What is the best powder to optimize a load for a 2 inch barrel 38 special? I generally use a 158 grain cast SWC or a 125 grain cast SWC.

What is the best powder to optimize a load for a 2 inch barrel 38 special? I generally use a 158 grain cast SWC or a 125 grain cast SWC.


I have a little S & W J model,and use the Speer 135 grain Gold Dot ammunition that was designed just for the ultra short barreled guns.
My handloads arestrictly for practice/enjoyment,and i use Bullseye or Red Dot powder.
Frank

I used to run 110gr HP's with Bullseye, was the only powder that got a full burn in the little 1.875" bbl. I don't recall the load off hand, came out of an old Speer book and was pretty hot. Definitely not one you want to shoot on a regular basis.

Agree with the others that a fast burning powder would be best in a short barrel. Currently loading 3.8 gr. Bullseye with 158 gr. cast SWC bullets for my S&W Model 60.

Not too long ago I participated in a thread (can't seem to locate it now) in which a fellow was getting something like 150 fps extreme spread in velocity from his snubby loads. Out of 700 fps, that is a lot. I, and others I know, have experienced a lot of disappointment with snubby accuracy. It always amazed me that I could shoot groups under 2” at 25 yards with my 3” Charter Bulldog, but seldom could do much better than 5” at that range with a barrel and sight radius just 1/3 shorter. I always put it off to the short sight radius fooling my eyes, even though the effect was disproportionate. Then I came upon that thread. I have never chronographed a snubby. I now suspect the gross velocity inconsistency was likely a major culprit in the accuracy issues I’d noticed before. If I owned one of these revolvers, I would have used that new information to work out better loads for them, and will do so the next time an opportunity offers itself. Meanwhile, all I can offer is theoretical.

Really fast powder seems to be the ticket. Even Bullseye cannot burn completely in these short barrels. Shooting the 110 grain Hornady XTP right at the SAMMI maximum of 17,000 PSI with Bullseye, burns around 92% in the barrel. In a rifle, that’s a perfectly good percentage, but in a short barrel, you don’t get time to correct or catch burning up to a poor start. It therefore has exaggerated sensitivity to consistency of ignition. At the time of the snubby thread, I ran a bunch of QuickLOAD calculations and was surprised to find Hodgdon Clays and Vihtavuori N310 and Norma R1 were the only powders in its database that would burn completely in the short tube. (There are others, like Tightwad, not in the database that may do so as well?) The drawback was maximum velocity loss caused because you can't use much of these very fast powders and keep within safe pressure ranges. Nonetheless, they are a way to address the velocity variation problem.

A good theoretical compromise is Accurate’s Nitro 100. It is between Clays and Bullseye in speed. It will burn 99.9% in the barrel and get to nearly the same velocities Bullseye does. Below is an example set of theoretical maximum loads. DO NOT USE THESE LOADS without working up to them from about 20% lower (that big percentage is only a grain here). QuickLOAD generated excellent agreement with Accurate’s data on Nitro 100, but got into disagreement with Hodgdon’s Clays data. Hodgdon posts larger charges as standard. They also claim too big a peak pressure difference between their starting load of 4.0 grains and maximum load of 4.2 grains for 110 grain bullets. About 3 times too big, by QuickLOAD’s calculations. Also, that oddly narrow start-to-max powder weight range is smaller than most measures will throw a flake powder consistently. So, they clearly got their data messed up or typo’d or something. I have more faith, in this case, in the smaller 3.7 grain maximum that QuickLOAD gave, but because QuickLOAD also puts this powder far out of its normal rank on burning charts, I am suspicious the sample measured for the database was atypical. For these reasons I have decided to drop Clays loads until I can see them proved out to match the database. The Vihtavuori N310 is much more available in the U.S. than Norma R1, and is also available outside the U.S., so I’ve left it as the one fairly sure cure for incomplete in-barrel combustion.

110 grain Hornady XTP, 1.875” barrel, 1.445” OAL
Loads adjusted to highest 1/10th grain that does not go over the 17,000 PSI (SAMMI limit for non- +P loads.)

N310, 3.9 grains
16,793 PSI
901 fps
100% burned in barrel
25.5% Ballistic Efficiency (B.E.)

Nitro 100, 4.5 grains
16,671 PSI
945 fps
99.9% burned in barrel
20.7% B.E.

Bullseye 5.4 grains
16,467 PSI
969 fps
91.0% burned in the barrel
17.2% B.E.

If you have access to a chronometer, you will find it useful in assessing the powders and their performance with different bullets. Heavier bullets will burn powder more completely by giving them more time. I don’t have the 135 grain Gold Dot in my database, or I would have run it. Because of the apparent sensitivity to ignition, the snubnose may be one application where match primers and polyester wads are justified to help mitigate velocity variation, even when shooting jacketed bullets? As I say, if I owned one, I’d work beyond the theoretical basis to see what more could be done?

Nick,
You shoot much better than I can if you can shoot 5" groups with a snubby at 25 yards. That combination is very challenging. Have seen new shooters step up to the 25 yard line with their new snubbys still in the box and carrying a box of factory loads attempt to duplicate Camp Perry scores. After a few rounds, the futility of it sinks in, and they retreat to the 7 yard line where the results are far more satisfying. It's possible for an experienced pistol shooter to shoot accurately at distance with a snubby, however, it will take a lot of concentration to do so. My perception of a snubby is a tool best used for close-up and personal work. Given the choice of a snubby shootout at 25 yards or a strategic withdrawal, I would be inclined to choose the withdrawal.

Thanks for your thoughts and the informative load data.

Nick,
You shoot much better than I can if you can shoot 5" groups with a snubby at 25 yards. . . Have seen new shooters step up to the 25 yard line with their new snubbys still in the box and carrying a box of factory loads attempt to duplicate Camp Perry scores. . .

I probably should clarify. The 5" snubby group was fired off sandbags. This was at a public range near Hollywood Florida in 1998. Three of us were taking turns shooting it and some other guns we had along, so random luck probably played a roll. Most of the groups we fired were more lik 7" or 8", which is why I referred to 5" as being about as good as you can expect to see from most of them. I also recall the cylinder latch checkering shaved the skin off my right thumb knuckle. I always lose track of how I am hanging on to a small frame Smith, and my thumb always pays. This get-together was part of a dive trip, and it was when we hit the salt water in the afternoon that I really noticed it.

For Camp Perry-like scores, I have one 1.75" 25 yard group I fired offhand from my 3" Charter Bulldog. It has aftermarket extended grips to give my little finger somewhere to roost, but otherwise is a straight frame sight factory model. That was circa 1982 or 3, when my eyes were still in their prime. It's not something I could do every time, even then, but, compared to the snubby experience, it is the reason the disparity between what light 3" and 2" guns can be expected do stands out to me.

That exceptionally accurate Charter is, of course, my gold standard for compact revolvers. I should admit that it barely held 8" at 25 yards as purchased. A return trip to the factory with an accuracy complaint resulted in them replacing the frame. Apparently it had been over-torqued at barrel installation. I have read this was a common problem with those guns at the time, about half of them seeming to shoot well and about half not. The load was a simple 3.9 grains of Bullseye under the 240 grain Hornady swaged SWC, believe it or not. And this was long before I first read Veral Smith’s book and got exposed to ideas like firelapping. It is just the way that gun likes to shoot.

Are occaions; snubbies that just seem to shoot so much better than they should....your guess as good as mine as to why; I lean to good cylinder/barrel alignement, crisp trigger pull, and tight tolerances.

One Mod. 37 was fine for tin can shooting at 25yards...getting 5 for 5 wasn't unusual. Old style tin sights, string-bean stocks, and glaring nickle finish....but it would certainly shoot. Otheres haven't been quite as accurate...or the shooter quite as accurate, take your pick.


One thiong i did find. the powders that gave the best 4" vel. also gae the best 2" velocity...wasn't as drastic a differnce in vel. as there is in 4" or 6", but 2400w as still teh powder to beat with 158gr. cast bullets. Recoil in that light gun was stiff, it's not recommended for that kind of +P load (but I did it for years anyway), and that hot load certainly wasn't the accuracy leader.


The "trick" to getting 2400 to burn in a .38special was to (1) use brand new of real-life once fired cases (2) a TIGHT expander.

Today's manuals don't usually list 2400 as a .38special powder...the old ones did, and the pressure of those older loads is proablly higher than listed...but as i just don't have that many people that need shooting in a given afternoon, the wear-and-tear on the gun when un-noticed.

i load .38 spls with homecast 150 gr swcs over 2.7-3.0 grs of bullseye for the spousal units little colt det.spl.... i load a little hotter .38 spls for my s&w model 27.... up to 3.5 grains of bullseye for it.........she does enjoy popping off a few rounds once in awhile with her late fathers duty piece.....

I just bought a lb. of Accurate #2 and loaded 200 pieces with 3.8 gr. over 158 swc. They seem to shoot ok from my stubby. I have not shot them off a sand bag yet or done any extensive cornie test yet but plan to in the near future. I also plan on loading some 110 gr. XTPs with #2. I will post the results after I take them to the range.
I like the way #2 flows from the powder measure, it flows a lot better than Red Dot or Bulls Eye.

I reload for a S&W Model 36 and a Model 60 .38 Special with 2-inch barrels. My preference has been 168 grain lead SWC bullets ahead of a moderate charge of Unique. Works fine. Take care...
Oberndorf

Large flake powders are tougher to throw consistently from a measure. Unique, with its large flakes, is particularly difficult and prone to bridging in the measure, and instructions with some measures recommend against even trying to use it. It needs a wide metering cavity. Bullseye, being small flakes, has never given me any particular grief other than the Dillon measure's slide bar tends to cake up after awhile and require cleaning. The ball powders always flow most easily, but are usually harder to light. It will be interesting to hear how the #2 works out for accuracy first, then, if you can get some chronograph data, see how consistent it is there? The big swings in the other thread on the topic were enough to make noticable difference in how hard the bullets hit.

Vihtavuori N320 might be the best compromise? About 3.2 grains will produce the same velocity and pressure as 3.8 grains of #2, and burn over 99% in the barrel. It is a very short cut extruded powder, and should meter better than Unique, if not Bullseye, but won't be a good as the ball powders in that regard.

Buffalo Bore has a 158 gr GC lead HP that goes about 1000 fps from a 2 incher. Id just get some of those for carry if I had to use a snub. S&W used to make a 3 inch heavy barrel Chiefs Special with a square butt and bigger sights. I found that I could shoot it nearly as well as a 4 inch K frame. If you must have hot loads for a 2 inch 38 then find a copy of the Speer #7 manual. I have used some of those in steel framed guns.

The following are the results I got using a chronometer with two loads of Accurate #2. One with 158 gr. SWC over 3.8 grains, and the other using 110 gr. XTPs over 5.2 grains. I shot them from two revolvers for comparison. One a 2" Taurus and the other a 6" Smith.

2"
158 gr SWC
3.8 gr. ACC #2
666 fps ave.
83 fps spread

6"
158 gr SWC
3.8 gr. ACC #2
683 fps ave.
82 fps spread

2"
110 gr. XTP
5.2 gr. ACC #2
898 fps ave
82 fps spread
6"
110 gr. XTP
5.2 gr. ACC #2
913 fps ave.
60 fps spread



These results are from five shot strings.

I am astonished at how small the velocity difference between the two is. It makes me wonder if the 6" gun is mechanically a lot looser than the 2" gun?