[336A]

I know that Remington and Winchester used to load this ammo way back when, it was pretty anemic from what I learned. The reason for it's coming in to being was to give LEO something that approximated the vaunted .41 Long Colt. I have been thinking of experimenting with this bullet weight in the .38 SPL, However I would like to try and run at (+P) pressures and try to get close to 850fps from the 4" barrel of my S&W M10.

My issue however is there is no current load data for this bullet weight in the .38 SPL. I do have some older data for 2400 but I'm unsure if the stated charge weight is still considered safe or not. I am aware of one fellow who used the older data with Rem 200gr bullets and got about 850fps from his 4" M10. So what do you all think?

 

[papajohn]

I know it's fun to experiment, but my question would be "What are you gonna shoot with it?" I've tried every oddball bullet I can find in the 38 and the 357 from 66 grains up to 190, and I'm convinced the best you can do in most applications is a 158-grainer of whatever form seems to fit the intended use. The old British 38/200 load was meant to penetrate heavy clothing and such, but in modern terms, it was a lousy manstopper. The trajectory is horrible because the velocity is so low, and it might be good for edible small game at short range, but there are still better choices available.

Having said that, if you want to try it just because, go for it. Off the top of my head, 3.5 grains of Unique sounds like a good place to start. 8)

 

[336A]

At first I wanted to try it just for giggles so to speak. However I'm going to be moving to GA here in the very near future and want to try to get me a piggy or two. I can't afford to go out and buy a more appropriate revolver such as a .357 mag. So I have to make due with what I have and thought of trying these out and using them in the event of an emergency. I'm not talking about actually hunting with it but rather putting one into the ear if such a case arose. I feel that a heavier bullet than the standard 158gr bullet would be a better choice in such a scenerio. Here is a link to what i mentioned earlier, take note of the 200gr loading as that is what I was planning on working up to.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/144598-some-38-special-chronograph-tests.html

 

[twodot]

for what it's worth:


2004 Alliant Powder Reloaders Guide shows this 38 Special +P load

200 Gr LRN 7.1 gr of 2400 powder 890 ft/sec 17,500 psi

Federal 100 Primer OAL 1.54 inch Barrel length 5.6 inch

..

 

[35remington]

Be sure you know which 200 grain bullet is being used and what the seating depth is.....such differences make a big difference in the pressure developed by the load.

 

[twodot]

very true.
unfortunately, a lot of times all the info you get from the powder manufacturers is a generic "RNL" or "LSWC".
that's why it's important to reduce your starting load 10 or 15% below what is shown as maximum, watch the over all length, take good notes and observe the results in YOUR firearm.
..

edit: when seated to the crimp groove, which one takes up more powder space?
each one is a 200 gr 38.

 

[twodot]

I added a pic to illustrate two very different 38 caliber round nose bullets

 

[Snapping Twig]

IIRC, the English used a 200g .38 moving @ 700fps, perhaps a bit more, and it was VERY useful and much more effective than our 160g .38's because it penetrated far better.

IMO, it's a worthy goal to resurrect this load.

 

[Barenjager]

I was under the impression the British WWII load was a 200 grain bullet in the .38 S&W case at a nominal 625 FPS. The long and heavy for caliber bullet would become unstable and had a tendency to tumble when entering flesh, actually increasing it's effectivness, but not necessarily it's penetration.

Roe

 

[City Slicker]

Hey 336A

Get your hands on the 45th Edition Lyman manual. It has data on heavy cast bullets including the 200gr. I've played with all kinds of .38 loads and I came to the conclusion the 166gr Lee mould is as heavy as I need in a .38spl. Playing with all the bullet weights is what makes reloading fun...go for it.

 

[Charlie98]

I have some beautiful 180grn cast flat nose .38 bullets... they go into .357 loads, not .38's. I'm with PJ, if it can't be handled by a 158grn, you need a bigger cartridge.

 

[miatakix]

If you have a 30-30 and .444, as your signature indicates, either of those would serve as fine piggy busters in Georgia.

 

[planeflyer21]

I was under the impression the British WWII load was a 200 grain bullet in the .38 S&W case at a nominal 625 FPS. The long and heavy for caliber bullet would become unstable and had a tendency to tumble when entering flesh, actually increasing it's effectivness, but not necessarily it's penetration.

Roe

Correct. I had a S&W Victory in .38 S&W. As with all calibers a person doesn't reload, they were EXPENSIVE! Especially working armed security for a whopping extra $0.10/hour.

I've read/heard accounts of how all the other groundpounders in WWII had cartridge envy for our .45ACP, as the results were effective and immediate.

Jon

 

[papajohn]

I've read/heard accounts of how all the other groundpounders in WWII had cartridge envy for our .45ACP, as the results were effective and immediate.

The lucky ones were issued the Webleys chambered in the 455 Eley. Not as good as a 45ACP, but a world better than a 38S&W!

 

[planeflyer21]

The lucky ones were issued the Webleys chambered in the 455 Eley. Not as good as a 45ACP, but a world better than a 38S&W!

I almost bought one of those, back when they were on 30 pages of Shotgun News twenty or so years ago.

Live and learn!

Jon