.38 Special is Really Special

mokin said:

I like the 38 Special. I don't own one but the ammunition works fine in my .357s. The biggest problem is I can't find brass at the range....

On a different note, my girlfriend wanted to go shooting. She'd never been. I let her start with some powder puff 38 loads. The light loads and the heavy revolver made easier shooting than a .22. She shot well, enjoyed herself, and we've been out several times.

Click to expand...

I too used to find bunches of "free" brass at the local range. Not anymore.

Ted100 said:

When I was a "kid", I used to talk all kinds of smack about the 38 special. I think I have 9 of those suckers now. Anyway, growing up, movies like Dirty Harry made negative comments about the 38, you had the Miami FBI Shootout with bad outcomes for the 38 and 9mm guys. because of the rare instances where the 38 didn't perform well, many in the gun community "snubbed" it. I personally have come to the conclusion that the 38 is an exceptionally effective caliber. great for carry, the guns are small and many of them are high quality. Plus, the myth remains that the 38 is under powered . good for us!

Click to expand...

This is my exact experience as well!

Are you a senior citizen too?

This is the only actual 38 I own, the rest are 357.

I really enjoy the .38 Spl as well. I am on the hunt for a very unique Model 14 right now.

In addition to the first article, I found this one informative: https://revolverguy.com/ammo-evolution-38-special-treasury-load/

Here is another good article on the 38 Special:
Cartridge of the Century: The .38 Smith & Wesson Special

And tons of wheelgun articles here:
https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/category/wheel-gun-wednesday/

Here's a question: What do you think the length of the .38 Special would be had it been designed for smokeless powder, something like the 9mm?

Paul7 said:

Here's a question: What do you think the length of the .38 Special would be had it been designed for smokeless powder, something like the 9mm?

Click to expand...

Most .38 Special designed guns originated in more robust frames than their .32 and .38 S&W/Colt counterparts. It probably would have just had less case capacity as all that room is not necessary. I always wondered how those .32’s and other .38 black powder cartridges could have easily achieved as much as the .38 Special had it not been for the rather weak guns they were chambered in. Just because some of them made the switch they were always kept in and around black powder pressure levels.

wcwhitey said:

Most .38 Special designed guns originated in more robust frames than their .32 and .38 S&W/Colt counterparts. It probably would have just had less case capacity as all that room is not necessary. I always wondered how those .32’s and other .38 black powder cartridges could have easily achieved as much as the .38 Special had it not been for the rather weak guns they were chambered in. Just because some of them made the switch they were always kept in and around black powder pressure levels.

Click to expand...

Isn't there empty space in a .38 Special cartridge?

Paul7 said:

Isn't there empty space in a .38 Special cartridge?

Click to expand...

Yes quite a bit, .38 Special was introduced in 1905 during the transition from black to smokeless powder. So yes case capacity is that of a black powder cartridge. Compare it to the 9mm which is substantially shorter and more efficient but designed for smokeless. The potential of the .38 Special is much greater than it is currently loaded, it’s the guns designed for it that have always kept it a relatively low pressure round.

My point was that other cartridges of the time have the same potential in case capacity but the metallurgy and designed (Think S&W break open) in and around 1880ish are just not capable of any development beyond their anemic pressures (.32 Short, S&W, Colt etc). No reason that a .32 S&W long cannot be just as if not very close to a .32 H&R Mag, but you don’t want to put such a round in an old iron gun. Same for .38 S&W. Easily can be loaded to .38 Special ballistics, but an H&R Top Break ain’t gonna take it.

It’s my belief that the .38 made such a good transition is that revolvers were being improved upon, frame size increased at the same time. So a 158 RNL loaded to 820 FPS is not going to stress out a K frame sized Smith or similar Colt. One of the popular conversions were older First Generation Colt SAAs to .38 Special. My BIL has one such gun an 1884 Colt originally a 38-40 (from what I remember). Sent to Colt for a refit and refurb in .38 Special.

Long way of saying the case of a .38 Special could be 2/3 it’s size and get the same performance in a modern gun with modern smokeless powders.

wcwhitey said:

Yes quite a bit, .38 Special was introduced in 1905 during the transition from black to smokeless powder. So yes case capacity is that of a black powder cartridge. Compare it to the 9mm which is substantially shorter and more efficient but designed for smokeless. The potential of the .38 Special is much greater than it is currently loaded, it’s the guns designed for it that have always kept it a relatively low pressure round.

Click to expand...

Interesting stuff. FWIW, I've always thought the .380, designed by JM Browning for smokeless powder, is looked down upon due to it's dimunitive size, when in reality it's about as effective as a standard .38 Special round. I don't feel undergunned with my Glock 42, seven rounds and a much faster reload than a snubbie.