Help with Bullet ID, Please.

[boondocker]

I found this yesterday and was just wondering what era this might be from. It's dia. is .355", length is .690", it is fired and shows rifling on the lead, it has 2 upper rings above the indented groove and a concave base. Hope my description of the bullet helps. Many thanks Dean

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[boondocker]

Any one, Any one, is this modern or is it old? Thanks Dean

 

[Monty]

By modern, what do you mean? I'm pretty sure it is a .38 Special or .38 S&W round nose that is still available today. They came out with the advent of .38 caliber cased cartridges, sometime shortly after the turn of the century. You can still buy the loaded cartridges, loose bullets, or bullet casting equipment to roll your own. Monty

 

[BosnMate]

By modern, what do you mean? I'm pretty sure it is a .38 Special or .38 S&W round nose that is still available today. They came out with the advent of .38 caliber cased cartridges, sometime shortly after the turn of the century. You can still buy the loaded cartridges, loose bullets, or bullet casting equipment to roll your own. Monty

Right on, could possibly date back as far as the Spanish American War. Police carried .38's for years, I remember my Dad's police revolver back during WWII was a .38. John Browning invented the Colt model 1911 .45 because the .38 lacked stopping power, or at least that is the legend I've been fed over the years.

 

[NOLA_Ken]

.355 is right on for a fired .38 cal. Looking at it I would hazard a guess of possibly a .38 Smith and Wesson. I found this pic online, you can see the one to the left is similar to yours.

 

[Monty]

I don't think the .38 S&W ever was loaded commercially with anything over 140 grains weight. Standard for the .38 Special in the round nose configuration was 158 grains weight. The .357 Magnum used a more of a flat point bullet and went as high as 200 grains if I am recalling correctly. I had to carry a .38 Special duty gun with 158 grain round nose bullets, 850 fps my first 10 years in police work. We cheated by handloading cast hollow point bullets in the same weight with what would be a +P cartridge in todays performance standards, and got about another 100 fps out of them. Our issue sidearm was the S&W Model 15, Combat Masterpiece with a 4" barrel. When I retired we had moved on up first to the .357 magnum Revolver and then to the Glock Model 23 in .40 S&W. I never liked the "plastic" guns and still have mine with several hi-capacity magazines. My last ten years was with the Detective Division and more than likely I was carrying my 1911 Combat Commander in .45 ACP. But thkat's another story! Monty

 

[tigerbeetle]

Among the too-many things I've been collecting since I began detecting in the 1960s are fishing sinkers, used almost exclusively in saltwater. I bring this up as a lead-in to, well, lead.

Along with detecting and sifting lead sinkers that surely date back to the 1700s -- based on academic archeo-digs I've done -- I've also dug one of the larger collections of Revolutionary War musket balls. I have discovered that lead surfaces oxidize at a fairly consistent rate, displaying various degrees of what might be called patinization.

In reality, lead forms a layer of lead oxide. And it is very telling. Although lead discolors very quickly -- and even shows a powdery surface oxidation within just a few years exposed to the atmosphere -- very distinct visual attributes slowly rise as lead ages. The likes of old bullets and musket balls assume a fully non-duplicatable oxidization/patinization gleaned from the amount of time they have been in the ground. This look is so distinct it has become a decisive factor in determining the age of dug lead items. I have done so for museums.

The photo of your bullet has all the attributes of a bullet buried well over 125 years. Closer examination could date it even further back. To home in on its exact age, it becomes imperative to relate it to the where it was found and what other relics/artifacts were found near it.

By the by, many lead items are (understandably) washed by TH'ers, removing some very tell-tale layers of oxidation. Even then, the remaining oxidization can surely tell if it's old or very old.

 

[NOLA_Ken]

Monty, most of the .38 S&W I can find is pretty close to that, 145 grains, I had a few boxes until recently but I sold them since I had no pistol to match.

 

[boondocker]

Thanks guys, I thought it was more modern than "old", I was hoping for Civil war era. Dean

 

[High Plains Digger]

Tigerbeetle: I understand what you are saying, and pretty well agree with it, but doesn't soil chemistry have some variation on how the oxidation goes? The best example I can give is the "Ft. Fisher Bullet" for lack of the proper name immediately at my fingers. That is the double ended "slug" that is almost exclusively found there. They are known for not being well oxidized. At least this is what I understand. May need Cannonballguy to elaborate on this. I don't remember any bullets specifically, but I suspect that ones found in the lowlands of So. Carolina next to some of those near perfect buttons may not be the same as elsewhere.

 

[tigerbeetle]

Good point on the impact of soil chemistry on lead. That is where an understanding of the surrounding environment and history come in to "exact" a date.

I have helped with dating shot, musket balls and bullets found during digs along the Eastern Seaboard and also out West. The lead oxidation is surely more pronounced in certain areas. I noticed significant oxidation depths in lead bullets from the deep south.

A scientist I know even looked into the varying quality of the lead that was poured during the making of objects. However, lead was lead, so to speak. Variations came with contamination, displaying more as artifacts in the lead, which were fairly definable as pits or even non-lead intrusions (sand and such). The lead itself still oxidized the same on the unaffected surface.

The variances in oxidation from different geographical areas, while notable, only made it harder to home in on exact ages. What might be termed general oldness (to within, say, a few decades) could still be estimated by oxidation alone. That's when the other evidences -- locale, contemporaneous artifacts, etc. -- allowed for far more exacting determinations, in the case of battles, down to weeks and days.

By the by, unlike many other hard and soft metals, lead offers a very low electrolytic flow capacity. That means that unlike other buried metal objects (iron, silver, copper) it's oxidation is seldom if ever ameliorated or even impacted by the electrical flow of other nearby metal objects. Also, lead does not conduct the electrolytic flow found in all soils. The electricity that perpetually surges through soil often inflicts devastating impacts on buried metals, as all public works authorities know as they try to maintain sewer systems.

Many a detectorist simply blames chemicals in the soil for ruined coins and buttons when it it just as much the impact of the electricity surging through the soil -- albeit it enhanced by certain resident chemicals. Add moisture-holding soils to the mix and you have an electrolytic set-up that can eat through inch-thick steel.

 

[kenley]

.355 tells me 9 mm/.380 I couldn't find where the weight was posted?

 

[Monty]

But the 9mm, .380 were not rimmed. It's an early, rimmed, rim fired, revolver or or one of the early lever action rifle cartridges. I have a slew of .38 S&W ammo out on my reloading bench but mine are the .38 S&W center fire made for the .38 S&W top break revolvers. I have an S&W clone for which thousands were produced and sold because they were less expensive and of less quality than the actual S&W . I think they were one of the first true "Saturday Night Specials". Mine will fire but it is so loose I wouldn't want to shoot it much. Monty

Oh, and I forgot to add it may measure .355 because if it were the exact chamber size it wouldn't fit into the chamber.

 

[kenley]

I was just making rough, top of the head bullet conversions fron mm to decimal.

 

[Monty]

mm is OK as I think we can figure it out. I was just explaining why and perhaps how some of the ammo out there isn't exactly the same size it looks or measures to be. Prime example is the popular .44 Magnum. The bullet actually measures .429"! Monty