Some mediocre results from efforts to put the loads on paper, burning up the remainder of the test loads. While it was very windy at the range, these targets represent the best of an embarrassing lot. The rest were best forgotten.

The 2-inch Model 10 and 5.4 grains of Unique. Shot the left target at 10 yards in single action mode . Also showing a spontaneous 25 yard effort, also shot single action. It was the only revolver that was unlimbered at 25 yards. I'd thought to make a bit longer effort with the snub in order to show it off. Didn't work out and there wasn't enough ammo for a second attempt. This was a 6-shot attempt. Note the merest hit of a bullet clip on the right side of the target.

Here's the 4-inch Model 10 HB with "The Load." 10 yards, both single action and double action.

The 8 3/8-inch and a single action group (group you say?) at 10 yards with the 2400 load.

It's a sure bet that these weren't target handloads. The revolvers didn't seem to be excessively leaded by visual examination and didn't prove to be difficult to clean.

It is possible to equal the Buffalo Bore +P 158 grain factory loads by reaching back to data in older handloading manuals but I'd be sorely tempted to load with Buffalo Bore for self defense purposes since such handloads can't be pressure tested. These loads were worked up but they still could be too much of a good thing for any type of long term use.

Perhaps these loads would have some hunting application but it would be easier to leave the .38 Special at home and just go with the .357 Magnum.

​

 

Several years ago I inherited hundreds of Frankford Arsenal .45 ACP cartridges from 1931 (headstamp of FA 31). Like you, the primers in many had gone bad. I pulled the bullets and reloaded them in other cases. The trick is to break the lacquer seal on the bullet before pulling. Use a seating die, dial it down a half turn after contact, and use it to push the bullet in just enough to break the seal. Then pull the bullet normally. I broke a kinetic puller before I figured out this trick. Also, the FA 31 cases had slightly smaller-than-standard large primer pockets, and not even the RCBS punch-type decrimper would make them the right size. I crushed several primers before common sense took over. The cases were also very brittle and split easily, so I ended up tossing them...

 

bcmc, as I'm just getting launched with reloading your post is timely. Been loading .45 ACP for the steel matches, but .38 Special will be next.

Question: did any of those hot loads result in any leading in the barrels?

FWIW, I buy from a local bullet supplier (Billy Bullets) whose bullets are all moly-coated, and they leave zero leading. I ran some comparable commercial 200 gr SWC reloads (uncoated) recently, and didn't realize how good I had it with the moly bullets - normally a quick dry brushing is all my barrel needs, but after the commercial reloads I needed to work at getting the leading out... annoying.

 

Hi Smitty;

No, surprisingly enough the shadow of leading seen in the rifling just ahead of the forcing cones just brushed out with a bronze brush and Hoppe's No. 9. Each handgun had fired about 70-80 rounds between: working up loads, 10-rounds of each of the 4 loads chronographed, and the minimal target work. The old Lyman stick Alox hung in there for me. I didn't clean the revolvers between the day I shot them over the chronograph and the day I shot them for group. I did get right on cleaning them after returning home from the target session.

It was hot by then. Perhaps the lead just melted out of the bore and was wiped away. While cleaning them in the 102F shade I began to wonder if I couldn't just stuff some scrap lead in some bullet molds and place them out on the driveway in the sun and make "sun bullets." I mean...after all, folks make sun tea.

Seriously, I think that leading problems may be minimized to some extent by cleaning in between each and every shooting session. Well-fitting bullets, properly lubed helps. Getting away from the popular notion that one must have hard cast bullets may have some merit but I'm not certain about that. Getting right on the task of cleaning may also help. I admit to cleaning a firearm whether it was fired 400 times in an afternoon or one time at a skunk.

I don't often have leading problems in modern handguns with smooth bores. Now, the oldies with frosted, pitted bores are something else again. Even with them rapid attention seems to help.

 

Fantastic thread, Bryan! :congrats:

 

Bryan, thanks for a gret and imformative thread that I can really get into. Not only is the 38 spl one of the most versatile but one of the most reloadable cartridges out there.

I think for my purposes, the Unique will be a main stay though.

 

Good info, thanks for posting it.

 

"I think for my purposes, the Unique will be a main stay though."


It's sure hard to argue with that. When all is said and done, Unique is the one single powder I'd use if I could have only one powder for all handgun use. It does a competent job with everything from .25 ACP to .45 Colt and really useful loads may be assembled for both cartridges along with absolutely everything in between. Can't really say that with Bulls-Eye and certainly not with H110. Dirty? Bah! Clean the guns when finished with them and don't fret about it.

It's also difficult to argue with 900 fps or better and 300 ft./lbs of energy or better from the Unique-fueled handload with a 158 grain bullet from a .38 Special with a 2-inch barrel and one doesn't have to go all the way to to 5.4 grains to obtain that level of performance.

 

Great post.

The Model 10 4" heavy barrel was my uniform carry gun beginning in 1969 as it updated our old Colt Offical Police weapons.

The Model 10 2" was my first carry gun when I went into the DB in 1970.

Thanks for taking the time to do your research.

 

Agreed on all points. A handloader who knows his beans can do just about anything, and I believe the grand ole 38spl is even better today than ever as a viable real world defensive cartridge.

Another great round that is begging for some attention at the reloading bench is the 44 spl. Although Elmer did much of the work for us, there is more to do, as the " new improved Unique" is not the same animal it was back then.

My affection towards " working handguns" has lead me into some of the same type of testing with the 41 magnum. Have you got around to that one yet? Here's a tip for ya, with the new Unique, start at about 7 grains. Forget Elmers 9 grains for this one if using a 210 weight swc.

I really appriciate your effort, as it gives me all I need to know.

 

Hey thanks Glockman10mm;

I can use the advice about the .41 Magnum as I keep stumping my toe on the box of 500 210 grain lead SWCs I have on the floor by the loading bench. I've been vacillating on how to approach a Unique-fueled load with the bullet in the .41 Magnum. I would like to come up with a combination that gives 900 to 950 fps.

Yeah, I need to get to work on the grand ol' .44 Special too. My data is dated (sad to have dated data) on .44 Special. Unique is a favorite for it but seems the formulation has changed. I have used and continue to use the .38 Special more than any other center fire handgun cartridge but have always thought that I was a .44 Special kind of guy. If the revolvers weren't quite so large...

Hey OldSchool;

Then your revolvers weren't so far off from the age of that 4-inch Model 10 Heavy Barrel shown which lettered to have been shipped in June of 1971. I didn't get it however until 1975.

 

My data is dated (sad to have dated data) on .44 Special.

As a numbers guy, I can agree.. day to day it's sad to have dated data. Say that to yourself 10 times (while I duck and run...)

 

7 to 7.5 of the new stuff will get you there Bryan. My 4 5/8 inch BH is spitting it out at 920fps with a WLP primer and Winchester brass. 5 inch 5 shot groups are the 50 yard off bench norm.
I like this load because it's easy shooting and a great all round load for about anything. With 9 grains it starts to get mean and vicious, but not bad, clocking 1150 plus fps.

 

I know that this will be more than what your looking for in the .41 magnum but 8.5gr of Unique does really well in my Ruger BH. It gets close to 1100fps out of the 4 5/8" barrel of my BH so it is no weak sister in the power department and it's acurate and clean to boot. This load seems to do well for other folks revolvers as well. It seems that 8.5gr of Unique seems to hit that sweet spot for clean burning and accuracy. I can't comment however on the 7.0gr and 7.5gr loads as I haven't tried them. The more I use Unique the more and more I like using it, for full power loads I use 2400.

 

Hi 336A;

Glad to see you here though I was thinking you were already a long time member. I sure do want a whiz-bang little cast bullet load using Unique for the .41 Magnum. I've had the bullets now for some months but need to actually poke them into some cases. I intend to run the whole gamut with Unique and cast 210 grain SWCs from mild to wild just for the education of it all. What a great revolver cartridge the .41 Magnum is. Why did I go so long without one?

Unique is the staple handgun powder around here. I use others but load more Unique than anything else.

 

One thing that I'd like to add is that according to a long time user of the .41 once you get up to 9.0gr of Unique it is best to turn to another powder for more performance. His point was that he started running into diminishing returns much beyond that, the pressure wasn't woth the small gain in performance. I can't comment on his advice but I worked up to 8.7gr and decided to stop there since recoil was getting to be more than I wanted for a general purpose/plinking load in the BH. The 8.5gr load was more accurate too so that was why I settled on it. I plan on turning this load loose on some piggies this fall:biggrin2:

 

sorry for resurrecting this old post but I thought this was interesting.

Last night I made a spreadsheet using calculations from the chapter on reduced loads in the lee reloading manual. I've been punching numbers into it all morning from hodgdons website and my lyman handgun manual. using powder/bullet combinations with 3 charges/pressures listed (starting, max and +p) I've been getting pressure estimates out of the spreadsheet that are within 100-700psi when staying within 38spl and within 1000-3000 psi when entering 357mag loads into the spreadsheet and reducing to 38spl charge weights.
not knowing what bullet or OAL was used in these tests makes it possible to only give a rough estimate, but I have made estimates from several different loads, both working up from 38spl data and down from 357 data (which seems to work especially well for the lyman 170gr SWC, btw). I have rounded these numbers out for convenience.


first lets go with "The Load"

8.0 grains of 4756 should give you somewhere around 42,000psi depending on the bullet its used with and assuming you keep the OAL as close to max as you can. this figure comes from 357mag data because "The Load" was 1.5grains higher than the max charge for 357. when working from 38spl data I projected the pressure to be closer to 30,000 psi, but this number is most likely very low. as you add powder to a case it takes up volume which by itself causes pressure to increase further, basically each .1grain gets you a little more pressure than the last. because Richard lee's calculations are based on 2 points of data and I'm bad at math, these calculations become more and more inaccurate as you move farther outside the 2 points your using. hence the calculations based of 357mag data are probably closest to the truth

next lets talk about the 11.5 grain charge of 2400

this ones not so bad. depending on the bullet your using and the OAL, your looking at somewhere between 21,000 and 29,000psi. I personally have worked up to 10.5 grains with 2400 and the speer 158g LWSC-HP and all cases dribbled out of my S&W 15-3. with that bullet/charge I estimate I was at 22,000-25,000psi. this one worked out different than the 4756 load in that the 38spl data yielded the higher estimates while the 357mag data yield the lower estimates. this is consistant with 2400 being a slower powder, giving the pressure increases a less pronounced curve as powder is added because the powder takes longer to burn.


well that's what I have to offer. I didn't bother with the other loads because 5.4g of unique is still max for lyman in my handgun manual and is of course a high end but saami approved load. ditto 5.0 of herco. for pressures on those loads see a load manual, not a madman with a spreadsheet. if anyone is interested in hosting the file for the spreadsheet I made to do these calculations I will be happy to share. honestly i'd like to see it stickied for use estimating reduced charge pressures, which is its intended purpose.

 

"The Load" is what it is. It is nothing more than an actual published load found in an older manual. It is the starting load listed for IMR 4756 with a cast lead 158 grain semi-wadcutter bullet as found in the .38 Special chapter of the Speer No. 8 manual which has a publication date of 1970. Some later printings of the Speer No. 8 don't show it and neither does the Speer No. 9. "The Load" is the result of a bunch of friends' discussion on a private firearms forum over several years time. We all worked it up and conducted various tests with it using revolvers as small as a steel J-Frame Smith & Wesson up to as large as a N-Frame Smith & Wesson .38 Special Heavy Duty. Colt Detective Special and Official Police models saw some use by members of this group. For my own 6-inch barrel chronograph tests I employed a .357 Magnum revolver. I'm not aware that it was tested in any other brands of .38 Special revolver. It is very heavy and would not be recommended for extended use, even in quality .38 Special revolvers of steel construction. It would be completely unsuitable for use in alloy-frame revolvers or cheapo revolvers. No prudent person should take any load data at face value whether it is a shooting bud's pet favorite, or found on the internet, or even found in loading manuals, old and new. Always work loads up for one's own gun.

You mention pressure estimates and pressure estimates would be fun to calculate but it is hard to say how accurate they truly are. One out of the group owns a commercial bullet casting operation and went to the trouble to pay to have "The Load" tested by SAAMI. I didn't know this was possible and don't know the cost. He apparently prepared the ammunition and sent it to them. He says that SAAMI tests showed "The Load" returned an average pressure in the range of 26,000 psi. This is still above all SAAMI .38 Special +P specifications, a figure which has been a moving target over the years. It's been variously set at 18,500, 20,000, and 21,500 psi.

We had a good time seeing what could be accomplished with the .38 Special cartridge and published data from days gone by. I was willing to work up to the minimum listed charge weight of IMR 4756 but personally saw no future in striving to go any higher. Given the outstanding velocity performance with the minimum charge of IMR 4756 there is no need.

Practically speaking, there is no real need to use such heavy handloads at all since revolvers chambered for the excellent .357 Magnum are readily available. I have several .357 Magnum revolvers on hand if truly increased performance is required. For the avid handloader though, who only possesses a .38 Special revolver, such heavy loadings could find a niche. Playing with the .38 Special has been a lifetime academic exercise that I enjoy. It's an underdog cartridge that has been severely underrated. Despite current conventional wisdom, the .38 Special and the 9mm are two peas in a pod yet the 9mm enjoys an unfair measure of performance respect that the .38 Special doesn't enjoy. I place the .38 Special ahead of the 9mm simply because the .38 Special handles heavier bullets more capably. The .38 Special revolver can be far more than just a small, light 5-shot snub and .38 Special factory loads can be far more than lightweight jacketed hollow points at 800-900 fps. In the not too distant past, accepted and published .38 Special handloads could be even more potent. Some of us ol' geezers have long memories.

The data and results for the four loads mentioned in this thread were presented for interest to avid handloaders, not as a suggestion to attempt them. They happened to work out for me and my guns.

 

Dancing around 1000 fps with the .38 spl is good stuff and deserves to be dug up and dragged out into the street now and then.

Thanks, Joe!

 

158 Grain Lead SWC/5.4 Grains of Unique

2-inch Barrel
MV 964 fps
ME 326 ft./lbs
ES 75 fps
SD 33 fps

4-inch Barrel
MV 1026 fps
ME 369 ft/lbs.
ES 31 fps
SD 13.4 fps

6-inch Barrel
MV 1047 fps
ME 385 ft./lbs.
ES 43 fps
SD 16.6 fps

8 3/8-inch Barrel
MV 1149 fps
ME 463 ft./lbs.
ES 56 fps
SD 23.3 fps

This load I never would risk Shooting in an 38 spl (even not 38 spl +P) Revolver. I would shoot this only in an 357 mag Revolver.
I get somewhat flat primers using (38 spl cases shot in 357 mag revolver) up to 4.0 grain VV N330 powder with an deep seated 148 grain Wadcutter lead cast (Lee mold) bullet (about 1000 fps velocity and 329 ft-lbs of energy).

Even in an 357 mag Revolver I would not load 5.4 grain Unique even seated normally.

 

Hi S.A.Reloader;

My K-Frame .38s, especially my old favorite Model 10 (especially back in the mid-1970s when I was young) have digested so many of those 5.4 grain loads of Unique under a 158 grain lead bullet that I cannot feel any trepidation over the load.

Doesn't mean that one shouldn't be cautious, working up loads for his own guns.

 

I would say that load is then in about in the 357 mag Levels.

I assume steel thickness determines the difference between 38 spl and 357 mag.

 

5.4 grains of Unique with the 158 grain bullet has been standard as a maximum published load for the .38 Special in several editions of Lyman, Pacific, and other loading manuals for a number of years. It's not that fearsome a load when compared with the .357 Magnum served up with full-charge loads.

The pre-World War II .357 Magnum revolvers, being only the Smith & Wesson N-Frame .357 Magnums, the Colt New Service .357 Magnum, and the smattering of Colt Single Action Army revolvers chambered for .357 Magnum, did rely on thick steel to contain .357 Magnum performance. Those revolvers are large guns. Later, in the early 1950s Colt produced .357 Magnum revolvers on its intermediate frame, which was introduced in 1907 as the Army Special. Smith & Wesson "one-upped" Colt by introducing the .357 Magnum in its even lighter K-Frame revolver. Now we have J-Frame Smith & Wesson .357 Magnums and Ruger LCRs sporting plastic frames. Metallurgy and other engineering feats have tamed the .357 Magnum. Well, that and a general watering down of factory loads to some extent.

 

Deep-seating wadcutter bullets over a charge of a powder with a burning rate very similar to that of Unique, such as the Vihtavuori N330 you are using would certainly raise pressure levels.

Your photo is a bit dark and my reading glasses are a bit weak, but it appears that the loaded round featured with the recovered bullets in the photograph is showing a bullet that is seated well below the case mouth. Given the length of the .38 Special 148 grain wadcutter, this is almost certainly a load with a compressed powder charge, a combination that would very likely result in flattened primers when fired. This would also explain the unusually high velocities you report that you obtain when using Vihtavuori N330 in that charge weight with that bullet.



This is a very abnormal way to seat bullets. Resulting pressures would be well above any maximum published .38 Special Unique load in an old Lyman reloading manual. Compressing relatively fast-burning propellant powders such as are suitable for handguns would be hazardous in the extreme.

 

bmcgilvray,

How much velocity did you get back then in the 1970's from those 158 grain loads? You most likely back then did not have an chronograph availlable I may guess.

smattering of Colt Single Action Army revolvers chambered for .357 Magnum,

I guess that is the case of my Pietta (Heritage) 357 mag SAA revolver since it is supposed to be an replica (although modernized with safety bar) of the classic 1873 Colt SAA. However chambered in the smaller 357 mag (.358") caliber this gives more "meat" to the cylinder and thus more thicker cylinder walls. The cylinder walls are fairly thick on that gun. On top the gun is forged steel as I suppose and not cast steel as Rugers are so the cylinder walls are not quiet that thick as on an Ruger revolver (and do not need to be as I understood The Yankeemarshall on Youtube).

Yeah! It's a way to cut costs as well isnt it?
Reducing pressure levels for the 357 mag (and even maybe reducing SAAMI standard pressure) in order to be able to manufacture "plastik" revolvers. At least they will never be sold to me. But for old age maybe an 36 oz revolver as mine is is a bit heavy. Age has to be taken in account as well but best is shooting while one is young since age brings other "variables"who may hinder the shooting sport.

Regards my deep seated bullets.
I found the power levels of normally seated bullets that meager (the bullets fell in front of the target to the ground) that I opted to improvise a bit.
One told me on a forum that an 9mm Luger case must have about 7.5 grain water content in the powder compartment (deprimed case, then seated the bullet as normal without primer and powder. Then you weight the round. Put then with an syringe water into the primer hole to fill it up without airpockets. Then you weight the round again. The difference for an 9x19 should give about 7.5 grain of water content). Same principle I applied to the 357 mag since both have the same pressure levels (35000 psi).
I figured out how deep I could seat the Wadcutter in the 38 spl case in order to have 7.5 grain of water weight room for the powder. As you see the round loaded it has exactly 7.5 grain of Water weight in the powder space. So I am fine.
The powder is as far as I can see NOT compressed. It would be with 5.4 grain of Unique. So basically my 38 spl cases loaded to 35000 psi pressures have the same charge as my 9x19 for pistol.
I do not weight anymore the powder but rather use the Lee powder measure kit. For both 9mm Luger and 38 spl (35000 psi) I use the 0.5 cc powder dipper. I readjusted the loading technique to the 0.5 cc powder measure to speed up the reloading.

However I noticed my 9x19 have not 7.5 grain water weight in the powder compartment if loaded with the 124 grain lead TC TL Lee bullet. My 9x19 have now an OAL of 1.050" with that bullet and same 3.9 grain VV N330 powder (as for the 38 spl +P+). I had a hard time to adjust the 9x19 load to cycle the gun reliably since again I had to adjust seating depth to the 0.5 cc powder dipper. The 9mm Luger rounds chamber below 1.085" in the chamber of the Taurus PT 92 but by no means the pistol works reliable with that seating depth. So I ended up with the optimal seating depth of 1.050" for the 9mm Luger pistol and get with that about 235 ft-lbs having an velocity of 925 fps (then the pistol works reliable).

I shot recently an 600 lbs heifer for slaugthering with the 9x19 and the animal dropped immediatelly on its knees (1 meter distance shot). So the 9mm Makarov power levels are plenty for practical use and since it's a bit more power than an 380 acp I guess the 188 ft-lbs of an 380 acp FMJ/lead will do any job as well.

Both my 9x19 and those 38 spl +P+ reloads you see in the picture have the same powder space and thus should be safe to use. Obviously the 38 spl is shot from an 357 mag revolver.

 

Wow! Very impressive! And great thread. I struggled to get 920 fps with my 135 gold for load. I had to go WAY over any max that I could find. This is great info on the 158s

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

Yes.
For this info they blocked me out of CastBoolits.com.

However remember one thing: If you seat the bullet deeper than normal you MUST reduce the powder charge.

Seating deeper the bullet rises pressure.