.38 Super Govt Model

[Mick_In_Texas]

I have a Taurus 9mm PT92AF. But in .38 cal, I prefer my Colt's .38 Super Govt Model in ss. .38 Super is a good round.

Here is my Colt's:

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d54/Mick_In_Texas/72db58c2.jpg
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d54/Mick_In_Texas/2bc77ec7.jpg

I LOVE .45 ACP. But, in 9mm/.38 Special/.357 Mag/.38 Super, give me my .38 Super Colt's any day. It's 100%, same caliber, same fps.

Y'all take care and be safe.
Mick

[TattooPaul]

BEAUTY, Mick!!! The grips are awesome. I WILL be adding a Super to the herd when finances allow. I can't wait to shoot 'em and get back into handloading. Love the slabsides and striaght-up 'n' down serrations. No frills - straight function and power. Great looks and finish to boot. Nice one, buddy...

[Bud White]

She's a looker love them grips

[larry starling]

Nice Grips Mick. I think you will find that most people that have had a chance to shoot something in .38 super tend to like that caliber. ;)

[Barry in IN]

Yep, 10+1 of near-.357 Magnums in the easy to shoot 1911 is a nice little arrangement.

Yes, I know, some may say the 357 Mag/125 is "more powerful" than the 38 Super/125 based on it giving a hundred or so fps more muzzle velocity. A quick check of a emington Ballistic chart lists their 357/125 Express load at 1450 fps and the CorBon 38 Super/125 is a claimed 1350 fps. But it doesn't seem to work out thatw ay in real life. Some things to consider:
Those figures for the .357 Mag often come from a 6" barrel, while a 4" barreled revolver is closer to Gov't Model's overall length (and the revolver is still wider). Fire some 357/125s through a 4" revolver over a chronograph and the numbers are different. From what I've seen, 1350 fps is about right for a 357 Mag/125 from a 4" barreled revolver.
I also think it's approprate to use the hotter 38 Super loads for comparison. Those loads, the CorBons for example, are loaded to what the round and the gun are capable of, rather than the majority of watered down factory loads. The CorBon 38 Super/125 JHP is claimed to travel at 1350 fps and while I haven't chrographed it yet, other CorBon loads meet or exceed their claims. Regardles of whether it's from a 4" 357 or 5" 38 Super, it's a .36 caliber 125 grain bullet in the 1350 fps ballpark.

Is that as good as a .45 at 850?
I don't know.
The 357 Mag/125 load has an outstanding reputation. The 38 Super doesn't get used enough to have a reputation, but it should perform similarly.

I like the idea of having 10 rounds of 38 Super in the mag and another in the chamber. I waffle back and forth on big bullets or more bullets by switching between 1911s and Browning HiPowers, and see the argument for both. Maybe the somewhat hi-capacity, somewhat hi-speed, 38 Super is the compromise answer.
I hate to muddy my waters any more by adding a third option, but the Super does deserve some experimenting.

[Mick_In_Texas]

Barry--I appreciate your information! Very interesting stuff... I had not thought about the barrel length in re: fps... I do know that the .38 Super/9mm/.357 Mag are much, much faster a round than my beloved ol' .45 ACP, and combined with a smaller bullet size, likely increases penetration on many types of targets (I read technical material now and again). That's one reason I prefer the .45 ACP as an "apartment gun", now that I have it, over my .38 Super or my .357 loaded with .38 Special SJHPs. Less likely (rule of thumb) to penetrate outside walls and stay in the target (heaven FORBID I ever have to fire a round in defense!)... Lots of folks think the 850-950 fps is "archaic" or "obsolete", which I totally disagree with (and we're good cases in point, especially those among us who are LEOs and are allowed to carry their preference of sidearm--and do carry their .45s--it's just a very good defensive round!) and obviously the .45 ACP in the 1911 platform is STILL one of the most popular handguns in the world, with a well-deserved reputation for effectiveness as a defensive handgun. It's way over 100 years old, this year, as far as the first commercial production Colt models go (the Model 1905).

That said: the .38 Super is gaining popularity. As Barry says, it is still a very viable round--not just to us, but to me, as well, as I am impressed with its controllability and accuracy (at least out to 25-30 yds). It's been some time since I've shot 9mm or .357 Mag; but, as I recall, while being the same caliber, but with a much smaller powder charge (9mm) or similar powder charge (.357 Mag), hull-wise, these two kick back MUCH harder than even those "+P (I've read here ALL .38 Super ammo is marked +P to distinguish it from .38 Auto, which is apparently still around)" .38 Supers I was shooting, and all three of course get muzzle climb and maybe the Super, like my .45s, goes a little to the right going up more, but, those two things, with the relative lack of felt recoil, lets me get back on target quicker than with the alternative .38s. I've heard the Super has a very flat trajectory--I don't know, but, it is an incredibly dead-on 1911. The patterning, right out of the box, when I was actually trying... wow. The sights on the Colt are the best three-dot combats I've seen on a factory gun (although, of course, my new 1991 Colt's has the same ones)--that includes S&W, Beretta, and my current Taurus, Rugers, Springfield. That prob helps some, but, like all 1911s, it's also a very good "point and shoot" pistol, a feature Mr. Browning, being a shooter and hunter himself, recognized being important in a defensive handgun (even his FN pistols have the "bloodline" of the platform).

A .38 caliber is a good caliber. Like Barry said, having that extra capacity in a 1911 platform, also appeals to me--it is by far my FAVORITE platform, it just FITS me, or I fit IT. I've never owned, fired, or held a pistol or revolver that felt better or fired better in my hand. Modern ergonomics aside, for me, the platform WORKS. Capacity in a civilian defensive situation... the three close encounters I've had with criminals attempting to commit a crime against me or my property with me in it, were one-on-one. In those three situations, 7+1 would have been plenty--although two of those were with my long-gone Beretta 92F, the other with a Mossberg pump shotgun, all of which had more capacity than my .45s--as I did NOT (thank heavens!) have to fire, only brandish with intent. LEOs and soldiers and sailors are in a very different defensive situation very often, so there is real consideration between bullet caliber vs. capacity (although some few Desert Storm vets I've known, spoke of the lack of stopping power per round from the M92 vs. the M1911A1). One guy at work, the only one who was not totally in awe of me for choosing a 1911/.45 ACP for personal carry (I understand the "reputation/mythology" of the .45 ACP, although to me, it's just a controllable, very good round), said, "It only holds 7 rounds." I said, "7+1, I carry loaded and locked... but, regardless, how many rounds do you NEED as a civilian???" He just nodded, and said, "I see what you mean." I said "I NEVER want to have to ever brandish again, much less fire. But, there you go." End of discussion.

That said, though, Barry, ALL--yes. My .38 Super IS a KEEPER. Lately, I've carried when I'm out wandering the Brazos Valley--just a road/truck gun, and not going to my dad's to visit. In THAT situation, especially, it's becoming another "working gun". I have holsters for my Taurus and GP100, as well as my P90 (well-worn, too, as that was my first .45 ACP, and the one I've taken both (so far) my CHL shooting tests with); but, I don't carry them at all anymore. Last time I carried one, was the Taurus about two years ago on business trip, as I only had 1 1911 then, and it was torn down for a thorough cleaning. I didn't want to carry my P90, for some reason...

My .38 Super, hee hee, also fits my 1911 holsters, of course! So, there you go... I'm especially comfortable with my Galco Fletch.

The grips are pewters, handmade... the right one was a little off on the grip bushing holes, and had to do about 5 minutes worth of work with a small round file. I'd love to be able to afford some German silvers in the same western-leatherwork patterning, it's very nice and provides some grip, although I still like a good smooth... seems now, though, only my Mil-Spec still has a smooth on it! Hah! GI45 has the stock "U.S." checkered, Colt 1991 has the stock diamond-checkered, RIA the Alumagrips... the "silvergrey on ss" is an acquired taste, I think, although I'm starting to like it, myself.

Y'all have a good one, and be safe.
Mick

[carsoni]

How do the prices of ammo compare? 45vs.38 super?

[Mick_In_Texas]

How do the prices of ammo compare? 45vs.38 super?

Generally speaking... and this is from a quick scanning of Cheaper Than Dirt's catalog... the .45 ACP is more available, in more configurations and price ranges--many less expensive--than the .38 Super ammo. That said, we're talking roughly $3.00/box/50, though. My problem is with my 38 Super Govt, I cannot often find the .38 Super locally; the .45 ACP, I can.

.22LR is the cheapest of ammo: I'd love to have a Colt's Ace 1911A1 in .22LR. That said, still, I prefer practicing with what I carry, and the .38 Super is very similar in feel (and price) to my beloved .45s as far as shooting. Similar felt recoil, similar muzzle climb, similar discharge muzzle to the right. My P90, maybe doesn't climb/skew to the right as much as my 1911 platforms (38 Super included); but, just no longer like the feel of anything other than a 1911 platform, INCLUDING how one feels in the holster on my hip. A 1911 just "rides right" for me, concealed or open. Whether in my Galco, Horseshoe Leather, or Springer XD Yaqui. Once I get it in my hand, NOTHING compares.

Sir, I love .45 ACP. But, if you have the money, certainly, I'd look into one chambered for .38 Super. Hard to get the true history of the round, but in general, was requested of Colt's by LEO folks in the mid- to late-20s, as they loved the 1911 but found the .45 ACP didn't penetrate Model T and Model A body metal (read: bootleggers and "gangsters") very well, and they were facing challenges with stopping these folks in various situations. So, Colt's and Mr. Browing came up with the .38 Super. I believe the .38 Auto also existed prior, but, these folks wanted a .38 cal in the 1911/A1 platform, opposed to the then unfamiliar 9mm (Browning Hi-Power, from FN in Belgium). At least as I understand it.

We afficiandoes of the platform, gotta love the Hi-Power and the .38 Super. As well as the venerable commercial Ace in .22LR. I actually stepped out on a limb and bid on an Ace from 1962, but (for my bank account, fortunately) didn't win it. Frankly, I wish Colt's would reintroduce the Ace. I had a conversion kit once, but really didn't like it. That said, sir, the .38 Super's a GOOD round. I've heard here, it's coming in to favor in competition nowadays. My .45s are pretty good at 30 yds; but, that .38 Super is frankly amazing. I mean, it is BAD in a good way! That's why I've lately decided to carry it sometimes, when I'm driving around the Brazos Valley taking photos. That's with FMJs, as a road/outdoor gun. I got one just 'cause of learning the history of JMB's development of the 1911 platform. It's a classic round for a 1911/A1.

Hope this helps. There are several manufacturers who make the 1911A1 in .38 Super; my Colt's is excellent, but Springfield and Armscor also make them, and I know both those brands are very good, too, as I have those as well in .45.

Not for everyone I reckon. I'm actually thinking of using my .38 Super, next CHL shooting qualification in a couple or three years, although I've never used anything but .45 ACP previously. It's just a nice, nice round, Sir. Yet... I LOVE .45 ACP, while I really don't like the dang .50 Army round. Too much. Same with the .500 Casul revolver I saw at the range. I'll leave .50 cal to the American military's machine guns. If I can't "do it" with a .45 or .38 or 9mm (including .44 Mag and .357 Mag), I reckon I don't need to be "doing" whatever.

You take care and be safe, carsoni.
Mick

[TattooPaul]

Mick, do you do any handloading at all? I did in the past but all my gear got damaged beyond repair with flooding and sewer back-up at my former (gee, wonder why!) residence 9 years ago. After I pay off my new furnace I plan on gettting back into that and figure that shoud help with the cost of all my ammo and particularly with .38 Super, after I finally get to add one to my "corral". That also helps with the availablity issue which is usually a bit more of a factor than cost, though handloading (after the initial cost of equipment and brass) will pretty much cut your cost in half for all calibers over the long run.
Once again, beauty of a Super there, buddy... can't wait to get one of my own (along with a 70 Series).

[Mick_In_Texas]

Mick, do you do any handloading at all? I did in the past but all my gear got damaged beyond repair with flooding and sewer back-up at my former (gee, wonder why!) residence 9 years ago. After I pay off my new furnace I plan on gettting back into that and figure that shoud help with the cost of all my ammo and particularly with .38 Super, after I finally get to add one to my "corral". That also helps with the availablity issue which is usually a bit more of a factor than cost, though handloading (after the initial cost of equipment and brass) will pretty much cut your cost in half for all calibers over the long run.
Once again, beauty of a Super there, buddy... can't wait to get one of my own (along with a 70 Series).

So far, I'm not into reloading. I have a retired gunsmith buddy who is... and I give my brass to him, as well as the folks who own the commercial range here. But, I agree with you, sir, reloading is GOOD. I am thinking of it, in the future; I'd go more toward the factory loads, but, the re-use of hulls... I'm a conservationist, if not a literal tree-hugger, and I recycle a lot of stuff. I just haven't really considered reloading equipment, living in a small apartment. Doesn't mean I don't believe in it. I've seen some weird reloads, not functioning; but, that is the reloader's fault. My USGI 1911 functioned perfectly with the lead bullet/factory powder loaded .45 ACPs, as she was designed to do. I've seen other reloads, jam and fail to fire. But, that is the reloader's fault: factory level, I think would work. My guns work great with factory ammo, but that doesn't mean I don't like reloading.

Does that make sense, sir? I hope so. We'll see. I favor Dillon, myself. I know a little bit about it, and seems it's a good product.

Mick

[ArmyPilot]

What a beauty! Who made those grips?

Brad

[TattooPaul]

I had a Dillon press and dies when I did it. Top notch stuff, I used it for years. That's what I'm gonna go back to in the future, they have a lifetime guarantee and back their products up. I had great luck with my loads. You just gotta take your time and check the specs as you go. It's fun, satisfying and a money saver.

[OD*]

So, Colt's and Mr. Browing came up with the .38 Super. I believe the .38 Auto also existed prior,
Mick,

Mr. Browning died three years before the introduction of the Super .38, he designed the .38 ACP. A need arose for a better round for LEOs (not the FBI, who did not carry sidearms at that time, agents didn't even begin formal firearms training until 1934) to use against the heavier gage steel used in the older cars, that the .45 ACP wasn't up to. Colt engineers came up with the Super .38 ACP (yes, that is the correct terminology). The cartridges are interchangeable and Colt added the Super prefix so people wouldn't use the Super .38 ACPs in their .38 ACPs.

[Barry in IN]

Although the 38 Super wasn't his, I bet he would have liked it and been OK with the 1911 being chambered for it.
I've often wondered if the various .38/9mms were John M Browning's preferred auto pistol bore.
From reading "John M. Browning, American Gunmaker" by John Browning and Curt Gentry, he sure designed a lot of .38/9mm caliber (OK, .355 caliber) pistols.

From that book-
-His very first handgun design (about 1894-95) was a .38 caliber semi-auto.
-Next was a similar gun in .32 caliber in the fall of 1895, but two more .38s came by the middle of the next year.
-His next handgun design was another .38 auto later that same year (1896).
-The Colt Model 1900, designed by JMB (patent filed in 1896), was another .38, and the first semi-auto pistol commercially produced in the USA.
-The next was gun that became the FN Model 1900- a .32 auto.
-Then the Colt M1903 Pocket .32 auto.
-The FN M1903 9mm Military semi-auto was next. It was a 9mm Browning Long.
-Then came the pistols that became the 1911. The 1905, 1910, and 1911- all in .45ACP.
-The .25 cal Vest Pocket was next.
-Next was the M1910 (FN) and M1922 (Browning) pistols, in .32 and .380 (another .38/9mm).
-A kinda nifty .22 cal pistol was designed with a similar grip to the 1911 for possible US military use as a trainer/practice gun.
-The Colt Woodsman followed in 1914- another .22.
-Then in 1923, he began work on a 9mm pistol for a French military request. More or less the beginnings of the HiPower.
-And the last pistol patent was filed in 1923, and granted in Feb 1927, 3 months after his death- the very Hi-Power-like 9mm.

That's 19 pistol designs, 10 of which were either .38, 9mm, or .380 caliber, or were available that way (not including the 1911, which was made that way after his death). Many of the non-.38s were designed per requests of manufacturers or governments. For the most part, when he was designing guns on his own accord, they were often .38s.
I have read somewhere (I wish I could find it now) that the gun he usually carried when just strolling the countryside was one of his .38 autos.

So, although I know the Super 38 was not his, the base cartridge for it was (.38 ACP) and he sure seemed to like the bore size. Therefore, I have to think he would have approved of the Super 38.

[OD*]

Yep, I've got the book too. ;)

[Mick_In_Texas]

What a beauty! Who made those grips?

Brad

There's a guy on GunBroker.Com who offers them. He doesn't make them, it's some other guy. While I left him positive feedback, I did tell him in e-mail that his guy was not matching the standard 1911A1 grip screw bushings. They worked out, obviously, on my Colt's 38 Super Govt Model. I do like them, now... I've gotten used to them on the ss finish. They may end up on a .45 1911A1, my Colt's O1991 in the future. I don't know, I sure like them on the .38 Super Model.

It's a good round. Thank you for your comments, sir. Like I said, I'm taken to carrying her sometimes, now. It's a good round, and she's reliable to a T. Outdoors and on the road, especially.

YOU take care and be safe, sir. Thank you.
Mick

[Mick_In_Texas]

Although the 38 Super wasn't his, I bet he would have liked it and been OK with the 1911 being chambered for it.
I've often wondered if the various .38/9mms were John M Browning's preferred auto pistol bore.
From reading "John M. Browning, American Gunmaker" by John Browning and Curt Gentry, he sure designed a lot of .38/9mm caliber (OK, .355 caliber) pistols.

From that book-
-His very first handgun design (about 1894-95) was a .38 caliber semi-auto.
-Next was a similar gun in .32 caliber in the fall of 1895, but two more .38s came by the middle of the next year.
-His next handgun design was another .38 auto later that same year (1896).
-The Colt Model 1900, designed by JMB (patent filed in 1896), was another .38, and the first semi-auto pistol commercially produced in the USA.
-The next was gun that became the FN Model 1900- a .32 auto.
-Then the Colt M1903 Pocket .32 auto.
-The FN M1903 9mm Military semi-auto was next. It was a 9mm Browning Long.
-Then came the pistols that became the 1911. The 1905, 1910, and 1911- all in .45ACP.
-The .25 cal Vest Pocket was next.
-Next was the M1910 (FN) and M1922 (Browning) pistols, in .32 and .380 (another .38/9mm).
-A kinda nifty .22 cal pistol was designed with a similar grip to the 1911 for possible US military use as a trainer/practice gun.
-The Colt Woodsman followed in 1914- another .22.
-Then in 1923, he began work on a 9mm pistol for a French military request. More or less the beginnings of the HiPower.
-And the last pistol patent was filed in 1923, and granted in Feb 1927, 3 months after his death- the very Hi-Power-like 9mm.

That's 19 pistol designs, 10 of which were either .38, 9mm, or .380 caliber, or were available that way (not including the 1911, which was made that way after his death). Many of the non-.38s were designed per requests of manufacturers or governments. For the most part, when he was designing guns on his own accord, they were often .38s.
I have read somewhere (I wish I could find it now) that the gun he usually carried when just strolling the countryside was one of his .38 autos.

So, although I know the Super 38 was not his, the base cartridge for it was (.38 ACP) and he sure seemed to like the bore size. Therefore, I have to think he would have approved of the Super 38.

I've got that book, too. Yes, I agree with Barry, that one of JMB's fave carry pistols, was one of the .38 FNs.

As OD* says, it was a Colt's thing, to have the 1911 chambered in .38 Super, not a JMB thing, since he was deceased. That said, with the LEOs wanting it, I think he would have approved, considering his love of the .38 caliber in his lifetime. It worked for what the LEOs wanted, as you and Paul say. It's a dang good round, actually, in my experience, despite my preference for .45 ACP defensively. I love my 38 Super Model. I would not want to be on the wrong end of it, just like my other handguns.

We all have our preferences, mine IS the .45 ACP. That said, see above. I know from the "book" that JMB often carried a .22 or a .32 or a .38 ACP. He was a shooter, as well as a designer. I think, myself, that he'd have liked the .38 Super, and knowning that for what the LEOs wanted it for, it worked. But, yes: it was an after the fact caliber. The reasons OD* states, are the reasons I carry it as a ROAD gun, not an apartmetent/house gun. Too hot for my apartment, to me. But, I still LOVE it. It's a good gun. Just like my Taurus and my GP100.

Mick

[horse 91-A1]

I've been searching out the .38 Super also, but from a handloading point of view. The .357 SIG gets a lot of attention in tupperware platforms with 125gr JHPs, what the .38 Super offers is the ability to move heavier, therefore higher sectional density bullets, including 160gr lead.

http://www.lapua.com/index.html

Vihtavuori powder, specifically N105 gives the .38 Super close to .357mag velocity and leaves the .357SIG, 9x21mm and 9x23mm in the dust according to their reload data.

I've found their 3N38 loadings for 9mm 147gr and .40S&W 165gr to be very close to chronograph data so their .38 Super data should be close to real life velocities.

Bob

[Slimbo]

i paid 16.xx/50 for winchester 130gr FMJ yesterday.

mick, your collection and mine seem to be staying pretty similar, im in the process of picking up a colt custom 38 super. :)