Manstopper bullet for the 38 special

[Geezer in NH]

For all the guys talking about a HBWC loaded backwards. How do you all get accuracy at 25yards? I tried the HBWC loaded backwards but got very poor accuracy and poor penetration. About the only thing they did do was expand, but then again a soft lead wadcutter loaded properly gave good expansion and way better penetration.

At 25 yards I wait for backup or get the shotgun or rifle!! My tests of accuracy and penetration showed to ME load them backwards.

Of course that was at a serious range of about 10 yards or less. For further range see the first paragraph.

[9.3X62AL]

Seen any trout on bicycles lately?

Ha ha! Not lately, that medication change a few months back might account for that. And I've had a saltwater focus for the last year or so.

[35remington]

Chargar is precisely right....whether powder be forward or rearward has zero to do with hitting anything. In performing this testing the point of aim was an 8 inch plate at 50 yards, with my forearms resting on sandbags off a bench with the pistol and the supporting hands touching nothing to give a semblance of the movement the pistol experiences when shot from standing unsupported. Whacking the plate regularly occurred either way in a 4 inch C series Military and Police. I am not good enough with the vestigal sights on most snubbies to flatter myself that the same 50 yard plate is duck soup, but much shooting at closer ranges reveals nothing of concern as to point of impact variation.

If the most important concern is to hit, and it is, truly powder position does not matter.

However, since the second part of the equation once the hit occurs is the power behind the bullet, I investigated the powder position thing. Blackwater is quite right.....being a blackpowder round don't help matters. But then the "ideal" ballistic consistency was probably to be found in the 9mm Federal and we all know how that one turned out. So we optimize the 38 Special. I do not have an affinity for full moon clipped 9mm snubby revolvers as I've never thought adding a loose piece of metal to the headspacing equation increases the odds that the five rounds in the snubby are going to go bang.

What prompted all this, as mentioned, is the number of "standard pressure only" 38's I have. Both due to metallurgy and weight. A 14-15 ounce 638 is not all that pleasant to shoot with some Plus P loads even if it is rated for it.

Tazman, I'll get to the Titegroup in a minute.

I will note that the snubbies will have, for whatever reason, about 20-30 fps higher spread from powder forward/powder rearward than a 4 inch will with identical loads.

All charges carefully weighed.

4.7 grains Unique is considered the top end of the standard pressure range with a 158 SWC, in this case the Lee 158TLSWC.

In a four inch M and P, powder rearward (PR) 923, 919, 903
powder forward (PF) 840, 868, 845

In a snubbie (638) PR 820 807 803
PF 707 717 705

4.9 Herco does pretty much the same thing as 4.7 Unique with the same bullet.

4 inch PR 892 925 920
PF 830 854 848

Snubbie: PR 818 801 811
PF 723 717 731

Power Pistol is feted as being "the thing" when loading 38 Special for performance, that is, if blast and flash does not bother you, and performance it gets is quite good, at least when the powder is near the primer in a snubbie.

Here I used the Lee 148 TLWC seated out to mimic the seating depth of the Lee 158 SWC. The idea was to determine if "seating out" would obtain an advantage with the larger powder charges allowed the more shallowly seated bullet. In terms of ballistic consistency, it is going backward. When the powder is forward, it is inferior to a 148 WC seated normally with a "lower" performance loading.

5.4 grains is considered the top end of the standard pressure range. I goofed and (mis)remembered the number and actually loaded 5.5 grains but the point is still valid:

4 inch: PR 976 961 957 (impressive indeed for pretty much "standard" pressure)
PF 911 903 901

That didn't seem too bad, and I was hoping the snubby would show similar "low" spreads, as 70 odd fps in a 38 isn't too bad in a "higher performance" loading. Instead, this happened:

Snubbie: PR 853 859 875
PF 745 731 773

Ack. Fell on its face a little. Reprising the test with a 158 SWC did not improve things. Average speed 862 fps powder rearward, 750 fps powder forward. 244 ft/lbs. versus 185. A 24 percent drop with the 148 grain bullet. I don't care for that.

By contrast, compare the above with the Lyman 358495, a 148ish grain WC when seated deeply to its crimp groove with 3.5 Titegroup. While this is the top end of the standard pressure range, Titegroup is not considered "high performance" by any means in terms of velocity. Same snubbie:

PR 825 818 817
PF 801 803 801

Note that the "low" velocity performance with the powder forward exceeds that of Power Pistol load by over 50 fps, using a powder supposedly less in performance potential. The more deeply seated bullet performs similarly no matter how the gun is oriented. Since the gun is most likely to be fired with the powder forward, no Herco, Unique or Power Pistol for me with a conventionally seated bullet.

Bullseye performs almost identically to Titegroup with perhaps 10 fps lower velocities with the same charges. In my guns, at least.

The whole point may be mooted if you're using factory loads, but the choice there might be between Plus P 158 SWC and a Buffalo Bore Hard Cast 148 WC seated conventionally.....deeply, in other words. Both get 850 fps from short barrels, but the Buffalo Bore load gets that 850 fps pretty much no matter how the powder moves in the case. The other SWC load does not and 100 plus fps spread are common.

Tazman, Titegroup does pretty darn well with the 158 SWC. In this case I used the 358432, a "semiwadcutter wadcutter" or class III type that seats out of the case like a SWC. Same 3.5 grain charge.

4 inch: PR 839 847 838
PF 828 822 818

Not bad at all for a 38. Velocities are about 100 fps slower from the snubbie, extreme spreads a little higher but much better than the Unique/Herco/PP tribe. Problem is that even at max charges per Hodgdon of 3.7-3.8 grains at standard pressure performance does not exceed the PP load, but consistency is better. That is, with powder forward speeds are about the same, but Titegroup does not come within 50 fps of the PP load with powder rearward.

If there is one powder to absolutely, positively avoid in the 38 in terms of ballistic consistency, it is Hodgdon Universal. I theorize the formulation is no more sensitive than, say, Herco, but its fine granulation means it does not take up much room in the case and the powder shifts around more. Velocity variation may exceed 140 fps with some SWC loads. You couldn't run fast enough to give me that powder to load in the 38 if I couldn't orient that powder before the shot.

Having some go out the barrel at 740 fps and others at 880 does not give me what I am looking for.

Even Titegroup will fall on its face a little when the bullet is noticeably shallowly seated, like a Lee 105 SWC or the Lyman 140 RN used as a 38 Special/heavy 9mm bullet. Here 3.2/Titegroup does this with the 140 from the 4 inch:

PR 747 744 751
PF 669 684 677

Things are starting to spread out a little. The shallow seating depth also reduces the power somewhat over an identical charge with a 148 WC. The operative factor is seating depth. When the Ranch Dog 190 FN is used and seated to maximum length the cylinder will accept, which results in somewhat shallower seating than the common 158 SWC, extreme spreads are still high despite the comparatively great weight even when Titegroup is used.

I have a number of other powders I've shot I could use as examples but these serve to make the point.

Ed Harris isn't just whistling Dixie when he proselytizes for the 148 full charge wadcutter. It has advantages in the snubby besides just the flat point and overall suitability in terms of power for the pocket gun. Ballistic consistency is excellent and, as I see it, it's superior to the 158 SWC at the same pressures for that reason. You get the same thing whether the gun is up, down, or sideways.

Blackwater's point about the WFN being a breeze to reload is well taken, though. I would have that as the backup rounds with the wadcutters in the gun. Wadcutters are a turd to load. Getting the gun reloaded fast takes precedence over ballistic consistency or a little wider flat point.

Yeah, this all may be theoretical, but as I pointed out if factory loads are your thing Buffalo Bore standard pressure WC is the way I'd go with a solid bullet in preference to any other solid reposing in the gun at the time of need.

[robertbank]

Fellows at distances normally within the range of mortals shooting a snubby would it be fair to say worrying about a reload is not going to be your first concern if in a gun fight at those distances. It maybe your last but I doubt your first. I think Al and Charles summed it up nicely.

Take Care

Bob
ps My concerns are more of the four legged variety and reloads will never be an issue that means much where I live.

[35remington]

Quite true, but if I have ammo to reload, it better be the easy reloading variety or nothing else. Some do carry reloads for the EDC piece as a regular thing. A speed strip is not a big imposition.

[robertbank]

Agreed.

Bob

[9.3X62AL]

If I'm carrying a firearm CCW fashion, a refill or 2 come along with it. I use HKS speedloaders with the 686.......not the most tacticool, but they are simple--reliable--largely indestructible--and practically dirt/grit-proof.

[tazman]

35remington---
Thanks for testing the Titegroup powder and all the others. While it did somewhat better than the other powders it still isn't perfect.
It is nice to have some idea what to expect with my loads. I have that same 358432 mold and use either Bullseye or Titegroup under it for most uses. That boolit shoots excellent groups from all my 38/357 revolvers and has become my load of choice for close range social occasions. I will back it up with something speedloader friendly but will start with the wadcutters.

[35remington]

I know that 358432 loaded with about 3.7/3.8 Titegroup would have similar velocity to the 148's seated more deeply with 3.5 grains and has 12 grains more bullet. Mine shot well with Bullseye and Titegroup too. Those load much better than the Lee TLWC's do. I can actually do them pretty fast.

In the overall sense your choice of bullet is probably better than mine.

[Piedmont]

35remington, I am still not following your logic. Let's say one carried the FBI load (+p swchp) that is known to be somewhat iffy in expansion characteristics from a 2". For sake of argument let's say it will expand at least a bit half of the time (maybe the half where the powder is more to the rear of the case). That would mean half the time it beats your wadcutter and half the time it performs about the same. That seems preferable to the wadcutter which is never going to expand.

As a practical matter what does your lower standard deviation of velocity get you as far as hitting or stopping an assailant?

[Blackwater]

This sounds like solid thinking to me. I'm going to check it out. Once in a while my carry gun is a S&W M60 .357 5 shot. Usually I carry it when out in the boonies. Fast reloads could be an issue. Maybe load it with something with a bigger meplat, then the TC's in a speed loader. Never tried the Safariland, now I will. What does JM use? He's fast.

Dual, I believe he uses the full moon clips - fastest of anything available, as is ol' Jerry himself! Next fastest, at least that I've found is the Safarilands, and they really ARE faster and more reliable than the HKS style, by a significant degree. It tometimes takes a while to learn to load the ctgs. into them, but it's really a lot like learning to ride a bike. Once you do it right a couple of times, you wind up asking yourself why you had any trouble in the first place, and it's really a worthwhile endeavor to learn. The HKS are pretty idiot proof, but I don't like the way they rattle, or the way you often have to jiggle them a bit to get the gun back in action. With the Safarilands, you just align, push and it's loaded. Takes a little practice, so make up 6 dummy rounds with a hole in the side of the brass so they're readily identifiable, and you'll find yourself marveling at how great they work. I've been sold on them for a couple of decades at least. The only criticism of them that I've ever heard is they CAN be hard to learn to load, but all it really takes is a little focus, really, and anyone with normal dexterity can really profit from them, I think. FWIW?

[Love Life]

I've never had issue with HKS speed loaders. Mash em' in the cylinder, twist the knob sharply, pull speed loader off rounds at a slight angle vigorously. Sheeooot, I even use speed strips at times...

[Blackwater]

35, that's some really good testing. Very thorough. Been a long time since I did much of that, and I went to school on your info. Thanks! The .38 is a great caliber, as has already been stated, but like any "racehorse," it has its peculiarities, and you've hit on its biggest one. Just wondering if you've tried any CFE pistol in your guns yet? It's showing some interesting properties if you believe Hodgdon's Annual Manual. I've got a can, but have yet to get my new reloading room set up, but you've got me wanting to wade into the old one and put some loads together and set up my Pact. I also need to make up some grips for my DIL's tiny hands. Not being a shooter, this can be a big deal for her, and can determine how well and "naturally" the gun points for her. Thanks for all the good info.

[tazman]

I have been working with the CFE pistol a bit over the summer when it was available here for a short time. The experiences I had showed the same velocities posted on the Hodgdon data site(within 20fps give or take) for 3 different cartridges. I loaded it in 38 special, 9mm, and 40 S&W. My neighbor used it in 45LC and his experience mirrored mine.
Odd that all 3 cartridges showed the velocities posted on the data site, but it did happen. Usually I get slower fps than the loading data shows.
I just got my hands on a jug of it and will be working with it more in the future.
It is a fairly dense powder and will give the oportunity for powder forward/back differences that the others will. I didn't think to check that when I had it before.

[robertbank]

If you are talking fast reloads you use Safariland or Jetloader speedloaders. We use them playing IDPA and IPSC or USPSA for a reason they are faster and easier to use when under stress. While I consider the topic of reloads to be a bit academic for the suggested purposes here, if you are going to have to do a reload than go with what is the fastest. You may think you are good with the twist types but you will be faster with the Safariland or Jetloaders. Let the Queen breath or in your case the President, and spend $20. and go quick.

Take Care

Bob

[Petrol & Powder]

As for Speedloaders, I'm with Blackwater. I've used HKS, S.L Variant and Safariland and possibly a few others. After MANY years I settled on Sarfariland and never looked back.
The operation of Safariland is indeed a lot like riding a bicycle, once you get it, you get it.

The HKS models are tough, inexpensive and plentiful. However, if you grab a HKS loader by the body and insert the cartridges into the cylinder you have to change the position of your fingers to operate the release knob. If you use the release knob as a handle eventually the mass and inertia of the rounds will cause the loader to release the rounds before they are in the cylinder.

The Safariland models do not require that you reposition your grasp. You simply grab the loader, insert the rounds into the cylinder, push to release, let go of the loader and close the cylinder. I've found the Safariland to be every bit as durable as HKS and very reliable. The drawback of the Safariland models is they tend to cost a bit more and are not as common in retail settings but they are available by internet. The Safariland loaders are very easy to operate under stress.

The S.L.Variant models are the Cadillac's but way too expensive, very hard to find and appear to be a bit fragile. They're also a tad large.

The Safariland loaders come in three different models: Comp I, Comp II and Comp III.
The Comp I is the smallest and generally paired with a J-frame. The operating knob is very small and designed for concealment not ease of filling the loader.
The Comp II's are similar to the HKS in size and are the most prevalent.
The Comp III's are spring loaded and great for games but they are a bit large for normal carry. They do rapidly launch the rounds into the cylinder with some authority.

I generally pair a speedstrip with a 2" J-frame because a speedstrip is flat and therefore easier to conceal than a speedloader that must be as large as the cylinder. If you don't mind the bulk the Comp I works well with a small revolver.
The Comp II is used any setting that a HKS would normally be used in.
The Comp III is too big for most carry situations but they sure are fast & sweet to use !

[35remington]

Piedmont the comparison is to be between solid SWC versus solid WC.

Blackwater, no CFE tried yet. Haven't seen it in 3 years since the panic.

[Outpost75]

Another who favors Speed Strips or Tuff strips for flat concealability. But the fastest reload is a New York reload.

Having a second gun accessible to weak hand is a good thing. I tend to be a wheelgun guy, but never did J-frames.

Give me "Six for Sure."Attachment 150203Attachment 150204Attachment 150205

[Blackwater]

Amen on the shortage! Overpaid for the 1 lb. can. Figured it'd be enough to play with and test in the calibers I shoot. Sure is hard just to GET the stuff we just want to TRY, and when we do, it's a scalper's game, it seems .... when they can GET powders in my area! Kind'a perturbing, but it's the only game in town.

[35remington]

The powder here is actually starting to come back. I've seen 8 pound jugs of Titegroup and bought one of them, and ditto on the W231 and WST. Also recently bought an 8 lb'er of Bullseye. Just haven't seen any CFE for pistol.