Underwood 158 grain 38 Special +P Semi Wad Cutter Hollow Point bare gel test and chronograph retest

Underwood 158 grain 38 Special +P Semi Wad Cutter Hollow Point bare gel test and chronograph retest featuring as always the Ruger LCR with its 1.9" barrel ("snub nose" 38 Special)

[@jw-sigp2258]

Nice 38 special load. Great performance.

[@tmut44]

i just ordered 2 boxes thanks

[@brianblackburn-author7531]

Thanks for the update. The velocities you're getting are about 100 feet feet shy of a 158g Rem. HTP .357.

[@timesup6386]

Velocity need to be mid 900 fps for a defensive close range round. I load my 158 LSWCHP's for better performance that this.

[@onewayup5]

Hot Durn, that fast from a 1.9_ you do have some bad-boy paws there (albeit bruised? hee)! I use the Keith LSWC and those 158gr LSWCHP in a SW 627 2.6 and its 37oz allows for a rather quick, smooth reacquisition which needs for this here Black Bear and Cougar country.... But my carry 856 3" runs the 150gr LWC perfectly with the felt characteristics of the Keith from the 627. No doubt Underwood has a Champion triumvirate with those heavier fast-movers but it WAS the Fearsome Foursome: Seems Underwood Co. no longer uses the Gold Dot in the 125 grain, and is no longer a Bonded. After witnessing Tools and Targets recent testing I got disheartened to see an emasculated round appreciably underperform the original product, SKU 128. The recent offering uses a Hornady and is id'd SKU 129. Nonetheless, they're still shown as 1250fps 434flbs. The world IS goin to hell in a handbasket. May Heaven help us all! Hee

[@MuleysAndBushcraft]

Great test. Thank you!

[@ravenrise320]

Kinda wish ALL ammo makers would label 4-inch barrel and 2-inch barrel "average" velocities, on their ammo packaging. Many of the big name makers dont label such things at all. Or if they do? The "muzzle velocity" they vouch is either from an 8-inch test barrel or a 6 or 4 inch "service" revolver somebody has had in their vault for half a century. Neither of which reflects what most folks are buying or carrying these days. The same could be said for semi-autos too. With most test ammo getting shot out of 5-4 inch "service" barrel. NOT the 3-inch tube many folks are buying and carrying.

[@YellowHammer26]

👍👍definitely some power there, I just don’t know if I could stand the recoil out of my j frame. Really good video, thanks Dave.

[@GeographyCzar]

Glad you liked it! I think my material is improving, I might just invest in a decent camera/phone this spring...

[@whippy107]

That's one sweet round! From watching other tests on internet, the main problem I've seen with +P 158 lswchp has been that it moves too fast for expansion. This underwood is looking very good! Thanks for the video of your test!

[@ravenrise320]

It's not that it moves too fast. It's that it moves too slow for the bullets density. Heavy bullets, driven at slower than 1,000 fps, tend to under expand and perform more like FMJ or, in .38 Specials case, like lead round nose. Ammo makers have been trying to get by with just lightening or redesigning their bullets to get them to go "just fast enough" to "maybe" expand out of a 2-inch or less barrel. With associated mixed results. There comes a point where, as the old adeage goes, "the juice ain't worth the squeeze." What this means is that one of two or three things NEEDS to occur in order to get consistent, proper, bullet expansion out of 2- inch or less .38 Special barrels. Bullet makers are going to have to REALLY ramp up powder charges, which will result in more chamber pressure, recoil, and possibly more unburned powder flying out of a snubbies barrel? Unless, of course, the gun powder a given maker is using can be lab twiked or blended to produce the desired results. Ammo makers are going to have to tailor design their .38 Special bullets to suit the powder charges they are currently driving .38 Special at. Which is BTW, wayyy slower than .38 Special is truly capable of, as a standard. Or...there's a 3rd option. Gunmakers could team up with ammo makers in order to build better revolvers that can perform better. That means sticking TRUE 2-inch or 3-inch barrels on "snubs", beefing up snubbiess lockwork, and making them generally more heavy duty than either the fragile little "jewelry" ornaments they are at present or the "bargain basement", "economical", stark and plain, unappealing, heavy actioned, shakey maracas, they are now.

[@whippy107]

@@ravenrise320 great response! I'd read a theory a few years ago that if a bullet has excess velocity, it can just cut through the target matter without expanding until it slows down enough for the target to "grab" the leading edge of the bullet in order to make it expand as designed. That did make some sense in my mind at the time, but I have no idea if that is actually true. A safer bet is the scenario that you describe. 👍

[@J.R.F.23]

Thank you for testing these and posting the video. I am highly considering carrying these in my S&W 442 .38 special +P

[@scotchnstogies5618]

Just got these exact same bullets. They’re loaded in a 642 Airweight. Probably not fun to shoot but defensive shooting isn’t supposed to be fun anyway lol. I’m sure if the day ever comes I won’t even notice the recoil. But it is a 158gr +P out of a light gun with a short barrel so it’s to be expected. I’m sure these would be a pleasure to shoot in my GP100 4” tho.

[@LUVDOGS1954]

where have you been? No vids for a few months...hope all is well.

[@noahcount7132]

Really enjoy your ammo tests and evaluations, Dave! Keep 'em coming! 👍👍

[@rob6850]

I'd really like a revolver like that. The S&W 638 is so good too though. Have you been happy with the concealed hammer/double-action only?

[@GeographyCzar]

Not completely. I'm a hammer fan. This LCR is exceptional, but still a long pull. The grips also needed a bit of dremmeling to fit my fat fingers, lol. Over all, this is still my #1 carry gun as it is so light and easy to conceal.

[@exothermal.sprocket]

If you want to run the high power stuff, simply go with the LCRx in .357 magnum. It'll give a little big of weight and stand up to the extra abuse of the hot stuff in .38+p. None of these snubs is a true magnum revolver as they'll have issues with a steady diet of the magnums, eventually. Going with a GP100 or 686 or SP101 will handle magnums all day every day. The LCR series are better suited to .38 and .38+p for a regular load.

[@rob6850]

@@exothermal.sprocket thanks. Still haven't found "the one" at a great price just yet.

[@littlewoody5539]

You need carry that ammo you won’t feel recoil if your fighting for your life .

[@shanepitzer4126]

Wow, that's a monster load for a 38 Spl. I think for the snubby, I might prefer it to be slower. Maybe in the 850-900 fps range. I believe it would still expand well, but not risk shedding a donut ring of lead. Great test, thanks for sharing!

[@c.miller3802]

These will make a great deer hunting round too. I carry a Ruger GP 3".

[@Valorius]

Another great test, thanks for posting it DDR!

[@SouthernShodan]

That cartridge is loaded so hot, you couldn't put that round in a 4" revolver. It's core would punch out for sure. Nice test.

[@theone031]

I would not hesitate to carry those other than the recoil. But in a defense situation you probably won't notice the kick.

[@GeographyCzar]

Exactly. And when you're limited to 5 rounds, the shear violence of this round instills confidence!

[@palerider7171]

Got to wonder what they would be like out of the 3” LCRx. Thanks for sharing Dave!

[@oldschoolcop8568]

You would definitely put someone in the ICU 😮 😅

[@briank.7937]

Great video! Very good performance from a .38 - is love to try and duplicate it. Trying to find a smaller box of LSWCHP now to try.

[@nickshowsstuff435]

The hard cast .357 went up in price from them $7 I was pretty surprised to see that much of a jump at once. I bought it not too long ago and checked my history to make sure I wasn’t going crazy. It was a good deal for what it was now it’s just expensive! Good stuff I think they are just catching up to the Buffalo bore prices since they were a good bit less. I always say the same thing “I should of bought more”. They really do load some good ammo. I bought item 151 from them it’s a .380 round I got 4 boxes for my dad but I have no idea what bullet they even use in that load. I couldn’t find any info online at all or any viedos on it. I’m still waiting on it I’m curious to see if it looks like the photo. From the image it almost looks like the newer federal hydra shok deep but it can’t be that I’m sure. It just has that look so if anyone knows I’d really like to know.

[@Swampytheroot]

How much value do you place on your life? Try the Underwood 38+P Keith-style 158gr. No expansion. And it will hurt your feelings. But it will penetrate anything short of armor in front of you

[@GeographyCzar]

Ahh, yes, my very favorite and most hated 38 special round. It's the 38 champ, and hits like Mike Tyson too.

[@williamkrone5020]

that it traveled in the gel

[@williamkrone5020]

what was the distance ?

[@dangerman007]

I've never seen a hollow point peel back so much to the point where it sheds it pedals... absolutely devastating. However, listening to the moans of pain convinced me that it's not a round I want to shoot out of a snub. I'll pass on this round.

[@GeographyCzar]

Yup, both Buffalo Bore and Underwood will do that in bare gel. Those two +P LSWCHP rounds are basically twins. And yes, they are a handful!

[@marioncrane09]

This is my carry round in a Kimber K6S, 2", 6 shot revolver...at 23 ounces, recoil isn't an issue out of the Kimber

[@Fudmottin]

That has to be well over SAAMI pressure. I imagine the person on the receiving end won't feel any sympathy for you getting punished by the recoil! LOL.

[@guardianminifarm8005]

Good nasty! Good 38 snubby option.

[@buddysumner4022]

Badass 38 round,