Colt Bright .38 Super and Warm Loads

[74A95]

Originally Posted by HiBC

The impact of a slide launched forward by a 24 lb spring ultimately travels into the slide stop and the holes in the frame supporting the slide stop.

We're not talking about a 24 lb spring. A 18 lb or 20 lb at most. I think that was what Dane Burns used - I'm happy to be corrected if anyone can find his old source material.

FYI, according to Wolff, factory 38 Super recoil spring weight is 14 lb, 40 S&W is 19 lb, 45 Auto is 16 lb. If people went to 18 lb, it's still less than the 40 S&W, and a 20 lb is just one lb more than the 40 S&W. https://www.gunsprings.com/COLT/1911...cID1/mID1/dID1

IMO,a ramped barrel and supported chamber are a place to start.

Neither the 38 Super or 9X23 require a ramped barrel, so it doesn't solve anything.


Load to the gun,not the chronograph.

That's for you, but not everybody thinks that way. Nor should they. We learn and advance when we think outside the box. And if you're loading for competition when a certain power factor is required, you will be loading for the chronograph.


A 38 Super has more than enough velocity to expand 9mm bullets.

Then when you load your 38 Super ammo, you can follow this line of thought. It doesn't apply to everyone or every purpose.


The Major Caliber thing has been adjusted. Extreme 38 Super loads are no longer required.

This only applies if you're loading for competition that has specific power factor requirements. It does not apply to other purposes.


You know,due to the 38 super semi-rim,a 10 mm rim dia (breech face) isn't that much bigger.

Why bother when you can get the performance you want with the 38 Super? Besides, full power 10mm has more recoil than full power 38 Super, 9X23 and 45 Auto. Now you have even more recoil to deal with. That's not much of a solution.

If you want a dyno-chronograph bragging gun,you can rechamber to a 10 mm necked down to .356.Its maybe the 9x25 Dillon?

Again, more cost, and even more recoil.

The 38 Super is a very versatile cartridge. There's no reason to limit it.

[tipoc]

74A95,

You are correct I was wrong and was quoting the information for the 357 Sig which appears on the same page, page 26 of the Western powder manual.

The actual information which Miller cites does show the 147 gr. round nose bullet over 8.3 grains of powder moving at 1300 fps with a pressure of 36,110.

147 (L) LC RN 8.3 1,170 9.2 1,300 36,110 1.270

Approach this slowly.

If a person wants to experiment with heavier and faster loads for the Super I encourage getting a 1911 with a fully ramped barrel. Several makers produce these. The same is true if you want to swap out a 9x23 barrel.

The home of the 9x23 and the gun it was developed for is the 1911. It was developed with a ramped and supported barrel to begin with and with a case that could operate at higher pressures.

The Super is a very good round and from a Colt with an unramped barrel will do most things you may need it to, it's done that for over 90 years now.

tipoc

[HiBC]

What I said

You do things your way.No problem
I'll suggest reaching for heavier recoil springs is not the best plan.

Heavy springs have a couple of problems.One,there is a choreography issue.

The magazine needs a certain amount of time to lift the column of cartridges up to the mag feed lips.A heavy recoil spring speeds up the slide....Which results in problem two.

The 1911 is designed with a reasonable amount of steel to deal with stopping the rearward motion of the recoiling slide and barrel.

Its far less robust when stopping the forward motion of the slide. I'm not a pro 1911 smith. Amateur hobbyist still learning would be closer. IMO,I'll go 2 lbs heavier than JMB intended with a recoil spring if I have reason to. I get ther by installing a 4 lb over spring, At the point the slide stays open most of the time with the 4lb over spring, for myself,thats a limit. Then I go back to the 2 lb over spring. The slide should reliably hold back.

FWIW,the above suggestion will typically select a 16 or 18 lb spring.

I've seen folks recommend and choose 24 lb springs.(Not necessarily for the Super)

My point is heavy recoil springs are a path to a short lived gun.

If you reread my post,I think you'll fing my tone more about "For myself,I choose" or "you do as you wish,my advice would be"

Point by point you selectively edit/quote,and then spin an attack.

You talk out both sides of your face about Major Power.

And the red print. Whats that about? Do you see anyone else doing that? Its weird. Are you needing attention?

I gave my best answer to the OP. You can give your best answer to the OP.

We can disagree. That's OK.

Its an open page. There is room for both of us. A red type tirade?

That's just weird. Are you OK?

This is the OP. This is what I was answering. If you have some freak agenda,thats OK. But please leave me out of it,thanks.

Are you feeling insecure?

The OP:

I have a Colt .38 Super 1911 in bright stainless. It's a 2008 gun. The Internet says I owe it to Mexicans failing to buy as many guns as Colt produced for them.

The odds that I will ever use this gun for self-defense are about like the odds that California will put an AK-47 on its flag, but I still want to make some defensive rounds. No good reason at all.

Can anyone give me advice regarding what the factory chamber can handle? I don't know much about it. Are there aftermarket barrels that are safer for hottish loads?
---------------------------------------------------------------

My first 1911 was a Super,about 30 years ago. I owned a Ben Jones Guncraft open race gun in 38 Super. I gave it to my brother. I have access to it as a model. I suspect you don't know who Ben Jones is,or what kind of 1911he built.

I don't limit the 38 Super.

I'm in process building a Caspian double stack with a Commander length ST Tru-bore comp barrel. I expect to load it to the 40,000 psi range.

I've learned some about the 1911 by building them. I have an idea about what helps them live.

We have an OP shooter who is new to his 38 Super talking HiVel loads with Blue Dot. Been there,done that,got the tee shirt and a junked Clark barrel.
He won't screw anything up with CorBon or Buffalo Bore or factory loads.
The OP said he just wanted SD loads before the velocity thing kicked in.
I did not tell him what he could or could not do.
I told him to ask himself what he is trying to achieve and why.

I don't even need to read his answer. The answer is for him. Its no skin off my nose.



I clearly said I'm an amateur hobbyist.

The comped double stack Caspian I built out of reclaimed parts runs like a watch with 1450 fps 124 gr Montana Gold and Power Pistol with a 12 lb recoil spring.High speed video showed that the flattest shooting combination.

What have you built with your hands?

[74A95]

Originally Posted by tipoc

Approach this slowly.

If a person wants to experiment with heavier and faster loads for the Super I encourage getting a 1911 with a fully ramped barrel. Several makers produce these. The same is true if you want to swap out a 9x23 barrel.

The home of the 9x23 and the gun it was developed for is the 1911. It was developed with a ramped and supported barrel to begin with and with a case that could operate at higher pressures.

tipoc

A 38 Super does not require a ramped barrel. If a person wants to load 38 Super past its SAAMI pressure limit, then yes, a ramped barrel is needed to do this safely.

I don't know what the gun design was that Ricco used for developing his 9X23mm Super that was 'stolen' by Winchester. It might have had a ramped barrel. But the 9X23 Winchester does not require a ramped barrel. That was the purpose of making the case so thick - so it could be safely fired in a non-ramped barrel.

I don't think Colt's 9X23 barrels were ramped. None that I could find with a Google search are ramped.
https://www.gunauction.com/buy/8222415
https://www.okshooters.com/threads/f...-super.155388/
https://www.gunsamerica.com/94578330...per-Barrel.htm

The article below on the 9X23 Winchester indicates that a ramped barrel is not required for the 9X23, and the ammo fired in that article was firing in a non-ramped barrel. There are pictures showing that the original Winchester 9X23 Winchester brass handles the pressure without bulging in an unramped barrel.

I've got a 9X23 barrel that is unsupported like that. Winchester 9X23 ammo show no bulging at all in my barrel either.

An important distinction is made in the article between Winchester's original 9X23 Winchester cases and Starline's 9X23 Comp. The Winchester brass is very thick and handles the high pressure in an unramped barrel just fine. The Starline brass is not as thick or strong and bulges dangerously when fired with high pressure loads in an unsupported chamber. The Starline brass does require a fully supported (ramped) barrel to safely shoot 9X23-like high pressure loads.

https://www.shootingtimes.com/editor...nchester/99601

Oh wait, that looks like the same author you were complaining about. I guess you won't trust that article either. It's ironic that you say that author can't be trusted, when it was, in fact, you who couldn't be trusted.

[HiBC]

74A95,why is your style so snotty and obnoxious? Its unnecessary.

Here at TFL we generally try to share info,knowledge and experience in a pleasant way. Then its enjoyable.

The snotty narcissist thing belongs on some other forum,not here

[Aguila Blanca]

The question that this thread was asked to address was about .38 Super, not 9x23 Winchester. Other than pointing out that they are not the sdame and that load data for 9x23 should not be used for .38 Super, the 9x23 Winchester is off-topic.

It's possible to disagree with another member here without being insulting. Since this thread has gone off the deep and in that regard, and the OP probably has enough solid information to help him make his decisions, this thread is closed.