38 spl "FBI load"

[35remington]

It also seems curious that those who stay within limits suggested by loading manuals for Plus P and honestly report their findings with the loads they used at the time are implied to be in error or lacking in knowledge about how to do it.

They got what they got. Good methodology was used in paying attention to loading manual suggestions. That does not seem foolish or ignorant in any way, and it is doubtful that if the bullet lacked 50 or 100 fps from what some may think is needed it would suddenly start bouncing off.

[Wayne Dobbs]

I really enjoy seeing 35remington's and Outpost75's reasoned and well written posts on this. I have carried and shot lots of the FBI load, initially the Winchester version and later the Remington version. I was fortunate to be acquainted with Alan Jones, Firearms Examiner for the Dallas County Crime Lab (properly known as the Southwest Institute of Forensic Sciences - SWIFS). He did what proved to be ground breaking terminal ballistics work in the 1970s that provided real testing of various handgun loads out there at the time. He also proved through objective testing that the FBI load was a very effective and well balanced load in both 4" and snub revolvers. The load was adopted and used widely in Dallas and other major cities and its frequent use on slow learners proved the load's efficacy and validated Alan's testing.

He later went to CCI-Speer for a long career and now writes a very informative ballistics column in Shooting Times.

My chronograph testing of the Winchester and Remington FBI loads in 1 7/8" S&W revolvers showed velocity ranges from 790 - 840 fps in several different guns. I think that matches up with what we've seen posted here.

[USSR]

This thread changes every time the wind blows.
4 or 5 pages back 800fps was the magic # and good enough. Now it's 850fps.

The wind just changed, wounder what it will be today???

It'll be whatever they need it to be.

Don

[35remington]

Nope. Just what the FBI load actually does.

Opinion is no substitute for factual information. Factual information is presented in great plenty in this thread. Knowing the difference is helpful.

[FergusonTO35]

Outpost75- you say that .38 ammo in a .357 chamber will be slightly slower than the same ammo fired out of a .38 chamber. How about the short cylinder .357 revolvers out there? For example, my Rossi 461 .357 has a noticeably shorter cylinder than my .38 Special S&W 10-5 and Ruger Service Six.

[tazman]

Outpost75- you say that .38 ammo in a .357 chamber will be slightly slower than the same ammo fired out of a .38 chamber. How about the short cylinder .357 revolvers out there? For example, my Rossi 461 .357 has a noticeably shorter cylinder than my .38 Special S&W 10-5 and Ruger Service Six.

I'd like to hear the answer to that question myself. It seems strange that a 357 mag would have a shorter cylinder than a 38 special though.

[Outpost75]

Lower velocity of .38 Special fired in the longer .357 chamber is welll documented and is due to gas loss as the bullet base transitions the gap between the mouth of the .38 case and the longer cone of the .357 chamber.

[tazman]

Lower velocity of .38 Special fired in the longer .357 chamber is welll documented and is due to gas loss as the bullet base transitions the gap between the mouth of the .38 case and the longer cone of the .357 chamber.

I got that part. What about when the cylinder itself is a different length?
Different manufacturers make the cylinders different lengths. S&W made different length 357 mag cylinders depending on the model. The Ruger Blackhawk has a long cylinder in 357 mag.
Several companies took 357 model revolvers and chambered them for 38 special using the standard mag length cylinder(Colt Python, Dan Wesson that I know of).

[Outpost75]

Chamber length is more important than cylinder length.

[tazman]

I was hoping for some data, not just an opinion.

[Petrol & Powder]

OK, now we are getting somewhere.

You are NOT talking about 158 grain bullets, you are talking about 150 grain bullets,

"The reality of it:
When I did the 10 bullet test I started with a standard 358156 hp mold that had a standard .125" pin. It weighed 150gr dressed out. So when I say a 358156 150gr bullet was faster then the 358439. (150gr vs 157gr) It absolutely was!!!"


The three major ways to increase velocity are: use a lighter projectile, use more pressure or use a longer barrel. You used a lighter projectile.

Your assertions that a better bullet base design and softer alloys also help to increase velocity are valid assertions but not nearly as critical as bullet weight and pressure.

You have been listing velocities for your loads and I have no doubt those are accurate velocities BUT they were not achieved with 158 grain projectiles. In order to compare apple to apples we have to be talking about the same things; Same cartridge, same barrel length, same maximum pressure and SAME bullet weight.
You listed some impressive numbers but you achieved those velocities by using a lighter projectile.

As for the pressure, I don't know if 6.2 grains of Power Pistol behind a 150 grain projectile will exceed SAAMI limits for 38 Special +P but Alliant's on-line data shows a load of 6 grains with a 158 grain bullet, so 6.2 grains of Power Pistol and a 150 gr bullet may be beyond SAAMI +P levels as well.

[35remington]

Another question might be that as powder charges are increased beyond some source’s maximums and bullets vary from those used in actual pressure testing, how do we know we are “right” in terms of the actual pressure generated being within limits?

Something to think about.

[Outpost75]

I was hoping for some data, not just an opinion.

The test data is proprietary and belongs to my then employer, Sturm, Ruger & Co., where I was employed by their engineering dept. at Newport, NH. They will not share the company data, and I would be violating a non-disclosure agreement to publish further specifics. You will have accept my opinion that I know what I am talking about.

If you want to show me YOUR data, then I would be delighted to see it.

[35remington]

I happen to have a Rossi 357 and yes, the cylinder is shorter than some Smith 38 cylinders. In theory, if all else was magically the same, the shorter cylinder would have a little less throat length. This would theoretically have a little less throat/barrel travel before bullet exit than another gun with a longer cylinder and identical barrel length. This might be presumed to give a little less velocity.

Thing is, when measuring the barrel length I come up with the barest hair less than 2.6” on the Rossi rather than the 2.5 inches nominal of Smith guns, which also may vary sometimes from
nominal length.

Without the multiple guns and rigorous testing Outpost did with guns that were held to closer tolerances and only a single variable accounted for I cannot give you a good answer as to how it compares to other revolvers of slightly longer cylinder length. I am comparing apples to oranges.

I can tell you that all 38’s fired in its 357 cylinder go bang and exit the barrel with decent velocity. Long shooting sessions of 38’s make 357’s more difficult to seat (no rocket science in that observation!!).

It does go a bit faster than 1 7/8 and 2 inch Smith 38’s. I did not have a 2.5” Smith 357 to compare it to. Cylinder gap is 0.005-0.006.” Having not shot it much with 357’s (an intentional policy) it is still tight and very unworn.

That is the best I can do as for information. My curiosity about that particular issue is admittedly low and I just record what it does and go on.

I know this didn’t help much but that is all I got.

[FergusonTO35]

No, that helped plenty! I consider the Rossi akin to the .357 K-frame. It will handle .357's but a steady diet is going to wear it out a lot faster. My 461 was rebarreled by Rossi due to a yawning b/c gap. It now has a snug .003 so I'm eager to see what kind of chronograph readings I'm going to get.

[35remington]

I would think it would do well unless the cylinder throats are bizarrely oversized compared to other guns of the same barrel length.

I must admit that due to noise issues out of the shorty barrel I find 38’s or equivalent handloads in 357 cases to be much more pleasant for general use than 357s and all I really need for a knocking around in the field gun.

Around here when “river ratting” on the backwater sloughs of the Missouri a 38/357 revolver loaded moderately is a handy thing to have when running trot lines and bank lines, camping overnight near the river via boat travel, etc.

Provides security and plinking and potting vermin. Popping gar is a rather fun activity too, and it doesn’t chuck my cases into the weeds. Comes in handy when a snapping turtle swallows the bait and hook on your bank lines as well.

Launches big green bullfrogs well into airborne status!

[ShooterAZ]

Please keep it civil here guys. The thread has been informative, let's keep it that way.

[tazman]

The test data is proprietary and belongs to my then employer, Sturm, Ruger & Co., where I was employed by their engineering dept. at Newport, NH. They will not share the company data, and I would be violating a non-disclosure agreement to publish further specifics. You will have accept my opinion that I know what I am talking about.

OK. I can live with that.
As far as my data, I have none. That is why I ask questions in order to obtain some data.

35remington--- Thanks for the information from your Rossi. I don't have a Smith with a barrel shorter than 3" so cannot test loads appropriately. Also, since I don't have ptessure testing equipment, I can't go that route either. This is why I ask questions.
I can test loads in my Model 60 and and my model 15 to see what happens but that is the best I can do.
A lot has changed in the powders that are available since the FBI load first came out. I can't afford to invest in a bunch of powders just for testing a load I will seldom shoot and I imagine most can't either.
That is why we come here and ask questions.

[35remington]

I have not tried all powders certainly, but I have shot quite a few.

One observation is that a three inch barrel is much closer to a 4 inch barrel than a 1 7/8-2” barrel in terms of generated velocity. One might logically think that it would be right in the middle but in my trials it is not.

One of the downsides of Power Pistol has to be mentioned because it is getting a lot of free press here. It is that velocity variation is rather high with shifts in powder position, approximating what Unique does. Bullseye and Titegroup will both beat it in that respect.

Universal is utterly horrible in the 38 Special in that regard and performs very poorly in the 32 Long case despite its smaller size. It has my nomination for one of the worst large case/low pressure powders currently available.

[johniv]

Very useful thread. Thanks to all for the info here.
John