TargetTalk

Hi folks,

I hanker after a centre-fire revolver. At present I shoot ISSF .22 standard pistol. I know very little about hand-loading, but it sounds interesting. Various revolvers are coming up for sale, hence the question...

Please can I have some advice regarding the pros and cons of a .357 Magnum revolver versus a purpose-made .38S&W Special (wad-cutter) revolver? I know .357s are often used with .38 ammo, but is there any practical disadvantage, as far as accuracy is concerned?

There is a lot of bullet jump when firing .38 Special ammunition in a .357 Magnum revolver. Some folks find accuracy is degraded and others don't.

Regardless, it does lead to a ring of gunk in the cylinder.

Avoid that by loading .38 Special loads in .357 cases and you should be fine.

Thanks.

What about the resulting empty space in the cartridge, if the long .357 case is used? Is this a real, or just theoretical, problem?

I've been loading the equivalent of .38 Special target loads in .357 cases for nearly 40 years with no problems whatsoever. Because the .38 started life as a black powder cartridge there's always a lot of extra space with modern powders - the .357 case is only a tenth of an inch longer, so any additional extra space is proportionately minor. Obviously you don't want to use reduced loads of slow-burning and hard-to-ignite powders (W296 is one that comes to mind) due to potential detonation problems, but with the faster-burning powders that are typical for target loads you won't have any problems. I find 3.8 gr of Unique under a 148 gr HBWC to be an accurate and very pleasant shooting load.

In my opinion there is no better shooting revolver than a smith model 14 38 Special.
With a target hammer and trigger they are an utter pleasure to shoot and made for competition.
Long discontinued though now.

Anonymous wrote:In my opinion there is no better shooting revolver than a smith model 14 38 Special.
With a target hammer and trigger they are an utter pleasure to shoot and made for competition.
Long discontinued though now.

I thought I had automatically logged in be fore I posted the above.

GOVTMODEL wrote:There is a lot of bullet jump when firing .38 Special ammunition in a .357 Magnum revolver. Some folks find accuracy is degraded and others don't.

Regardless, it does lead to a ring of gunk in the cylinder.

Avoid that by loading .38 Special loads in .357 cases and you should be fine.

Hi

Is this bad even if you don't ever shoot .357's in the gun? I can see where the gunk ring wouldn't allow loading a longer cartridge after firing a bunch of .38's, but does it matter otherwise?

I've never tried it being 1911 type.

Mike
Wichita KS

Mike:

"Back in the Day" I shot a lot of .38/.357 and spent a bunch of time working up various loads etc.

I found that each chamber took 1-2 wadcutters to consistently gunk up the lead ring to the point where each subsequent bullet would behave consistently.

Was it a huge difference?

Not at 25 yards . . . first 12 shots to last 12 shots maybe a change in ES/AES of 3/8 - 1/2 an inch (148 gr HBWC ~900 fps). Roughly twice that for 50 yards.

The problem was that starting with a clean gun the first 12 shots were "jumping" that short distance; the last 12 shots were "sliding" (along the lead ring) for the short distance.

Your mileage may vary!

Steve

What's ES/AES?
Error Squared / Average Error Squared ?

Am I understanding this correctly? Is the 'lead ring' formed in the chamber in front of the shorter .38 Special case? Why not circumvent this problem by using .357 Magnum cases? Is there a disadvantage to this?

dlb wrote:What's ES/AES?
Error Squared / Average Error Squared ?

Extreme spread/ average extreme spread.

Shooting Kiwi wrote:Am I understanding this correctly? Is the 'lead ring' formed in the chamber in front of the shorter .38 Special case? Why not circumvent this problem by using .357 Magnum cases? Is there a disadvantage to this?

I don't think "Magnum" cartriges are allowed in competition.

I know that this is a Bullseye thread but ISSF 8.4.6 ...For safety reasons high power type “Magnum” ammunition is not allowed. refers to the loads, not the cases used.

Of more consideration might be the size of the shooter's hand - the K frame better suits those of us with shortter fingers.

Spencer

Spencer, I also have dinky little hands. The gun in question is indeed a K-framed Smith, model 19, considered by my advisers to be not really up to continuous duty firing Magnum ammo. Should be OK with target loads, I hope.

Given that the K-frame model 14s have taken many years of target loads without problems, and double action wear is more of a problem for the K14s when used for power factor loads of 120 000 in Action/1920 and the Australian Service Pistol event target loads should not be a problem.

I would not advise even one shot loaded to 'magnum' level, let alone 'continuous duty'. The K14 frames are a great pistol - BUT designed for magnum loads they are not.

Spencer

I used a Ruger Security Six .357M, with .357M cases loaded with a target load (2.8 gns DuPont 700X) for years with no problems and it was as accurate as several other much fancier pieces around at the time.

Spencer's explanation re "magnum loads" is spot on, the inference is the energy not the brass.

I now have both a M14 in .38 and M19 in .357. I'd suggest you use the .357M cases in the M19 with a suitable .38 target load. I hope you enjoy CentreFire.
Cheers

Thanks for the advice and discussion folks.

I was lucky to secure a model 19-4 at a recent auction. I'd have gone for a 14, had one been available. Then, of course, a heavy-barrelled model 14-7 was advertised locally. At about twice the price of my 19, however, I couldn't really justify it.

Local gunsmith, an ex-champion revolver shooter and Smith expert, has looked over the 19 and declared it a good 'un. He then ferreted about in dark recesses and offered me a pair of Morini ortopaedic grips for it, at a silly price. He was lucky to remain with two arms! So now it sports Morini grips, which fit me better than the previous, home-made, orthopaedic grips, which I spent a few hours re-working, tidying up, stippling, etc., but couldn't get to fit really well.

Initial shooting, with 'borrowed' wadcutter target loads, and the earlier grips, was surprising - only minimally less accurate than my .22 semi-auto shooting. Lots of 10s, but also an apparently separate group (different MPoI), slightly larger. Since the aim and hold seemed OK, I feared I was flinching. So I loaded a couple of live rounds into the chamber, 'blind', by feel, spinning the chamber, and filled the remainder with fired cases, again by feel. Then shot, spinning the chamber between shots. Sort of Russian roulette.

Fascinating result. About one third of the time, the little flinch or anticipation was clear to see on the dry fires. On dry firing, without live rounds, in the stress-free home environment (!), there is no flinch. Very useful exercise - I commend it to those who haven't tried it. Slowly, my flinching is reducing. It's improved my .22 shooting also (in which the effect is much harder to detect, and of which I was not aware until I could try this revolver experiment.

The same effect can be achieved with a semi-automatic - get somebody to load your magazine with random 'duds'.

Easy for CF, just load up some cases without replacing the spent primer or putting in any powder.

.22LR unprimed rounds can be purchased (when and if they are available).
Alternatively, soak some .22LR round in white spirit or kerosene for a few weeks, though you might have to loosen the projectile to get the solvent to soak in. This usually works, and is the method we (in AUS) 'manufacture' malfunctions for Range Officer accreditation traiining.

Spencer

Hmm, Spencer, it's safe, is it?... Anyway, worth a try, thanks for the idea.

Been safe so far (30+years) - the occassional soaked round goes off, very smokily!

Spencer

As an aside, a bad batch of T22 (i.e. 10-20 malfunctions per box) was transformed to 100% reliability - sometimes you just can't win!
S