Bullet diameter for S&W model 52?

[jeff423]

I'm just getting started in casting. My first effort will be for a S&W model 52. I seem to recall reading an article that said that the diameter should be something like .3563.
Does any one else cast for the 52 and if so how do you size your bullets?

I may be forced to slug the barrel.

Jeff

[missionary5155]

Good morning
"Slugging the bore" is alsways the BEST route... My barrel/chamber probably was cut with a different tool on a different day so variances exist. The proper size cast boolit will always reflect the work with accuracy.
Are you Iced in ?
Mike God Bless you.

[Willbird]

I do not know the bore size, but I DO know that the hollow based wadcutters that most folks used in them were .358 :-).

They are very strong guns, they can be loaded a LOT hotter than 38 special mid range, I know one pistolsmith that modified his mags to hold 6 rounds and used his with hot loaded full wadcutters (not hollow base) to shoot bowling pins. They not make the model 52 in 9x19 I believe ??

Bill

[BruceB]

We've owned a pair of 52-1 pistols for almost forty years now(!).

The limiting factor for loads is the strength of the brass just above the web area. Get a wee bit raunchy with the loads, and it DOESN'T TAKE MUCH, and a very obvious swelling occurs where the case is unsupported over the ramp area. We've had no case blow-outs, but any increased-pressure load much above factory levels shows the bulging very early-on.

The Model 952 is a latter-day version of the 52 in (what else?) 9x19 . I haven't handled one of these, but it's safe to say that the feed-ramp area has been radically changed. Of course, the 9mm is a far friendlier round in the feeding department, compared to the square-nosed wadcutter load for the 52. Our 52s will feed empty cases with no hesitation at all, just as we might expect. This makes ball-and-dummy training extremely simple.

I size cast bullets for the 52 at .357", and feeding is fine along with excellent accuracy. My first efforts used straight linotype bullets, but better results were obtained with 50/50 lino/lead. I should get another research project going with softened wheelweight alloy.(I didn't get into wheelweight alloy until after we moved to the US of A in '97.) Those swaged factory wadcutters which shoot so well are almost pure lead.

Since the Model 52 absolutely requires that NOTHING projects beyond the case mouth, I even tried a few Nagant-like loads with 358156 and 358311 seated with noses flush with the mouth. Strange-loooking rounds! If you try this, start VERY VERY low, because the normal case capacity is grossly reduced. Low-end .38 S&W loads sould be safe.

[Willbird]

We've owned a pair of 52-1 pistols for almost forty years now(!).

The limiting factor for loads is the strength of the brass just above the web area. Get a wee bit raunchy with the loads, and it DOESN'T TAKE MUCH, and a very obvious swelling occurs where the case is unsupported over the ramp area. We've had no case blow-outs, but any increased-pressure load much above factory levels shows the bulging very early-on.

The Model 952 is a latter-day version of the 52 in (what else?) 9x19 . I haven't handled one of these, but it's safe to say that the feed-ramp area has been radically changed. Of course, the 9mm is a far friendlier round in the feeding department, compared to the square-nosed wadcutter load for the 52. Our 52s will feed empty cases with no hesitation at all, just as we might expect. This makes ball-and-dummy training extremely simple.

I size cast bullets for the 52 at .357", and feeding is fine along with excellent accuracy. My first efforts used straight linotype bullets, but better results were obtained with 50/50 lino/lead. I should get another research project going with softened wheelweight alloy.(I didn't get into wheelweight alloy until after we moved to the US of A in '97.) Those swaged factory wadcutters which shoot so well are almost pure lead.

Since the Model 52 absolutely requires that NOTHING projects beyond the case mouth, I even tried a few Nagant-like loads with 358156 and 358311 seated with noses flush with the mouth. Strange-loooking rounds! If you try this, start VERY VERY low, because the normal case capacity is grossly reduced. Low-end .38 S&W loads sould be safe.

I'm not sure what kind of Brass the Pistolsmith was using BruceB. I have read here and there that the brass expressly made for HBWC ammunition is better for loading them because it does not taper as quickly, IE the bullets will seat in it without bulging the cases.

I also saw some references at one time of using 38 super brass in model 52's, the 38 super is semi rimmed but I do not recall if they made a new bbl or used the original one. Nonte I guess also shortened 38 special brass to use conical bullets, 38 short colt is very common due to country and western shooters using it, I bet it would work.

I came real close to buying a model 52 but the deal fell through, nowadays it would be cheaper to build a recoil operated 1911 in 38 special probably. Some of the factory guns on 1911 frame that shot 38 special/38 AMU were blowback operation, which stinks :-).

Bill

[jeff423]

Thanks for the help. I'll slug the bore.

I've got 2 - 52's a "beater" and one still in the box. The beater shoots like a dream. They have the best triggers around. Mine has the classic "Glass break" feel at about 2 lbs.
I've had great luck with soft Speer and Hornady swaged bullets. I've never tried hotter loads than 2.8 gr. Bullseye with a 148 gr. bullet (and don't intend to). Mine feeds button nose bullets just fine, if I seat them deep enough.

Based on my experience with the 52's I bought a 952 and was very disappointed. I sold it after about 3 months. I felt that instead of designing a 9mm version of a 52, S&W improved the fit and finish of one of their existing pistols and tried to piggyback off the 52's reputation.

Yes I am iced in in Louisville. I've been in the hotel since noon yesterday.

Jeff

[Willbird]

The price tag on the 952 was a shocker. The 52 always was a spin off of another pistol wasn't it ?? Maybe a model 59 ? I seem to recall they actually have a DA/SA trigger but it is or was blocked so it only worked DA ?

[Scrounger]

The price tag on the 952 was a shocker. The 52 always was a spin off of another pistol wasn't it ?? Maybe a model 59 ? I seem to recall they actually have a DA/SA trigger but it is or was blocked so it only worked DA ?

Model 39, 9MM Luger, single column, 8 round magazine.

[BruceB]

The original M52 (no "dash") had a regular single-action/double action trigger with a screw fitted to lock out the DA function. The M52-1 and -2 have true single-action triggers, and yes, it's one of the finest triggers I've ever used.

Scrounger is correct, the 52 is based on the single-stack 9mm Model 39. The 39s, except for a very few rare pieces, were built on an aluminum frame. All the 52s have steel frames.

.38 "MATCH" brass for the 148 wadcutter does have a different internal profile, at least in some makes. The case wall is of consistent thickness from the mouth down close to the web, at least, closer than normal .38 brass. This allows seating the long hollow-base wadcutters without distorting the case wall, but it also presents a thinner portion of case at the unsupported ramp area.

My handloaded .38 wadcutters are not hollow-based (Lyman 35863), making them shorter than an equivalent HB bullet of the same weight. As a result, I 'm able to use almost any .38 brass that comes along, barring a few specific types.

[Scrounger]

Yep, steel frame Model 39s were a collectors item and I lucked into one. I went into Wisser's Sporting goods store in Anaheim one Saturday after a once a month swap meet in the Santa Ana Gun Room parking lot. They always sold their guns at retail price, no mark-up on hard to get models. Novice that I was, I bought the gun just because I liked it, and didn't discover for weeks that it was a collector's item and was worth much more than I had paid for it.

[Willbird]

I could never keep the 39/59 stuff straight in my head :-).

Bill

[TAWILDCATT]

willbird: the 59 is double stack.I have a 52 DA/SA.the frame is size of 39 so the mag got squared on front.I would not load hoter than target load as I have seen the case blow and usually the left grip goes.There is a gold cup 38 spec that was made,but my 1911 has a custom sleeved barrel in 38.the dif is you can use a slightly longer bullet. I dont use the 52 much as my target 38 is a mod 10 bull 4' with Bomar rib.:coffee: [smilie=1:

[Lloyd Smale]

I had a 952 and dumped it about 6 months after i got it. It was the most finiky gun for feeding ive owned and it wasnt the tack driver they made it out to be.

[HeavyMetal]

waited a ,long time to find my 52 and refused to pay the obnoxius price for the 9mm version!

Had a feeling they weren't as billed!

Using 35887 and 35863 sized to .358 mostly because I did not want to oversize them, they fell from the mold at .360.

The only place I 've put this on paper has been the indoor 50 ft range. Load is 2.8 grain Bullseye and nickled WW case's and ww primers.

Load will shoot one hole at this range if I do my part.

[Willbird]

willbird: the 59 is double stack.I have a 52 DA/SA.the frame is size of 39 so the mag got squared on front.I would not load hoter than target load as I have seen the case blow and usually the left grip goes.There is a gold cup 38 spec that was made,but my 1911 has a custom sleeved barrel in 38.the dif is you can use a slightly longer bullet. I dont use the 52 much as my target 38 is a mod 10 bull 4' with Bomar rib.:coffee: [smilie=1:

Oh I know the difference in the two guns, just cannot remember for the last 30+ years which is which :-).

Bill

[Echo]

Colt did make a Gold Cup .38 Special that was straight blowback (not locked breech). The chamber was ringed inside to delay slide action - the case was supposed to expand into the grooves in the chamber to slow things down. Never shot one, had no need - my Clark .38 does just fine, thank you.
But. The Smith 52 is a SWEET gun! The .38 autos are finicky, probably the result of longer barrel time for the projectile - I have called mine some naughty names, but if I do My part, it does it right.

[t_dickinson]

So which bullet can I use in my 52-2 that will achieve the same result as the 148gr HBWC.

Lee has 2 on their site but neither has the hollow base. One has a flat nose and the other has a button nose.