensate for it's low power, the 38 S&W cartridge was often loaded with a 200 grain bullet that acheived very low velocity. Those 200 grain bullets from that gun may not have penetrated a car's windshield., I don't know, I never owned one. But I did own a 38 Special, and I always doubted those "experts" who claimed that 38 Special ammo "won't penetrate a car's windshield". So, when my old 1961 Dodge Lancer finally breathed its last breath in 1974, I sold it for junk, but not before I put it out of it's misery by blasting a cylinder full of 38 Specials into its windshield from about 10 feet away using my little Charter Arms Undercover model 38 Special with it's tiny 1 7/8 inch barrel. I used 158 grain factory ammo to do it, which may or may not have been loaded to todays 38 Special +P specs, I don't remember now. But I do remember that every shot penetrated the windshield and front seat. And that was back in the day when windshields were nearly twice as thick as they are today. I looked all over Tampa (I lived outside Tampa in Hillsborough County back then) , but never found any factory 200 grain ammo to shoot in that gun, and I wasn't a handloader. But I'd be very surprised if a 200 grain bullet loaded to 38 Special +P specs wouldn't blow a hole right through a modern-day windshield with no problem..
 
The old W-W and Remington 200 gr loading weren't anywhere near +P loadings. The 158 gr LRN, while definitely noted for lackluster performance, was much better than the old 200 gr loadings. They were slower than a 148 gr full WC target load and performed much worse.
 
Penetration Test Update, 200g load

Shot it out yesterday with the wily milk jugs, using the W-W factory 200g load from my 2" Colt D.S., range 10 feet. This load chrono'ed recently at 605fps.

RESULTS:

1. Penetrated 5 jugs through-and-through. Two pop-off caps launched, all screw-ons remained intact, #2 jug split along the handle seam.
2. Missed #6, left classic keyholing dent 1/16 to 1/8 inch deep in backstop behind #6 (a piece of 2X12), caromed off and was not found.
3. Bullet tracked straight through jugs 1 and 2, and entering #3; deviated slightly right in exiting #3 and entering #4; deviated significantly thru #4; entered #5 near right edge and exited in right rear corner, thus missing #6. Total deviation about 4-5 inches rightward.

ANALYSIS:
1. Penetration and deviation very similar to handloaded 200g LRN chrono'ed at 663 fps.
2. Note that 200g LSWC-K at 718fps penetrated all 6 jugs arrow-straight, then penetrated 2x12 backstop to the shoulder, knocking down backstop & falling out. (This is my "service load" & it clocks just over 750fps from 4" guns.)

UPCOMING: will test 750fps LRN and LSWC-K loads from 4" guns. DG45, you make me wish I had a ready supply of windshields to play with! :-)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top