Question on factory 38 Special ballistics..

A

aspen1964

New member
...decades ago, the standard load for ammunition companies gave about 850 fps and 266 Ft lbs at the muzzle...now the standard has been around 775 fps and a little over 200 ft lbs..when did the ammo companies load a more anemic 'standard'??..the old-timers might know this..?
 
my research...

BRAND Feet per Sec. Ft. Lbs.
Remington 950 220
S&B LRN 997 349
S&B FMJ 889 278
CCI Blazers LRN 755 200
CCI Blazers +P JHP 940 245
Federal Premium 1000 245
Fed Hydro-Shok 950 255
Winchester USA 845 238
CorBon +P 1250 382

There is a smattering of some basic rounds, most are pretty decent.
When looking them up, it seemed that mostly wadcutters and cowboy rounds were in the slower 750-800 fps range. Anyway, gives ammo manufacturers the opportunity to sell you a +P round at an additional expense.
 
when did the ammo companies load a more anemic 'standard'??..the old-timers might know this..?
Click to expand...
+1 to what Majic posted as it goes hand in hand with what happened.

Ammo companies used to be as notorious for listing inflated velocity figures as car companies were for inflated milage figures.

You'll note that the 775 fps is probably listed in conjunction with a 4 inch vented test barrel and it's based on an aggregate/average number of rounds. In days of yeasteryear, the ammo companies would use a 6 inch or an 8 inch unvented test barrel and list the highest velocity the test rounds would achieve, not an average.

According to my own figures, each 1 inch of barrel length adds or subtracts about 25 fps - in most handguns. The oft mentioned 50 fps per inch rule is far too generous for a typical pistol. It's fine for a carbine or rifle, but 25 fps per inch is more fitting - IMHO. Add that to the typical velocity spread (about 10%) of a 10 shot string - and Voila! that 775 fps climbs right back up to 850fps.

The other major factor to consider is the cost of the testing equipment & the easy availability to "spread the word". 20/30 years ago, a Chrongraph was a major investment. (To say nothing at all about how much better and more accurate the ones of today are!)

(FWIW - I have some old gun mags from decades ago down in the basement. Circa '70's a set of "Sky Screens" ran close to $995. In 2005 terms, that's close to $10K give or take.)

Even if you could afford one and you could debunk the claims,,,who'ya gonna tell? Outside of a few friends/word of mouth there wasn't any such thing as the internet - forums/blogs/whatever, to let everyone know the figures were wrong. This isn't exactly the type of thing the local newspaper was going to print in it's letter's to the Editor. None of the gun magazines would touch it either since the ammo mfg's via their ads, supplied major bucks to them.

Nowadys, you can pick up a used chrono for $50, runs some rounds across it's screens from your 4" revlover, and post the results on the web for thousands to see.


There's little mystery here at all. The figures listed today are simply more honest than many of the figures listed from years ago.

'course I guess I could always take the easy/popular stance and blame it all on the lawyer's huh? No doubt someone's sure to do that....
 
..I don't buy some of the answers here, from a 1958 Sports Afield Gun Annual...a standard 38 Special is listed 158 gr. at 870 fps and 266 ft lbs....from a 6" barrel....a test made by Remington in 1951, here are the results with different barrel lengths...6"...870 fps, 5"...860 fps, 4'...845 fps, and 2"...775 fps...I have numerous brands of old ammo from the 50s and 60s...the stated velocity and energy on the back of the box verifies this...it is not because readings are that much better today...other cartridge loads are the same then as today....somewhere(maybe when the +p thing was started)standard factory loads for the 38 were lessened somewhat...the answer of why is still a puzzle to me...
 
*shrug*
Suit yourself.
Like I said earlier - back in the 50's and 60's -ya know before there was such a thing as "Truth in advertising" - mfg's {{{gasp!!!}}} lied about things.

Pretty much they prinited exactly whatever they wanted to print.

Anyhow - whatta I know anyway. I only grew up in that era and saw the stuff change first hand.........

Good luck in your quest.
 
Aspen, Hal is right.

Plus they have to worry about things that go bang.

Here is an alternative get a Chrono. Use a good strong 357 hand gun and shoot loads of 38, based on what the books say today.

Step up the loads a little until you see some signs of pressure, flat primers etc. and check the chrono.

I have the new Lyman book and they speak directly to this issue. Some times pressures get higher but the vel does not. Funny but true. Everything has to be in unison. Short barrel you are only going to blow up the gun before you get enough pressure to make a difference. To much blowing out the front end.

Powders and length of barrel, speed of detonation some powders are slow burners some are fast. The 38 revolver lots of loss with the way the gun is made and the length of barrel...If you look at the 9mm in comparison similar but one is an auto and utilizes the power more proficiently. Plus the grain of bullet. Experiment and you can come up with a pretty good load.

Harley
 
..I don't buy some of the answers here, from a 1958 Sports Afield Gun Annual...a standard 38 Special is listed 158 gr. at 870 fps and 266 ft lbs....from a 6" barrel....
Click to expand...
Like I said what kind of 6" barrel? Was it a barrel of a revolver and what make? A tighter bore and lower B/C gap will give higher results. Was it a vented test barrel to simulate a revolver, but they still give higher numbers than a true revolver? Or was it an unvented pressure barrel which acts like a semi-auto or a rifle.
Just saying 6 inch barrel still leaves a lot of options open to get the highest numbers for advertising.
New reloaders always question why they can't get the numbers published in the manuals. Then they learn to read what test vehicle was used and start to understand those numbers only apply to that barrel which was used and represent only an approximation of what you might obtain. There are to many variables to consider the numbers cast in stone.
 
Last edited:
..my gripe about the explanation of the padding of numbers is that many other cartridges listed at that time still have the same vel. and energy listed in today's factory loads....a Remington 30-30 170 gr. soft point in 1958 is still about the same for velocity and energy for a Rem. 170 gr 30-30 soft point in 2005...

here are the numbers from several mid to late 60s factory loaded ammo boxes...Western 45 auto 230 gr FMC...muzzle 850 fps energy 369 ft lbs
Western 45 colt 255 gr Lubaloy 860 fps 410 ft lbs...Winchester 38 special 158 gr lead...855 fps 255 ft lbs....all 3 boxes have the child warning label on them...

..very curious.....
 
here are the numbers from several mid to late 60s factory loaded ammo boxes...
Click to expand...
aspen my friend I understand what you're saying...
You seem to be missing completly the point I'm trying to get across..
The info on those boxes stands a very good chance of being anything from a mild exageration to an outright lie.
In short - you can't rely on it as "fact".

Earlier I referred to vehicle milage and how the city/hiway figures were played with. The infamomous catch phrase "YMMV" - "your milage may vary" comes directly from that practice. With a little bit of effort I could probably track down a window sticker from a 70's "Gas guzzler" with some outrageous milage claim on it.
That gas guzzler never got anything near what the wiondow stiker said it would either. - just like some of that ammunition you mention is likly to perform to claimed velocities in an actual gun.

Bit of non published trivia (take it 100% FWIW - it was my observation at the time).
IMNSHO - the point where the Japanese car makers started to kick Detroit's butt was when the Japanese published more realistic milage figures on their window stickers. People like myself noticed things like that while we sat in gas lines waiting to pump our $2.00 per stop "ration". My window sticker said my car would get 15 mpg. - In reality it got about 10. Meanwhile, the guy in the Honda's said his would get 22,,,,and it actually got 24. <-- THAT's when people started to notice the curious - rust prone - but 110% utterly reliable Japanese cars.

I mention this because that's the same tact that Cor Bon used (uses). Cor Bon put's velocity figures on their boxes also. Where they broke with tradition was they were one of the first to understate the actual velocity. In a very short period of time, Cor Bon got the reputation of being a round that "gave you more for your money" ie. a "something for nothing" feeling.
It's a proud tradition with Cor Bon now. (check out their FAQ's). If you buy a box of their ammo, then you will probably get a slightly higher velocity firing it out of your pistol than what the figure on the box says.

RE: Rifle ammunition. Sorry, I honestly don't know why the mfg's didn't do the same thing with it as they did with handgun ammunition. For all I know, they may very well have done it, and the 2 loads you listed are the exceptions. I never had (and still don't) have any interest in rifles at all. - beyond a fondness for lever actions that is.
(FWIW - I just looked it up - in 7 years and inside of >5300 posts I only have 89 in the "Art of the Rifle" - and those 89 deal with either a lever action, a .22 or a pellet rifle for all but a few.)
Your initial post asked about the .38spl and you requested input from an old timer - I've pumped countless rounds of .38spl downrange,,,and I'm kinda an old timer (54 in Feb and been shooting since I was 20).
 
Hal---Psych 101 is a real good supplemental for Binary

My wifes computer just went down and can't get up. Not a good time for it to go on vacation.

Aspen, several have explained very well the problem. Now go out and do your
own research and you will be amazed at what you find.

Many variables, each and every gun will be different, each and every shot will be different. They take 10 rounds shot under ideal conditions add up the total and then divide and come up with the velocity and pressure. Read some handloading books and get into the action. I recommend Lyman # 48, good one for reloading and making your own castings etc. I actually have about 10
reloading books, because I am 64 and have been shooting 38's since 1965, before that it was 45's (service).

Harley
 
Hal spoke the truth. This question comes up a few times a year on this forum and some others. Basically it's old data based on 6" non-vented barrels versus current data based on 4" vented barrels. I'll go out on a limb and state that the black powder loaded 38 special of 1899 and the 2005 non+P loads are ballistically the same. I speaking of 158 grain RN ammo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top