Is .38 Super sufficiently uncool?

Status
Not open for further replies.
.357 Sig is a bottleneck cartridge based on the 40S&W case making it a pain to reload. Had a P229 with both barrels but I sold it when I got into 10mm's. It's been a while since I had it and I never tried to reload for it, as I recall it was fussy about bullets requiring one with a short ogive I think, might be wrong about that. Part of the reason I never reloaded it.
I will say it was quite an accurate round that came closer to .357mag. velocities but ammo was expensive.
 
rpenmanparker said:
Someone please help me understand the difference between .38 Super and .38 SiG. I’m guessing the SIG is more intended as a SD cartridge to give .357 MAG type performance to the autoloader platform including the stiff recoil, noise and flash. Seems the Super is more about better competition performance than 9mm without being hard to live with. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Never heard of a 38 SIG.

The 357 SIG was designed to provide 357 Mag-like performance in a 9mm/40 caliber gun frame, hence the 357 SIG's short overall length. I doubt that the stiff recoil, noise and flash were intended parts of the design, but 357 Mag-like performance produces 357 Mag-like recoil.

The 38 Super, because of it's longer 45 Auto-like overall length, requires a larger frame depth, like the 45 Auto/10mm. It grew from the introduction of Colt's Super 38 pistol introduced in 1929, which was chambered for the 38 Automatic. Around 1933 folks figured out that the 1911 could handle a cartridge with a little more power than the 38 Automatic, and upped the performance and this "new" loading became known as the 38 Super. The 38 Super provides a higher magazine capacity than the 357 because the 38 Super is based on a 38 caliber cartridge and the 357 SIG is based on a 40 caliber cartridge. SIG When the 38 Super is loaded to 357 Mag-like performance, it also produces 357 Mag-like recoil. No free lunch and all that.

"without being hard to live with" Don't have a clue what that means.
 
wanderinwalker said:
And you don't fully understand "my precious" until you're scrambling to find your once or twice fired .38 Super brass in the weeds.
Click to expand...

I nearly jumped for joy one day when I showed up at the range and someone ripped off 100+ rounds of 10mm in their Glock, and around 50 .357 mag that morning and just walked away.

They were all waiting in the grass shiny and bright and only once fired.
 
fxvr5 said:
Never heard of a 38 SIG.

The 357 SIG was designed to provide 357 Mag-like performance in a 9mm/40 caliber gun frame, hence the 357 SIG's short overall length. I doubt that the stiff recoil, noise and flash were intended parts of the design, but 357 Mag-like performance produces 357 Mag-like recoil.

The 38 Super, because of it's longer 45 Auto-like overall length, requires a larger frame depth, like the 45 Auto/10mm. It grew from the introduction of Colt's Super 38 pistol introduced in 1929, which was chambered for the 38 Automatic. Around 1933 folks figured out that the 1911 could handle a cartridge with a little more power than the 38 Automatic, and upped the performance and this "new" loading became known as the 38 Super. The 38 Super provides a higher magazine capacity than the 357 because the 38 Super is based on a 38 caliber cartridge and the 357 SIG is based on a 40 caliber cartridge. SIG When the 38 Super is loaded to 357 Mag-like performance, it also produces 357 Mag-like recoil. No free lunch and all that.

"without being hard to live with" Don't have a clue what that means.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I did mean .357 Sig.
 
fxvr5 said:
The 357 SIG was designed to provide 357 Mag-like performance in a 9mm/40 caliber gun frame, hence the 357 SIG's short overall length. I doubt that the stiff recoil, noise and flash were intended parts of the design, but 357 Mag-like performance produces 357 Mag-like recoil.
Click to expand...

Yep. At least with 124/125 grain bullets and loaded to their full potential, the 38 super and 357 sig are ballistically very similar.. basically 9mm +150fps. The difference is literally where the .357 sig and the 38 super store the extra powder to produce that additional speed. The 38 super is longer, and it stores the powder in a longer column. The 357 is fatter, with a necked-down 40 base, and it stores the powder in a fatter cylinder of similar length to 9mm.
  • If you care about ease of reloading, total magazine capacity, and/or grip width, the 38 super is the cartridge for you.
  • If you care about grip length (fore and aft) and/or need a cartridge to run in a gun that only has the slide-movement window to accommodate 9mm/.40S&W length ammo, then 357 Sig is the one for you.
In the practical pistol games, magazine capacity is a huge deal, and ease of reloading is also very important (competitive shooters are high-volume shooters, and most reload their own ammo in significant volumes). Most people in the relevant equipment division are shooting 2011-based things with plenty of stroke length and grip length for a .38 super, so there's literally no advantage to the 357Sig for them. The .357 Sig sees absolutely no competitive use outside of people shooting their first matches with non-gamer gear or someone purposely using their duty gun or the like.

The real question in the relevant division is whether to shoot 38 super or 9 Grenade (9 Major), which forces 38 super/357sig performance out of a 9mm case.
 
Last edited:
JR24 said:
I nearly jumped for joy one day when I showed up at the range and someone ripped off 100+ rounds of 10mm in their Glock, and around 50 .357 mag that morning and just walked away.

They were all waiting in the grass shiny and bright and only once fired.
Click to expand...

I hear that. I picked up my first .357 Magnum revolver in the middle of the Banic, and man were .38 and .357 ammo difficult to come by. One day at the range I found 4 or 5 boxes of .38 Special brass, neatly and freshly piled up. Made my day right then!

My Colt .38 Super throws brass like a Mini-14 or AK. I'm lucky it comes down in the same zip code. Five hundred pieces of virgin Starline brass has gone from 10 boxes of loaded ammo to enough for 8 boxes of ammo and some spare brass in 3 loadings. Thus making me consider getting a 9mm 1911 or sticking with the .45. Either can be easily fed with range brass.

Also, oddly, I've found a smattering of .38 ACP head stamp brass on the range recently. Not more than 8 or 10 so far, but enough to make me wonder who has that pistol.
 
ATLDave said:
Yep. At least with 124/125 grain bullets and loaded to their full potential, the 38 super and 357 sig are ballistically very similar.. basically 9mm +150fps. The difference is literally where the .357 sig and the 38 super store the extra powder to produce that additional speed. The 38 super is longer, and it stores the powder in a longer column. The 357 is fatter, with a necked-down 40 base, and it stores the powder in a fatter cylinder of similar length to 9mm.
  • If you care about ease of reloading, total magazine capacity, and/or grip width, the 38 super is the cartridge for you.
  • If you care about grip length (fore and aft) and/or need a cartridge to run in a gun that only has the slide-movement window to accommodate 9mm/.40S&W length ammo, then 357 Sig is the one for you.
In the practical pistol games, magazine capacity is a huge deal, and ease of reloading is also very important (competitive shooters are high-volume shooters, and most reload their own ammo in significant volumes). Most people in the relevant equipment division are shooting 2011-based things with plenty of stroke length and grip length for a .38 super, so there's literally no advantage to the 357Sig for them. The .357 Sig sees absolutely no competitive use outside of people shooting their first matches with non-gamer gear or someone purposely using their duty gun or the like.

The real question in the relevant division is whether to shoot 38 super or 9 Grenade (9 Major), which forces 38 super/357sig performance out of a 9mm case.
Click to expand...
Excellent explanation. Many thanks.
 
wanderinwalker said:
I hear that. I picked up my first .357 Magnum revolver in the middle of the Banic, and man were .38 and .357 ammo difficult to come by. One day at the range I found 4 or 5 boxes of .38 Special brass, neatly and freshly piled up. Made my day right then!

My Colt .38 Super throws brass like a Mini-14 or AK. I'm lucky it comes down in the same zip code. Five hundred pieces of virgin Starline brass has gone from 10 boxes of loaded ammo to enough for 8 boxes of ammo and some spare brass in 3 loadings. Thus making me consider getting a 9mm 1911 or sticking with the .45. Either can be easily fed with range brass.

Also, oddly, I've found a smattering of .38 ACP head stamp brass on the range recently. Not more than 8 or 10 so far, but enough to make me wonder who has that pistol.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my 10mm 1911 hurls brass into the next county too. Luckily the 25 yard part of our range has a wall behind the bench that bounces most of them. At the pistol range part I'm usually scouring the weeds and parking lot
 
wanderinwalker said:
Also, oddly, I've found a smattering of .38 ACP head stamp brass on the range recently. Not more than 8 or 10 so far, but enough to make me wonder who has that pistol.
Click to expand...

Folks that have been shooting 38 Super for a long while and reload probably have some 38 ACP cases in their brass stash. I do.

I have not bought any commercial ammunition for my 38 Supers in decades but when I first got one, I did by some 38 ACP ammunition.
 
Back when I had a .38 Super, I got a Deal on some .38 ACP brass which I used for moderate loads. The cases were lighter in weight than .38 Supers, so I did not hot load them. When I sold the gun, I gave the brass to a shooter who was more interested in accurate comfortable shooting than Major power factor.
 
Olon said:
Ah, picking things that are "uncool" because that's cool.

Starting to sound an awful lot like those millenial hipsters you so passionately denigrate.
Click to expand...

No passion. Merely observation. There will be a safe space for you somewhere though.
 
LRDGCO said:
No passion. Merely observation. There will be a safe space for you somewhere though.
Click to expand...

Sweet, maybe I can get some time off work and see ya there. Unlikely though; I've got to put food on the table and we all know this hobby ain't cheap.

Tell you what, we can split a six pack of local craft beer.
 
Dave T said:
Had to laugh at this. Because I'm old and broken (severe lower back problems) I pick up my brass with a Pooper-Scooper. You can't get any more un-cool than that. (smile)
Dave
Click to expand...
I can relate to this but using a cheap effective tool to get the job done reeks of cool, as long as there's no poop in the scooper.:cool:
 
Hipsters were mentioned. 38 Super isn’t ironic enough for hipsters.

Wasn’t the original designation Super 38? I seem to remember reading that in American Rifleman a few years ago.

I’ve always wished for a Springfield XDs in 38. No idea if it would suck or not but given the frame length it makes sense.
 
460Shooter said:
Wasn’t the original designation Super 38? I seem to remember reading that in American Rifleman a few years ago.
Click to expand...

Yes, the gun, introduced in 1929, was caller the Colt Super 38. It was chambered in 38 Automatic. The 38 Super cartridge, as we know it today, didn't come around until about 1933.
 
George Costanza once said "it's not a lie if you believe it." So along those lines, "it's not uncool if you like it."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CZF
  • Locked
1911 .38 Super Fans?
Replies
17
Views
2K
popeye
popeye
Armed 24/7
  • Locked
John Browning .38 Super Question
Replies
2
Views
417
Armed 24/7
Armed 24/7
Panzerschwein
  • Locked
.38 Super vs 9mm +P or +P+
Replies
21
Views
8K
justin22885
J
C
  • Locked
Your 38 Super Experience
2
Replies
43
Views
3K
RainDodger
RainDodger
M
  • Locked
.38 Super to .45 conversion?
Replies
2
Views
430
MountainBear
M
Back
Top