# Georgia Arms 38 Spec 158-gr. LSWCHP +P: Informal Test



## Stephen A. Camp (May 9, 2006)

Hello. "Gomer," a gentleman who posts here at _The High Road_ contacted me some weeks back concerning Georgia Arms' commercially reloaded .38 Special ammunition and asked if I'd ever tried it. I responded that I had not. He generously sent me 25 rounds of this ammunition for informal penetration & expansion testing as well as for chronograph checking from a J-frame's 1 7/8" barrel and a 4" if possible.

He bought the ammunition at nominal cost compared to factory new ammunition and it was described as being +P and rated at 900 ft/sec and 284 ft-lbs. of kinetic energy.









_The two test guns for today's informal tests were an S&W Model 642 and a 4" heavy bbl Model 10._

With a limited amount of ammunition, here is how I decided to use it.

One 5-shot group with each revolver for a total of 10 shots fired.
3 shots from each revolver into wetpack for a total of 6 shots fired.
4 shots over the chronograph from the Model 642
5 shots over the chronograph from the Model 10

Certainly this is not an extensive scientific test, but it gives a general idea of what might be expected from similar revolvers.

As is my usual protocol in making expansion test media, I soaked newsprint for 24 hours and then drained it 30 minutes before shooting.

*Shooting:* One target was fired at 15 yards from a rest and in single-action with the Model 10. Another target was shot standing and with a two-hand hold using the Model 642 at 7 yards.









_At 7 yards, the Georgia Arms ammunition grouped nicely from the S&W snub._









_Likewise, at 15 yards, this ammunition proved itself capable of very nice grouping._

*Penetration:*

Three shots of the Georgia Arms 158-gr. LSWCHP +P was fired into the super-saturated newsprint from both a snub 1 7/8" bbl and the common 4" service bbl of the larger Model 10. Shooting was done approximately 5' from the target. I thought it might be of interest to see how some of the other often-recommended snub 38 loads compared so I fired my stand-by, Remington 158-gr. LSWCHP +P, as well as Speer's 135-gr. Gold Dot +P and Corbon 110-gr. DPX +P. Three rounds of these were also fired.

Here are the average penetration depths measured for rounds fired from the Model 642:

*GA 158-gr. LSWCHP +P:* 9 1/2"
* R-P 158-gr. LSWCHP +P:* 8 1/2"
*Speer 135-gr. GD +P:* 7 1/2"
*Corbon 110-gr. DPX +P:* 8"

From the 4" Model 10 I only used the two LSWCHP +P loads because the DPX and GD were engineered for short bbl's and my supply is extremely limited on each.

*GA 158-gr. LSWCHP +P:* 7 1/2"
*R-P 158-gr. LSWCHP +P:* 7 1/2"

*Expansion:*

From the snub the average expanded diameters were:

*GA 158-gr. LSWCHP +P:* 0.36" (No expansion from any of the shots fired.)
*R-P 158-gr. LSWCHP +P:* 0.589" x 0.568" x 0.495" tall
*Speer 135-gr. GD +P:* 0.545" x 0.543" x 0.432" tall
*Corbon 110-gr. DPX +P:* 0.567" x 0.582" x 0.504" tall









_Not surprisingly, the Georgia Arms' unexpanded bullet penetrated deeper than the other loads which did expand from the snub. From left to right: GA, R-P, Corbon, and Speer._

None of these bullets lost any significant weight after expansion.

From the 4" S&W Model 10:

*GA 158-gr. LSWCHP +P:* 0.568" x 0.540" x 0.503" tall
*R-P 158-gr. LSWCHP +P: * 0.606" x 0.577" x 0.446" tall









_These are from left to right: Remington 158-gr. LSWCHP +P and two of GA's bullets. All expanded when fired from a 4" revolver._

*Chronograph Results:*

Fired from the 1 7/8" bbl Model 642 the GA averaged 802 ft/sec and had a standard deviation of 17 ft/sec.
This is almost exactly what I get from the Remington load in most lots. My current lot of Remington is a little hotter and averaged 837 ft/sec from this same gun.

From the 4", Georgia Arms' 158-gr. LSWCHP +P averaged 897 ft/sec with a standard deviation of 18 ft/sec.

I think that this is close enough to their advertised 900 ft/sec to say that they are truthfully advertising their listed velocities and it becomes clear that their claim is based on a 4" barrel.

*Observations:* None of the 25 shots fired today were difficult to extract nor exhibited any "sticking." Cases were obviously reloaded and from different makers, but the ammunition was both consistent over the chronograph and accurate enough for 99.99% of our needs.

Its velocity from both the snub and the service-length revolver barrels closely approximated Remington's +P version of this load. I believe that the GA ammunition is in fact +P. Felt recoil is subjective to be sure, but I noted no differences between the Georgia Arms ammunition and the Remington when fired. (Perhaps my hands are not calibrated finely enough?)

I _ think _ that the bullet's used are from Hornady, but am not sure. The shape of the bullet and the small hollow cavity remind me of the old Hornady bullets I used to reload in this design, but they had sort of a waffle pattern on the sides.









_Both the Remington (left) and GA (right) 158-gr. LSWCHP +P bullets were fired into the same test media from the same snub revolver._

I would not consider this for defensive use from a snub unless I simply wanted inexpensive ammo that mimics the traditional SWC in this bullet weight. From the 4" gun, it does expand&#8230;at least for the three shots I fired into wetpack, but I personally think that I'll stick with the Remington in this style bullet from the snub and probably in the 4" as well. The DPX and Gold Dots continue to show promise as new loads for the snub 38's, but I still do not count out the Remington 158-gr. LSWCHP +P for the snub-nose. These are all choices for the individual user to make.

Does this mean that I believe that this Georgia Arms' reloaded .38 Special round is useless? No, far from it! I think it would make a peach of a practice load for non-reloaders to use when wanting to practice with something that duplicates POA vs. POI and felt recoil of their carry load&#8230;if that happens to be a 158-gr. bullet loaded to +P velocities.

I want to thank "Gomer" again for his kind gesture in sending me this ammunition and hope that the information here is of interest.

For folks interested in more information, below is the link for Georgia 
Arms:

http://www.georgia-arms.com/

Best.

PS: If interested, here are results from similar informal tests that might be of interest:

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/38 Special Expansion Tests.htm

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/38 Snub Ammo Test.htm


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

Very, very, good report. Thanks for taking the time to write this out and test it. You done a fine job. Thank You .. Baldy


----------



## Stephen A. Camp (May 9, 2006)

Hello and thanks very much. I'm glad it was of interest.

Best.


----------



## Bob Wright (May 10, 2006)

*Good Report!*

Good reporting.

I wonder what you could have done with fifty rounds!

Bob Wright


----------



## 2400 (Feb 4, 2006)

Excellent write up Stephen.
Did you see my question about the Aguila 45 117gr aluminum round?


----------



## Stephen A. Camp (May 9, 2006)

Hello, sir. No, I reckon I must not have. Just got back into town.

My hands-on experiences with Aguila is limited, but here's what I do have. Though it focuses on 9mm, it does mention the .45 round:

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Aguila.htm

Best.


----------

