Plus-P or not Plus-P?

[BlueTrain]

This isn't about the guns but rather about the ammuntion, and in this case specifically about .38 special and .44 special.

Concerning .38 special, are there loads that are +P but not marked as such? Likewise, have there been loads that have become rated differently even though the load itself has not changed? By this I mean changed from a non-+P rating to a +P rating or vice-versa, if you follow me. I was thinking especially of the Nyclad loads, which for that matter, may no longer be in production. That sort of reduces it to a matter of a historical footnote but I still have a few boxes. The ones I have are not marked +P but I suspect there were more than a single loading in that line. I ask because my favorite revolver continues to be a pre-Model 10 M&P, 5-inch barrel, and you aren't supposed to use +P ammo in them.

My second question is about the .44 special. Although I am "between" owning a .44 special, I was wondering if there is an official +P loading of that cartridge. I know some companies load everything up. It might be worth knowing someday.

 

[SaxonPig]

The +P marketing scam is mostly limited to the .38 Special although there are 9mmP loads that are marked +P and +P+. Maybe some others as well but this nonsense started with the .38 Special.

After much research and a great deal of actual shooting experience I concluded that factory +P is not powerful at all. It is loaded to less velocity and pressure than what "standard" ammo was before the lawsuits started and the ammo companies ran scared of people suing them if they blew up a cheap, imported gun.

No, there's no currently made +P ammo not marked as +P. They all follow the same guidelines on labeling.

You see differing velocities from different companies because it's all loaded below what is allowed for the cartridge and some are a tad hotter than others. But all factory +P is currently loaded well below industry maximum pressure for the .38 Special.

Not everyone agrees with me, you understand, with some folks saying I'm wrong, crazy, and a few other things, too. But I know what I see.

Below is pictured a 1942 era S&W M&P revolver along with 10 boxes of Remington +P ammo and the first 150 rounds of many hundreds of handloads that were considerably warmer than the factory +Ps (125s at 1100 FPS) that I shot through this revolver without any decernable damage or extra wear to the gun. Some people insist that this was meaningless. I think it shows that even and older revolver has no trouble with +P ammo or loads that are beyond what any manufacturer currently offers. Others remain unconvinced. You do what you think is best. Factory +P does not concern me in the least in a quality revolver.

 

[Qwiks draw]

Hello. The non +P are standard loads have less pressure when fired.The +Ps have more pounds per square inch when fired. This gives the bullet a little more velocity but at a slight increase in recoil. Most boxes of 38 Special for the last few decades have been marked with +P if it is not standard. I shoot Taurus revolvers in .357 magnum and a snub nose .38 special.The higher pressure does no harm to the magnums,but the manual for my snub nose revolver states a limited use of +Ps. The extra pressure can batter the small revolver and cause problems that would make it have to go back to the factory for repairs.So I practice with normal o loads as much as possible and will shoot +Ps,oh, about 100 rounds of 158 grain bullets a year.The lighter 125and 130 grain practice rounds in .38 make it fun.Yes,your model 10 can handle the standard loads you have. It is possible the +P marking could wear off but Nyclad were loaded in both +P and non+P.The model 10 can handle +Ps but have a gunsmith check out the gun to be sure.By the way,if the bullet weight for nyclad is 158 grain ,you have +P.I'm sure other more knowledgeable people than myself will weigh in on this.

 

[BlueTrain]

Thanks for the comments. The revolver I have that prompted the interest is in fact exactly like the one in the photo above, less the lanyard ring. I also have a brand new production Model 10 purchased this year. It has a tapered barrel but no lock.

I also asked the questions without examining the boxes I have on hand. I vaguely remembered that some Nyclad was Plus-P and others were not. The non-plus P rated I think is 125 grain, which shoots lower than any 158 grain. I have fired a few plus P round through it and it did not come apart. All the same, the range I visit has some graphic reminders that guns will come apart, apparently very dramatically and probably with handloads. Most of my shooting of handguns has been with handloads.

 

[JohnKSa]

... factory +P is not powerful at all. It is loaded to less velocity and pressure than what "standard" ammo was before the lawsuits started and the ammo companies ran scared of people suing them if they blew up a cheap, imported gun.

Not true.

The apparent reduction in power was not a reduction in power at all. The apparent reduction was due to several factors.

1. Migration from CUP to PSI pressure measurements. In many cases an equivalent PSI pressure measurement will LOOK smaller (i.e. be a smaller number) than the CUP measurement it corresponds to.

2. SAAMI's insistence in the late 1970s that revolver ammunition be tested in a 4" vented test barrel instead of the unvented 8+ inch test barrels that were once commonly used. This resulted in significantly lower cataloged velocity numbers for obvious reasons.

3. The wide availability of inexpensive chronographs which make it impractical for the ammo companies to continue to "round up" their velocity figures.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=211995
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=204900

 

[gb_in_ga]

In addition to what JohnKSa said:

The +P specification merely indicates that a given load is higher pressure than an equivalent non +P load. This does NOT guarantee that the +P loading will actually give higher velocities, even in the same gun with the same bullets. Usually, this is the case, but it is no guarantee. Other factors come into play, in particular the powders being used. It is quite possible to have an optimized non +P load outperform a +P load that uses a non-optimum powder. Don't believe me? Just go check a decent reloading manual.

 

[SaxonPig]

JohnKSa- Again, all I can say is what I see. I do not consider a 125 grain bullet loaded to 925 FPS to be a powerful load. It is, in fact, quite mild. The standard .38 Special load when I was a youngster was a 158 loaded to 870 FPS and I suspect this load actually generated more chamber pressure than the +P but over the past few decades they have reduced the loadings in response to lawsuits and liability concerns. They used to load the "Hi-Speed" load with the 158 at 1140 FPS. Colt OKed this load in the D frame and Elmer Kieth reported this ammo worked fine in J frame Smiths with alloy frames. If that load didn't damage the guns then factory +P most assuredly will not.

When I started shooting this ammo I was startled to see that fired cases would fall from the chambers by simply elevating the barrel. No need for the ejector rod at all. Also, the cases were blackened on the outside, indicating that pressures were so low that there was no expansion at all in the cases when fired to seal the chambers and keep this blowback from occurring. If I observe this effect in my handloads I know they are too mild because the case should seal the chamber under pressure.

Factory ammo used to give greater velocities than current +P. Reloading manuals from the 1970s and earlier list loads that vastly out perform current factory +P and these loads do not exceed allowed pressures. Some want to explain all of this away by saying "they used pressure barrels" or "nobody had chronographs and they lied."

To quote you, sir, NOT TRUE.

Many shooters had chronographs back then. Certainly not as many as now but they were around. Also, the gun periodicals always qualified velocity claims and stated that actual performance would be a little less than what the ammo companies claimed. A little less, not 50% less as I have heard some people claim.

I repeat, everyone can do whatever they like with +P and they can believe whatever they want. I have done the research and I have run my own tests. I don't rely on hearsay or legend or rumor or myth. Factory +P is loaded to levels barely enough to qualify as a target load. My .38 Special load of choice is the same 125 JHP used by +P but loaded to 1100 FPS. This load came from a reputable reloading manual published in the early 1970s and I achieve just about exactly the results predicted so they weren't lying about the velocity of the load. This isn't the top load listed, either, but it works just fine in my K and J frame revolvers.

 

[Jkwas]

Not to go off in a different direction, but Georgia Arms loads a feisty 38spl 125gn jhp at 950fps, non +p. I've tried em, they're great, and I double checked with the manufacturer, they are not considered +p. How does that work?

 

[gb_in_ga]

Cancel this -- wrong load data!

 

[j-framer]

Jkwas,

Do you happen to know the barrel length used to obtain the 950 fps from those Georgia Arms .38s? I went to their site and, unless I missed it, they don't say. Guess you have to assume it was a standard SAAMI barrel, which is pretty long relative to typical barrel lengths in defensive revolvers.

I only ask because I have great interest in locating good .38 loads for snubbies (I'm currently exploring the Buffalo Bore loads and, of course, the 135 gr. Gold Dot). Always like to hear about milking the potential of this venerable round.

 

[BlueTrain]

As usual, this thread has taken off in some interesting directions, although the original question has not really been addressed (and no one has mentioned the .44 special). At any rate, I have my own ideas (but not about the original question).

Velocity and pressure are almost unrelated, though clearly it is pressure that gets the bullet out the barrel. This is a little more complicated that is being covered but a faster burning powder will generally give more pressure than a slower powder provided the same velocity is achieved. It is true that the faster powder may be more efficient if you measure efficiency by how much powder is burned inside the barrel. Some powders will appear to have a lot of left over, unburnt powder. Some powders will also appear to have a lot of powder being burned outside the barrel, creating a certain amount of blast, though you usually only notice that with either magnum calibers or other hot-loaded cartridges. Yet they will safely give a higher velocity than a hotter powder. Keith complained that the original factory .44 magnum was loaded too hot for him and if he thought so, it must have been.

As I said, it is more complicated than that. It may be that a heavier bullet will produce more pressure but the seating depth of the bullet will make a bigger difference in the pressure, though that is usually more relevant to rifle cartridges. Bullet construction probably enters into the matter and there is also the matter of temperture, at least the temperature of the ammunition. The age of the ammuntion may make a difference. Couldn't say what difference barrel length makes but the condition of the barrel, or more correctly, how the bullet fits the barrel could be important.

As an aside, I might note that in tank gun firing, ammunition (propellant) temperature is a relevant factor used by the computer.

By the way, the gist of my original question was whether or not any given load, particularly in .38 special, has been re-rated over time, in either direction. I rather doubt it has but I also have no doubt that the pressure ratings of different commerical loads are likely to be spread out over the allowable ranges. I also have no doubt that some loads will blow up a revolver.

 

[Jkwas]

I shoot the 125gn gold dots and 125gn starfire from my snubs, and I would say these were equivilent. I shot some thru an airweight and they were snappy but manageable.

 

[JohnKSa]

SaxonPig,

In all fairness, I can't say that .38 +P is likely to damage a good quality gun in good condition because I don't think that's true. It's certainly not going to blow it up, but it is also certainly true that the heavier the load, the more the wear, and that has very little to do with pressure and a lot to do with recoil.

However, there is good and sufficient evidence to document and verify what I said about the velocities being the same after all the considerations I mentioned are compensated for.

In one of the links I put in my initial post, I summarized an article which quite thoroughly debunked the mistaken idea that modern ammunition is less powerful than in days of old. In fact, I posted that summary on one of your threads from another forum.

indicating that pressures were so low that there was no expansion at all in the cases when fired to seal the chambers and keep this blowback from occurring.

This was addressed in the article and in the summary of the article I posted on your other thread. The fact is that improvements in powder technology have actually allowed the pressures to fall somewhat while still providing the same power levels. Which means that even if you're right about the pressures being lower, that does NOT mean that the power of the load is automatically reduced as well. In fact, just the reverse is true in some cases. Some companies are using this technology improvement to offer MORE powerful ammunition which still meets the original pressure specs.

Reloading manuals from the 1970s and earlier list loads that vastly out perform current factory +P and these loads do not exceed allowed pressures.

It's no coincidence that you're quoting load information from BEFORE SAAMI began insisting (in 1977) that the industry convert their velocity measurements for revolver ammunition to 4" vented barrels from the over 8" unvented test barrels they were using. Cutting the barrel length by a factor of two and also venting them certainly reduced the cataloged velocities considerably while not affecting the actual velocities one bit.

Furthermore, if you're measuring reloads made up with 30 year old information you should be aware that the characteristics of some reloading powders have changed in the last three decades.

Lastly, while pressure is the topic of this thread, pressure isn't the main thing that wears out guns. Pressure can blow up a gun, but an overpressure of 10% is NOT going to blow up a gun unless the gun is hopelessly defective and already unsafe with standard pressure ammunition. Blowing up a gun is an absolute worst case scenario and that is NOT what the cautions against +P are about. In some of the lighter frame revolvers, you may get frame stretching from hot loads, but that's also a pretty extreme situation and not terribly likely

What wears out guns is friction and recoil. Friction is easy--when the moving parts of the gun rub against each other there is wear--and that happens pretty much regardless of the load power level. Recoil is another story. When the gun recoils, parts of the gun bang against other parts. Over time, this banging will cause wear and the parts will get more room to build up speed before they hit each other. That progresses until something breaks or has to be replaced. CLEARLY, the harder the banging around, the faster this process takes place.

 

[Jkwas]

Just as a Post Script, The Smith/Wesson manual states any 38spl manufactured by them after 1958 is rated OK for +p.

 

[SaxonPig]

SSSSIIIIIIGH.

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. I am well and fully aware of the "pressure barrel" issue. I mentioned it already. The claimed velocities by the factories were somewhat inflated. But some people are saying they were inflated by 300 FPS or more and I don't believe that. IF SAAMI changed the reporting requirements in 1977 that was a good thing, but I do not think the use of the special test barrel can account for all of the reduced velocity seen today. On the gun magazine article, these are the same people who make their living off advertisers like ammo companies, right? No chance at all they might be backing them up (the ammo makers don't want us to know they have done this)? As for the reloading manuals lying, as I said before (is there an echo in here?) I get almost exactly what the books say I should so I don't see how they are lying.

You don't see many cheap, imported .357 Magnums so the industry standard pressure for this caliber remains the same it has always been. But the world is awash with cheap guns made in .38 Special and nobody wanted to get sued when one blew up so they quietly started reducing the power levels in the 1970s. They did the same with the .38 Super because even after nearly 100 years some folks were still loading the Super ammo into their .38 ACP Colts and making hand grenades. The Super used to push a 130 FMC at nearly 1300 FPS. I have chronographed factory ammo from the early 1970s at this speed and this was the claimed velocity. The last box of factory 130 grain Supers I clocked ran 1080, making them safe to shoot in the .38 ACP guns and eliminating the lawsuits.

Yes, of course guns wear. The more you use the more they wear. They are mechanical things and mechanical things wear.

So what? You can't stop this unless you don't use the gun. As for warmer loads accelerating the wear... well, maybe. But I doubt most people will ever shoot their gun enough to know for sure. If anyone is really and truly worried about wearing out their gun then use whatever softball ammo you like and baby it to your heart's content. You'll get no argument from me if that's what you want to do. I on the other hand want to shoot my guns and I do not believe that a quality revolver will be worn to any measurable degree more with ammo loaded to 1970s levels than with 1006 ammo. As always, do as you wish with your gun. But refer to the photo I posted above. That's a 1942 era M&P that has fired countless rounds of pre-1970 ammo, current +P and handloads that are much warmer than that. It shows some wear but I do not think the warmer loads are doing any harm. You disagree. Fine. Do as you wish. This debate is without end. Like I said, I know what I see, not what rumor holds to be true. I will keep shooting my revolvers and I will let you know if anything bad happens.

 

[JohnKSa]

Did you read the article I mentioned in the link?

It covered the topic quite well.

First of all, there is no "IF". The SAAMI recommended changes are a matter of record.

I don't know about 300fps, but between going from an 8 to 10" unvented pressure barrel or possibly longer to a 4" vented pressure barrel and bringing the velocity numbers into a more realistic range (some manufacturers were much worse about this than others) there was quite a large difference in the cataloged velocity numbers that occurred over a relatively brief period starting with the SAAMI push in 1977 to change testing procedures and to start reporting more realistic numbers. It was also pointed out that some manufacturers complied almost immediately while others took a bit longer (even a few years) to come into full compliance.

The key flaw in your theory is that there has not been a slow slide in velocities as one would expect if this was mounting concern over lawsuits--it happened quite abruptly as one would expect from a universal change in testing procedures. The other key flaw is that there is a much more simple and easily documented explanation for the change.

The author of the article went to great lengths to test vintage ammo and compare velocity figures and was unable to find any evidence to suggest that performance of .38spl ammo has decreased.

As for warmer loads accelerating the wear... well, maybe.

Oh, come on... I don't think there's really any debate on this topic. Of course hotter loads cause more wear.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't use +P or that they should be afraid to use +P or to shoot their pistols excessively due to fear of wear, I'm specifically responding to your claims that +P is a scam, that .38spl ammo has been significantly reduced in power over the years and that people should ignore manufacturers recommendations regarding +P. The evidence simply doesn't support those claims and recommendations.

As for the reloading manuals lying...

I made no such claim or implication.

That's a 1942 era M&P that has fired countless rounds of pre-1970 ammo, current +P and handloads that are much warmer than that. It shows some wear but I do not think the warmer loads are doing any harm. You disagree.

First of all, "pre-1970" ammo was pretty much identical to what you buy today according to testing results from the article I mentioned. But NO. I do not disagree, I have no basis on which to disagree. Furthermore, I'm not even arguing about that. It's entirely possible that your gun is handling +P quite well, but that's irrelevant because I'm not talking about your gun. I'm talking SPECIFICALLY about your sweeping claims about .38 special ammunition, NOT about its effects on your particular gun.

 

[Majic]

IIRC Nyclad could be had in +P and non-+P loadings and was so marked on the boxes and cases. I have some older non-+P 158 grainers (the blue boxes) and newer +P 158 grainers (the gold boxes) and the boxes and cases are so marked.

 

[dairycreek]

Heavy 44 Special

http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm#low44

Buffalobore loads a round they call a "Heavy .44 Special" and I have included the URL for the site which includes the ballistics. It would be a stout round indeed and some may choose to call it a "magnum lite" but it is surely not the run of the mill 44 special stuff.

 

[BlueTrain]

I used a couple of .44 Special (M624) revolvers for a while. It has been a while since I owned them (My goal being to own one of everything--just can't manage all of them at once) but the newer mountain revolvers makes them mildly obsolesent. I actually think a .41 Magnum in that configuration might make the most sense, if there is such a thing. Still, there is a much better ammo selection with .44 Magnum and I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the two when fired from four inch barrels (M58 and M29). I am not a big believer in trying to get more out of them than factory ammo will give, and that includes .357 as well. Given the .357, I also don't see the point of hot loading the .38 Special.

I experimented a lot with heavier loads in the .44 Special while I had them, partly because that was the main reason for having them. If you have one anyway, you are bound to do your own reloading, partly because of the expense otherwise and also because .44 Special is not common at the store and in most places, neither is the .45 Colt (and .45-70). At any rate, I found the 6-inch barrel version (or was it 6 1/2?) to be the better balanced handgun with the light barrel. The older light barrel .45 ACP target revolvers must have been very desirable guns but I never had one. I don't know if they were M1950 or M1955 models. I think they were all more desirable than the current range of S&W revolvers, mostly.

The load data for the .44 Special that I used came from published tables from the powder manufacturer. There really wasn't any hot load in the Speer manual I have but I understand they toned down certain loads from earlier editions, except I only have one edition and can't say for sure. None of the loads were at all unpleasant to shoot with either a 4 inch or 6 inch revolver, both being stainless steel. Pleasant is not a word I would use to describe shooting either a .41 or .44 magnum or even .357 with factory ammuntion, though I found both easy enough to manage when shooting with one hand on the range. For the record, it was not fast shooting but I would not hesitate to rely on any of those revolvers for carrying around in the woods. Of all the handguns I've owned, the one I found most difficult to shoot one handed was a lightweight Colt Officer's ACP. It was not so intimidating as a .44 magnum but it really wanted to jump around in your hand. Real nice to carry, though.

 

[Lazarus777]

SaxonPig is dead right, period. Ammo used to be loaded with a lot more power. He tried to tell you he knew this from experience, not conjecture or looking it up on other internet web sites. I reload and I own some of the older reloading manuals from the early seventies and the loads are hotter then todays loads. I also hang around a lot of old guys who've been reloading longer than I've been alive and they are a living testament that ammo back then was a lot more hotter then what they are selling today. As Saxon said, Lawyers and guns blowing up made the change. The best point he could have made was them covering it up for profits and because they have deals with the ammo companies. Just like you'll never get a cure for cancer coming from the Cancer Association, they make way too much money in donations and "maintanance drugs". If a cure was ever developed they'd be out of a good living. The worlds a scam, sad truth.

Elmer Keith saying the factory stuff was too hot! That has to be bunk? Could it be true? Where'd you hear/read that at? The guy invented the .357 load and pioneered the .44mag also. Though he don't get the credit he deserves in some respects. I find it kind of surprising that he found the factory stuff to be too hot. I guess anything is possible. Do you remember where you read or heard it? Was it in one of his books? Elmer was loading the .38 with over 18grs of 2400, I'm sure he busted more than a few guns in his time! I guess you've all read about his 600 yard shot with the .44 magnum? I think he really made that shot!