On the box question Federal .38 ammo?

Z

ZVP

New member
On my newest box of Federal .38 Range and target bullets it clearly states "Not for Police use"
These rounds are loaded with a 130 gr fully jacketed bullet rated at 810fps muzzle velocity.
Why do you suprose such a statement needs to be posted on the box?
Interesting, eh?
Thanks,
Dave
 
It's American Eagle target and practice ammunition and obviously not intended or appropriate for use as police on duty defensive ammunition. Perhaps the metal jacket rather than target lead would suggest otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your answer.
I don't know much about bullet types, I thought Police had to use jacketed ammo like the military.
Thanks you taught me something I did not understand. Learning more every day!
Dave
 
I believe that he is right. A 130 grain jacketed round at 800 fps is barely more powerful than the old .38 long colt, and that was as retired fifty years ago. Nobody should carry that when there is a danger of a gun fight.
 
briandg said:
A 130 grain jacketed round at 800 fps is barely more powerful than the old .38 long colt, and that was as retired fifty years ago. Nobody should carry that when there is a danger of a gun fight.
Click to expand...
Which is ironic when one considers that the USAF issued this very load to sentries at their bases for several decades. :rolleyes:

The load was deliberately underpowered to prevent it from blowing up the early USAF aluminum alloy frame Aircrewman revolvers, which reportedly tended to blow up anyway and hence were removed from service, but the load continued to be issued to sentries.
 
That is rather odd. You say it's new ammunition?

I was under the impression that no police agency uses .38 special revolvers anymore, and haven't for years.
 
^^^^ Considering that there are thousands of LE agencies in the United States, I'm certain there are holdouts, particularly when one considers that county sheriffs in many states are elected and can generally set their own policies on matters such as sidearms.

Additionally, AFAIK some types of security guards in certain jurisdictions are still required to carry revolvers only.
 
I believe that the 130 grain in .38 rounds is going to be a relatively new, and growing market. The default has always been 158 grains, but by reducing the bullet by 28 grains the maker could save millions annually. That ammo isn't selling for less than the 158 loads.

There are a lot of reasons why many people will prefer the 130s, and the makers will love it. This is almost as good as selling 8 oz cans of coke.

I agree, there are a lot of people out there who are still using revolvers for policing duties, and many who use them for defense. This makes the second time I have heard about that warning recently, and I'm wondering if there is a story behind it. It obviously isn't a BAD round for police use, it's inadequate compared to other available rounds. My paranoid self is looking at this and seeing a conspiracy, the ammo makers are instructing people to not use the cheap stuff and buy the not cheap stuff. There are other perfectly reasonable explanations. There may have even been a legal issue involving a person using incompatible ammo for police service and winding up in trouble. Lots of possible reasons for the warning, but I believe that the only explanation for a 130 grain bullet in the first place is that it saves money, comparable to a 158

Re the afb, I remember that they caarried .38s and I believe that the army and other services carried 1911s. I'm not sure. It's hard to think of an explanation. The immediate thought was gee, we don't want big bullets around planes, but that didn't add up. an afb probably wouldn't have been a particularly unusual thing to police... Not back then, at least, not on us soil... I grew up near offut, and it's not at all like it was then.
 
A little more explanation...

ZVP said:
I thought Police had to use jacketed ammo like the military.
Click to expand...
U.S. military forces use jacketed bullets because they follow Declaration III of the Hague Convention of 1899.

Here's what Declaration actually says.
The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions.
Click to expand...
Non-jacketed bullets that do not "expand or flatten easily in the human body" are not specifically prohibited, but if the bullet is jacketed, the jacket must "entirely cover the core".

Technically, the Declaration only applies in a war between its signatories, which do not include the United States! The U.S. follows its provisions in what amounts to an informal effort to encourage signatories to also follow the rules when fighting against the U.S.

Police are NOT bound by Declaration III, and neither are military forces when fighting unlawful combatants.

Police MAY be bound by state or local laws and policies regarding expanding bullets, but such laws and policies are uncommon today due to a backlash against "kinder and gentler" police policies of the 1960s that were seen as needlessly handicapping police in the face of increasing crime in the 70s and 80s.

[EDIT TO ADD]
briandg said:
Re the afb, I remember that they caarried .38s and I believe that the army and other services carried 1911s. I'm not sure. It's hard to think of an explanation.
Click to expand...
The general explanation is that military regulations stringently prohibited carrying a M1911 "cocked and locked" and generally required personnel to carry in Condition III. However, it's very difficult to chamber a round in a M1911 while the other hand is restraining a leashed guard dog, so the USAF compromise solution was to issue revolvers.
 
Last edited:
btw, if it also has "not for ported barrels" that warning is because of the fact that it is a plated, rather than copper jacketed bullet. it's not going to function at 100% in a ported gun.

There are people who will be thinking that this is because of a big buy back or contract issue with the government, but that is almost certainly not the case. This is a walmart exclusive, I have heard, and it will be sold in millions of boxes, these aren't just overruns that have been rejected by the governemnt or whatever other suggestions. This is new production that was created for walmart. There is some simple reason for it, but I think it simply comes down to the fact that it's just not appropriate for LE use. It's a plated bullet and just that one simple thing makes it very different than fmj, and federal and the various other companies who are doing it will not want LE agencies using it for field use, and if they can avoid it, they don't want the agencies to buy this cheap stuff for the thousands of rounds of training ammo.

It also brings up the question, does a plated bullet bring any unusual maintenance or possible hazards that a jacketed one may not have?

So many possible things, but I have not found any answers.
 
briandg said:
...does a plated bullet bring any unusual maintenance or possible hazards that a jacketed one may not have?
Click to expand...
Plating tends to disintegrate at high velocities—generally >1,200 fps—which hampers accuracy and causes barrel fouling. Plating is less durable under rough handling and violent feeding such as in full-auto submachine guns. Plating may also be damaged by heavy case crimping, although this is less of a problem with auto pistol cartridges than revolver cartridges, which are generally crimped more heavily.

However, in low-velocity light-duty pistol applications, the coverage of the rear of the bullet reduces the shooter's exposure to lead fumes and also tends to keep the barrel cleaner, particularly in comparison to unjacketed lead. Lastly, they're less expensive than FMJ.

I handload plated bullets almost exclusively.
 
Last edited:
This is only conjecture on my part but the "not for police" use warning may be due to some manufacturing quality control step Federal uses for the ammunition they do endorse for police use.
 
"...had to use jacketed ammo like the military..." Cops used cast RN's long after the U.S. signed the assorted Hague conventions(there's one about adopting kids from other countries too.). U.S. signed and ratified the 1949 version of the Rules of Land Warfare in 1955. Signed the 1899 version in 1902. You can stay busy reading 'em all for months. Cops aren't bound by 'em anyway though.
A 130 gr fully jacketed bullet rated at 810fps muzzle velocity would very likely fail to penetrate a car windshield. That was one of the things cops complained about before they switched to .38 Special lead SWC's from RN's, long before they switched to pistols.
Kind of odd to see a 130 grain FMJ being sold as target ammo though. Usually 149 grain WC's.
"...some manufacturing quality control..." Anything printed on a box is more about marketing than QC.
 
Kind of odd to see a 130 grain FMJ being sold as target ammo though. Usually 149 grain WC's.
Click to expand...

"Target" means different things to different people.
To a serious target shooter sticking to tradition or entering the NRA revolver only Harry Reeves and Distinguished Revolver matches, the midrange wadcutter is mild and accurate.
To John Q. Public renting a lane for $10 and bragging about "one ragged hole at seven yards" the 130 gr jacketed (probably actually plated at that price) looks like real ammunition and is cheap.

"Not for police." I shot an IDPA BUG side match with .38 revolver and ammo included in the entry fee. The guns got hot and dirty and were spitting copper plating fragments all over the place. I would not want it for serious defense or duty even if it were not underpowered.
 
T. O'Heir said:
Kind of odd to see a 130 grain FMJ being sold as target ammo though. Usually 149 grain WC's... Anything printed on a box is more about marketing than QC.
Click to expand...
You kinda answered your own question there. ;)

To be more serious, most stores and ammo makers tend to broadly categorize handgun ammo into 2 classes: "Target / Range" and "Self Defense" (or "Defence" since you're Canadian ;)). The REAL target ammo that a serious Bullseye shooter would use is generally labeled "Premium Target" or something like that. Again, it's marketing.

The 130gr FMJ ~800 fps "Air Force load" is commonly sold at big-box sporting goods discounters as cheap range ammo. The USAF stopped using it decades ago but I assume that the manufacturers have continued to crank it out simply because it's remained popular, although yes, it is NOT serious Bullseye-type target-shooting ammo. It's just a cheap low-recoil load for informally blasting holes in paper. :)
 
I believe that old farts like some of us are have had our language stolen and redefined.

I never liked th a term "target practice," I'm not practicing. I'm target shooting. Do people go out and spend $200 a day to "golf practice?" Shooting is shooting.

But more to the point, target once meant something, and if it wasn't genuine target shooting it was generally called plinking. I guess with the loss of casual schooling venues we all have to use targets instead of coke cans now, and boy, what a shame. Shooting at a paper target as big as a book isn't the challenge that a can was.

Target grade ammo was, as said, wad cutters or .45softball, so forth, things tuned for accuracy, and now it's a catchall phrase for things without any other special purpose.

I just had a discussion regarding "blasting" ammo, my wrinkled and calcified brain can't wrap itself around some of today's ideas.
 
Yep, my first target was a tin can on a stick in my uncle's pasture, at age 7. Continued similar practices in sand pits for a long time. I think I was at least 40 before I paid someone to use a range.
 
I live in an old time mining region, and we had piles of crushed tailings that stood literally hundreds of feet tall. and a few hours trespassing on someone elses land shooting into his abandoned sand piles was the only shooting opportunity that a person had. Well, thirty years ago or so, that was stopped, and we have pretty much no open shooting opportunities in the entire town, and only recently had three ranges open up to the public. A free one 20 miles away, an hourly one outside of town, and a new pay range with an annual fee. I don't know how a person picks up a home gun and learns how to use it anymore. How many people are sitting with guns in their night stands who have never fired a single round through it, because they don't have a chat pile that they can shoot at?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top