Which Special's Most Special, or, Do Bigger Bullets Make for Smaller Groups?

H

Hand_Rifle_Guy

New member
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back in the good old days of target shooting, you did it with a revolver. Period. Them new-fangled otter-matical contraptions were fine for the military, but serious target shooters everywhere relied on Colt Shooting Masters and S&W Triple Locks, and lets not forget the Officer's Model Match, and the legendary K-38. These guns set records. So I wanna know which one's more accurate: big bore, or small bore? You can talk about the .32 long, too. Heck, .38 and .32 have such stellar reputations that they found their way into semi-autos. Anyone remember the .38 AMU?
So I want opinions and stories, and I want to know WHY. Back it up, the more info the better, I always say.

Combat opinions/stories are welcome, too. This is not just about target shooting.

And try and leave the mags out of it. We can talk about those someplace else.

Ooh, I almost fergot.

Merry Christmas, Everybody!

Or Happy Solstice, if that's what floats yer boat! I'm very tolerant.:D

;) :D ;)
 
Couple years before me.

1890. 50yd .32-44 S&W, ten shot group 1.25" outside measure.

".......100 yd .32-44 and .44 S&W Russian, ten shot group 3" outside measure.

..........200 yd .44 S&W Russian, ten shot group 8" outside measure.

All fired by Mr. William E. Carlin. Source...Himmelwright 1904.

Put that in your smoke n pipe it.:D

Sam
 
Greeting's All;

In this modern day and age, my vote would still have to
rest with the small bore; ie: .38 Special and .32 S&W Long.
I have seen far too many standard, stock Colt Officer's
Model Match and Smith & Wesson's K-38 that out shot
everything else on the range, during any given session.
Even with the advent of the powerful .357 magnum,
these old timer's still dominated.:)

Granted, there are some make's and model's of .44's
and .45's that are highly accurate; but all in all I believe
that the small bore's will take home the prize, most every
time.:D :cool:

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, Life Member N.R.A.
 
Ok, this is a good start. Anyone care to say why? what makes for real revolver accuracy? Freedom Arms line-bores their cylinders, but there's got to be more to it than that, as all those PPC revolvers were not line-bored to my knowledge. For instance, what did Bill Davis do to those revolvers beyond mounting a bull-barrel and a Bo-Mar rib?

And is there such a thing as a HBWC for .44's, and how much does it weigh? If I used those at some nice mild velocity, would their practical accuracy be the same, better, or worse in a comparably-prepped gun?

Such a mystery. Can someone explain why the .44 fell from grace as the premier target round? I've read that it was the cat's pajamas in the early part of the century, but I don't understand how the .38 (Or .32) supplanted it, unless it was simply more accurate. Is it a factor of the guns being built, or the round itself? so many questions...
 
Hand_Rifle_Guy;

I believe that the correct answer is a combination of both;
gun and cartridge. In the early day's, pride was at stake
among major firearm's manufacturer's; with each wanting
to produce firearm's better suited to the needs of the
consumer. Therefore, tolerance's were standardized;
and each gun manufactured was as if it was hand
crafted. And, on top of that cartridge company's
such as Remington-Peters and Winchester-Olin
delivered ammunition in both, .38 Special and .32
S&W Long that were tested and proved to be very
good performer's in these weapons. Add to this,
the advent of "handloading"; only served to make
these guns more accurate. As time marched on,
ammunition maker's only got better; and in today's
society, there is some "top quality" product's
available from lot's of manufactuer's; making
these old cartridge's, once again very popular.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, Life Member N.R.A.
 
Lyman mould # 429422 is holler base semi wadcutter, 220gr.

Multi contrbutors to the rise of smaller calibers popularity in center fire. Heft of gun. Recoil of gun. Reduction of range distance in many pistol matches; we no longer do the National match course at 50 & 75yds for example.. Better quality and consistancy of ammunition.

Sumpin to humble oneself with. Groups used to be scored by outside measurment.....not center to center like today.

A flurry of 9mm choices stormed the world. Military, police and hence civillian. Most popular of the 9s were .38 Colt, .38 S&W, 9X19 etc. Demand for performance begat cartridge and gun developement.........hence the .38s became the .38special. Short range tack driver.

.32s were popular all day carry guns for police, thus many made and fired. Again the multitude of guns drove the cartridge folks to make better product. .32 developed into the .32 S&W Long which is another short range tack driver.

Scoring methods also were against the larger bullets. If the range was short enough (50yds and in), it behooved the shooter to make a smaller hole if accuracy could be maintained. Again, outside scoring.

Scoring by group hurts the larger bullet. Clark's .44 cal 3" ten shot 50yd group under old rules would be scored as just over 2½" under later rules.

Size does work both ways...using numerical scoring, larger bullet has better chance of cutting higher scoring ring.

Advertisers like small group size.

Accuracy enhancers. Attention to cone, bore dia, chamber dia, chamber mouth dia, alignment at lock up. Finish of chamber, lockwork etc. Revo has to have all holes alike and align alike to be consistant. Tough to do and meet modern production demands. Being an ex Smith dealer I look at em all. I have seen few and perhaps no Smith production guns that were right from the factory in the last several years. Most had multiple problems.

Bells, whistles and "tacticle" sell better and for more money than practicle and precise.

Nuff for now.

Sam, ya got me wound. :)
 
The larger calibers do have the edge. A difference of .2 gr. in a .44 bullet is much less than that same error in a .38 bullet. Bullet shape? You'd have to give the aerodynamic edge to a semi-wadcutter, but the pure wadcutter holds most records. One of the top .45 gunsmith's (1911 in bullseye competition) claimed to consistently get groups of 10 shots under an inch, at 50 yards. Using a ransom rest. Occasionally getting groups of 1/2 inch. I think the gun and the shooter are probably the answer. Just don't expect the modern semi-auto's to give fine accuracy.
 
Let's see, comparing the S&W model 52 to the Colt Gold Cup, we are comparing a 38spl semi-auto to a 45ACP semi-auto.

All else (shooter skill) being equal, my money is on the model 52. So I wouldn't say that bigger caliber is better.
 
Hi, guys,

The word is MONEY. There may be exceptions, but the most accurate cartridges are the ones that have had the most money and effort spent to make them accurate.

An example, is the .25ACP, which in a good barrel is a tack driver. But do you know any ammo company or reloader who is going to spend big bucks on experimentation on a round that is used in 2" barrel pistols?

The .38 Special is a very accurate cartridge and many very good target handguns have been made for it. Why? Because the U.S. rules (NRA rules) favor it for center fire matches.

The .45 ACP is a very accurate cartridge and many very good target pistols have been made for it. Why? Because it was the U.S. service cartridge for umpty years. If the U.S. had adopted the 9mm P in 1908, the .45 would be a non starter.

Jim
 
Thankyou, thank you, thank you! This is much better than I hoped. Now if I can just figure out how to fix mis-aligned chambers in those revovers of mine...

Here's a significant memory: I saw a picture of a S&W 1917 that had been set-up with a short cylinder to accomodate stubby little .45 ACP's. It looked funny, with the extra space in the frame window, but the text said it increased accuracy in the given gun by 100%. wonder why Sellout & Worthless doesn't do that with the 625? I've read about other guns being set-up to shoot only flush-seated wadcutters, with comparable results. Seems like a cheap way to improve accuracy from a factory standpoint.

Presuming the factory CARED about improving accuracy...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top