What can and what can't a .38 special do?
- Thread starter kcub
- Start date
- Status
youngunz4life
New member
deputy you make some good points. Even an ER Doctor without much weapons knowledge knows and will confirm when asked that most victims of 44 wounds die on the table. Also, it is undeniable that bullet design makes a difference(hollowpoints as an example)
that being said, saying +P ammo is irrelevant or doesn't make a difference is in fact an incorrect statement. Sometimes depending on the particular situation maybe the difference is considered negligable, but not every time...you will wear out the weapon quicker, but as long as you are not firing that round all the time it can help in a HD/SD situation.
I use the +P hollowpoint old cia/fbi rounds for my 38derringer and do not plan on changing that based on your opinion. the round will eventually cause issues with my firearm if I shoot it a lot(which I don't), but of course it is always fire ready. At any rate, I feel more comfortable with this round as I usually have 357s(44mag rifle), and the 38 derringer saturday night special is my backup gun and NY reload
that being said, saying +P ammo is irrelevant or doesn't make a difference is in fact an incorrect statement. Sometimes depending on the particular situation maybe the difference is considered negligable, but not every time...you will wear out the weapon quicker, but as long as you are not firing that round all the time it can help in a HD/SD situation.
I use the +P hollowpoint old cia/fbi rounds for my 38derringer and do not plan on changing that based on your opinion. the round will eventually cause issues with my firearm if I shoot it a lot(which I don't), but of course it is always fire ready. At any rate, I feel more comfortable with this round as I usually have 357s(44mag rifle), and the 38 derringer saturday night special is my backup gun and NY reload
Spats McGee
Administrator
Deputy276 said:
I don't recall anyone claiming that the .38 Special was "the best round for personal defense." I believe the opening question was:
Clearly, Deputy276, you do not think that .38Spl falls within the description of "rounds sufficient for self-defense." Fair enough. I disagree. I will not claim that it is "the best" SD round. IMO, it is sufficient. It is capable of doing enough damage to stop an attacker, and controllable enough that I believe that I could reasonably expect to put any shots subsequent to the first one on target, if necessary.
If a cartridge is still in production, then it's not obsolete.
I think the .38 special is a perfectly adequate self-defense cartridge for a revolver. It isn't a big game cartridge to be sure but some would claim neither is a .357 magnum. Going on from there, some would say neither is a .44 magnum, now that larger cartridges are available for handguns but, again, some would say no handgun cartridge is adequate for large animals. But you are certainly more likely to be carrying a handgun around all the time instead of walking off and leaving it leaning against a tree fifty feet away while you're gathering an armload of wood.
Is it the best for self-defense? For a revolver, sometimes I think it is. I also think you're never poorly armed, given the basic limitations of a handgun to begin with, revolvers in particular.
Our expectations are not what they used to be.
I think the .38 special is a perfectly adequate self-defense cartridge for a revolver. It isn't a big game cartridge to be sure but some would claim neither is a .357 magnum. Going on from there, some would say neither is a .44 magnum, now that larger cartridges are available for handguns but, again, some would say no handgun cartridge is adequate for large animals. But you are certainly more likely to be carrying a handgun around all the time instead of walking off and leaving it leaning against a tree fifty feet away while you're gathering an armload of wood.
Is it the best for self-defense? For a revolver, sometimes I think it is. I also think you're never poorly armed, given the basic limitations of a handgun to begin with, revolvers in particular.
Our expectations are not what they used to be.
True, but I would consider some cartridges that are still in production to be obsolescent. In my mind, a cartridge is obsolete when neither guns nor ammunition are in production and obsolescent when ammunition is still produced, but guns are no longer available. Examples of obsolescent cartridges would include .32 Short Colt, .32 S&W, .38 S&W, .455 Webley, 7.62 Nagant, 8mm Gasser, and 7.63 Mauser. A cartridge can, of course be brought back from being obsolete or obsolescent if the production of guns and/or ammunition is resumed after a hiatus. Examples of such are many old west cartridges such as .44 Russian, .45 Schofield, .38-40, and .32-20 which have been revived due to interest in Cowboy Action Shooting.
Of course, .38 Special has never had a hiatus in production of guns or ammunition (the S&W Model 10 holds the title of longest continuous production handgun) so it is neither obsolete nor obsolescent.
"Why subject yourself to excessive recoil of +P and .357 Mag when you can get a .44 Special that is comfortable to shoot and more efffective?"
"The .44 magnum is basically a hunting caliber, although it will also chamber the .44 Special."
"As to +P and magnum loads...I wouldn't use a caliber if that's what's required to make them effective."
The whole point is with any caliber you need velocity to create expansion and to get penetration. At some point you run into overkill on the velocity, but no 38 Special +P or 44 Special +P is going to be overkill. They're also nowhere close to even light magnum loads in the same caliber. Modern firearms are perfectly capable of handling +P loads unless you shoot thousands and thousands of rounds in them.
The funny thing is even a +P 38 Special is still not a high pressure cartridge. It is only considered over pressure compared to a standard pressure 38 Special.
I still have a lot to learn about guns and ammo and some people have way more to learn than I do.
To the original point of this thread, the 38 Special can actually make a pretty good woods round. I don't get why most 38 Special defense loads with 125 grain bullets come up short of the 9mm in velocity, yet Buffalo Bore has a 158 grain hard cast load that gets anywhere from 1100-1250 fps in 3"-6" barrels.
http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=288
So why don't we get 125 grain 38 Special +P's in the 1200 fps range??? I realize Buffalo Bore loads their stuff to the max, but even with 20% less weight and the same velocity you get 125 grains at 1100+ fps that we don't see in self defense ammo.
The load you chose is a light .44Mag which has velocity that exceeds even a .44Special +P. It doesn't make sense for you to argue against the value of +P and more velocity in .38Spl and then reveal that you don't trust .44Spl enough to use it for home defense--that you feel have to use something with more velocity and pressure than the .44Spl to get the job done.
That's not relevant--your repeated claim has been that +P/additional velocity offers no benefit. If that's true, why aren't you using standard pressure .44Spl in your home defense gun instead of light .44Mag rounds? Clearly you must believe that the additional velocity/energy compared to the standard pressure .44Spl is buying you something or you wouldn't use it.
That's neither here nor there. They aren't trying to make authoritative statements about what's more effective or less effective with respect to terminal performance. It's reasonable to expect someone who's making such statements to have a handle on the most basic aspects of terminal performance and, conversely, it's reasonable to expect that someone who doesn't have a handle on those aspects isn't at all likely to be helpful when it comes to the more complex aspects of the topic.
You stated that those bullet designs made +P obsolete. The fact is that ALL of the bullet designs you listed are sold in +P loadings. Not only do those bullet designs NOT make +P obsolete, they are actually USED in +P ammunition.
The point isn't what you know about what's available, the point is that the evidence that you provided that supposedly proves that +P is obsolete actually proves that +P is alive and well and that the bullets that supposedly make it obsolete are actually considered, by the manufacturers/designers of the bullets, to be useful in +P loadings as evidenced by their decision to load and sell those bullets in +P loadings.
It's true that people who think a topic as complex as terminal ballistics can be boiled down to a few simple numbers will be disappointed. That's true whether a person puts their hope in energy, momentum OR diameter as the single parameter that tells the whole story.
However, it's also true that understanding the scientifically proven quantities relating to the science of motion and ballistics will provide valuable insight into the basics of terminal ballistics. Muzzle energy, velocity, and "other mathematical numbers" and quantities related to terminal ballistics and the science of projectile motion certainly don't tell the whole story, but they are a good place to START.
It's not a trick question at all, it's simply a question where insufficient information has been provided to give an accurate answer. The answer is that depending on a number of assumptions and other variables, such a weapon certainly has the potential to be "impressively lethal".
Saying a thing, even saying it repeatedly does not make it true.
You say that it is established, but you have not provided any evidence indicating that bullet design has superceded the need for +P velocities to achieve reliable expansion. In fact, as I've pointed out, the bullet designs you listed as supposedly making +P velocities unnecessary are provided loaded to +P velocities precisely because the designers/manufactures know that those velocities provide more reliable expansion and better penetration.
The most perfectly designed bullet can't do anything at all without the proper velocity, energy and momentum. The idea that you can put all your eggs in one basket simply isn't borne out by the facts. The most perfectly designed .380ACP bullet, for example, can't both expand and still pass the full FBI penetration testing because it doesn't have sufficient momentum and energy.
It takes a balance.
As I've said several times, I'm not a huge fan of +P ammunition, and although I haven't said it on this thread, I'm also a huge fan of reading manuals and abiding by them. However, neither of those facts is any evidence at all that +P or +P+ does nothing but "promote excess and premature wear on guns". If that were true, no one would make it or buy it.
People are willing to put up with the risk of excess wear precisely because extra velocity provides measurable improvement in performance--both in terms of penetration and expansion--assuming proper bullet design.
That's completely false.
For one thing it is not true that the M&S figures included more shootings involving the .357Mag than any other calibers. In fact, the M&S figures included nearly TWICE the number of .38Spl shootings as .357Magnum shootings.
Second, if the number of shootings related to the final M&S scoring then 9mm and the .357Mag should have come out virtually identical since they had very similar numbers of figures included in the data set (about 1450). Of course they weren't scored the same at all.
The entire idea that the scoring had anything to do with how many shootings represented a particular caliber in the data set is bogus. The scoring was done by calculating a percentage of the total shootings in a general category that met the M&S criteria.
How many shootings it was involved with had no bearing on the scoring. Percentages are not based on how many total data points are in a general category, they are based on the ratio of a particular data set to the total number of data points that contain the particular data set.
I'm not going to defend the M&S numbers, but it's totally false to state that the reason the .357Mag was scored so high is that it showed up more often in the shootings than other calibers.
This is an example of why you're getting rather "lively" responses. It appears that a good portion of what you're posting here you're either making up as you go along or you're repeating things that you've heard but never fact-checked.
You wanna talk more about the .38 S&W Special or other cartridges?
Mind you, if we talk about the .38 special, we're talking about revolvers, usually. There have been some good .38 special target autos, though I don't think any are in production now. But that's something a .38 special is good for: target shooting. I realize target shooting isn't particularly exciting, which is why people go skateboarding, skydiving and driving. But it is a lot of fun, sort of relaxing if you aren't competing and somehow there seems to be a lot more to it than doing the same with a .22. A .22 is for plinking, you know, to keep yourself in good form for shooting .38s.
There are other things the .38 special is good at (or for). It is a handloader's delight. Of course, once you start reloading, it quickly becomes a case of shooting justify the reloading. The late Dean Grennell must have written more about the .38 special than any other cartridge but that's just a guess. There's more that you can do with a .38 special, I think, and still have fun with than just about any other cartridge, unless you are looking to invent a load that surpasses the .44 magnum but that's in a different class. But you might have a lot of fun fooling around with 200-grain bullets, if you can find a mold to make them with.
Another thing the .38 special still has a use for is in small frame revolvers. Oh, I know the .357 can be had in a J-frame but if you thought a Colt Officer's ACP was a handful in .45 ACP, what must a J-frame be like? Even a 4-inch barrel K-frame has more blast than I care to experience on a regular basis, although to be honest, the "kick" isn't bad. I also know that M&S stated that the .38 wasn't as effective when fired from a 2-inch barrel but I doubt anyone would expect it to be. But would you choose a .22 over a .38 in a pocket revolver? For some reason lots of people seem to have more faith in a .22 than anything else. With faith you can move mountains.
Speaking of cartridges, why do the major cartridge companies not produce loads like the famous Buffalo Bore company?
Mind you, if we talk about the .38 special, we're talking about revolvers, usually. There have been some good .38 special target autos, though I don't think any are in production now. But that's something a .38 special is good for: target shooting. I realize target shooting isn't particularly exciting, which is why people go skateboarding, skydiving and driving. But it is a lot of fun, sort of relaxing if you aren't competing and somehow there seems to be a lot more to it than doing the same with a .22. A .22 is for plinking, you know, to keep yourself in good form for shooting .38s.
There are other things the .38 special is good at (or for). It is a handloader's delight. Of course, once you start reloading, it quickly becomes a case of shooting justify the reloading. The late Dean Grennell must have written more about the .38 special than any other cartridge but that's just a guess. There's more that you can do with a .38 special, I think, and still have fun with than just about any other cartridge, unless you are looking to invent a load that surpasses the .44 magnum but that's in a different class. But you might have a lot of fun fooling around with 200-grain bullets, if you can find a mold to make them with.
Another thing the .38 special still has a use for is in small frame revolvers. Oh, I know the .357 can be had in a J-frame but if you thought a Colt Officer's ACP was a handful in .45 ACP, what must a J-frame be like? Even a 4-inch barrel K-frame has more blast than I care to experience on a regular basis, although to be honest, the "kick" isn't bad. I also know that M&S stated that the .38 wasn't as effective when fired from a 2-inch barrel but I doubt anyone would expect it to be. But would you choose a .22 over a .38 in a pocket revolver? For some reason lots of people seem to have more faith in a .22 than anything else. With faith you can move mountains.
Speaking of cartridges, why do the major cartridge companies not produce loads like the famous Buffalo Bore company?
Seven High
New member
The .38spl round did fairly well for a PDW during the Vietnam War. The round was a 130 grain fmj. Kind of anemic but it worked.
QuakertownRich
Moderator
It can:
Give enjoyment to countless shooters, young and old, at the range plinking cans and target shooting.
Give piece of mind to arthritic older citizens, not able to manipulate a bottom-feeder, who live alone or not alone when things go bump in the night.
Make a bad guys' night go bad in a hurry.
It can't:
Convert closed-minded individuals who believe nothing but what they shoot will do in any situation.
Give enjoyment to countless shooters, young and old, at the range plinking cans and target shooting.
Give piece of mind to arthritic older citizens, not able to manipulate a bottom-feeder, who live alone or not alone when things go bump in the night.
Make a bad guys' night go bad in a hurry.
It can't:
Convert closed-minded individuals who believe nothing but what they shoot will do in any situation.
Not only are you way off the original question, you are so far out in left field it is scary. The 357 was designed to penetrate car doors and kill bad guys hiding in the cars made in the 1930's (Steel). The reputation of the 357 Magnum as a fight stopper was made way before 125 grain JHP's made the scene some 50 years later. Cops blinded and useless from firing magnums? Please.
I'm inexperienced compared to most of you, but I have opinions on the .38 Special. Here's my input to the OP's question:
The .38 Special can:
Be really fun to shoot
Be very accurate
Kill small game
Kill larger game (it's been done)
Kill rattlesnakes (I've done it several times)
Kill humans
Hurt like hell according to my co-worker who was shot with one
Make you feel more secure when it's in the nightstand
The 38 Special can't:
Cause as much damage as a .357 or .44 Magnum or bigger magnum calibers
Hurt your hand as much as a magnum load (unless you have severe physical limitations)
Guarantee safety against any and all species of angry, crazed animals that want to kill you
I don't know why the .38 gets disrespected. Seems like a fine cartridge to me. That being said, I also own a .357, a .45, a .270, a 12 ga., and a 7.62x54. Draw any conclusions you wish.
The .38 Special can:
Be really fun to shoot
Be very accurate
Kill small game
Kill larger game (it's been done)
Kill rattlesnakes (I've done it several times)
Kill humans
Hurt like hell according to my co-worker who was shot with one
Make you feel more secure when it's in the nightstand
The 38 Special can't:
Cause as much damage as a .357 or .44 Magnum or bigger magnum calibers
Hurt your hand as much as a magnum load (unless you have severe physical limitations)
Guarantee safety against any and all species of angry, crazed animals that want to kill you
I don't know why the .38 gets disrespected. Seems like a fine cartridge to me. That being said, I also own a .357, a .45, a .270, a 12 ga., and a 7.62x54. Draw any conclusions you wish.
What would be REALLY impressive would be to get that 62 grain bullet going 3100 f/sec out of a revolver...... this being The Rvolver Forum and all..... hell, I can't get them to go that fast out a 16" barrelled AR without wrecking the brass.....
Anyhoo, the .38 special is just about the easiest round to reload ..... I have loaded far more of them than any other cartridge.
According to the Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson an M&P (pre model 10) with a 4" barrel unloaded with the factory stocks weighs 29.5 ounces. The Glock 19 unloaded weighs 21 ounces.
So what I said earlier about the Model 10 with a 4" pencil barrel loaded weighing less than the G19 unloaded was wrong. It just feels that way when you hold them side by side. This is because, in my opinion, of the way the weight is distributed. In the Model 10 with the light weight pencil barrel, the weight is directly over the hand. In the unloaded G19 the weight is forward in the muzzle. The center of the guns weight changes as it is loaded with a full mag and changes again as the mag is empty.
Since 16 ounces equals a pound I figure it may be safe to say that the loaded Model 10 is in the neighborhood of weight of the loaded G19. Which doesn't mean much at all though, well other than round count, speed of reload, etc.
tipoc
seeker_two
New member
But how much does the Glock weigh when loaded?
ScottRiqui
New member
I don't have any ammo here at work, but one internet source lists .44 ounces for a 124 gr 9 mm round. I'll check when I get home and update this post if I find that's wildly wrong.
So, 16 rounds in the Glock would weigh just over 7 ounces. Add that to the 21-ounce unloaded weight, and you get 28 ounces, which is still less than the unloaded Model 10.
I agree that the weight distribution and density makes a difference in how heavy a gun "feels", though. Back when I had my Glock 19, it never felt *that* much lighter than my pre-Model 10.
So, 16 rounds in the Glock would weigh just over 7 ounces. Add that to the 21-ounce unloaded weight, and you get 28 ounces, which is still less than the unloaded Model 10.
I agree that the weight distribution and density makes a difference in how heavy a gun "feels", though. Back when I had my Glock 19, it never felt *that* much lighter than my pre-Model 10.
- Status