Powders for snubbies?
- Thread starter jski
- Start date
I have a 38spl snubbie lcr I shoot 158s. I tried 4 powders, power pistol, hp-38, and clays, and cfe pstol
power pistol was too slow, had massive fireballs, and was painfully snappy, had inconsistent velocities, but gave the most velocity.
hp-38 has some snap, slightly reduced velocities, and minimal flash.
Clays gave lower velocities, but was super consistent, and very pleasant to shoot even at max. I could shoot those loads in my snubbie all day long.
cfe pistol, was super inconsistent. I suspect the ball powder is having a hard time igniting due to to low pressure of the 38spl cartridge. velocity was poor as well.
I have used power pistol in 357 mag, but it is a 6in gun. it gives great velocities with 120 and 125s, up in the 1575fps range. not sure how it would perform out of a snubbie, but it does not need magnum primers which is nice.
power pistol was too slow, had massive fireballs, and was painfully snappy, had inconsistent velocities, but gave the most velocity.
hp-38 has some snap, slightly reduced velocities, and minimal flash.
Clays gave lower velocities, but was super consistent, and very pleasant to shoot even at max. I could shoot those loads in my snubbie all day long.
cfe pistol, was super inconsistent. I suspect the ball powder is having a hard time igniting due to to low pressure of the 38spl cartridge. velocity was poor as well.
I have used power pistol in 357 mag, but it is a 6in gun. it gives great velocities with 120 and 125s, up in the 1575fps range. not sure how it would perform out of a snubbie, but it does not need magnum primers which is nice.
jetinteriorguy
New member
You should try Clays in a 9mm sub compact. Just something about it that eliminates the snappiness typical of these small guns.
Its on my list already, but there are quite a few projects i have to finish up before i get to it
Mike Irwin
Staff
I've always used WW 231 for the vast majority of my handgun loading. Works great in my various .38 snubs.
Loading ammunition "proper" for snubbies is always a matter of compromise - and opinion.
First and foremost, it's about fast propellants. The pressure curve must be steep enough to be compatible with the short barrel. Sure, if you load up 357 Magnum with a 125 JHP and case-filled amounts Winchester 296, it'll likely deliver a higher velocity in your snubbie than the same projectile using Winchester 231. But . . . it'll come at the price of undesirable characteristics. Namely, huge flash, big boomy report, and tons of thrust recoil. To most, that is not "proper" short barrel ammunition.
You need the propellant to do its thing quickly and get it over with. Using heavier bullets can remedy this to some degree, but that too has a drawback - lower velocity. Which brings us to this:
That's a point up for endless debate. At best, it's a fine line. If you're looking for expansion, it's best to start with a bullet profile with an aggressive hollow point, facilitating low velocity expansion. In the case of 38/357, Speer's Gold Dot "Short Barrel" bullets come to mind. They're made in 110gn and 135gn weights (the 110's are not recommended for 357).
Using a flash-suppressed propellant is also a good idea.
So those are the principles.
I don't load for 32 H&R. But I've dabbled around with 38/357. I've had good luck with W231 (of course) and AA#2. Titegroup too. Even when I'm shooting my 4" 38 Special revolver, I prefer this type of ammo. A nice crisp controllable 125 +P round is a delight to shoot, IMO.
First and foremost, it's about fast propellants. The pressure curve must be steep enough to be compatible with the short barrel. Sure, if you load up 357 Magnum with a 125 JHP and case-filled amounts Winchester 296, it'll likely deliver a higher velocity in your snubbie than the same projectile using Winchester 231. But . . . it'll come at the price of undesirable characteristics. Namely, huge flash, big boomy report, and tons of thrust recoil. To most, that is not "proper" short barrel ammunition.
You need the propellant to do its thing quickly and get it over with. Using heavier bullets can remedy this to some degree, but that too has a drawback - lower velocity. Which brings us to this:
That's a point up for endless debate. At best, it's a fine line. If you're looking for expansion, it's best to start with a bullet profile with an aggressive hollow point, facilitating low velocity expansion. In the case of 38/357, Speer's Gold Dot "Short Barrel" bullets come to mind. They're made in 110gn and 135gn weights (the 110's are not recommended for 357).
Using a flash-suppressed propellant is also a good idea.
So those are the principles.
I don't load for 32 H&R. But I've dabbled around with 38/357. I've had good luck with W231 (of course) and AA#2. Titegroup too. Even when I'm shooting my 4" 38 Special revolver, I prefer this type of ammo. A nice crisp controllable 125 +P round is a delight to shoot, IMO.
A side note on bullet style. I have become a huge fan of wide flat nose bullets. I have done some get testing with a clear ballistics block. I compared some in both 9mm and 44spl so far. The results were the same in both. The JHP tend to open and leave a large perment cavity for a few inches then leave a pin hole to the end of travel. The wide flat nose however tend to create a large hole the entire length of travel and penetrate much further. my friend hunts with wide flat nose in 44special. last deer he took he said it punched about a 1in hold in 1 side, all the way through, and out the other side.
I suspect this is also why semi was cutters were preferred in 38s for a long time, but they don't load as smoothly as the wide flat nose.
I will hopefully make it to the range to be able to test Friday. all are loaded with Hodgdons max charge of 3.1g of Clays. All will be shot through a Clear Ballistics 10% gel block. Il try and get some pics and catch the bullets if I can.
Left 158g home cast from a lee mold round flat
Center Brazos 158g SWC
Right Hornady XTP 158g
Also here are my testing results from my LCR. I did a thread a while back on whether or not faster burning powders were better for snubbies, which is when I posted this data. here is the original thread, results with post #40 along with my notes.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=613662&page=2
Ruger LCR chambered 38spl P+ (no +P loads used) with a 1.87in barrel.
Mixed 38spl brass
CCI #500 Small Pistol Primers
Brazos 158g SWC (hi-tek coated lead)
5 shot groups unless otherwise noted
Power Pistol (the one with a lot of unburned powder)
4.7g, avg 734fps, SD 4.35, ES 8 (4 shots, 1 registered at 13,000fps was removed)
5.2g, 804fps (only got 1 good reading, 1 error, 104fps, 99fps, 102fps, 804fps)
HP-38 (aka W-231)
3.1, avg 524fps, SD 22.6, ES 53
3.7, avg 652fps, SD 27.63, ES 75
4.4, Avg 739fps, SD 4.39, ES 11
Hodgdon Clays
2.8, avg 632, SD 12.77, ES 28
3.1, Avg 677, SD 14.17, ES 37
I suspect this is also why semi was cutters were preferred in 38s for a long time, but they don't load as smoothly as the wide flat nose.
I will hopefully make it to the range to be able to test Friday. all are loaded with Hodgdons max charge of 3.1g of Clays. All will be shot through a Clear Ballistics 10% gel block. Il try and get some pics and catch the bullets if I can.
Left 158g home cast from a lee mold round flat
Center Brazos 158g SWC
Right Hornady XTP 158g
Also here are my testing results from my LCR. I did a thread a while back on whether or not faster burning powders were better for snubbies, which is when I posted this data. here is the original thread, results with post #40 along with my notes.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=613662&page=2
Ruger LCR chambered 38spl P+ (no +P loads used) with a 1.87in barrel.
Mixed 38spl brass
CCI #500 Small Pistol Primers
Brazos 158g SWC (hi-tek coated lead)
5 shot groups unless otherwise noted
Power Pistol (the one with a lot of unburned powder)
4.7g, avg 734fps, SD 4.35, ES 8 (4 shots, 1 registered at 13,000fps was removed)
5.2g, 804fps (only got 1 good reading, 1 error, 104fps, 99fps, 102fps, 804fps)
HP-38 (aka W-231)
3.1, avg 524fps, SD 22.6, ES 53
3.7, avg 652fps, SD 27.63, ES 75
4.4, Avg 739fps, SD 4.39, ES 11
Hodgdon Clays
2.8, avg 632, SD 12.77, ES 28
3.1, Avg 677, SD 14.17, ES 37
Attachments
Last edited:
For fun and practice a 148 grain wadcutter (Lyman #358495) and either 2.7 gr. Bullseye or 3.1 gr. W231/HP38. Serious load run a 156 gr. semi-wadcutter (Lyman #359156 gas checked) over 5.0 gr. Unique. I use the loads in an S&W M60 snubby and in full sized .38 Spl. revolvers as well. FWIW, the W321 load is the more accurate load with the wadcutter in my revolvers.
Paul B.
Paul B.
My understanding was you did not need gas checks until around 1200fps... which you could do in a longer barreled 357.
Snubbies will produce plenty of velocity to expand bullets even with .38 specials +p rounds. A .357 magnum can propel 125gr bullets to over 1200 fps in a snubby. I believe Paul Harrell has a video comparing both with a chrono for both of these rounds.
The fast powder for short barrel is a myth. It doesn't work that way. If you want the highest velocity for a short barrel you want the powder that can give the highest velocity period in any barrel. This has been proven over many times and I am surprised the myth continues. I'll let you guys that still think fast powders are what get the highest velocities out of snubbies do your own dd. That way you'll understand the combustion process. Otherwise Bullseye would get higher velocities from a short barrel than H110.
The fast powder for short barrel is a myth. It doesn't work that way. If you want the highest velocity for a short barrel you want the powder that can give the highest velocity period in any barrel. This has been proven over many times and I am surprised the myth continues. I'll let you guys that still think fast powders are what get the highest velocities out of snubbies do your own dd. That way you'll understand the combustion process. Otherwise Bullseye would get higher velocities from a short barrel than H110.
Last edited:
My goal was to get a more complete burn of the powder. Which i achieved. With the powders i had power pistol had the best velocity. It also had a fair bit of unburnt powder coming out along with fairly large fireballs.
The hp-38 (w231) gave good performance with minimal muzzle flash. Both power pistol and hp-38 were snappy and uncomfortable to shoot. Clays you could shoot all day long and had almost no muzzle flash.
It depends on what your goals are. In my case the best velocity came with excessive muzzle flash. The medium velocity load worked well but was still too snappy to practice with regularly. The clays load i could 50 or 100rnds and not be hurting.
Last edited:
warnerwh said:
It actually has a lot to do with peak pressures and position sensitivity in low loading densities and also upon whether an apple-to-apples peak pressure comparison is being made. I've seen a couple of examples of slower powder loads that produced high SDs in a 2½" barrel that tightened up in a 4" barrel in the same DW revolver. However, if you increase the charge of the same slow powder to get higher peak pressure, it ignites better and the problem in the snubby usually clears up.
Where the apples-to-apples issue comes up is when people aim to get a specific velocity from their snubby. In working different powders up to that same velocity, they forget that their slower powders will achieve the same average velocity as their fast powders do with a lower peak pressure and higher muzzle pressure and they are therefore running their slow powders at lower peak pressures than they are their fast ones. So, of course, they have a harder time with both ignition and consistent percent completion of in-barrel-burn with the slow powders, as they prefer to run at a higher pressure and not lower pressure.
Bottom, line: you can create test conditions where the short barrel is at a consistency disadvantage, but you don't have to.
Veral Smith's customers have been aware for a long time that the WFN profile is almost magic within reasonable ranges. For decades, Smith has been emphasizing that through-and-through tunnel they cut that Shadow9mm described. It makes for a faster stop, a better blood trail, and as a bonus, it produces less bloodshot meat. The low BC makes it unattractive for shots over 200 yards, IMHO, but for woods hunting it is terrific. I particularly like the 45-70 for fast stops with these shapes, but the fact is a 357 carbine or a 30-30 loaded with them will take deer just fine.
reynolds357
New member
It's not really a myth. It is a misapplied principle. The powder that produces the fastest velocity in my .357 mag Contender carbine is not the same powder that produces the highest velocity in my snubnose. The Snubbie will actually blow raw powder using the Contender load.
Powders for short barreled handguns :
In these days of shortages ... you have to use whatever you can find .
Any of these powers will work :
Clays
700X
Titegroup
Bullseye
Red Dot
Zip
Acc #2
W231
HP-38
Unique
Keep a list with you while shopping and if you see any of these powders ... buy some !
Gary
In these days of shortages ... you have to use whatever you can find .
Any of these powers will work :
Clays
700X
Titegroup
Bullseye
Red Dot
Zip
Acc #2
W231
HP-38
Unique
Keep a list with you while shopping and if you see any of these powders ... buy some !
Gary
38 Special Data
Here's a real world case in point, from personal experience:
I load a fair share of 125gn JHP's (Everglades) for my "+P" 38 Special loadings.
I have two loadings that I have shot a lot of over several years. One with AA#2, and one with AA#5. As most know, AA2 is fast and AA5 is intermediate.
In my Smith Model 60 1-7/8" bbl:
AA#5 runs 871 f/s.
AA#2 runs 866 f/s.
So that's a difference of 5 f/s.
In my Smith Model 67 4" bbl:
AA#5 runs 967 f/s.
AA#2 runs 934 f/s.
So that's a difference of 33 f/s.
Obviously, the 4" bbl firearm makes better use of the intermediate burn rate propellant, compared to the snubbie. Yes, the slower propellant still delivers more velocity in the snubby, but the difference is negligible. However, the AA#5 loading has more muzzle blast and recoil. Is it a fair tradeoff? That is where opinion comes in. For me, the answer is "no." In fact, I stopped loading the AA#5 ammo. The AA#2 is a great shooter.
Here's a real world case in point, from personal experience:
I load a fair share of 125gn JHP's (Everglades) for my "+P" 38 Special loadings.
I have two loadings that I have shot a lot of over several years. One with AA#2, and one with AA#5. As most know, AA2 is fast and AA5 is intermediate.
In my Smith Model 60 1-7/8" bbl:
AA#5 runs 871 f/s.
AA#2 runs 866 f/s.
So that's a difference of 5 f/s.
In my Smith Model 67 4" bbl:
AA#5 runs 967 f/s.
AA#2 runs 934 f/s.
So that's a difference of 33 f/s.
Obviously, the 4" bbl firearm makes better use of the intermediate burn rate propellant, compared to the snubbie. Yes, the slower propellant still delivers more velocity in the snubby, but the difference is negligible. However, the AA#5 loading has more muzzle blast and recoil. Is it a fair tradeoff? That is where opinion comes in. For me, the answer is "no." In fact, I stopped loading the AA#5 ammo. The AA#2 is a great shooter.
Guys, what do you think about Ramshot’s True Blue for snubbies? I’ve read a lot of praise for True Blue for Mini-9s, a similar application to snubbies. Not the fastest burning powder but certainly faster that magnum pistol powders.
To us? Ramshot True Blue is simply, easily, one of the best powders for 9MM you can buy in the known Universe. It can do plinking, it can do accuracy, it can do low charge weight plate shooting, it can do 9 MM Major.
To us? Ramshot True Blue is simply, easily, one of the best powders for 9MM you can buy in the known Universe. It can do plinking, it can do accuracy, it can do low charge weight plate shooting, it can do 9 MM Major.
Last edited: