quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:
My test procedure, if I was looking for snubby revolver ammo, would be to read some studies done by FBI, testing labs, or police departments. They have the budget and capability to do such tests and I would get the benefit of all that for free. Since you stated that cost is a concern, I would spend the money to practice with your chosen round to become familiar with and proficient with that round.
Otherwise, since there are no feeding issues like a semi-auto could have, the only testing I would do is to fire off a box or two to verify no issues in them lighting off in my particular gun and to verify my point of aim.
If this is a hobby of yours that's a different matter.

Agreed and I did so. But knowing what's best for my guns and my personal abilities, I'm doing this test - and yes this is just for hobby purposes. I've found with a little planning and good recordkeeping, I can learn a LOT, versus just going to the range shooting. I've done enough of that to learn the futility of getting better without a plan. For me at least.

quote:

Originally posted by copaup:
When we approved .38 as a backup/off duty load about 10 years ago (good grief, has it been that long? where does the time go?) the only ammo that passed our testing was the 135 gr Gold Dot. 158 gr LSWCHP worked ok in bare gel but failed when denim or any other barrier was introduced.

Since then, the Federal HST has come out and is getting rave reviews. I'd pitched the idea to examine it as an option, but we've approved a couple of 9mm BUGs and the .38s are slowly going away. There just isn't interest in the expense of new testing.

If I were looking for a new carry .38 load for a snub I'd be primarily concerned with can I hit a pie plate with all 5 rounds at 7 yards at speed one handed and will it penetrate 12 to 18 inches of gel. Expansion is a plus. That is however predicated on the fact that my use for a .38 snub is as a secondary weapon where the crap has hit the fan and the danger is up close and personal. I need to know I can make rapid hits from likely odd positions at speed more than I need "perfect" performance of the round. 5 .357 inch holes 14 inches through COM make up for some failure to expand. If it were a primary carry load for me then the ability to make accurate hits at longer range while maintaining terminal effectiveness becomes more important.

That's a long winded way of saying that I appreciate the fact that controllability seems to have significant importance to your protocol.

Regarding your pie plate recommendation, my OP stated exactly that, a 7 inch paper plate at 7 yds. I'm ahead of you on that one, but all 5 rounds at speed one handed as you mentioned, that's above my paygrade. I don't know anyone who can do that, but I'm sure old Jerry can do it. Regarding your 12-18 of penetration recommendation, that's already in my OP as well. I chose 14 inches mean or median penetration as ammo choice criteria. The rest of your recommendations are again above my paygrade. If I were retired and had the time and $, I'd train my ass off and become a black belt shooting ninja. But as far as my snubbie goes, I don't want to practice beyond 7 yds, as I'm a carry civilian only, no immediate plans taking down fleeing felons. I bet Jim Cirillo did though with his snubbies. I saw an old photo of a target he shot with a snibbie at speed during a LEO shooting competition, I could hardly believe it.

In my relative water jug testing of .38 Special in 4" barrels, I learned that most rounds do not expand with any level of consistency until they exceed 900 fps. Out of a 2" barrel, I would imagine there would be few contenders that would even get close to that.

The only round I found that was cost effective and expanded reliably was the Federal 110 grain Hydra Shok +P. I loaded that if my gfs (at the time) Model 66. With a claimed 1000 fps, they were better than anything else that wasn't $1 a round. It was also accurate.

Accuracy is paramount. Still, out of a 2" barrel - and with likely distances involved - my personal thinking is pretty much a decent semi-wadcutter would suffice.

quote:

Originally posted by wrightd:

Regarding your pie plate recommendation, my OP stated exactly that, a 7 inch paper plate at 7 yds. I'm ahead of you on that one, but all 5 rounds at speed one handed as you mentioned, that's above my paygrade. I don't know anyone who can do that, but I'm sure old Jerry can do it. Regarding your 12-18 of penetration recommendation, that's already in my OP as well. I chose 14 inches mean or median penetration as ammo choice criteria. The rest of your recommendations are again above my paygrade. If I were retired and had the time and $, I'd train my ass off and become a black belt shooting ninja. But as far as my snubbie goes, I don't want to practice beyond 7 yds, as I'm a carry civilian only, no immediate plans taking down fleeing felons. I bet Jim Cirillo did though with his snubbies. I saw an old photo of a target he shot with a snibbie at speed during a LEO shooting competition, I could hardly believe it.[/QUOTE]

Oh, don't misunderstand, I'm not talking 5 rounds touching in .5 seconds. I just want to be able to put 5 reasonably quick rounds into the circle at 7 yds as quick as I can get a flash sight picture in contrast to slow deliberate shooting where I have time to carefully aim each individual shot. 9 inch pie plate at 7 is a pretty forgiving target. I'm OK, but I'm no elite pistolero. I can do it out of a 642 with the 135 gold dot, but that's probably about as much recoil as I'd be able to do it without slowing down to an unacceptable level.

Again, I'm just glad to see that someone is concerned with more than just how big the round expands and how deep it goes. Handgun rounds, especially out of snubs, are pretty poor stoppers. The ability to make multiple rapid accurate hits makes up for a lot of that.