OT- .38-44 S&W

[336A]

The more I think about what my personal needs require for a handgun the more I've become attracted to the idea of a revolver in this chambering. I know a lot of folks here will ask why when the .357 Magnum is much more available and can do more. Well for me there are a few reasons. First is I don't like the muzzle blast and concussion that comes with magnum calibers. I can't speak for the .38-44 however as I've never fired such a load but I would like to think that the muzzle blast and concussion wouldn't be as bad as the magnum. Yeah I know so what then load .38 SPL rounds in the magnum, not for me as I hate to clean those dang carbon rings out of the longer cylinder.

I shoot more .38 SPL than any other caliber in a handgun but at times it would be nice to occasionally use .38 -44 level loads. I may be completely off my rocker but I sure wish that there was a modern revolver that was made for this cartridge. Such as a S&W K-frame now that would be sweet.

[J Miller]

336A,

The 38-44 load was the precursor of the .357. Elmer Keith was using his 358429 170± SWC over 13.5grs if I remember right and that is a moderate .357 load. So you're going to have a lot of noise out of it.
If you drop to say 5.0 to 5.5grs Unique under the same or similar bullet you've got a nice 38 SPCL+P load that isn't too loud.

Look for Ruger Security Sixes and certain runs of GP 100s. Some of them were made in 38 Special.

I know what you mean about the muzzle blast and concussion, that's why I'm a fan(atic) for the .45 Colt and couldn't care less about the 44 Mag.

Joe

[COSteve]

For an interesting read on the 38-44, take a look at THIS Article. Having read it, the 38-44's muzzle blast and concussion will only be slightly less than the 357's, while the performance will be down too.

[Cast Bullet Hunter]

If you think the .38-44 level loads are equivalent to a slightly loaded-down .357 Magnum you are nuts!! A charge of 13.5 gr/2400 in a .38 Spl. case actually has a higher loading density and, therefore, higher pressure than the previously Alliant/Hercules listed maximum for the .357 Magnum of 15.3 gr/2400. This is with a 158 gr. cast SWC bullet.

In modern brass it actually takes ca. 11.2 gr/2400 to produce equivalent velocity to the factory .38-44 158 gr load which was listed at 1115 FS from a 6 1/2" barrel. The same velocity can be obtained with 6.2-6.3 gr/Unique or 7.0-7.1 gr/4756.

While EK notes loading 13.5/2400 for the .38-44 revolver, nowhere does he say this is a .38-44 equivalent load. He also notes that this was being done with the old-style solid head cases, what we usually refer to now as balloon-head, which had nearly the same volume as the original .357 magnum cases. For both the .38 Spl. and .44 Spl. Elmer notes that if the new style cases were used that his load of 13.5 gr/2400 (in .38-44) (or 18.5 gr/2400 in .44 Spl.)should be reduced to 11.5 gr. in the .38 case.

Your load of 13.5 gr/2400 in modern cases is developing probably 50-55,000 PSI, far above SAAMI standard for the .357 Magnum. Do you think this could be why you are having case-head separations? This is an excellent example of the old maxim "A little information is a dangerous thing", in this case, quite literally.

The article Steve linked to contains several factual errors which are old firearms myths, but still errors. The first that jumps out is that the original bullet for the .357 Magnum was designed by EK, this is not even close. The actual bullet was designed by Winchester and was a modification of a basic design by Phil B. Sharpe. Even Sharpe did did not like the Winchester design, but it was his collaboration, not Keith's that resulted in that bullet. It is a semi-wadcutter gas-check bullet. No Keith designed bullet had a gas-check.

[COSteve]

Interesting discussion, but both Quickloads and my own chrono testing don't agree with your statements.

If you read my thread, "I just Found Out I'm Shooting a 38-44!!" here, you'll note that Quickloads calculated the results I quoted (21,200psi for a 38spl cased round with a 158grn Zero JSP bullet, with 13.5grn H110, magnum primers, medium crimp, and an OAL of 1.460") and therefore, disputes your estimate of 50-55,000psi peak pressure as being overstated by a factor of 2.

Further, I have very recent chrono data from the same batch of both my 38-44 (hot 38spl+P) and 357mag ammo through my Rossi rifle, Rossi carbine, and Uberti pistol which shows a considerably lower performing round using the same bullet, same powder, and same primer. I quote that post where I say,

"Here is the performance of my 38-44 round out of both my Rossi rifle and carbine as well as my Uberti pistol. All are 357mag based weapons and all are shooting the same batch of 158grn Zero JSP bullets, set in a 38spl case, with 13.5grn H110, magnum primers, medium crimp, and an OAL of 1.460"

24" bbl Rossi Rifle = 1,490fps and 779lb/ft ME
20" bbl Rossi Carbine = 1,496fps and 785lb/ft ME
7½" bbl Uberti 1873 = 1,290fps and 584lb/ft ME

These loads are well above the 38spl+P load's performance but well below the 357mag loads. The reduction from the 357mag to 38-44 loads is:

24" bbl Rossi Rifle = -332fps and -39lb/ft ME
20" bbl Rossi Carbine = -293fps and -30lb/ft ME
7½" bbl Uberti 1873 = -258fps and -23lb/ft ME

The 38-44's reduction in recoil and muzzle blast over the 357mag in the pistol is pretty noticeable. The difference between the two is less so in the carbine and even less so in the longer barreled, heavier rifle where the difference is only slightly more."

Both these elements support the premise that the 38-44 load I used has a higher peak pressure than even the 38Spl+P (18,500psi) but far lower than the 35,000psi peak pressure a 357mag generates.

[Cast Bullet Hunter]

But I have the writings of Elmer Keith, published data from Alliant/Hercules over many years, and quite a bit of chronographed data while I was developing .38-44 factory load equivalent loads for my Outdoorsman.

Your QuickLoad data can easily be seen to be erroneous, if the pressures you say it calculates are accurate, simply from the fact it is so far at odds with pressure tested data published by Alliant/Hercules.

[w30wcf]

336A,
The factory .38-44 cartridge was cataloged at 1,115 f.p.s. with a 158 gr. bullet in a 6" barrel which would make it less noisy than a .357. I had acquired a number of REM-UMC .38-44 headstamped cartridges over the past several years and in 2009, decided to work up a handload that would be the equivalent of the factory .38-44 ballistics.

Dissected cartridges contained
1.) 7.5 grs. of a fine disc powder. I shot them through my 6" Ruger and they averaged 1,105 f.p.s. Pretty darn close to the published ballistics.
2.) 13.0 grs. of a ball type powder. They averaged 1,107 f.p.s. from the 6" barrel. I thought it was quite extroarinary that the two different loadings were almost spot on in velocity.

My goal, then, was to find equivalent powders in the same charge weights to equal the factory ballistics.
Long story short, I tried several different powders and:
7.5 gr. equivalent - HS-6 was the closest with 7.5 grs. pushing a 158 gr. bullet to 1,122 f.p.s.
13.0 gr. equivalent - W680 was the closest with 13.0 grs. giving 1,124 f.p.s. with the 158 gr. bullet

Elmer Keith's .38-44 loads were definitely hotter than the factory loads and, thus, are not representative of them.....

w30wcf