+p's in older j frame?

S

snubking

Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
331
Likes
102
Feedback: 10 / 0 / 0
I have heard alot of conflicting advice on this subject. I have a s&w 649 nodash. When I purchased it the gunshop owner told me all steel J frames will shoot +p's. So a couple weeks later I called smith and wesson and they told me NO. I shouldent shoot +p's ever.

Also are the +p's we shoot today less powerfull than the ones from yesteryear?

So whats the real scoop.
 
Doing what you have suggested is "safe" in that the revolver won't explode (most likely), but "unsafe" in that you'll affect timing, crane alignment, and a bunch of other things if you do it often enough.
 
would I carry +p for defensive purposes, yes I would and have. Would I feed it a steady diet, no way.
 
I personally would keep shooting .38 special all the time - practice with the .38 special self defense so if you need to use it you know what to expect.... I would not practice with .38 special and then load with +p for self defense...

My 2 cents....
 
Pilgrim said:
S&W says any of their guns with a Model Number are ok for +P's.
Yours is a 649 so it's good to go.
Click to expand...

You are correct that any S&W gun made since 1958 should be able to handle + P's. However it should be pointed out that the Model 19 did not hold up well against .357 magnum loads esp the newer 125 grain stuff that came out in the late 70's. Forcing cone erosion was a major problem and it was solved by introducing the L frame. At one time conventional wisdom was to use .38's for training and .357's for duty/combat, but since people fight like they train, this proved disastrous. The famous (or infamous) Newhall Massacre was a major event and a turning point in police training philosophy.

I think Shanef brings up a good point, although I certainly can't fault Glockaholic's rationale either. There are some standard velocity Federal loads that are designed to work well in short barreled revolvers. I do not know if these are still being manufactured or not. That might be the best option. Since my J Frame is rated for +P and my Ruger SP101 is a .357 the point for me is moot. If I were the original poster, I'd probably shoot at least some +P's for practice and then shoot a lot of standard .38 spl just to keep my marksmanship skills keen because the snub revolver is a difficult beast to control, much less master, and carry +P's for everyday use. I'd also periodically inspect the revolver for excessive wear.

Another option (and a fun one) would to purchase a newer 649 rated for +P (great excuse to buy a new gun [smile])
 
Last edited:
However it should be pointed out that the Model 19 did not hold up well against .357 magnum loads esp the newer 125 grain stuff that came out in the late 70's. Forcing cone erosion was a major problem and it was solved by introducing the L frame. At one time conventional wisdom was to use .38's for training and .357's for duty/combat, but since people fight like they train, this proved disastrous.
Click to expand...

I assumed he was referring to .38 +p's which would be no problem. Perhaps I was wrong and he was referring to .357's? If so, I've never heard of .357 +p.
 
Pilgrim said:
I assumed he was referring to .38 +p's which would be no problem. Perhaps I was wrong and he was referring to .357's? If so, I've never heard of .357 +p.
Click to expand...

Pilgrim,

Perhaps I muddied the waters a bit. My apologies for any confusion. The OP was referring to +P 38's. I was attempting to show that the idea of using one level of ammo for practice and one for carry might cause some problems (or not). This was conventional wisdom with the Model 19/66.

I do not believe that there are currently is .357 +P ammunition being manufactured although I think back in the 90's there may have been a 110 grain round with +P attributions and marketed as such, but I am not resourced at this time to verify this , and I imagine that such companies as Corbon have hot loads for .357 whether they are designated +P or not.

While I don't think a steady diet of +P's is going to help the longevity of a J frame made in 1958 or after but not specifically rated +P, the gun if in proper condition isn't going to blow up or anything, but wear will be accelerated and the revolver is more apt to go out of time. As you know the J frame was redesigned, made longer and beefed up to handle .357 magnum and concurrent with this all .38's were rated for +P by stamping it on the barrel (my 637 has this designation).

On the other hand, the OP contacted S&W and they advised him not to fire +P's in his revolver. That has to count for something, although gun companies are notoriously conservative in matters such as this as to be expected.

I should add to the OP and to anyone else that the point of view I have articulated is mine alone. Like everything else, your mileage may vary and I do not advocate that anyone carry +P's in any gun not so designated esp in the S&W J frame line.
 
When I bought my 649 I was also told by smith and Wesson that +p were not compatible with the model. However, when I asked my local gun shop they told me (like glockaholic said) that I shouldn't be going to the range to shoot hundreds of rounds of +p through it, but they are able to handle the extra fire power. I only load mine with +p while carrying, and ive yet to actually shoot a +p round through it just to be safe.
 
My thinking is that the difference between a standard 38 Special load and a +P is not worth the risk that you won't be familiar with the report, recoil, muzzle flash, and other differences from the round you practice with. The ability to stay cool, deal with the adrenalin rush, and actually aim and fire deliberately in a shooting situation are far more important. If you never, or seldom fire a +P round, not only will you possibly be surprised when you do, but it might run through your mind at the moment you're pulling the trigger and distract you.

I carry what I practice with.

I cam across tis interesting note on the 38 Special wikipedia page:
It is important to recognize that SAAMI changed the specifications for the .38 Special in 1972. Prior to that time the standard .38 Special was very close to today's "+P" cartridges.
Click to expand...

So, it may be that older revolvers are fine with +P rounds, as they were rated for the older 38 Special spec. But, I don't know any more about that.

It's also worth noting that if expense is not a severely limiting factor, one should decide on what they want to carry and get it, not try to figure out how to make what's on hand do a job that it's marginal at.
 
I have an old flat latch model 36 made in 1951 that I have carried for years and have trained with. For practice I reload my own and I keep the load moderate. Both to minimize wear on the revolver and wear on me. I have put thousands of rounds through it of regular .38's in personal practice, snubby specific training at Sig and in Michael de Bethencourt's class. Typically I will run 50 - 100 rds of regular .38 through it followed by a cylinder of +p. I like the Buffalo Bore 158 gr. LSWCHP +p. It is cost prohibitive and painful to shoot the +p all the time. That old gun is my gun. I know it well. I believe that the amount of time that I have spent shooting it is the most important thing. When I shoot that last cylinder full of +p's I pull from my pocket as fast as I can and empty as fast as I can into a 5" shoot n c at about 12 feet. Usually they are all well within the 5" area. I don't shoot the regulars any better. I understand the theory of always shooting what you carry, but personally I do not buy it. I want to practice with my carry gun and not go broke or destroy my hand and then if I need it for real I want as much power as possible within the restrictions of what I carry. JMHO.
 
The Goose said:
I understand the theory of always shooting what you carry, but personally I do not buy it. I want to practice with my carry gun and not go broke or destroy my hand and then if I need it for real I want as much power as possible within the restrictions of what I carry. JMHO.
Click to expand...
I agree with Goose here, sort of. I certainly practice my 9mm with different ammo than I carry because I don't want to go broke practicing (although I am anyway, now). The difference in this situation, IMO, is that a +P has a noticeably different recoil than a standard .38SP, so it's a little different than, say, 9mm jacketed versus 9mm hollow points.
 
Well, different strokes, I guess. If I was a professional musician I wouldn't practice with one instrument set-up, and then use a different one for the big concert.

In addition, I might be concerned, with an older gun, about just when it might exhibit symptoms of damage due to loads beyond its design limits. What happens when the crane gets bent and the cylinder is not in alignment when you pump those last +P practice rounds through it, and you don't know it - and are now carrying it for protection? I guess you could check it after the range session (if you have an alignment tool). Or, you could just shoot it pretty much forever with the round intended for it and not worry about it, or get a carry piece designed to take +P ammo.
 
Add me to the list as another one who has an old j frame and shoots 38s at range and carries +p for self defense, never had a problem
 
I don't think its too much of a gamble using +p, from all I've heard over the years its reloaded ammo that's made way too hot that causes major barrel bulges etc,
 
I carry my 20 year old non +P airweight j-frame with 125gr Federal Nyclads. Unfortunately, the Nyclads are very hard to find these days, but from what I've read they are still one of the best non +P .38 special loads for a snub. I was always led to believe that putting +P through a non +P j-frame would damage it over time. I imagine this would be more likely with an aluminum frame airweight.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

New J frame
Replies
3
Views
372
Coyote33
Coyote33
Got a new sub machine gun in today
Replies
3
Views
323
Rocky Mosasaurus
Rocky Mosasaurus
AR lower lasering- suggestions in SNH
Replies
4
Views
345
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
S&W I Frames, worth considering?
Replies
3
Views
389
RKG
R
Dont judge. But I bought this monstrosity
2
Replies
56
Views
2K
kingson
kingson
Back
Top Bottom