What's a great 38 sp. SD ammo?

[Buckeye!]

Dave T
Senior Member

Join Date: April 17, 2000
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 1,236
Quote:
...would probably be far better served by the 5 shot j frame in 38 special...
Couldn't disagree with this more. My last 6 years in law enforcement I was the chief firearms instructor for my department (400 armed personnel). I was responsible for all the training and qualification, including off duty weapons and concealed weapons worn by detectives and undercover deputies. I saw a lot of rounds fired down range in those 6 years and very, very few people could shoot 2", 5-shot 38 Specials well, particularly when pushed with tight time limits.

When I retired I ran my own firearms training business, qualifying people for concealed carry permits and teaching self defense classes. I did that for 10 years and saw a lot more rounds fired down range. Again, very, very few people could shoot 2" J-frames acceptably let alone well.

Every one tells me you'll only have to shoot 2-3 yards in a self defense situation so the little, difficult to control guns are no problem. I've seen way too many people miss at close distance on nice sunny days when no one was shooting back or threatening them, just me yelling to "shoot, shoot, shoot".

Nice speech .. .. You are most likely right as rain .., Hardly no practice will ever prepare anyone for a life or death situation... I guess train . shoot .. shoot .. shoot ... practice.. practice.... and I pray my only target will be paper or a can or anything that will not shoot back ..

A 380 or 5 shooter 38 or 357 will be my BUG .. sometimes my primary.. .. so I practice and pray..

[RKG]

Originally Posted by Dave T

Couldn't disagree with this more. My last 6 years in law enforcement I was the chief firearms instructor for my department (400 armed personnel). I was responsible for all the training and qualification, including off duty weapons and concealed weapons worn by detectives and undercover deputies. I saw a lot of rounds fired down range in those 6 years and very, very few people could shoot 2", 5-shot 38 Specials well, particularly when pushed with tight time limits.

When I retired I ran my own firearms training business, qualifying people for concealed carry permits and teaching self defense classes. I did that for 10 years and saw a lot more rounds fired down range. Again, very, very few people could shoot 2" J-frames acceptably let alone well.

Every one tells me you'll only have to shoot 2-3 yards in a self defense situation so the little, difficult to control guns are no problem. I've seen way too many people miss at close distance on nice sunny days when no one was shooting back or threatening them, just me yelling to "shoot, shoot, shoot".

YMMV,
Dave

There's a lot of wisdom in this post. I'd like to add a couple of points:

1) Most of the people you're going to deal with in this context, though professionals (either sworn or civilian) who carry guns for a living, are not what we consider "gun people" (i.e., firearms enthusiasts). You have to accept this and arrange you drills and recommendations accordingly.

2) In addition to -- perhaps even more important than -- the short barrels with the small J-Frame revolvers is (a) their light weight, (b) their (often) skinny sights, and (c) their tiny grips and short backstrap-to-trigger distances. Back when revolvers were the norm, I found that switching an "upstairs guy" from a Model 36 (or 60) to a 2" Model 10 made a huge difference in their ability to draw, fire and hit. All by itself.

3) That said, if a student wants to use a J-Frame, the fact of the matter is that they can be used with effectiveness, but if -- and only if -- the student is willing to invest the time (and ammo) required to become comfortable and intimate -- and I mean intimate, not merely "familiar" -- with it.

4) And, to go back to the nominal thread topic, for my money and in this context, a wadcutter (preferably cast and, given my 'druthers, a cast button-nose wadcutter like the H&G #50) loaded to about 850 fps (4"; works out to about 750 fps 2") is all you need and all you want to maintain controllability.

[Nick_C_S]

Speer Gold Dot +P Short Barrel 135 gr.

This one ^^

If I carried a 38 Special (or a J-frame 357), I'd likely carry this ammo. It's the only 38 Special defense ammo I'd choose. Chronographs at 955 f/s through my 3" bbl S&W 686.

Honorable mention goes to the 357 Mag equivalent (135gn GDHP SB); chronographs at 1153 f/s through my 3". I would likely use these if I carried a light K-frame 357.

However, I carry an L-frame, 7-shot 686 (357), 3" bbl; in its charge holes reside Speer's 158gn GDHP's. These heavies lumber through the chronograph at 1058 f/s. I'm a member of the heavy bullet mindset club - especially in the winter.

[Nanuk]

I respectfully disagree with Nanuk. 38 special has many great offerings of excellent self defense ammo.

You are free to disagree. I come to my opinion from seeing lots of people shot. In the 80's 38's were pretty popular in the projects.

[481]

Originally Posted by Nick_C_S

Honorable mention goes to the 357 Mag equivalent (135gn GDHP SB); chronographs at 1153 f/s through my 3". I would likely use these if I carried a light K-frame 357.

I agree.

Not a bad load considering that it duplicates a decent 9mm load in terms of its perfromance and has a bonded JHP; the Gold Dot is a really good bullet and makes up for a lot of 'ills'.

[Doc Holliday 1950]

My 357 in magnum, 6 shot, 2" EAA is not a J frame. Not at this weight. It's closer to a L or K frame & I think that makes a considerable difference at 1.9 lbs. For a 2", I really do not like a 14 or 14+ ounce 357 in magnum. It jumps all over the place IMHO. Some how the post got away from the original question.

[otasan]

I once read a story about .38 Special 200 gr LRN. The bullet tended to tumble thru the target flesh.

[Dave T]

otasan,

The old timers I met when I first went into law enforcement talked about that load, and most of them said it was a joke. In in the context of this thread (2" barrel 38 Specials) its velocity was so low it would sometimes bounce off a windshield. And the number of stopping failures with that load was higher than even the standard 158g RNL 38 Special.

Again YMMV,
Dave

[otasan]

Weaker than the old 158gr RNL? That is saying something.

[Buckeye!]

feel free to disagree. I come to my opinion from seeing lots of people shot. In the 80's 38's were pretty popular in the projects.

They are a wide range of 38 Spl ammo ... Some not as good as most ...same can be said about any ammo ..any .....
and self defense ammo has come along ways in the past 35 years .. Most 38 spl ammo in the 80's was 158 gr LRN
Personally my choice of defensive 38spl ammo will function better than most .....

[481]

Originally Posted by Dave T

otasan,

The old timers I met when I first went into law enforcement talked about that load, and most of them said it was a joke. In in the context of this thread (2" barrel 38 Specials) its velocity was so low it would sometimes bounce off a windshield. And the number of stopping failures with that load was higher than even the standard 158g RNL 38 Special.

Again YMMV,
Dave

I believe that it (can't remember if it was specifically the 158 or the 200-grain LRN) was called the 'widowmaker' by those having to carry it. Probably a reason for that.

[WyMark]

This one: https://www.luckygunner.com/winchest...nse-20#geltest

[Cheapshooter]

In the 80's 38's were pretty popular in the projects.

Thirty years ago bullet technology was quite different. As was many of the propellants used by ammo makers.
The industry has come a long way, with many improvements since 1980.

[Water-Man]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fjQTwehngI&t=7s
Here's that 38 Underwood ammo that I mentioned before.

[Nanuk]

They are a wide range of 38 Spl ammo ... Some not as good as most ...same can be said about any ammo ..any .....
and self defense ammo has come along ways in the past 35 years .. Most 38 spl ammo in the 80's was 158 gr LRN

I have been in LE since 1979.

[Nanuk]

I believe that it (can't remember if it was specifically the 158 or the 200-grain LRN) was called the 'widowmaker' by those having to carry it. Probably a reason for that.

The 158 was the widowmaker. It was more prolific.

[Nanuk]

Thirty years ago bullet technology was quite different. As was many of the propellants used by ammo makers.
The industry has come a long way, with many improvements since 1980.

Very true. A snubby 38 throws most bullets in the 650-750 fps range, no matter what you do to the bullet there is only so much it can do at that velocity. Expecting magic bullets from technology is a foolish proposition. It seems every week someone talks about carrying wadcutters in their 38.

After all the advancements in bullet tech, show me one that has proven more effective than the Remington 125 grain 357 magnum circa 1984 on the street, not jello, not water but people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8WNQxIjutc

[Buckeye!]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=YgGjNQ_hhIQ

This a repeat .. But by comments made , the must have missed it
Federal HST 130gr 38spl ... This is listed as a +P ... But by velocity and said recoil .. It behaved as a standard pressure

Edit : just bought 4 boxes at Wal-Mart for 24.37 a box .. After looking at Academy, 3 LGS's ..and Bass Pro

[.38SPL enthusiast]

Maybe the original 200 grain factory loading was as weak as some remember, but my 200 grain reloads over a modest powder charge were always great for even large varmints. Seemed to be equal to or better than anything else I've used out of a two inch gun. Also, such respected gun writers as Ken Waters, Charles Askins, and even Elmer Keith favored it in .38's.

[samsmix]

It sort of depends on what you are trying to get out of the .38 snubby, and for whom, and what that person's skill level is.

If I were after the lowest possible recoil, and "at least it's not a. 22lr" stopping power, then 148gr wadcutters would be high on my list.

The Speer Short Barrel would be great for better performance. Will the expand? Who knows, but they are a lot more likely to than a non-hollow point.

.38+p.....you might gain some speed, but it is up to the individual to decide if there is any real gain there.

I have one snubby, and its currently used for home defense by a loved one in a trailer park. It is loaded with Hornady CD 110gr due to thin trailer walls and close proximity to the neighbors.

[ThomasT]

This was written by one of the best posters on this site. It discusses the 38 and what the real 38 loads were like before it was watered down to the weak level it is now and how most 38+P is not even up to the original 38 special loads.

http://shootingwithhobie.blogspot.co...-saxonpig.html

My uncle was a cop till his death. In about 1967 he killed a man while on duty. The load was the old round nose lead. And it was indeed a widow maker. It made a widow out of the woman married to the man my uncle killed. One shot was all it took too. His gun was a model 15 4" barrel.

Am I promoting the RNL for defense? Nope, but don't fool yourself into thinking it is not effective or will not stop someone. But there are better bullets now.

[DPris]

The 130 HST chronoed at a consistent 800 plus change FPS through my Colt DS snub, best 5-shot 25-yard group under 3 inches, and penetrated 18 inches of water jugs before coming to rest perfectly expanded with zero fragmentation.

I realize this does not translate directly into the same results on tissue, but it is a good indicator of velocity, expansion, and bullet construction.

The old LRN could & did kill, but so did rocks, and we're lightyears beyond both in modern JHPs today.
Denis

[Buckeye!]

DPris .. To me this load seemed not to recoil quite as bad as some other 38spl +P ammo .. Particularly Remington 125gr 38Spl +P .. How bout you ?

[DPris]

Very mild recoil.
Denis

[Laz]

I am no expert in anything firearms related but I have googled and searched forums for a number years regarding topics such as Plus P 38 Special especially as it relates to airweight snubbies, particularly older “non Plus P rated” ones. The internet is a wonderful thing and there are many knowledgeable experts and posters. However, I would feel a lot more comfortable about the wisdom of using Plus P in some revolvers if almost every single source reporting the weak nature of Plus P and it’s non-issue in older firearms that I have found for a number of years did not ultimately lead back to one particular individual who has been promoting that idea for years and who regardless of his expertise is still one poster on the internet whose expertise and knowledge is frankly unverified. If you have searched this subject at all, you know what I mean and I mean no disrespect to him. But, just like a doctor, I would like a second and third opinion instead of reading source after source that trace back to one man’s opinion of what others can safely do with their guns. It weakens the value of the information. Repetition does not increase reliability of information.