Great article and I heartily agree with you. I have carried a 38 special since I first pinned on a badge in 1973. I am comfortable as the 38 special will still do everything I need it to do as long as I do my part.
I enjoyed reading this. It's very similar to my thoughts on my favorite platform the semi automatic. I just like the extra rounds and easier reload. A few years ago though I got to thinking about my ballistics. I carried a 40sw 165 grain speer gold dot. Solid very accepted self defense round. In the 411 to 420 ft lb range it was significant step up from then current 9mm rounds. I thought it was a very good middle of the road, better than 9mm but not as expensive as 10mm or 45auto.
I now carry all copper 60gr rounds that are 533 ft lbs of energy. Modern tech and ballistics have given the 40sw a 25% increase in muzzle energy and almost double the velocity. I had been looking at moving to a different gun and ammo to give lighter recoil with low end rifle velocity out of a pistol. New technology meant that all I had to do was purchase new ammo. Keep the same gun, magazines and holsters but step up to new performance. It also dropped about a pound off my belt between loaded gun and spare magazines.
Today I have moved down to 9mm because of age induced weaker hands and arms and to have a even smaller lighter gun and magazines. I'm still getting 462 ft lbs of energy at the muzzle.
I looked up their ammo for 38sp and it was puzzling. 250ft lbs at the muzzle. Standard loads run from 200 ft lbs to 350ft lbs already. I would be very curious why most calibers get a very substantial increase in energy while the 38sp is so anemic with their (liberty ammunition's civil defense) ammo.
9mm 462 FPE 2040 FPS
38sp 250 ft lbs 1500 FPS
380auto 250 ft lbs 1500 FPS
40sw 533 ft lbs 2000 FPS
10mm 780 ft lbs 2,400 FPS
357 magnum 490 ft lbs 2100 FPS
357 sig 587 ft lbs 2300 FPS
45 acp 600 ft lbs 1900 FPS
all I can think is that it has to do with sami specs for chamber pressures. Admittedly with the light weight of the bullets (between 50 and 78 gr. 78 for 45acp and all other 50 and 60 gr) there isn't a huge difference in bullet weight. So keeping the muzzle velocity down on the 38sp and 380 auto seem to be aimed at reducing chamber pressure.
:) now I will add this since these bullets really seem to hit that new stuff bad bone that a lot of us have over changing tried and true rounds for newer vastly different ones. Just about every time I post about these bullets I hear about how they don't have the penetration of ones like the speer gold dot. With it being closer to 12 to 14 inches than 19 to 25 ish inches. That is one of my likes for this round. We are not like cops that get a pass if a bullet goes through our target and hits someone else. With more energy on impact at close range and less penetration I am at a trade off I like. Also there are 5 different wound channels compared to one with standard rounds.
They do make a new Overwatch 9mm round that has deeper penetration comparable to the older school ammo and a 473 ft lbs muzzle energy. I guess it was at the request of military that they developed it at least that is what is on their webpage. it has a 72 gr bullet compared to 50gr for the civil defense which also lowered muzzle velocity to 1700 FPS.
this just all ties back into the article here. Newer and divergent upgrades in tech for bullets keeps older platforms relevant and comparable to more modern calibers/guns.
Ballistics and terminal ballistics are some fascinating subjects.
Unless you chronographed your ammo in your gun, the -published- numbers are meaningless beyond very general comparisons. They are "fired in test barrels" used on exactly zero firearms outside factories and labs. No cylinder gaps, for example. Also the test barrels are almost always on the longer side of actual carry barrels.
And we can assume from our own testing that many makers .... puff ... the numbers a bit.
I found some +P 125 grain .38 special loads were not more than 10-20 actual chrono FPS more in my J Frame than same brand non-P, but did make a nifty basketball sized flash absent from the slower rounds. Not enough barrel to make use of the propellant.
Shot a rabid raccoon with same J-Frame. It wasn't impressed with a solid center-mass hit from a topshelf ammo. Braining the poor thing did. Some things are too stupid or insane to understand they have been fatally shot. One has to turn off the lights to persuade them.
.38 will work. You just have to work harder to make it work.
Yes this is all true. There are a ton of variables that can cause changes in the end results. I hadn't thought about the cylinder gap, but that would explain a bit of difference. Even where different revolvers of same specs might be different muzzle energy due to different cylinder gaps.
From what I can tell the civil defense ammo is spec'd mostly for 4 inch barrels so most subcompact guns are going to run a bit less. For example my G27 with a 3.43 inch barrel. would get 1846 ft per sec out of it according to ballistic testing that Lucky gunner did. https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ This would come out to 453 ftlbs of Muzzle energy. A drop from the rated 500ish. While in my glock 35 with a 5.31 inch barrel muzzle velocity calculates at 2148 ft per second with a muzzle energy of 615 ft lbs. quite a difference.
I ran the numbers for a sub2000's 16 inch barrel and it calculated out at 3150 ft per second and 1322 ft lbs.. However this will most likely not be true in real life as it doesn't take into account where the bullet starts slowing in a longer barrel due to complete powder burn designed for shorter barrels.
supposedly in a 16 inch barrel it real world gets around 2500 ft per sec and around 800 ft lbs but I haven't been able to pin down what I would consider a valid source.
If I had a chronograph I would test it. I have guns with 3.5, 4.01, 5.31 and 16 inch barrels to test this in. Some day I will just because i have the curiosity bug.
Highly recommend buy or borrow chrono time. You may discover your favorite blaster needs attention. Also may discover favorite ammo is ... exaggerated. Or prove your preference correct. Was amazed at some results with my own.
Yep... the number of things I thought I knew because I was told or read or or the vendor claimed that haven't been true on testing it myself is legion! I hate it when it happens because I get really irked at being lied to or creatively miss lead, which I translate in my vernacular as being lied to.
heh.. i could tell some good stories of me going down the rabbit hole and buying a bunch of test equipment just to prove what the truth was over something I bought.
Little more broke and less energy nowdays, but once in a while, watch out.
I've shot .38 Special more than any other cartridge. I have two 5 gallon buckets of brass and another of nickle plated brass. As a young Officer my partner and I tested a lot of calibers on a car. Using the in load at the time 158grn LSWHP+P through the front windshield at a cardboard IPSC target. With the 2" M-10 the bullet penetrated the windshield and stuck in the cardboard. Yes, it failed to penetrate the cardboard after the windshield. With a 4" M-10 it penetrated the cardboard , the drivers seat , the rear seat and we found it in the trunk. Yes barrel length makes a big difference. Keep up the good articles!
I get the uneasiness of magazines sitting for long times with compressed springs. Over 40 years of shooting i have had a lot of different magazine fed guns, pistols and rifles. Of the quality magazines I have never had an issue. even if it sat for years loaded.. I think I have shot some that were loaded for as long as 10 years and not had an issue. Cheap magazines I have had an issue with but they had issues regardless of time loaded. Brand new they had issues.
Now if you using steel cased ammo and it starts to corrode sitting in the magazine it is absolutely going to fail :) but absent weirdness like that I have ceased to worry to much. Quality mags for me are magpul, glock factory mags, and a millspec aluminum and or stainless stell mags. Both rifle and pistol for those.
One exception to this is magazine fed shotguns. They will always fail to feed after sitting in magazine for even a month or so. Doesn't matter brand or type. Plastic shotgun shells warp into ovals if compressed in a magazine and ovals don't chamber in round holes. Shot gunshells were specifically designed to be loaded nose to butt in a tube. any magazine fed shotgun is fun and mostly reliable if you are loading and shooting within a day or two. I would never ever ever depend on one for self defense where it was beside the bed loaded for extended periods of time. It will not function. I have tested this and have the boxes of oval shaped warped shells to prove it.
Honestly, I love pistols and shooting them and carry when away from home but they are a bit anemic no matter what you are using. At home, it is a shotgun or rifle beside the bed with 16 to 30 rounds in case they brought friends. I fully endorse the old saying that a pistol is just there to get you to a rifle.
Rifle is inherently more accurate and less subject to a reduction in accuracy in relation to adrenaline based reduction in motor control in a flight or fight situation.
Rifle or shotgun or at least the ones I have are going to end the fight with the first or second round if you can hit center of mass. If you hit an arm or leg its going to functionally destroy it.
The effort to train to a decent standard is less with a rifle than with a pistol simply because of its inherent structural accuracy with its three point of contact including the shoulder with your body as opposed to two points of contact with a pistol hanging at arms length out from your body.
Most likely you will be more accurate with a rifle in three or four hours of training than you will be after more than a year with a pistol. This isn't to say that I don't like or use pistols. I probably do more than the rifles on a day to day basis. I can't carry a rifle with me daily and it would be very awkward if it was ok to do so. I spent years living with a rifle on me in the military up to sleeping with the damn thing in my sleeping bag. They are not cuddly. Having one in arms reach or on your body day in and day out interferes with doing other stuff sometimes. My pistol on the other hand is on or under my belt and I can forget it is there as comfortable as it is. No one gives me odd looks and freaks out because they don't know it is there. At home, I'm just going to start out with the most effective defensive object I can use.
That has changed over the years as I have gotten older and less physically able. Everyone has to know their own abilities and what they can use the most effectively.
The total weight of my Taurus View with a laser sight loaded with five 38 special caliber 148 grain wadcutters is about 12 ounces. Not even noticeable in a front pocket carry.
If your piece is rated for +P, you have a lot of options. Heavy, hard cast, flat nosed bullets going ~900-950 fps is bad news for the recipient in a lot of situations. It’s not the right tool for some situations, but you could do a lot worse. Target loads for the 38 special are fun and great for practicing DA-only shooting, which is an important skill for revolver shooters to develop.
When people talk about the .38(Long Colt)'s ineffectiveness against the Moros and its replacement by the old .45 Colt, they stop there. I've read nothing except the .45 Colt was basically ineffective also. Nowhere I've found in writing that the .45 changed the game, which is what is alluded to.
I know your point was they are talking about the wrong .38, but reading or hearing the story always makes me wonder if they know all of the story. Probably not.
Yeah, the Moro's were basically hopped up on drugs and they pre-torniquet wrapped their extremities prior to battle. Unless someone was lucky enough to hit the brain or the spine, they just ignored the holes in their chest and kept fighting until they ran out of blood. The only concession for the larger caliber is slightly quicker blood loss due to the slightly larger hole. That's basically it. Also the basic lead round-nose rounds were basically the worst for combat - a flat-nosed semi-wadcutter would have been better. But then again I'm not quite old enough to have participated, so I'm just guessing,.
my 15-3 is hands down my favorite handgun to shoot. iIve shown many people how to shoot using wadcutters and then ran defensive rounds as it rode in my waistband.
People who knock the .38 Special are people who really don't understand the problem! While I love the Airweight, for shootability the K frame and the .38 Spec are like apple pie and vanilla ice cream.
Good historical overview. I have a lightweight short barreled S&W .38 special. It is easy to carry, but shooting it is like trying to corral an angry cat. Your hand absorbs the recoil.
Great article and I heartily agree with you. I have carried a 38 special since I first pinned on a badge in 1973. I am comfortable as the 38 special will still do everything I need it to do as long as I do my part.
I enjoyed reading this. It's very similar to my thoughts on my favorite platform the semi automatic. I just like the extra rounds and easier reload. A few years ago though I got to thinking about my ballistics. I carried a 40sw 165 grain speer gold dot. Solid very accepted self defense round. In the 411 to 420 ft lb range it was significant step up from then current 9mm rounds. I thought it was a very good middle of the road, better than 9mm but not as expensive as 10mm or 45auto.
I now carry all copper 60gr rounds that are 533 ft lbs of energy. Modern tech and ballistics have given the 40sw a 25% increase in muzzle energy and almost double the velocity. I had been looking at moving to a different gun and ammo to give lighter recoil with low end rifle velocity out of a pistol. New technology meant that all I had to do was purchase new ammo. Keep the same gun, magazines and holsters but step up to new performance. It also dropped about a pound off my belt between loaded gun and spare magazines.
Today I have moved down to 9mm because of age induced weaker hands and arms and to have a even smaller lighter gun and magazines. I'm still getting 462 ft lbs of energy at the muzzle.
I looked up their ammo for 38sp and it was puzzling. 250ft lbs at the muzzle. Standard loads run from 200 ft lbs to 350ft lbs already. I would be very curious why most calibers get a very substantial increase in energy while the 38sp is so anemic with their (liberty ammunition's civil defense) ammo.
9mm 462 FPE 2040 FPS
38sp 250 ft lbs 1500 FPS
380auto 250 ft lbs 1500 FPS
40sw 533 ft lbs 2000 FPS
10mm 780 ft lbs 2,400 FPS
357 magnum 490 ft lbs 2100 FPS
357 sig 587 ft lbs 2300 FPS
45 acp 600 ft lbs 1900 FPS
all I can think is that it has to do with sami specs for chamber pressures. Admittedly with the light weight of the bullets (between 50 and 78 gr. 78 for 45acp and all other 50 and 60 gr) there isn't a huge difference in bullet weight. So keeping the muzzle velocity down on the 38sp and 380 auto seem to be aimed at reducing chamber pressure.
:) now I will add this since these bullets really seem to hit that new stuff bad bone that a lot of us have over changing tried and true rounds for newer vastly different ones. Just about every time I post about these bullets I hear about how they don't have the penetration of ones like the speer gold dot. With it being closer to 12 to 14 inches than 19 to 25 ish inches. That is one of my likes for this round. We are not like cops that get a pass if a bullet goes through our target and hits someone else. With more energy on impact at close range and less penetration I am at a trade off I like. Also there are 5 different wound channels compared to one with standard rounds.
They do make a new Overwatch 9mm round that has deeper penetration comparable to the older school ammo and a 473 ft lbs muzzle energy. I guess it was at the request of military that they developed it at least that is what is on their webpage. it has a 72 gr bullet compared to 50gr for the civil defense which also lowered muzzle velocity to 1700 FPS.
this just all ties back into the article here. Newer and divergent upgrades in tech for bullets keeps older platforms relevant and comparable to more modern calibers/guns.
Ballistics and terminal ballistics are some fascinating subjects.
Unless you chronographed your ammo in your gun, the -published- numbers are meaningless beyond very general comparisons. They are "fired in test barrels" used on exactly zero firearms outside factories and labs. No cylinder gaps, for example. Also the test barrels are almost always on the longer side of actual carry barrels.
And we can assume from our own testing that many makers .... puff ... the numbers a bit.
I found some +P 125 grain .38 special loads were not more than 10-20 actual chrono FPS more in my J Frame than same brand non-P, but did make a nifty basketball sized flash absent from the slower rounds. Not enough barrel to make use of the propellant.
Shot a rabid raccoon with same J-Frame. It wasn't impressed with a solid center-mass hit from a topshelf ammo. Braining the poor thing did. Some things are too stupid or insane to understand they have been fatally shot. One has to turn off the lights to persuade them.
.38 will work. You just have to work harder to make it work.
Yes this is all true. There are a ton of variables that can cause changes in the end results. I hadn't thought about the cylinder gap, but that would explain a bit of difference. Even where different revolvers of same specs might be different muzzle energy due to different cylinder gaps.
From what I can tell the civil defense ammo is spec'd mostly for 4 inch barrels so most subcompact guns are going to run a bit less. For example my G27 with a 3.43 inch barrel. would get 1846 ft per sec out of it according to ballistic testing that Lucky gunner did. https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ This would come out to 453 ftlbs of Muzzle energy. A drop from the rated 500ish. While in my glock 35 with a 5.31 inch barrel muzzle velocity calculates at 2148 ft per second with a muzzle energy of 615 ft lbs. quite a difference.
I ran the numbers for a sub2000's 16 inch barrel and it calculated out at 3150 ft per second and 1322 ft lbs.. However this will most likely not be true in real life as it doesn't take into account where the bullet starts slowing in a longer barrel due to complete powder burn designed for shorter barrels.
supposedly in a 16 inch barrel it real world gets around 2500 ft per sec and around 800 ft lbs but I haven't been able to pin down what I would consider a valid source.
If I had a chronograph I would test it. I have guns with 3.5, 4.01, 5.31 and 16 inch barrels to test this in. Some day I will just because i have the curiosity bug.
Highly recommend buy or borrow chrono time. You may discover your favorite blaster needs attention. Also may discover favorite ammo is ... exaggerated. Or prove your preference correct. Was amazed at some results with my own.
Yep... the number of things I thought I knew because I was told or read or or the vendor claimed that haven't been true on testing it myself is legion! I hate it when it happens because I get really irked at being lied to or creatively miss lead, which I translate in my vernacular as being lied to.
heh.. i could tell some good stories of me going down the rabbit hole and buying a bunch of test equipment just to prove what the truth was over something I bought.
Little more broke and less energy nowdays, but once in a while, watch out.
I've shot .38 Special more than any other cartridge. I have two 5 gallon buckets of brass and another of nickle plated brass. As a young Officer my partner and I tested a lot of calibers on a car. Using the in load at the time 158grn LSWHP+P through the front windshield at a cardboard IPSC target. With the 2" M-10 the bullet penetrated the windshield and stuck in the cardboard. Yes, it failed to penetrate the cardboard after the windshield. With a 4" M-10 it penetrated the cardboard , the drivers seat , the rear seat and we found it in the trunk. Yes barrel length makes a big difference. Keep up the good articles!
It's my bedside gun. I don't like keeping rounds stacked in magazines and I just need to wake up and start blasting with a gun guaranteed not to jam.
I get the uneasiness of magazines sitting for long times with compressed springs. Over 40 years of shooting i have had a lot of different magazine fed guns, pistols and rifles. Of the quality magazines I have never had an issue. even if it sat for years loaded.. I think I have shot some that were loaded for as long as 10 years and not had an issue. Cheap magazines I have had an issue with but they had issues regardless of time loaded. Brand new they had issues.
Now if you using steel cased ammo and it starts to corrode sitting in the magazine it is absolutely going to fail :) but absent weirdness like that I have ceased to worry to much. Quality mags for me are magpul, glock factory mags, and a millspec aluminum and or stainless stell mags. Both rifle and pistol for those.
One exception to this is magazine fed shotguns. They will always fail to feed after sitting in magazine for even a month or so. Doesn't matter brand or type. Plastic shotgun shells warp into ovals if compressed in a magazine and ovals don't chamber in round holes. Shot gunshells were specifically designed to be loaded nose to butt in a tube. any magazine fed shotgun is fun and mostly reliable if you are loading and shooting within a day or two. I would never ever ever depend on one for self defense where it was beside the bed loaded for extended periods of time. It will not function. I have tested this and have the boxes of oval shaped warped shells to prove it.
I appreciate the wisdom sir. I do have a laser sighted 9MM that i wouldn't mind having that bedside function as well.
Honestly, I love pistols and shooting them and carry when away from home but they are a bit anemic no matter what you are using. At home, it is a shotgun or rifle beside the bed with 16 to 30 rounds in case they brought friends. I fully endorse the old saying that a pistol is just there to get you to a rifle.
Rifle is inherently more accurate and less subject to a reduction in accuracy in relation to adrenaline based reduction in motor control in a flight or fight situation.
Rifle or shotgun or at least the ones I have are going to end the fight with the first or second round if you can hit center of mass. If you hit an arm or leg its going to functionally destroy it.
The effort to train to a decent standard is less with a rifle than with a pistol simply because of its inherent structural accuracy with its three point of contact including the shoulder with your body as opposed to two points of contact with a pistol hanging at arms length out from your body.
Most likely you will be more accurate with a rifle in three or four hours of training than you will be after more than a year with a pistol. This isn't to say that I don't like or use pistols. I probably do more than the rifles on a day to day basis. I can't carry a rifle with me daily and it would be very awkward if it was ok to do so. I spent years living with a rifle on me in the military up to sleeping with the damn thing in my sleeping bag. They are not cuddly. Having one in arms reach or on your body day in and day out interferes with doing other stuff sometimes. My pistol on the other hand is on or under my belt and I can forget it is there as comfortable as it is. No one gives me odd looks and freaks out because they don't know it is there. At home, I'm just going to start out with the most effective defensive object I can use.
That has changed over the years as I have gotten older and less physically able. Everyone has to know their own abilities and what they can use the most effectively.
The total weight of my Taurus View with a laser sight loaded with five 38 special caliber 148 grain wadcutters is about 12 ounces. Not even noticeable in a front pocket carry.
Adding a loosely folded bandana or handkerchief in front of the gun greatly reduces the "printing" we often fail to notice.
I’m a wheelgun fan. Carried a Colt Agent for many years before replacing with a Sig 365 for better concealment.
My competition load is a 170gr going 725fps. Crazy soft but knocks steel down with authority
A valuable bit of historical perspective. Thank you.
If your piece is rated for +P, you have a lot of options. Heavy, hard cast, flat nosed bullets going ~900-950 fps is bad news for the recipient in a lot of situations. It’s not the right tool for some situations, but you could do a lot worse. Target loads for the 38 special are fun and great for practicing DA-only shooting, which is an important skill for revolver shooters to develop.
When people talk about the .38(Long Colt)'s ineffectiveness against the Moros and its replacement by the old .45 Colt, they stop there. I've read nothing except the .45 Colt was basically ineffective also. Nowhere I've found in writing that the .45 changed the game, which is what is alluded to.
I know your point was they are talking about the wrong .38, but reading or hearing the story always makes me wonder if they know all of the story. Probably not.
Yeah, the Moro's were basically hopped up on drugs and they pre-torniquet wrapped their extremities prior to battle. Unless someone was lucky enough to hit the brain or the spine, they just ignored the holes in their chest and kept fighting until they ran out of blood. The only concession for the larger caliber is slightly quicker blood loss due to the slightly larger hole. That's basically it. Also the basic lead round-nose rounds were basically the worst for combat - a flat-nosed semi-wadcutter would have been better. But then again I'm not quite old enough to have participated, so I'm just guessing,.
my 15-3 is hands down my favorite handgun to shoot. iIve shown many people how to shoot using wadcutters and then ran defensive rounds as it rode in my waistband.
People who knock the .38 Special are people who really don't understand the problem! While I love the Airweight, for shootability the K frame and the .38 Spec are like apple pie and vanilla ice cream.
I carried an S&W K15 Combat Masterpiece the first part of my USAF SP career. Loved shooting it. Obviously had no say in what round we used.
Might need to hunt down one of those wheelguns.
“And it shoots just fine all the other days of the week also”
The Blind Side
Good historical overview. I have a lightweight short barreled S&W .38 special. It is easy to carry, but shooting it is like trying to corral an angry cat. Your hand absorbs the recoil.
I'd hardly call pushing a 158grn. bullet at around 1400fps (Underwood +p out of my 5" S&W Heavy Duty) anemic. 😉