38 SPL 158 Grain LSWCHP "FBI-Load" Hardness

[LuckySavage]

Didn't the wife complain when you glued them to the ceiling?

Larry Gibson

She complains more about my moronic tendencies....

[Larry Gibson]

I resemble that! My wife notices those things about me too.........

Larry Gibson

[Super Sneaky Steve]

It's specific to my normal CC, a Ruger LCP 380 pocket pistol. The hammer is "pre-cocked" after chambering a round. I have heard of a few instances where it has fired after being jostled around, etc. Ruger has a disclaimer stating that having a round chambered may allow the gun to fire prematurely.

My experiance with the LCP is that it has a very long double action pull. I find it very hard to believe it would go off being jostled around. I would trust it free balling in my pocket, but I prefer revolvers for most situations.

[MtGun44]

The Ruger (and Keltech) precock is about 50% of the travel, no way it can go off with
"jostling". Now, hook your key chain ring around the trigger and pull it out . . . . . . yep.

Not "jostling". I carry my Kel Tech in a pocket holster, which covers the trigger. Free
floating in the pocket is not a good idea, although if it was in a pocket that was NEVER
used for additional gear. . . . maybe. The chance error of dropping your keys or something
in with it and then fishing the keys/whatever back out with bad consequences makes me
a strong advocate of a pocket holster.

Bill

[bhn22]

She complains more about my moronic tendencies....

Oh, I thought you were from Australia.

[Low Budget Shooter]

Australia - funny!

[Elkins45]

Most revolvers have a safety feature built-in that make it virtually impossible for a round to fire without pulling the trigger, even if it is dropped.

So do most modern autos. The problem is that the trigger DOES get pulled sometimes...but that isn't the fault of the gun.

FWIW, I pocket carry either a 340PD (J frame) or a Kahr CW9. I don't feel more unsafe with one than the other in terms of drop safety.

I carry the Winchester FBI load in the J frame, but my reload is the Nyclad version so the bullets don't get imbedded with grit in my pocket. That may be dumb but it probably doesn't hurt anything.

[LesNoLess]

Lyman 358156 HP. Be prepared to spend over a hundred dollars for one. Plan B: watch NOEs page for a gascheck design to come available in and RG@ configuration. Plan C: find a clean 358156 mold and send it to Hollowpoint Mold Service for conversion. You'll still have a hundred bucks in it, but that'll likely happen whatever you do.

Folks, I’m new to the website as a member but have used it for ‘Load-Data’ and various information for a long time. But Now….. even 8 years after the original Lyman 358156 HP FBI post, I could use some help regarding:
IDEAL Bullet Mold 358 156 LSWC/HP/GC cal.38-357. I know this is now a LYMAN mfg’d mold.

My question is simple: the Mold Information notes; 156 Gr., and yet the finished Gas Checked bullet weighs in at 148 Gr. I’m puzzled at the disparity of the stamped label.
I have been loading the 156 LSWC/HP/GC (load data from RCBS 'Cast Bullet Manual' #1) @ 4.5 Gr. Bullseye for years without issue but have yet to find the answer to my query. (Why is the stamped bullet weight different?) Any thoughts?

[Outpost75]

Weight is alloy dependent. Pure lead is heaviest, as you add additional alloying elements weight decreases. Linotype about 5 grains lighter than pure lead. 1 to 30 tin-lead or 50-50 COWW and pure lead with 1% tin added have similar weight and hardness to factory swage lead 97-2-1 Pb-Sb-Sn at about 8-9 BHN

[USSR]

While cast bullet weight is associated with the alloy being used, with an 8 grain discrepancy such as you have, I would check the accuracy of my scale.

Don

[rintinglen]

The hollow point version weighs less than the original solid nose.

[USSR]

The hollow point version weighs less than the original solid nose.

Thanks for pointing that out, rintinglen. I missed the "/HP".

Don

[Kuduking]

I'm glad someone else resurrected this necro-thread!

I joined the FBI in 1986 and the issue load at that time with .38 Special +P 158 LSWCHP, either the Winchester X38SPD or Federal 38G load. Federal was probably the low bidder on the current contract, although there was still plenty of Winchester in inventory. At some point after I graduated the Academy, the equivalent Remington load, R38S12, was also procured.

The issue gun was the S&W Model 13-3 3" round butt, and all the guns had a Pachmayr grip adapter installed. A few of the female trainees had very small hands, and their guns had the stocks replaced with the Pachmayr Professional Compact grip, with exposed backstrap.

I recall the Federal bullet being softer than the Winchester, recoil about the same. Couldn't really tell what kind of accuracy these loads got, as all the practice and qualification was with factory Remington .38 Special 148 Targetmaster wadcutter load 38S3. The service load were only shot on "combat style" target arrays, in which a hit anywhere on the silhouette was OK. To me it seemed inconsistent.

When the FBI got around to doing actual 10% ballistic gelatin testing after the 1986 Miami shooting, they worked up a big test protocol. They found that the Winchester load didn't expand much when fired from the 3" barrel. The Federal load did measurably better, but the Remington load had the best performance. However, none of the loads could penetrate the car door simulation test. Even worse, the accuracy of the Federal load was atrocious: at 25 yards, the test gun group (10 shots from Ransom Rest) was in excess of 6", and the test barrel group (10 shots from the test fixture) was in excess of 9". The Remington and Winchester loads were nothing to write home about either (test gun groups of 4" and 5", respectively).

After these tests, the Bureau asked the Big Three for a 147 grain jacketed HP .38 Special load that would fire at 900 fps from the 3" gun and pass the test protocols. The 147 grain Winchester 9mm JHP load, which they euphemistically called "Open tip Match", had already been adopted for the the 9mm pistols used by SWAT. Only Federal and Winchester submitted samples, and the loads were listed as ".38 Special +P+". Both were authorized, although I recall seeing a lot more of the Federal 147 HS available. It had a higher velocity than the Winchester JHP and also somewhat better overall performance in the ballistic gelatin tests.

Once the +P+ JHP loads were adopted, the 158 grain SWCHP loads were relegated to training loads. The +P+ loads stayed in inventory for almost 20 years until revolvers were finally completely phased out.

[ddixie884]

The hollow point version weighs less than the original solid nose.

True that...............

[Tim357]

I'm glad someone else resurrected this necro-thread!

I joined the FBI in 1986 and the issue load at that time with .38 Special +P 158 LSWCHP, either the Winchester X38SPD or Federal 38G load. Federal was probably the low bidder on the current contract, although there was still plenty of Winchester in inventory. At some point after I graduated the Academy, the equivalent Remington load, R38S12, was also procured.

The issue gun was the S&W Model 13-3 3" round butt, and all the guns had a Pachmayr grip adapter installed. A few of the female trainees had very small hands, and their guns had the stocks replaced with the Pachmayr Professional Compact grip, with exposed backstrap.

I recall the Federal bullet being softer than the Winchester, recoil about the same. Couldn't really tell what kind of accuracy these loads got, as all the practice and qualification was with factory Remington .38 Special 148 Targetmaster wadcutter load 38S3. The service load were only shot on "combat style" target arrays, in which a hit anywhere on the silhouette was OK. To me it seemed inconsistent.

When the FBI got around to doing actual 10% ballistic gelatin testing after the 1986 Miami shooting, they worked up a big test protocol. They found that the Winchester load didn't expand much when fired from the 3" barrel. The Federal load did measurably better, but the Remington load had the best performance. However, none of the loads could penetrate the car door simulation test. Even worse, the accuracy of the Federal load was atrocious: at 25 yards, the test gun group (10 shots from Ransom Rest) was in excess of 6", and the test barrel group (10 shots from the test fixture) was in excess of 9". The Remington and Winchester loads were nothing to write home about either (test gun groups of 4" and 5", respectively).

After these tests, the Bureau asked the Big Three for a 147 grain jacketed HP .38 Special load that would fire at 900 fps from the 3" gun and pass the test protocols. The 147 grain Winchester 9mm JHP load, which they euphemistically called "Open tip Match", had already been adopted for the the 9mm pistols used by SWAT. Only Federal and Winchester submitted samples, and the loads were listed as ".38 Special +P+". Both were authorized, although I recall seeing a lot more of the Federal 147 HS available. It had a higher velocity than the Winchester JHP and also somewhat better overall performance in the ballistic gelatin tests.

Once the +P+ JHP loads were adopted, the 158 grain SWCHP loads were relegated to training loads. The +P+ loads stayed in inventory for almost 20 years until revolvers were finally completely phased out.

Thanks for the history lesson! Good stuff!

[ddixie884]

Yeah, what he said............

[Outpost75]

In 1972, the FBI adopted the Winchester XD38SPD .38 Special +P all-lead, hollow-point semi-wadcutter. This expanded well in ordnance gelatin tissue simulant when fired at typical velocities produced by the service revolvers then issued. The FBI load proved highly satisfactory in numerous officer involved shootings using both 2- and 4-inch barreled revolvers and was widely adopted by many Federal, state and municipal law enforcement agencies.

Remington and Federal thereafter developed equivalents to be able to compete in contract bid processes. Remington's R38S12 was a stellar performer in short barrels and is still manufactured.

Federal never seemed to get the alloy, lubrication or cavity geometry right and was a poor substitute, and is no longer manufactured.

[LesNoLess]

Good history lesson, thanks KuDuking.
As suggested by USSR, I checked my scale with other items of ‘known’ weights and various LSWC, from 125- 300 gr.
The scale was +/- .1 gr. across the board.

The LSWCHP/GC, which I questioned were cast from W/W and dropped into a full 5 Gal. water bucket direct from the mold to be used for .357 loads. (10.1 gr. Alliant 2400 @ 1330 fps), using MIDWAY Data loading charts for 148 gr. LSWC BN (NOT the 156gr. labeled on the mold.)

“Rintinglens” reply: “hollow point version weighs less than the original solid nose”, seems to carry some relevance regarding why the difference (Thanks Rintinglen!).

[Tim357]

The LSWCHP/GC, which I questioned were cast from W/W and dropped into a full 5 Gal. water bucket direct from the mold to be used for .357 loads. (10.1 gr. Alliant 2400 @ 1330 fps), using MIDWAY Data loading charts for 148 gr. LSWC BN (NOT the 156gr. labeled on the mold.

Did you chrono that 10.1 gr 2400 load? Last I checked, 10 gr 2400 w/ 158 boolit only gave 912 fps from a 4" bbl. That was in .38 Spl cases

[techie]

Midway chrono'd their .357 magnum loads through a 10 inch unvented barrel.