![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2021
Posts: 329
|
Low velocity 38 super
I shoot indoor bullseye. It seems that one could develop a
semi auto 38 caliber that would feed nicely 9 or more rounds by loading 38 super to say 750 -800 fps. I realize the 38 super was developed with power and more impact, but evidently nobody has done the opposite, by going for "powder puff" loads. I have a SW 52, which limits me to 5 rounds per mag, and godawful expensive mags (forget 3K, I can't make them work.) That, plus availability of parts and experienced smiths who know all about 1911's make the choice seem reasonable. Has this been done by any of the forum's members? |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 12,973
|
I have a 1911 in 38 super; sounds sort of like reverse engineering back to being a 9mm making a powder-puff load.
![]() I just looked your gun up--your's isn't a 38 special?
__________________
"Everyone speaks gun."--Robert O'Neill I am NOT an expert--I do not have any formal experience or certification in firearms use or testing; use any information I post at your own risk! |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 30,496
|
What you're looking for is essentially a down loaded .38 ACP, which ran a 130gr at about 1050fps and was the round the .38 Super was developed from.
The key here is the gun. For bullseye shooting, you'll probably want a barrel chambered to headspace on the case mouth, not the "semi rim" for better accuracy. Then the gun just has to be sprung to run on the light loads, and tuned for accuracy. I've never had any interest is doing something like that, but it seems like it would be fairly simple and easy to do, and not terribly expensive. Now, for load data, you're on your own, I don't think anyone publishes data for the Super (or the ACP) in the range you're looking for, its simply a tiny niche most people aren't interested in. There are several powders that will do what you want just fine, but you'll have to carefully experiment and be very careful not to double charge a case Bullseye or W231 are where I would start.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2021
Posts: 329
|
It's a hobby-I have a Colt in 38 super which is off getting a real
trigger installed (can't believe how bad stock trigger is) and I have made a few loads that run around 900, so I'am getting there. I am using VV N320, which works in 38 and 45 quite well at my lower power loads. |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 26, 2016
Posts: 1,674
|
Quote:
Hornady has data for the 38 Automatic. However, they list the wrong OAL in their data, so use their powder charges but use the OAL from the 38 Super data. Or simply use the starting loads for the 38 Super, whichever is lower. And some of them you can use loads less than the starting lows. Just work your way down. There are a few light 38 Super loads at the link below. https://www.shootingtimes.com/editor...r-loads/326242 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 28, 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 1,930
|
Try some 158 LRN bullets for the 38 special in your 38 super. As long as they chamber you are golden. I had 500 that I picked up years back for less than $30 and I prefer using SWC in my 38 special and 357 loads so the LRN bullets became 38 super ammo. They fit my chamber, feed well, shoot well and function well. No problem loading 9 in my magazines.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 12,973
|
Quote:
__________________
"Everyone speaks gun."--Robert O'Neill I am NOT an expert--I do not have any formal experience or certification in firearms use or testing; use any information I post at your own risk! Last edited by stagpanther; January 13, 2025 at 01:57 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 19,187
|
One gunsmith set up a .38 Super to shoot almost the same load as his .38 Special conversion, just a 146 gr SWC instead of WC and 2.7 gr Bullseye.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 30,496
|
Quote:
For the 50-60ish years before that, they were chambered to headspace on the rim. I don't know what the OP has, he may not know. My suggestion was that, if you are building a .38 Super target gun, a barrel cut to headspace on the case mouth is probably the best choice.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2021
Posts: 329
|
Low velocity 38 super
it's a Colt, new, so no issues about headspacing.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 16, 2014
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,659
|
My favorite 38 ACP loads are 3.8 grains HP-38 with a 125 grain lead Lee WFN or a 150 SWC with 3.5 grains HP-38. Those are hotter than 750 FPS but work well in my old Colts. The 125 Grain load comes in at 990 FPS.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2012
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Posts: 1,915
|
I "light Load" 9mm Luger for an old WWII Walther P-38 , 105 gr . cast Lee SWC over 3.7 grs Red Dot... it doen't beat the old warhorse to death and is very accurate !
Get out your reloading manual , load some light bullets at starting velocities ... If the gun doesn't cycle 100% , slowly increase powder charge . In the 9mm Luge / 105 gr. load I started with 3.5 grs. Red Dot , but it didn't cycle well ... 3.6 grs was better and 3.7 grs ...Jackpot ! 100% cycling and accurate shooting . Gary Last edited by gwpercle; January 14, 2025 at 12:44 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2021
Posts: 329
|
so far I'm getting 850-900fps with 3.9gr of VVN320 behind a 125g
JHP. I think a heavier bullet may be a good idea for what I am trying to get to, which is about 750. No question it will require lighter recoil springs. Another concern is SD with light loads, which might lead me to a slower powder, but that is far off at the moment. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|