My OP is of 1951 manufacture and in fine mechanical condition; just holster wear. I notice Buffalo Bore is offering a heavy .38 Special +P "Outdoorsman" load firing a 158 grain SWC at an advertised 1200 fps. My normal load for the OP is a 162 grain SWC at 900 fps which it handles just fine. But is that Buffalo Bore load too much for it? I am interested in it, but that is virtual .357 Magnum power; though BB says it is safe for any .38 Special revolver in good condition. What is the consensus?
Heavy loads in the Official Police
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Joined
·
12,840 Posts
If only as a few practice rounds, and then for Carry...it'd probably be just fine.
Anything more than that, I would feel to be asking too much of the old 'OP'.
That is ( 158 Grain and 1,200 FPS ) afterall, what one would consider .357 Magnum territory, or, close enough!
Anything more than that, I would feel to be asking too much of the old 'OP'.
That is ( 158 Grain and 1,200 FPS ) afterall, what one would consider .357 Magnum territory, or, close enough!
Fact is I have many guns better suited to the purpose; but I have developed a fondness for the old OP and find myself carrying it more often than not as a "woods walking" gun and even as a personal defense gun. Increasing its performance is an attractive option. Be that as it may, I believe I will lean to the side of caution and stick with loads in the 900 fps range. The flat-nosed cast lead bullets I prefer in it have performed well on the limited amount of smaller game I have used it on. I suspect they would do just fine for defense if called upon. I do appreciate your opinions. These fine old guns certainly are under-appreciated these days. Good to exchange views with others who hold them in high regard.
Joined
·
1,334 Posts
I love the OP, it's a dressed down version of the Python!
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
You can carry nuclear explosive sabot armor piercing Teflon coated hollow points if you want. Like ObieWan said, you're not talking about hundreds of rounds at the range so wear and tear isn't really an issue. Just how many rounds do you burn on your walks in the woods. Lest we forget, +P 38s came out LONG before guns were rated for them and they were labeled "for robust revolvers in good shape", or something like that. The OP is the poster child for robust 38 revolver.
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
Wait a minute, I just realized your post said 158gn @ 1200fps, I was thinking 125gn like Speer Gold Dot. I got books around here that list that load as 357mag. Don't put that s**t in your gun. Remington Winchester and Federal would never make anything that stupid. Unless of course the fine print said something about a twenty six inch test barrel.
Joined
·
2,415 Posts
I know that this is the Colt forum, but the real poster child for a robust .38 caliber revolver is the S&W .38-44 Heavy Duty revolver. 158 grains at 1200 fps is the nominal load for this gun.
Buck
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
The exception that proves the rule. The only 38 tougher than the OP, at that point in history, was this freakish (but awesome) S&W boat anchor. That gun was in a class by itself. And isn't that an N frame?
Joined
·
12,840 Posts
The Colt 'New Service' when chambered for .38 Special, or, the Smith and Wesson .38-44 'N-Frame' Models - either of those would be alright I think for the Buffalo Bore ".158 Grain and 1,200 FPS' Cartridges.
Official Police or others, no doubt they CAN do it, but, we all know, it has to be a strain!
I would not do it myself.
Is the Cartridge in question any 'worse' of a strain than the pre-War ".38 Special Heavy Duty" Cartridge was?
Where, we may recall, during the 1930s, both Colt and S & W Warranted all their .38 Special Revolvers, to handle that alright? Even the diminutive 'Police Positive Specials'?
No, the present Buffalo Bore Cartridge we have in mind, is likely no 'worse' for Strain, than the pre-War .38-44 Cartridges were.
Would I have used those then?
No.
Would I use the BB +P one now?
No...
Would I consider to try a few ( very few ) practice rounds, and, then to use the Cartridges for Carry?
Maybe, I'd consider it...and, then, not do it.
If I wanted to Carry .357 Magnum, I would just carry a .357 Magnum!
How easy, simple and no worries at all, about straining the Revolver, then.
Official Police or others, no doubt they CAN do it, but, we all know, it has to be a strain!
I would not do it myself.
Is the Cartridge in question any 'worse' of a strain than the pre-War ".38 Special Heavy Duty" Cartridge was?
Where, we may recall, during the 1930s, both Colt and S & W Warranted all their .38 Special Revolvers, to handle that alright? Even the diminutive 'Police Positive Specials'?
No, the present Buffalo Bore Cartridge we have in mind, is likely no 'worse' for Strain, than the pre-War .38-44 Cartridges were.
Would I have used those then?
No.
Would I use the BB +P one now?
No...
Would I consider to try a few ( very few ) practice rounds, and, then to use the Cartridges for Carry?
Maybe, I'd consider it...and, then, not do it.
If I wanted to Carry .357 Magnum, I would just carry a .357 Magnum!
How easy, simple and no worries at all, about straining the Revolver, then.
Joined
·
12,840 Posts
Yes!
My thought Egg-Zactly...
Or, a New Service chambered in .38 Special.
But, nothing smaller! Not for me anyway!
Not with that Cartridge...unless, I were to be firing it, out of a Revolver Chambered and Rated, for .357 Magnum.
Joined
·
3,989 Posts
I'm having envy issues just now. I've wanted one of those for years. Regret previously casting all the Heavy Duty revolvers aside at gun show tables for all those years, after I'd examined them to make sure it wasn't a Model of 1926 .44 Special I was seeing.
I'm not needing to use my Official Police for "serious social purposes" but if I was to be required to press it into service I'd be unconcerned with limited use of heavily loaded ammunition such as this. I have taken it on a test drive with the old Lyman maximum Unique load of 5.4 grains and a 158 grain bullet. The revolver is extremely well-mannered with such loads. Unlike these silly flea-weight 5-shot snubs that most folks now consider to the the only worthwhile .38 Special revolver to own.
The +P ammo of today isn't loaded to the velocity of the early .38 Special High Velocity.
+P Handgun Ammunition (.38 Special, 9x19mm, .38 Super and .45 ACP)
+P Handgun Ammunition (.38 Special, 9x19mm, .38 Super and .45 ACP)
Joined
·
7,725 Posts
It's natural for us gun folks to want to try different loads, albeit more "robust" stuff in our Colts...and here comes the BUT....however, why push the envelope on an old warhorse they don't make parts for anymore? Yes, occasional hot loads can be fired but I'd certainly not make a practice of it. That OP is 2 years younger than I am and believe me I can't do the stuff I used to when I was a mere lad
Yes it is an N frame.
As for being freakish & a boat anchor well opinions differ.
Joined
·
91 Posts
I agree that the Buffalo Bore “Outdoorsman” load would be a bit much for your Official Police. I think the old OP could handle the load but it would be a strain on the gun. Elmer Keith talked about loading 12 grains of 2400 under his 173 grain bullet for the “Officer’s Model Colt” which I think would deliver similar ballistics, but then Mr. Keith liked to push the envelope. There’s no need to do that now. I remember thinking when BB first introduced the load that the reason they named it the way they did was in reference to the old Smith and Wesson .38 N frame Outdoorsman that was the predecessor to the 357 Magnum revolver. At one time Smith and Wesson advertised the Outdoorsman as taking high speed .38 Special ammunition that would produce a velocity of 1300 fps.
I also regret not purchasing a Smith N frame .38 special back in the days before they became collectors’ items. I currently have an old Brazilian contract N frame which I am slowly accumulating parts for which will become an N frame .38, which will put me in the odd position of converting a .45 to a .38.
I also have an early 1960s .38 Official Police that is a very nice gun. I’ve shot some .38-44 level reloads through it, but generally use the old FBI or Chicago load (which gives similar velocities to your standard load) as my big load for this revolver. Fortunately I was able to blunder into a nice 4” Colt 357 which now serves as my 38-44 gun, but I must admit that the 357 is not as sleek as the fixed sight Official Police.
I also regret not purchasing a Smith N frame .38 special back in the days before they became collectors’ items. I currently have an old Brazilian contract N frame which I am slowly accumulating parts for which will become an N frame .38, which will put me in the odd position of converting a .45 to a .38.
I also have an early 1960s .38 Official Police that is a very nice gun. I’ve shot some .38-44 level reloads through it, but generally use the old FBI or Chicago load (which gives similar velocities to your standard load) as my big load for this revolver. Fortunately I was able to blunder into a nice 4” Colt 357 which now serves as my 38-44 gun, but I must admit that the 357 is not as sleek as the fixed sight Official Police.
Joined
·
671 Posts
I don't really want to get into a pissing match on this, but there are two S&W K frames in 357. The model 13, fixed sights and the 19 with target sights. If the K frame can take it the OP certainly can. And if as claimed the OP is a simplified Python...well you get the drift. It's not about can it! It's about should it!
Probably not, if you love your OP as I do mine. A 1960's nickel jewel of a shooter.
Probably not, if you love your OP as I do mine. A 1960's nickel jewel of a shooter.
Attachments
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
