Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Ammo & Reloading
Please explain +P ammo
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ldp4570" data-source="post: 1486243" data-attributes="member: 5168"><p>Continued;</p><p>Ask yourself this question: Would any ammo maker in today's litigious environment sell any ammunition that would be unsafe or harmful to use in the typical gun that a consumer may own? If factory +P were really hazardous would Winchester, or Federal, or Cor-Bon sell it to the general public?</p><p></p><p>With all the many, many questions regarding the safety of +P ammo, there must be many reports of blown-up guns, right? How many guns blown-up by factory +P ammo have you seen? How many guns blown-up by factory +P ammo have you heard about? I have been participating in the shooting sports and studying firearms since 1967 and I know of absolutely NONE. I have heard second and third hand accounts of one or two guns that were said to have been damaged by factory ammo but I think it more likely these guns suffered failure due to some manufacturing defect. It happens. I have a S&W .357 Magnum that was returned to the factory for a new frame. Something went wrong with it.</p><p></p><p>Certainly, using a gun causes wear. A gun is a machine and using any machine will cause it to wear. Using hotter ammo will likely accelerate the process to some degree. But a quality gun from S&W or Colt or Ruger will not blow up with +Ps. Nor will it excessively stretch the frame or split the barrel in my opinion. It will possibly wear a little faster, and I doubt if anyone could predict how much, but I think the added wear on a good gun will not be all that much. The gun would probably still last longer than the man who owns it.</p><p></p><p>I admit to some paranoia about warm loads in an alloy-framed gun but factory +P is not a warm load. I do not have any alloy revolvers but if I did I would stick to standard ammo (such as +P) and avoid my warm hand loads. In an alloy gun of good quality I have no concerns at all about +P on a regular basis since I consider factory +P to be nothing more than standard pressure (or less), anyway. Also, in 1955 Elmer Keith wrote of shooting the 38/44 load through the alloy J frame guns and he said that it did them no harm but recoil was pretty fierce. Keith favored big guns with heavy recoil so such a comment coming from him is quite meaningful.</p><p></p><p>This is just my opinion based on personal experience and research. There are differing points of view. Some replies to the +P question are quite adamant about avoiding regular use of this ammo. Others advise occasional use. Some say only carry +P for defense but dont use it for practice at all. Some say S&W guns with model markings are OK with +P*** (what about the Colts?) while others say only use it in guns specifically approved by the factory. The fact that there are so many answers to this question tells me that there is great confusion on this matter. Im a simple man and I take a simple course to the truth. I do basic research and try to find the facts. I have presented the facts as I see them. All one must do to find the truth about current factory +P ammo is look at the specifications. I submit that a 125/975 load is hardly high performance, and certainly nothing to cause concern for owners of quality revolvers. All are free to disagree. </p><p></p><p>Some forum members have accused me of being irresponsible in recommending the loads I mentioned. Of course, I am not recommending anything, only stating what I do. Also, all of the loads I use came from reputable reloading manuals. If the loads were safe in 1970 I dont see why they arent safe now, but I dont recommend anything to anyone. Each of us has to make our own choice. If you think any of the loads I mentioned are too hot then avoid them. If you are in any way uncomfortable with +Ps then stick with standard loads. </p><p></p><p>Notes:</p><p></p><p>* The manufacture and tempering of steel was imprecise before around 1930 or so. Any of my guns made before this date get reduced loads just to be on the safe side. Note that early S&Ws, those made before around 1918, had cylinders that were not tempered at all. A similar situation likely is true with Colt revolvers but I have no specific knowledge of when Colt began tempering their cylinders. </p><p></p><p>** This same document advertises a 125 JHP .357 Magnum load at 1775 FPS. Current factory ammo in this caliber with this bullet usually clock around 1250-1300 FPS. Apparently the Magnums have also been "downsized."</p><p></p><p>*** I never understood using the "model marking" on S&W revolvers as the cut-off for +P. As far as I can tell the last S&W made without the model number stamped on it was exactly the same as the first revolver to have the model number stamped on it. They didn't improve the steel or strengthen the guns in any way. All they did was start stamping the model numbers. Also, how could S&W have intended for the model marking to be a benchmark for +P when the ammo wasnt invented until 25 years later?</p><p></p><p>PS:</p><p></p><p>This same situation that has affected the .38 Special occurs with the .38 Super. The original loading for the Super was a 130 FMJ at nearly 1,300 FPS. But the Super cartridge is the same physical size as the old .38 ACP, just loaded to higher pressures so the ammo makers started fretting over some yahoo stuffing Supers into his 1905 Colt in .38 ACP and spreading parts all over the range. Thats why Super cases were nickel and the .38 ACP were brass until a few years ago, so shooters could instantly recognize which ammo they had. I was curious a few years ago when I noticed that they stopped doing this and I saw Super ammo in regular brass cases. I guess theres no need any longer since factory Super ammo now clocks about the same as .38 ACP. The last box I checked ran 1,120 FPS, only 40 more than the ACP. They have down-loaded the Super to nearly the same level as the ACP. No lawsuits. Of course, the Super isnt so super any longer, is it?</p><p></p><p>Some people claim that the standard .38 Special load today is the same as 30-50 years ago and the only difference is the claimed velocities in the past were greatly exaggerated by the test barrels they used. Everyone back then knew real-world velocity would be a little lower but not as much as some would have us think. Below are some actual measured velocities of various vintage ammunition. </p><p></p><p>Chart #1:</p><p></p><p>Some .38 Special velocities actually measured (not claimed by the manufacturer) from a 4" Colt Official Police:</p><p></p><p>Remington 158 grain lead made in the late 1960s-early 70s...840 fps</p><p>Peters 158 grain lead made in the 1950s...800 fps</p><p>Western Super-X 158 grain lead made in the mid-late1960s...810 fps</p><p>Western 150 grain metal-piercing made in the mid-late 1960s...1000 fps</p><p>Remington 158 grain lead "Hi-Speed" made in the 1950s...920 fps</p><p></p><p>The 158 loads from the 1950s-1970s are clearly more potent than the current offerings that achieve a claimed 730-755 FPS velocity. The observed 800-840 FPS is consistent with the manufacturer claims at the time of 870-910 FPS since they used a 6" "pressure barrel" to achieve the claimed velocities and actual velocities from 4" revolvers ran somewhat lower. But clearly not the huge difference some people claim in their assertions that factory .38 Special ammo has not been reduced in power. Also, bear in mind that the ammo being tested was all 30-50 years old and may have exhibited some deterioration in the powder which may have caused lower velocities than the ammo developed when new.</p><p></p><p>The bottom line:</p><p></p><p>Each man must do what he thinks is best. After a great deal of research and testing I do not consider factory +P ammo to be very warm at all and it concerns me not one bit in a quality revolver.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ldp4570, post: 1486243, member: 5168"] Continued; Ask yourself this question: Would any ammo maker in today's litigious environment sell any ammunition that would be unsafe or harmful to use in the typical gun that a consumer may own? If factory +P were really hazardous would Winchester, or Federal, or Cor-Bon sell it to the general public? With all the many, many questions regarding the safety of +P ammo, there must be many reports of blown-up guns, right? How many guns blown-up by factory +P ammo have you seen? How many guns blown-up by factory +P ammo have you heard about? I have been participating in the shooting sports and studying firearms since 1967 and I know of absolutely NONE. I have heard second and third hand accounts of one or two guns that were said to have been damaged by factory ammo but I think it more likely these guns suffered failure due to some manufacturing defect. It happens. I have a S&W .357 Magnum that was returned to the factory for a new frame. Something went wrong with it. Certainly, using a gun causes wear. A gun is a machine and using any machine will cause it to wear. Using hotter ammo will likely accelerate the process to some degree. But a quality gun from S&W or Colt or Ruger will not blow up with +Ps. Nor will it excessively stretch the frame or split the barrel in my opinion. It will possibly wear a little faster, and I doubt if anyone could predict how much, but I think the added wear on a good gun will not be all that much. The gun would probably still last longer than the man who owns it. I admit to some paranoia about warm loads in an alloy-framed gun but factory +P is not a warm load. I do not have any alloy revolvers but if I did I would stick to standard ammo (such as +P) and avoid my warm hand loads. In an alloy gun of good quality I have no concerns at all about +P on a regular basis since I consider factory +P to be nothing more than standard pressure (or less), anyway. Also, in 1955 Elmer Keith wrote of shooting the 38/44 load through the alloy J frame guns and he said that it did them no harm but recoil was pretty fierce. Keith favored big guns with heavy recoil so such a comment coming from him is quite meaningful. This is just my opinion based on personal experience and research. There are differing points of view. Some replies to the +P question are quite adamant about avoiding regular use of this ammo. Others advise occasional use. Some say only carry +P for defense but dont use it for practice at all. Some say S&W guns with model markings are OK with +P*** (what about the Colts?) while others say only use it in guns specifically approved by the factory. The fact that there are so many answers to this question tells me that there is great confusion on this matter. Im a simple man and I take a simple course to the truth. I do basic research and try to find the facts. I have presented the facts as I see them. All one must do to find the truth about current factory +P ammo is look at the specifications. I submit that a 125/975 load is hardly high performance, and certainly nothing to cause concern for owners of quality revolvers. All are free to disagree. Some forum members have accused me of being irresponsible in recommending the loads I mentioned. Of course, I am not recommending anything, only stating what I do. Also, all of the loads I use came from reputable reloading manuals. If the loads were safe in 1970 I dont see why they arent safe now, but I dont recommend anything to anyone. Each of us has to make our own choice. If you think any of the loads I mentioned are too hot then avoid them. If you are in any way uncomfortable with +Ps then stick with standard loads. Notes: * The manufacture and tempering of steel was imprecise before around 1930 or so. Any of my guns made before this date get reduced loads just to be on the safe side. Note that early S&Ws, those made before around 1918, had cylinders that were not tempered at all. A similar situation likely is true with Colt revolvers but I have no specific knowledge of when Colt began tempering their cylinders. ** This same document advertises a 125 JHP .357 Magnum load at 1775 FPS. Current factory ammo in this caliber with this bullet usually clock around 1250-1300 FPS. Apparently the Magnums have also been "downsized." *** I never understood using the "model marking" on S&W revolvers as the cut-off for +P. As far as I can tell the last S&W made without the model number stamped on it was exactly the same as the first revolver to have the model number stamped on it. They didn't improve the steel or strengthen the guns in any way. All they did was start stamping the model numbers. Also, how could S&W have intended for the model marking to be a benchmark for +P when the ammo wasnt invented until 25 years later? PS: This same situation that has affected the .38 Special occurs with the .38 Super. The original loading for the Super was a 130 FMJ at nearly 1,300 FPS. But the Super cartridge is the same physical size as the old .38 ACP, just loaded to higher pressures so the ammo makers started fretting over some yahoo stuffing Supers into his 1905 Colt in .38 ACP and spreading parts all over the range. Thats why Super cases were nickel and the .38 ACP were brass until a few years ago, so shooters could instantly recognize which ammo they had. I was curious a few years ago when I noticed that they stopped doing this and I saw Super ammo in regular brass cases. I guess theres no need any longer since factory Super ammo now clocks about the same as .38 ACP. The last box I checked ran 1,120 FPS, only 40 more than the ACP. They have down-loaded the Super to nearly the same level as the ACP. No lawsuits. Of course, the Super isnt so super any longer, is it? Some people claim that the standard .38 Special load today is the same as 30-50 years ago and the only difference is the claimed velocities in the past were greatly exaggerated by the test barrels they used. Everyone back then knew real-world velocity would be a little lower but not as much as some would have us think. Below are some actual measured velocities of various vintage ammunition. Chart #1: Some .38 Special velocities actually measured (not claimed by the manufacturer) from a 4" Colt Official Police: Remington 158 grain lead made in the late 1960s-early 70s...840 fps Peters 158 grain lead made in the 1950s...800 fps Western Super-X 158 grain lead made in the mid-late1960s...810 fps Western 150 grain metal-piercing made in the mid-late 1960s...1000 fps Remington 158 grain lead "Hi-Speed" made in the 1950s...920 fps The 158 loads from the 1950s-1970s are clearly more potent than the current offerings that achieve a claimed 730-755 FPS velocity. The observed 800-840 FPS is consistent with the manufacturer claims at the time of 870-910 FPS since they used a 6" "pressure barrel" to achieve the claimed velocities and actual velocities from 4" revolvers ran somewhat lower. But clearly not the huge difference some people claim in their assertions that factory .38 Special ammo has not been reduced in power. Also, bear in mind that the ammo being tested was all 30-50 years old and may have exhibited some deterioration in the powder which may have caused lower velocities than the ammo developed when new. The bottom line: Each man must do what he thinks is best. After a great deal of research and testing I do not consider factory +P ammo to be very warm at all and it concerns me not one bit in a quality revolver. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Ammo & Reloading
Please explain +P ammo
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
