,38 S&W test

[tinkerpearce]

My block of Cear Ballistics gel was about as shot up as it could be, but before recasting it I decided to try it with my .38 S&W carry-load. This is a 160gr LRNFP bullet, and I fired it over the chronograph, through four layers of denim and into the gel from a distance of ten feet. This showed a velocity of 724 fps. for 186 ft./lbs of energy. This was fired from my S&W .38 Safety Hammerless (4th Model) with a 1-5/8" barrel.



The bullet came to rest facing backwards dead-on at 16". The block was way too shot up to see the wound-track distinctly in a photo, but the wound was streamlined for the first four inches, then from there the wound-track gradually tripled in size at about 9 inches before reducing until it streamlined at about twelve inches.



Doesn't really compare to a modern service-caliber hollow-point, but not at all shabby. 

 
Yes, I removed the bullet from the gel for this shot- too many bullet-tracks in the block to have made it out otherwise. I'd also like to note that this is a pretty hot load for a top-break; I wouldn't run it in anything but a S&W, a British service top-break or a solid frame gun of good quality. Even so I shoot very few of them through this gun.

[bradshaw]

Aug 13, 2020 0:46:17 GMT -5 tinkerpearce said:

My block of Cear Ballistics gel was about as shot up as it could be, but before recasting it I decided to try it with my .38 S&W carry-load. This is a 160gr LRNFP bullet, and I fired it over the chronograph, through four layers of denim and into the gel from a distance of ten feet. This showed a velocity of 724 fps. for 186 ft./lbs of energy. This was fired from my S&W .38 Safety Hammerless (4th Model) with a 1-5/8" barrel.



The bullet came to rest facing backwards dead-on at 16". The block was way too shot up to see the wound-track distinctly in a photo, but the wound was streamlined for the first four inches, then from there the wound-track gradually tripled in size at about 9 inches before reducing until it streamlined at about twelve inches.



Doesn't really compare to a modern service-caliber hollow-point, but not at all shabby. 

 
Yes, I removed the bullet from the gel for this shot- too many bullet-tracks in the block to have made it out otherwise. I'd also like to note that this is a pretty hot load for a top-break; I wouldn't run it in anything but a S&W, a British service top-break or a solid frame gun of good quality. Even so I shoot very few of them through this gun.

*****

An informative, concise, much appreciated writeup. What I dig about Tinkerpearce, he delves with his feet planted. Reading his inquiry, right away I think this is a stiff load. And then he says exactly that. This is the kind of report I like, when you have nothing to protect but your integrity.
David Bradshaw

[timothy]

Great test, caliber and five gun! Thumbs up

[magpouch]

I love the .38S&W cartridge and kind of wish it was still being chambered in new revolvers. If there was a manufacturer that made a quality modern break-top I would think it could be a dandy companion for a concealed handgun, just as they always were. The older models were small, and easy to unload/load, I think they had a lot going for them but the metallurgy of the day left the older handguns weak. A new modern design could be very small and still reasonably powerful.

Anyway I appreciate the attention to the oldies, thank you.

[bouddha]

In 1976, I was shot four times by a man with a .38 S&W, and I thank everyone involved that he chose that round.

[magpouch]

Glad you made it!

[x101airborne]

Aug 18, 2020 9:33:18 GMT -5 bouddha said:

In 1976, I was shot four times by a man with a .38 S&W, and I thank everyone involved that he chose that round.

If I survived that ordeal, Im not sure everyone else in Texas would have. 
Thank God for your resilience! 

[bouddha]

LOL...when I woke up in the hospital three days later, I couldn't have kicked Shirley Temple's butt.

[bouddha]

BTW, I apologize for the thread hijack...was not my intention.