practical purpose for .38 spl guns gone....

Nanuk 'N' frames can hold 8 rounds that's why.
Click to expand...

Well for those of us with decades of 6 shot revolvers it does not work. Same reason I dislike 7 shot revolvers. Besides nobody makes a good 7 or 8 shot speed loader and moon clips suck for the 357 mag. It also makes a physically larger revolver with little to gain. Besides I do not like N frames, the trigger reach does not work for me. I can shoot them, but the K/L frame fits ME better.
 
That is a subjective argument without a definition. Define what is "fine" and we can move on, otherwise it is useless pontification.
Click to expand...

I think you are left, at least in this portion of the discussion, the burden of providing the definition and you created the argument that the .38 was not fine for self defense and that the .357 was. If we are going to have an argument of definition at least.

Most of this thread is useless pontification anyways :) We are having a discussion for the sake of discussion. Has anyone changed their mind?
 
I think you are left, at least in this portion of the discussion, the burden of providing the definition and you created the argument that the .38 was not fine for self defense and that the .357 was. If we are going to have an argument of definition at least.
Click to expand...

I am not going to post an entire history for you benefit. The information is available.

The 38 Special was woefully inadequate for LE purposes from the very beginning. Where it really started to manifest itself was in the 1960's as officers switched from 5" and 6" revolvers to 4" and shorter revolvers. The 357 magnum suffered not from this velocity deficiency. It was not until the 1970's that mass produced HP ammo was widely available.

Departments that were using 38 Special +P ammo were generally having to get 5-6 hits on BG's to stop them. When compared to the 357 magnum they were requiring 1-2 hits to stop.

There are outliers in every caliber. To determine if a self defense round is "fine" how does it rank in its ability to "stop" an attack? We need a definition;

A “stop” is defined as: 1) one shot to anywhere on the torso, not counting head, neck or extremity shots; 2) where the subject stops shooting, if he was shooting, or stops striking blows, if that is what he was doing; and 3) runs no more than 10 feet, if he runs. This study only deals with what happens in the first few seconds after the shooting, and does not factor in the eventual lethality of the wound or total recovery from the wound.
Click to expand...

If a bullet/cartridge fails about 1/2 the time is it fine? My opinion, no. I have seen many people shot with both having been a big city cop for many years, and with the Border Patrol working the Mexican border for many more. My personal, anecdotal experience tells me the 357 magnum works consistently and the 38 Special does not.

I still use 38 Special for IDPA and practice, I may even get a lightweight J frame some day as a BUG. But I go into it with my eyes open and understand its limitations.

Carry what you want, use what you want. Just do not try to tell me that the 38 Special is equal to the 357 magnum, its not even close.

Has anyone changed their mind?
Click to expand...

I am not here to change anyone's mind.
 
When issue ammo was the old "Police Widowmaker" 158 lead round nose yep not an effective round.
Now there are a plethora of effective 38SPL rounds. Follow up shots are truer. 125 357MAG may be 90% one shot stoppers, well that's because very few folks handle recoil for a 2nd shot.
Not many folks have the genes like Jerry.
 
When issue ammo was the old "Police Widowmaker" 158 lead round nose yep not an effective round.
Now there are a plethora of effective 38SPL rounds.
Click to expand...

If you actually look into the numbers they are not much better. I saw lots of failed stops with 38+P HP's.

Follow up shots are truer.
Click to expand...

For you?

125 357MAG may be 90% one shot stoppers, well that's because very few folks handle recoil for a 2nd shot.
Click to expand...

I am not disputing that. Some can, some can't; I can so I do. My split times with magnums in my 3" model 13 are within .03 of my split times with target wadcutters in the same gun. I know because I shoot it in IDPA.

Not many folks have the genes like Jerry.
Click to expand...

A 357 magnum does not recoil that much, no need to be superman to shoot one fast and accurate. Thousands of cops did it for generations, some better that others. I carried a 357 on duty for 15 years and still do off duty at times.
 
I carried a 357 on duty for 15 years and still do off duty at times.
Click to expand...

I think we can agree that there is a pretty distinct difference between a 2lb+ full size duty gun and some of the sub 1lb snubbies out there.

I'd actually agree with the idea that in the full size guns "why not" is not a bad statement. But if people are willing to buy .38 special only guns at a profitable price point it seems like a good reason to make them.
 
I think we can agree that there is a pretty distinct difference between a 2lb+ full size duty gun and some of the sub 1lb snubbies out there.
Click to expand...

I had a 360PD. It was not the shooting that bothered me so much as the fact that it was coming apart in my hands. I sent it in 3 times for new frames before I sold it. I never claimed I was shooting magnums from an ScTi revolver in this thread, though I did. I do my shooting and carrying with steel magnums.
 
A 357 magnum does not recoil that much, no need to be superman to shoot one fast and accurate. Thousands of cops did it for generations, some better that others. I carried a 357 on duty for 15 years and still do off duty at times.
___
Click to expand...

I'm happy for you.
 
For the same reason that some folks buy their guns in .44 Special and not .44 Magnum.

Because the special does all they want in a gun. If they wanted a magnum, they would buy one. There is still a market for both buyers to choose from.

The .44 special was almost lost when the magnum came out. Demand fell off sharply. That apparently hasn't happened with the .38 special.

It looks like Kimber went with what you may be thinking; .357 only.

Anyone guess how many more pages are left in this question?
 
Well for those of us with decades of 6 shot revolvers it does not work. Same reason I dislike 7 shot revolvers.
Click to expand...
Exactly....

Shooting a 6 shot D/A revolver - properly - has become a lost art.
Glad to see there are others that can appreciate the beauty of watching an X disappear on command & at any distance.

The exact cadence I was taught for shooting D/A was/is:
- one potato
- two potato
- three potato
- four
- five potato
- six potato

- Get (shift gun to left hand - place fingers on cylinder - release latch with right thumb & kick open cylinder)
- Some (invert gun with muzzle to the sky - punch star extractor with left thumb)
- MORE - reload & close cylinder.

5 shot, 7 shot, 8 shot, 10 shot (.22) - just mess with my head because the indexing is all wrong.
 
It’s key Nd of like this....you can get a 357 and shoot 38’s out of it. That comes at a cost. The guns are slightly bigger and heavier. 2 enemies of ccw. If I were never gonna carry 357, I would buy the 38.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top