Magnum loads from Colt Official Police

[HighValleyRanch]

Hmmm, looking at the BuffaloBore site, they quote 1255 fps from a six inch barrel and so their .38 +P Outdoorsman 158 grain Keith HC yields a whopping 530 foot pounds ME! That's in the mid range .357 magnum range, isn't it?

Now I've read that the Colt Official police was built to take the old 38/44 loads, maybe not as robust as the SW heavy frame versions, but still, my old Colt OP with its 6" barrel might work as a woods gun with those loads.

[T. O'Heir]

The Colt Official Police never came in .357 or any magnum cartridge. Kind of doubt it'd be safe with +P ammo either. .41 Colt and .38 Special, when +P didn't exist, was as hot as it got. No .357 load would be safe. Even cast loads
No .38/44's in the Colt Official Police's history. Colt apparently did claim the thing was strong enough for the cartridge, but notably did not chamber for it. Most likely because it was a Smith proprietary cartridge with pressures in the 20,000 PSI area. That's a .38 +P load, not a .357.
http://gundigest.com/classic-guns/38sw
Anyway, that 'ME' is the potential energy of the bullet, not the pressure the revolver can safely handle.

[SaxonPig]

Well, the OP is the same frame and cylinder size as the 357 Trooper and Python models. But unknown if they are tempered to the same level.

In my non expert opinion a factory load of a 158 at 1255 FPS is pretty warm but I wouldn't be afraid to use it in an OP in good condition. Face it, they don't want to get sued so if they are selling it they are probably pretty confident it will be OK.

[HighValleyRanch]

I am not saying that the Official Police came in .357 magnum.
What I am saying is that BB's .38 +P load out of a 6 inch barrel, 158 grains at 1255 fps is equivalent to mid range .357.

It doesn't matter if the original load came out of a .38 special case, or a .357 case, weight and velocity equal the same ME.

BB must be able to get more out of the same SAAMI pressures by using a better blend of powders. Since they (BB) are responsible to keeping it under current +P pressures, these loads should be safe to use in the Colt OP, EQUALLING the ME of mid range .357.

When I get a chronograph, I can better measure these specs.

[ligonierbill]

Contact BB. They are usually pretty clear as to what guns they have tested.

[reddog81]

I'm sure the loads would be safe to fire - as in they won't blow up the gun... But certainly hundreds of rounds will increase the wear considerably. There is no magical way to increase velocity without increasing pressure,

What makes you think Buffalo Bore is a member of SAAMI? I don't see anything on the SAAMI website to indicate they are a member nor do I see anything on Buffalo Bore's website claiming they are a member of SAAMI.

[HighValleyRanch]

What makes you think Buffalo Bore is a member of SAAMI? I don't see anything on the SAAMI website to indicate they are a member nor do I see anything on Buffalo Bore's website claiming they are a member of SAAMI.

Where did I claim that Buffalo bore is a member of SAAMI?

[44 AMP]

BB must be able to get more out of the same SAAMI pressures

This implies that BB is sticking to SAAMI pressures. They are under NO obligation to do so.

I would remind everyone that SAAMI "standards" are a voluntary set of standards agreed to by the members of SAAMI. They are not the law, they are not the blow up limit of the guns, they are an industry agreed on limit to provide safe working pressures in ALL firearms in the designated calibers.

I have no idea what BB loads are for pressure, you should ask them. If you have a question about a specific gun being able to handle their loads, ASK THEM. DO not ASSUME you old colt is ok with their ammo, unless they say so.

[HighValleyRanch]

This implies that BB is sticking to SAAMI pressures. They are under NO obligation to do so.

Implies is the key word.
Reddog said that I think that they are a member. I do not.
I stated:
"BB must be able to get more out of the same SAAMI pressure".
This was only an assumption based on BB's implication that they are safe in any firearm made for .38 +P.
This does not mean that they are a member. They are under no "membership" obligation, but they are under liability obligation by stating that these are safe in all modern firearms designated for +P pressures (as they do on their web pages).

Obviously, if one blows up, the first thing a lawyer is going to ask is if they are loading to industry standards, i.e. SAAMI pressures.

[Pathfinder45]

If I had an old revolver that I knew was plenty strong enough for some extra pressure, I would tailor my handloads to give it some without straining the limits. But if you were me, you wouldn't be putting that Buffalo Bore ammo in that Colt. Why chance wrecking the gun? They aren't making any more of those, you know. If you wreck the gun, the gun might wreck you. You could just buy another revolver in 357 magnum. But the 357 magnum, as great as it is, has some drawbacks to it. Mainly, extremely high-decibel muzzle-blast and secondarily, sharp recoil in guns that are fairly light in weight. You can match that power in a larger caliber, with less pressure and thus less muzzle blast, in a revolver that has a bit more weight with milder recoil. I think the 38 Special is ideal for many purposes without trying to make a magnum out of it. Let your Colt be all it was meant to be, not more; and go buy a bigger gun for when you need more gun.

[reddog81]

Your post did imply they are following SAAMI pressure guidelines. My post was intended to highlight they are not members and therefore not required to follow SAAMI.

No need to argue about it.

Like I said before the loads won't blow up a gun, but I'd assume there would be subtainally more wear using light to medium strength .357 loads in a gun designed for 38 Special. If you can afford to shoot through box after box of BB ammo I'd guess you can afford to fix or buy a new Colt when something breaks.

[Pathfinder45]

We have come this far, and still no picture of the Colt?

[HighValleyRanch]

Here's a pic. Made in 1937.


With the flap holster I made for it, hand tooled floral carving with stamping on flap.

[reddog81]

Nice looking gun.
Nice looking holster.

[Pathfinder45]

Thank you for the picture! Very nice! Another way to get more power out of it without over-doing it, is to use heavier bullets with a relatively slow burning powder. Perhaps 170-180 grain bullets using AA-9 or 2400 powder, loaded into the mild +P range, or simply maximum pressure for standard loads and call it good. It's a classic gun, so don't over-load it. If you don't reload, you are limited to what you can buy. But if you do reload, you can come up with something reasonably powerful that is perfectly tailored to that gun without causing undue strain upon it.

[HighValleyRanch]

Thanks, I do reload, usually milder target loads.

I was just thinking that since my polymer/aluminum LCR can handle those BB Outdoorsman +P loads, I am sure that a big old metal Colt should be able to do it fine as well.
Not intending to, and can't afford to shoot ton's of BB loads, but at that energy, it would be good for woods carry and a shoot a few to test POI.

[rodfac]

They aren't making any more of those, you know. If you wreck the gun, the gun might wreck you. You could just buy another revolver in 357 magnum.

Beautiful old Colt and holster...I'd heed the highlighted text. As you say you reload, then you'd know that 1255 fps with a 158 gr SWC out of a .38 special case is a VERY powerful load. And one that I'd not like to try in any of my guns. YMMV, good luck, Rod

[Cheapshooter]

BB must be able to get more out of the same SAAMI pressures by using a better blend of powders. Since they (BB) are responsible to keeping it under current +P pressures, these loads should be safe to use in the Colt OP, EQUALLING the ME of mid range .357.

BB is a boutique ammo producer that doesn't give a rats behind about SAAMI. If the did they wouldn't offer +P ammunition in cartridges that have no SAAMI +P rating like 32acp, 380acp, 9X18Makarov, and 40 S&W.

[salvadore]

I've run Skeeter's load and a slightly reduced Keith's in 38 cases thru a 1956 OP that caused great damage to my hand, the gun seemed fine. The 358156 and 358429 cast bullets are very accurate at these velocities.

[Jim Watson]

.38-44 is a 158@1100 or so, well under the BB.
I wouldn't.

[tallball]

Nice-looking old Colt! Mine is from 1922. I figure it will outlast me if I stick with mild target loads.

[DPris]

The comment about BB not caring about SAAMI specs deserves rebuttal.

They do the R&D for those who can't be bothered to do their own.
They have the lab that you don't want to buy yourself.
They are VERY cognizant of pressures.
They are very much concerned about safety among those who buy their products (both from a "We don't want to hurt anybody" viewpoint, and a "We don't want to get sued" angle).

Their stuff is consistently excellent quality.
Their stuff is expensive BECAUSE they did the R&D and they expand the envelope in bullet & load choices you generally won't find elsewhere.
They make no pretense of going after the mass market.
They produce products for those who want more performance in certain areas than the major makers will provide, for those who don't want to get into building their own, and for those who may only buy a box or two to last through several years.

As far as pressures go, they can run high.
The company does watch those in load development & does not sell bombs.
It sells high-performance ammunition.

The consumer has the responsibility of determining whether a high-performance load is appropriate in their particular gun or not.

Last September I ran some BB 158 LSWC gas-checked +P loads through a Smith 10 and a Colt OP, along with three other factory loads.
I did not chronograph through either gun.

Both guns were in excellent condition, the Colt was unfired from the early 60s & the Smith was lightly used from the 70s.

The BB produced a best-group at 25 yards through the Smith of five holes at 1 5/16 inch.
The BB wasn't the best performer among the four factory loads in the Colt, but did its tightest group at 2 3/8 inches.

The BB stood both guns up in my hands, literally.
Hot stuff.
Far more noticeable recoil than the next stiff load, a Black Hills 125 JHP +P.

If I were to carry a full-sized .38 again for defensive use, I'd go with a BB load without hesitation.
I'd do my own handloads at the upper levels of the manuals' charge ranges to come closer to the BB in recoil for realistic practice, but I'd actually carry the BB.

The only real factor I'd have any concerns about would be the broad axim that hotter loads GENERALLY run the risk of accelerated wear in a DA revolver, and for that reason alone I would not consider an older Colt V-Spring gun to be a viable candidate for such applications.

The basic action of an OP can stand up to hotter .38s, the 357 V-Springs did well with hotter magnums when those were introduced.
Both have the same internal vulnerability in the hand, though, and Colt can't service those anymore.

If I were going to shoot the OP here much, it'd be more mild ammo to prolong the life of the hand, and it'd be only occasionally, same reason.

And- SAAMI is not the final word on pressures, anyway.
Denis

[HighValleyRanch]

Thanks DPris for that input. I have also found their ammo to be high quality and what they repute it to be. In another thread, I stated I shot their .38 +P outdoorsman and some mid range Amcor .357 through my security six and found the recoil impulse identical.

I found this from the Smith and Wesson forums discussing the .38-44 (added the bold type to emphasize the statement):

Addition - I consulted the 1943 Western ammunition handbook. The ballistics information provided is mostly identical to that from Winchester given above. However, it is made clear that the Western .38 Special Super-X load is the same as the .38-44. There are no longer listings for the 158 grain lead and 158 grain metal point bullets for the .38 Special Super-X, only for the 150 grain metal point and 150 grain metal piercing bullets, both at 1175 ft/sec from a 5" barrel.

I'd bet that virtually identical ballistic information would be found in Remington publications of that time period, except that Remington's equivalent to Winchester's Super Speed and Western's Super-X is called "Hi-Speed."

And then I found this in the safe from my brother's old ammo collection from when he was an Oakland police officer. It's an old box of Winchester Super X from the 1970's. Now I see that Winchester still makes the Winchester Super X, but lists it a around only 875 fps. So wondering if they downgraded their ammo but kept the same name. I have not choreographed this old ammo, but it would be interesting to see how fast it is.

So do you think that the current Winchester super X is the same as this stuff?

Interesting to note that the box is NOT MARKED +P, but the cases are?

[DPris]

I won't re-open the debate over down-loaded .38 Specials in current factory loads as compared to older standards.

I'll just say one of the 158-grain lead handloads leftover from my wife's CAS days (a VERY mild CAS-level powder charge) chronoed hotter than a current 158 factory load a year or two ago in some comps I was doing.

Thirty years back, when S&W was marketing .38 Special ammo under their own brand, they had a load hot enough to qualify for the deer hunt in my state.

Before my buddy at the PD acquired his 686, he'd carry the department's Model 64 as a backup in the Fall, with that S&W .38 Special load in it.
Denis

[HighValleyRanch]

+P!