2400 powder in 38 Sp cartridge

[Wilsknife]

Does anyone have a source for 2400 loads for the 38 sp with a 158 gn SWC in lead?[smilie=s:

[leadman]

The Lyman 4th edition cast bullet manual shows the 358156, 155gr,
7.5grs 2400= 760fps, 11,500 cup
8.3grs 2400= 867fps, 14,300 cup
+P load 8.8grs 2400= 953fps, 17,300 cup

[870TC]

Skeeter Skeltons books would be a good place to look.

[mosinman]

Use caution with Skeeter Skelton's .38 Spl/2400 loads, he developed them years ago for his .357 Mag. revolvers when .357 brass was hard to find. They have pressures in the .357 range and are too hot for most .38 Spl guns.

From Ken Waters' .38 Special Pet Loads:

Lyman 358156, 8.5/2400, 828 fps from 6" revolver barrel, CCI 550, no GC

Lyman 358156, 9.0/2400, 890 fps from 6" revolver barrel, CCI 550, w/GC

Note the magnum primers. Both loads do not exceed standard .38 Spl pressures (they're not +P loads).

If you use Lee Liquid Alox, you can probably omit the gas check on the second load.


mosinman

[G. Blessing]

Hey, how about for a 124grn RN with the 2400?

G.

[Larry Gibson]

Hey, how about for a 124grn RN with the 2400?

G.

Not enough bullet mass to cause the 2400 to burn efficiently. Hard to that with 150-160 gr bullets and standard .38 Special loads.

Larry Gibson

[G. Blessing]

Hmm Interesting. OK, well, was worth asking anyway.

I just started using 2400 recently, and am loading a few hundred .38s with that bullet this week for range plinkers... ergo it would have been cool to try it in 2400.

G.

[firefly1957]

I am not going to list the load because I am not sure of the exact amount but we used to load 2400 under a 148gr HBWC loaded backwards so it had a BIG hollow point and shot them out of our S&W model 28's . They were only accurate at close range so we gave up on them. Despite our advice someone put five of those in a small framed 38 recoil was heavy and he had to drive them out with a big nail to eject them.
I AM SURE IT WAS A MID 1970'S GUNS & AMMO ARTICLE THAT THE LOAD CAME FROM.

[wills]

I remember the inverted 148 grain hollowbase, though not the powder, but I would have sworn it was from Dean Grinell/Gun World.

[Bret4207]

We used to load 2400 in 38's to levels (from published data) that would brings shrieks of outrage and terror from todays gun writers. In fact. the shrieks have been heard in these pages! Suffice it to say, the days of Skeeter, Speers' #8 and Phil Sharpe are long gone.

[Rocky Raab]

And if you ever saw the pressure curves for those loads, you'd turn white and be struck speechless. "Published" does not automatically cast a magic safety spell. Even if a gun appears to handle such a load for a while, sooner or later, the accumulated stress will be too much for it. Will that happen on the next trigger pull? You never know until you know - and then it's too late.

[para45lda]

Try 3 grns. of Clays with that 124 RN. Shot a ton of them in Cowboy; literally.

[Bret4207]

I'm already white Rocky and I can usually find something to say, in this case, "Yeah, that's kinda what I was getting at." I keep forgetting I have to walk on eggs when I write "gun writers'.

[Cowboy T]

Yes, I do use 2400 in .38 Spl cases--well, .38 +P headstamped, but same thing. I do so with a 150gr cast boolit (Lee 358-158-RF), and I do it quite often. Every .357 Magnum revolver I've tried it in seems to love this load.

However, these are definitely Magnum-style loads on the order of 27,000 to 30,000 PSI. They are definltely for .357 Magnum guns only, or the original .38/44 Outdoorsman, NOT your S&W Model 10! If you really want to see that load info, it's on Ammosmith.com in the "Favorite Loads" section under my userID.

[G. Blessing]

Try 3 grns. of Clays with that 124 RN. Shot a ton of them in Cowboy; literally.

8-) Will do, and thanks!

[mroliver77]

That 3 gr clays is going to be a very wimpy load!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


RCBS book lists 2400 loads for 38 Special
9gr for 925 fps

10gr 1020fps with their 159 gr swc boolit. Both these noted as using cci #250 magnum primer.

Jay

[Rocky Raab]

I was agreeing with you, Bret. Those days ARE long gone: wiped out by better testing methods that reveal just how close to tragedy some of those gun writers were going - particularly Phil Sharpe. Which just goes to show that "published" can mean two things: published loads and published writers. Both can be full of hooey. But there are still folks today who use those loads believing that they must be fine.

mroliver - are you sure you're looking at the right thing? Nine grains of Clays in a 38 Special is almost a triple charge. Clays is in the same burn rate bracket as Bullseye and RedDot, and no load anywhere lists charges of those powders that high.

[dale2242]

I think 2400 is a marginally good powder for the 38 Special, due to it`s smal lcase capacity.
I found more unburned powder than I prefer in my 6" GP100.
I seems to work fine in the 357.
I prefer Unique or Bulls Eye in the 38 Special....dale

[BruceB]

I'm no wild-eyed radical handloader (like "Clark"?) but there are a few decades behind me. My loads are and were carefully worked-up. Without specifying any particular load of 2400 in .38 Special, I will say this:

IF my brass lasts about forever, and

IF the extraction is easy with all six chambers fired, and

IF the ballistics are consistent, and

IF the powder has just reached the clean-burning state that I find desirable, and

IF the accuracy is superb, and

IF the K-38 fires a couple thousand of these "unspecified" 2400 loads without ANY APPARENT DETERIORATION...

then amigos, by empirical evidence, that load is a safe and good-working load in MY revolver. I don't need (or load) such ammunition any longer, since a decent variety of .357s have come to live with us, but they were effective and useful loads when I needed them.

I'm not about to "turn white" (too late for my hair)....whatever the information might be with today's instrumentation, MY instrumentation back then was a working and happy bunch of revolvers. That was good enough for my purposes. The guns and I all not only survived in fine shape, but we enjoyed the experience.

[Rocky Raab]

Bruce, the point where 2400 "begins to burn clean" is at the very upper end of SAAMI pressure limits for the standard .38 Special. Your loads may (nobody will ever know) have been decidedly +P or more. I'm glad you stopped using them, for your sake and for your excellent K-38's as well.

Others may not be so lucky, unfortunately. I don't argue with success; I warn against failure.

[BruceB]

Rocky, I will GUARANTEE that my loads were well above "Plus-P" levels. They pre-dated that concept by a LONG time, meaning that there was no such category as Plus-P. When my 358156 bullets were departing at 1200+ fps, they were a long jump ahead of what became known as "Plus-P". So were Lee Jurras' Super-Vel .38 loads.

We were well-aware that 2400 only got to burning well when pressures were elevated...that's WHY we used 2400 instead of the faster types. We were looking for performance, and we got it.

"Lucky"? I don't think so. My loads were much the same as a whole bunch of fellow shooters in my area, and no one reported any untoward occurrences. This was a sample of at least twenty other very-active handloaders and handgunners. If there had been a problem, it would have shown up.

There has been an enormous amount of second-guessing in on-line websites about the loads and practices of those who started in this hobby decades ago. I will only repeat my mantra regarding those days, those loads, those practices....THEY WORKED. So, things moved on, and most of us moved on along with them. The salient fact though is simply that we AND our guns were not harmed by the loads in common use at the time.

[Larry Gibson]

And if you ever saw the pressure curves for those loads, you'd turn white and be struck speechless. "Published" does not automatically cast a magic safety spell. Even if a gun appears to handle such a load for a while, sooner or later, the accumulated stress will be too much for it. Will that happen on the next trigger pull? You never know until you know - and then it's too late.

Your loads may (nobody will ever know) have been decidedly +P or more. I'm glad you stopped using them, for your sake and for your excellent K-38's as well.


I'm one that has shot lots of 2400 under the 358356 in .38 Special cases. They were used in .357 revolvers though and a 38/44 a friend had. I/we also never had a single problem with them. I only quit using them because .357 cases became readily available to me.

I am casting up some 358356s that will have a BHN of 20-23. I also have some old original mix WWs that were what we used "back in the day". Along with that I also have some Hercules 2400. "Nobody will ever know? How about all of us "know" and then see if we "turn white and be struck speechless"? Since I am going to be pressure testing some other .38/.357 loads I can easily pressure test .38 Specials loaded with 2400.

I will start at 8 gr 2400. When 100% loading density is reached I will bump the bullet out to the second crimp groove (that's why it's there after all) and continue until 100% loading density (should be 12.5 - 13 gr if I recall correctly) is reached.

Any suggestions?


Larry Gibson

[redneckdan]

My business 38 special load is 10.5 gr of 2400 under a 150gr RCBS KT. This is doing around 1000 fps out of my model 15. I don't shoot a lot of them, but when I do shoot them they have done the job every time.

[felix]

Larry, use a closed barreled gun to get the max pressure reading possible with 2400. The cylinder gap would really distort ignition characteristics for accumulative pressure attainment readings. When 20K is reached, then revert back to a revolter for its max at that same load. Make sure the throat clearance of the boolits is the same in the guns, otherwise the pressure measurements would be for naught. ... felix

[cuzinbruce]

I used an old Lyman load, called their "accuracy load" in .38 Spl. Quite a moderate load. From a 1950's Lyman manual. With 358429 it was quite accurate, as advertised. Also very dirty with loads of unburned powder everywhere. Current 2400 powder, Alliant from a plastic bottle.

[Larry Gibson]

Larry, use a closed barreled gun to get the max pressure reading possible with 2400. The cylinder gap would really distort ignition characteristics for accumulative pressure attainment readings. When 20K is reached, then revert back to a revolter for its max at that same load. Make sure the throat clearance of the boolits is the same in the guns, otherwise the pressure measurements would be for naught. ... felix

Felix

I do use round barrels with no cylinder gap. The barrel will also have a short throat as comparred to the revolver. As with any "test" barrel this will produce slightly higher psi's than the same load in a standard revolver. I will also use a standard .38 load or factory load for "reference" ammunition. The SAAMI MAP for the .38 is 17,000 psi and 18,500 psi for +P. It's pretty certain that any load in a commercial revolver is going to have less psi that that in the test barrel. Kind of a built in hedge factor, same as the big boys do.

Larry Gibson

[felix]

Yeah, Larry, I am surprised the other gun manufacturers did not start using that steel configuration that Ruger had commissioned for all their cylinders of any caliber. The formula was made public in a manufacturing magazine normally read by anyone in the machining trade, guns or not. None of us would have to concern ourselves about these so-called +P+ or whaterver loads. Just use the load which is comfortably accurate using the gun of choice, even with J frames, even though the internal works might be destroyed in no time. No blowup worries, though. ... felix

[Rocky Raab]

I look forward to your results, Larry. If wagers were in order, I'd place mine that your top loads reach well into 357 magnum territory of 30,000 psi or even more.

Bruce, again, I am not arguing with your success. I am confident that your crowd used high quality guns - and I'm exceedingly glad they did. The danger I try to warn against is some new reloader using similar loads in a less capable gun because he read about those loads on the internet and so they must be safe. We both know that such is not a universally valid assumption in all guns with all components and all reloaders. To your great credit, you have not posted your now-abandoned load recipe, and that speaks well of your conscientiousness.

[BruceB]

Rocky, pard;

Your concern is much appreciated....and UNDERSTOOD.

I'll be another interested reader of Larry's results when they become available.

Back when we were loading those "intrepid" .38 Specials, we certainly knew that we were treading hard on ground held by the .357. It was done by intent, both as an interesting foray into "steroid-izing" the .38, and as an answer to a perceived need for more performance from the .38.

As you noted, we did use decent guns.... Smiths and Colts (including a New Service...what a beast that was!). This was going-on in the mid-1960s, when both money and guns were limited. Today we have legions of .357 revolvers of every conceivable configuration....including some that I have NO desire to fire, thanks. The K-38 shares the same frame as the M19 .357, as you well know, and it was just as comfortable to shoot. My current 19 actually sees mostly loads that approximate the old .38 "intrepid" loads of forty years ago. Full circle, there.

[maglvr]

I use 2400 in my 38-44 loads in the .38spl case.
HOWEVER these are NOT to be shot in a medium or small frame gun, ONLY in the heavy N frame Smith 38-44s and guns made for the .357 mag.
With either a 158gr. or 173gr. I use 13.5gr. of 2400 and get over 1300fps from the 173gr. load with a 6.5" barrel. When trying to reach these levels in the heavy guns always start at 12gr.
Any non-magnum small pistol primer works fine.

[Larry Gibson]

Think I'll use the 358477 for strictly .38 Special length cartridges. I use the 358156 seated to the second crimp groove to climb above that since that's the way thompson intended it to be used in .357 magnum and 38/44 revolvers.

Larry Gibson

[geargnasher]

Try 3 grns. of Clays with that 124 RN. Shot a ton of them in Cowboy; literally.

I did a workup last year with my Dad's old JP Saur K38 clone (better gun than the real thing, IMO), started with Clays because I was out of Bullseye at the time, started with 2.7 grains and decided to quit right there, one-hole groups at 15 yards from the bench. It doesn't shoot just anything that well, in fact it's pretty picky about boolits and powder. I've since shot a few hundred through it, same remarkable results. I even tried the same load in .357 cases for a friend's GP100, it liked the loads too. Three grains shot more to POA, but not as accurate as 2.7. I've since purchased more Bullseye, but I have stacks of the Clays loads around so it will be a while before I switch back.

Gear

[Bret4207]

Rocky, pard;

Your concern is much appreciated....and UNDERSTOOD.

I'll be another interested reader of Larry's results when they become available.

Back when we were loading those "intrepid" .38 Specials, we certainly knew that we were treading hard on ground held by the .357. It was done by intent, both as an interesting foray into "steroid-izing" the .38, and as an answer to a perceived need for more performance from the .38.

As you noted, we did use decent guns.... Smiths and Colts (including a New Service...what a beast that was!). This was going-on in the mid-1960s, when both money and guns were limited. Today we have legions of .357 revolvers of every conceivable configuration....including some that I have NO desire to fire, thanks. The K-38 shares the same frame as the M19 .357, as you well know, and it was just as comfortable to shoot. My current 19 actually sees mostly loads that approximate the old .38 "intrepid" loads of forty years ago. Full circle, there.

I didn't start as far back as you Uncle Bruce, but in my neck of the woods loading books were rare. We used info that Elmer and Skeeter gave out, that came in Lyman books from the 50's and from Phil Sharpes book that a gentleman had. No damage and the loads I put through that little Colt Cobra were definitely "intrepid". I still use that "Skeeter" load in my M19, it works fine. But my days of looking for loud and fast are about over. I'd rather have my brass last and my powder too! I suppose I'm cheap.

[mroliver77]

mroliver - are you sure you're looking at the right thing? Nine grains of Clays in a 38 Special is almost a triple charge. Clays is in the same burn rate bracket as Bullseye and RedDot, and no load anywhere lists charges of those powders that high.[/QUOTE]

Dangitall!! Curses!! , invocations!

That is why I usually do not list loads. I made a comment about the clays load. I then listed the 2400 loads from the RCBS manual without saying so.
My bad!! My bad!!! My bad!! My bad!!! My bad!! My bad!!! My bad!!

Thank for catching this Rocky and I will say penance to the reloading Gods!
Jay

[Rocky Raab]

That's exactly what I thought had happened, my friend.

[uscra112]

I hope the O.P. got the message - that 2400 in .38 Spl. is not optimum on any scale of goodness.

[9.3X62AL]

I hope the O.P. got the message - that 2400 in .38 Spl. is not optimum on any scale of goodness.

Not these days, for sure. If it's the ONLY powder on the shelf, then run what ya brung. But there are better and more efficient fuels for the application.

Not long ago, I gazed wistfully at the RCBS Cast Bullet Manual and those "10.0 x 2400" loads it lists for its 158 grain-class boolits. Having idle time on my hands, I emptied out 50 of the more docile loads through my Model 10 x 5" and set to work. #358156, seated out in the bottom drive band, atop 10.0 grains of 2400 and CCI 500 primers.

A member here--sourcepoint for this same M-10 x 5" and a man whose judgement I respect--sent a deeply cautionary PM concerning this enterprise. No wishing to run afoul of a kind man and great source for REALLY FINE firearms, I elected to run the loads through my 686 x 4". I didn't clock them, but they were fairly healthy--I would guesstimate in the 1000-1050 FPS ballpark.

With 357s ranging in barrel lengths of 2.5--4--6.5--and 7.5 inches in the safe, the need for high pressure 38 Special loads is non-existent. The thought of straining my Colt OMT or that superbly-triggered Model 10 x 5" gave me (and gives me) pause. WW-231 or Herco get the call in 38 Special, maybe Unique as well. That whole "clean-burning" issue is a non-starter for me, given the venues I shoot reloaded ammo with. My CCW/carry rounds are ALL factory and recent-production items. I shoot it out twice yearly, which is just another way of harvesting nice, new brass for refilling. :) With castings, of course.

[Dframe]

Years ago I found a listing of an "Accuracy load" in an old Lyman manual. Lymans 168 grain cast boolit and 8 grains of 2400. I used it until I stupidly sold my mould. Great shooting load.