I ran out in the rain today, to shoot a little bit.
I accidentally over-oiled it, so it got some gunpowder residue stuck to it
Ruger with plates.jpgRuger with brass.jpgammo.jpgammo comparison.jpgbullet comparison.jpg
Because of the rain, I was in a hurry. I just wanted to run some ammo through it, to get a feel for it.
Here is some data for the ammo that I was using:
Buffalo Bore Heavy .38 Special +P; 158 grain LSWHC; 1000 fps, ME: 351 ft/lbs.
S&W mod. 60, 2 inch- 1040 fps (379 ft. lbs.)
S&W mod. 66, 2.5 inch- 1059 fps (393 ft. lbs.)
Ruger SP101, 3 inch- 1143 fps (458 ft. lbs.)
S&W Mt. Gun, 4 inch- 1162 fps (474 ft. lbs.)
Federal .38 Special +P; 125 grain, JHP; 950 fps, ME: 250 ft/lbs (4" barrel)
Blazer .357 magnum; 158 grain JHP; 1150 fps, ME: 464 (4" barrel)
I started off with the Blazer stuff, then the Buffalo Bore +P, then the Federal +P.
I don't know much about ballistics, but the Buffalo Bore produced the most recoil, then the Blazer .357. The Federal stuff was very mild; mild enough that I'm going to run some through my S&W 442.
I know that the Blazer stuff was tested in a 4" barrel, but how much do you think that it loses in a 2" barrel? They are advertising 1150 fps compared to the BB's 1000 fps. I wonder if it's true I know that the BB produced more recoil; does that means it delivers more on the other end?
I must admit that one of the reasons that I got the SP101 was because the 442 is so light, it's punishing on my hand.
I figured that the heavy beast would absorb the recoil. It does .
This thing is an animal and I'm loving it