Self Defense Ammo for .38 Snub Nose
I have a 2" .38 special Taurus that was manufactured in the early 90's. It's in very good shape. After reading about self defense ammo I'm not sure I have the best load for this gun. I currently have the 158GR Semi-Jacketed Hollow Points (Not +P).
Any feedback appreciated.
Any feedback appreciated.
0
-
Nothing wrong with that load--there are so many defense loads on the market you should try a few to see which ones print close to where you are aiming. I have carried +p and standard stuff in my Taurus snubby and so far I've just been sticking with Hornady 110 grain standard pressure Critical Defense. If you want to stick with 158 grain loads and want a little more oomph then you might try some Buffalo Bore. Federa Hydra Shok, Corbon, Speer & Winchester also make good defense ammo. +P is only about 10% more in power from standard pressure loadings--in a short barrel your gun probably won't even see much of a gain and you will have more recoil to deal with. 0 -
This is my 2 cents:
From a short barrel, a heavy 158 grain projectile isn't a bad way to go. The ones you have are probably fine. 158 grain +P rounds "could" be better than non+P, but in my experience, they aren't easy to find.
In general, its hard, if not impossible, to say what the "best" ammo for the 2" snubnose guns is. For obvious reasons you can't shoot 1000 people with different types of ammo, then see which one(s) work best!
I've looked into this quite a bit and to the extent that I could get ballistic data, the various big-name brands (Federal, Winchester, Remington, etc) launch similar-weight projectiles at fairly similar velocities. That happens to be about 800 fps for the 158 grain loads from 2" bbls.
Checking the specs, contrary to popular belief there isn't even all that much of a difference between the +P and "ordinary" ammo. With some brands in some weights, the "ordinary" rounds shoot as fast as other brands +P rounds.
So my personal take on this is that any "personal defense" ammo in +P is fine. I strongly doubt that any of the big manufacturer "premium" loads is so much better than any of the others that's its going to make a meaningful difference, and even if one of them were better, there would be no way for you to tell which one it was!
So in my opinion, you're better off spending your time practicing with your gun and gaining proficiency with it, than worrying about which brand of ammo to stuff it with. If you put your shots in the right place, any of them should be adequate. If not, none of them will work.
Personally, I'll carry whatever is convenient. Right now, I happen to have Winchester 125 grain +P ammo in my snubnose, but I've also carried Federal and Corbon. I'd be just as happy with Speer or any of the other "name" brands, too.
If you really want the "best" (at least on paper) there are a few companies that put out what might be termed "super premium" ammo that probably does shoot harder than the big makers (eg Buffalo Bore, Double-Tap, etc). But this ammo also costs quite a bit, and it probably really will wear out your gun faster than normal.
On bullet weight, I think 158 grains is probably better than 125, but again, I'm not going to worry about this too much.
If you're really worried about terminal ballistics, then switch to a .357 gun, because *ANY* .357 load is going to outperform *EVERY* .38 load.0 -
I've seen a number of customers who were shot with high power .38 & .357 loads without being instantly incapacitated, so my thought is that a lower velocity load that stays in the target will be more effective than one that punches through soft tissue. There's nothing wrong with factory .38 wadcutters (used by 1st generation air marshals). Plus, low recoil gives you faster follow-up shots.
My preference:
Neal0 -
There's always the long-time FBI issue .38 Spl. load - Winchester 158 gr. +P lead semi-wadcutter.
Not a bad choice, even for use with a snubbie barrel.0 -
I have changed my opinion regarding self defense loads. I used to think the Federal HydraShok-type ammo was best and technically, it actually just may be so.
However, that said, the truth is that if you get into a gunfight, any ammo you have in the gun is the best ammo. For the 38 Special snubnose revolvers, I believe that the 158 grain lead slugs (of varying configurations) or the 148 grain wadcutter slugs will give the best performance as far as weapon control is concerned and if you keep pulling the trigger five times, it will make a mess of your assailant. It is hard to beat the wadcutters for keeping control of your small, .38 special snubnose.
Off topic now, but regarding semi-autos, I think that hardball ammo is probably best. I keep 9mm Luger NATO spec ammo fmj in my Beretta 92FS regardless of the published reasons for not using the fmj.0 -
I carry Hornady 125 grain XTP standard pressure rounds in my S&W model 60.
http://www.hornady.com/store/38-Special-125-gr-XTP/
I can't say I've ever had any experience with that ammo except punching paper. It seems to do that pretty well. YMMV.0 -
quote:Originally posted by nmyers
I've seen a number of customers who were shot with high power .38 & .357 loads without being instantly incapacitated, so my thought is that a lower velocity load that stays in the target will be more effective than one that punches through soft tissue. There's nothing wrong with factory .38 wadcutters (used by 1st generation air marshals). Plus, low recoil gives you faster follow-up shots.
My preference:
Neal
I have to respectfully disagree here. It not enough for bullets to to "stay in the target" otherwise .22s would be great defensive rounds. You need something that hits with enough mass and energy to get through clothes, muscle, and bone to reach a vital organ and damage it, with the limiting factor in ordinary (ie low power) handgun rounds being simple penetration.
The problem with ordinary wadcutters as a defensive load is that they're specifically designed as low recoil (ie low energy) target loads. They're designed to punch holes in paper, not in people. As solid projectiles, they're fine, but the idea that they're going to make perfect full-caliber cylindrical holes in human tissue is a myth. . .it doesn't happen in the real world.
The reason air-marshalls used to (and don't anymore) use them is to reduce penetration. . .the idea being that accidentally punching holes in the hull or engine of a moving aircraft could be "bad". On the ground, you don't have that limitation, and in general, you want maximum penetration in defensive rounds to get the best likelihood of reaching a vital organ.
Using low recoil loads like wadcutters in a snubnose could make sense if you're recoil sensitive. But if you're not, why would you want to use a 148 grain wadcutter bullet doing 600 fps vs a 158 anti-personnel one doing 800 fps? Look at total energy, and three proper .38+Ps will put out more than a whole cylinder-full of wadcutters. Again, if you're getting in a fight, who do you want on your team, five midgets, or three weightlifters?
As the duplex/two-round ball rounds, in my opinion those are possibly even a worse choice for defense than the weak target loads.
The Remington load depicted above puts out two separate 70 grain 000 buckshot balls at roughly 600 fps each from a 2" bbl.
In other words, you're basically getting the same total ballistic energy as the weak wadcutter, only with the energy divided between two separate light weight balls. The net effect is to create a round that's not only less accurate than the wadcutter, but also offers considerably less penetration.
Again, as a basis for comparison, a measly .32 ACP will put out a 70 grain bullet at 900 fps, and most observers would tell you that a .32ACP is a pretty anemic round. Why are two projectiles each considerably LESS powerful than a .32ACP a good choice?
If you look at issue ammo. . .ie what the pros who stake their lives on their snubnose guns actually carry. . .it usually comes down to one of the "premium" defense loads (eg either 125 grain +P or +P+ rounds, or the special Speer 135 grain snubnose load), or a variant of the 158 grain +P "FBI" load.0 -
I use Federal Hydra-Shocks 129 Gr +P when I carry the 642, and the wife uses the 110 Gr. The bottom line is anything you are comfortable with is better than something you are not. Many years ago shot them both into either a pork or beef roast, and was satisfied that either would significantly adjust the attitude of an attacker. 0 -
I load the +p 125 grainers (The older Starfire are in my 2 snubs now, but any of the premium ones are good), but in reading the postings everyone above was pretty much on the ball. As for +p, not +p, +p+ etc...It's pretty clear that whatever you can a) shoot accurately and control in multi-shot strings, b) actually has the oomph to penetrate clothes and enter the vital area of a crook, and c) doesn't harm your weapon, is the way you want to go. All I can say is practice, practice, practice.
.38 Wadcutters at target speeds and solid roundnosed projectiles are great for kids/older folks/ or training new people learning how to shoot, and they surely can be lethal, but I've personally seen quite a few folks shot with them over the last 20 years in a variety of calibers. The results were less than reassuring, and almost never were they a quick fight-stopper. I'd rather a bit more energy be available to leave in the crook via an expanding bullet IMO, but again, any load/gun combo is better than none at all.0 -
Hornady .38 Special 110 gr Critical Defense Ammo.
This comes in standard and +P loadings. [^]0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments