What is the best defensive round type for the .38 snubbie?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Walt, I have read the Strassbourg tests. That is quite an elaborate hoax and who would benefit from it? Could it be, perhaps, that it doesn't fit your preconcieved notions and therefor it can't exist because it would shake your belief system?

Your blood loss statement amused me. So if a bullet does not fragment there will be bleeding, but if we have multiple fragments making separate wound channels they don't bleed?! I have seen shock work on animals I have shot. There is a big difference in game reaction depending on the load used. I see no reason this should be different in humans.
 
Walt, the media I used was a stack of newspapers, soaked overnight.

I haven't reloaded for a year now (no room in the new apt.) but I used Red Dot and however many grains it took to get up to about 800fps.

There IS ample space in the .38 case without spiking the pressure. If that was such a problem, why can you buy double-ended FWC ammo that is seated flush with the case mouth? It is fact that the less empty space in the case, the more reliable ignition is from one shot to the next. Also, lead is much "slicker" than copper, which is easy to prove. Try slugging a barrel with a JHP. Good luck.

I certainly didn't think of this load on my own. Like my first post said, I got this out of a gunrag.

This isn't my favorite load, just a neat one that does work under some circumstances.

Expansion was measured the only way I know exists. Dial caliper across the face of the bullet. Like I said, I was getting bullets expanding to .6" or so from a two inch snub (M36) and up to .75" from my 4" M15.

Yes, the idea is old. No, it is not the magic bullet. No, not all people like, or have good results with, this load. I was asked for my opinion on loads for a snubbie. I gave it, and then someone attacked my opinion. You probably did not mean to insult me, but it came across that way in your first reply to me.

BTW, I think the only merit, if any, that the "backwards" load has, is in a 4" adj. sighted 38, for field use where the opportunity to take game up to raccoon size may arise. I mentioned it mainly as a curiousity.

In the 'real' world, my M640-1 is loaded with either 110gr Win 'white-box' 357's, or Win Silvertip 125gr 38+Ps.

Take care, -Kframe
 
AC: re "...There is a massive energy dump of what energy is available. ..."

Massive energy dump? From a .38/.357 snub, with frangibles, no less? Not.

Few handgun calibers if any yield a massive energy dump (aka the mythical "knockdown power"), and the ones that might, you wouldn't want to shoot from a snubbie. You can't repeal the laws of physics.

Want a massive energy dump? Shoot a rifle.




[This message has been edited by Covert Mission (edited October 15, 1999).]
 
Kframe; I meant no offense, I simply did not think anyone used that load anymore. It sounds as though you are using a rather light load, and getting good results.

I think that the experiences I recall reading about were where an attempt to reach full or +P pressures was made. Yes, a flush seated LFWC is easily safely loaded in a .38 spl. I did so with several thousand Lyman #358495 bullets, and a very light charge of Bullseye.

Thanks for your input. Walt
 
The problem I see with the Strasbourgh Goat test, even if they are true is, IMHO,
1) The time differences beteen the animals falling is really very close between bullet design. I didn't think they really allegedly "prove" anything but that if you shoot someone, even with the perfect shot and the perfect load, don't expect them to fall immediatly.
2) The shots are based on a perfect placement with no obstructions. A main argument of people that prefer the deeper "penetraing bullets" is that you will not always get the perfect shot. I do believe that if you get a perfect shot at an unobstructed ribcage with bullet that dumps it's energy yet penetrates enough to get through the muscle etc, then the light/fast bullets are great. But, the whole thing is, that Murphy's Law comes into effect and once you are counting on something like the perfect clear shot to the upper torso, is exactly when you are going to get an arm in the way or anything else (or a really big guy) and the bullet will not penetrate enough.
"Deep penetration" lovers seem to be preparing for the worst case scenario which is so often where we find ourselves in combat, whereas the light/fast bullet lovers tend to be hopeful that they will get the perfect frontal torso shot and the energy will dump just under the ribs and into the lungs etc.
Anyway, point is, I don't see what the goat tests proved if they were real, because they tested exactly what the light/fast bullets excel at, which is the perfect torso shot. Now, make the test a little more realistic, like actually HUNT the goat rather than tie it up, and take the shot from whatever angle luck gives you, and suddenly penetration becomes an issue. If the goat tests did happen, they were set up to favor the light fast bullets and the reults are not that impressive.

JMHO and way off topic (I am looking for some 158gr CCI/Speer jacketed wadcutters BTW)
 
I don't know who the authors of the tests were. That does not mean they didn't take place. I certainly wouldn't put my name on them if I had performed them or written them up, with all the animal rights nuts we have in the West. Think about that. Rather, Brokaw, and that Canadian, would get plenty of mileage from it also.

My personal opinion is that they were performed for a United States law enforcement agency, or CIA, something like that. All of the loads are what we can obtain easily in the States.

I would disagree about the tests proving anything. They did show that frangibles were much quicker stoppers even than the standard 125 gr .357 load. They show how slowly even a good load will drop a man sized creature with a perfect shot. The 158 +P load I like from the 2" barrel will take 15 seconds to drop the goat. That is horrible. That is an eternity. The frangibles will be on the order of 5 to 6 seconds [frangibles weren't tested in the 2", only the 4" in .38]. I also disagree about hunting goats instead of testing like this. Goats are quadripeds, requiring more penetration for typical hunting shots, not to mention wanting a blood trail for hunting vs. letting the police worry about some felon's blood trail, if there is one. Think about being accosted. Your shot will be close and the man will be facing you directly. Discounting hitting his arms if they extended forward, and I think they can be discounted as even a FMJ can't be counted on to maintain its course down and arm and hit the torso, you have a chest shot.

I am just as concerned about penetration as you gentlemen. That is why the last three in my cylinder are 158 grs. But frangibles, I feel, give me the best chance of surviving if I can just poke one of the first two into the chest.

Any whose minds are not made up can read about the tests in Street Stoppers by Marshall and Sanow. This is a fairly expensive book, but I am very glad I purchased it as I periodically take it off the shelf to re read. It is entertaining if you are a gun buff, with plenty of real life anecdotes.
 
It's hard to think of anything as optimum in a 2" snubbie, but I don't think it's useless.
I agree with +P loads if you don't have an alloy frame and using any of the premium bullets such as gold dots, hydroshocks or the win sxt's. I like a moderate bullet of around 124 grs. to aid in penetration without giving the gun a hernia. I believe it provides a little extra momentum. Good luck sorting through all the advice.
 
Hangun projectiles do not possess enough energy to be worth "dumping" into any medium. A handgun projectile can only incapacitate or kill as a result of the tissue it actually touches and destroys. This does not require scientific studies to prove. Just a little practical observation while having fun shooting at various mediums should suffice. "AAP" (Accuracy & Adequate Penetration) is what counts. It is the "magic" formula.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top