View Single Post
 
Old 12-10-2011, 08:36 PM
Kavinsky's Avatar
Kavinsky Kavinsky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 672
Likes: 0
Liked 33 Times in 29 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 47D View Post
So post-1980 corner cutting is the reason for cracked forcing cones?

That doesn't really explain the picture in this thread: 19-4 Cracked forcing cone (19-4s and earlier have pinned barrels/are pre-crush fit).

Or this 19-3 thread: Model 19-3 with cracked forcing cone. Any Help?

Or this one: 19-3 Dilemma...cracked forcing cone...can I use..
you've got your numbers mixed up, its 19 - 3 and earlier that have pinned barrels and are non crush fit, the numbers vary for either model

although supposedly the crush fitting thing started a little earlier than 1980, not really sure when exactly so the latter 19 -3s could be crush fit as well

with the 29's its a dash 2 and earlier that means its a pre 1980, although mines a 1979 - 1980 one with the pinned barrel 6 incher as they did away with the 6 1/2's the time that was made and its probably one of the first crush fit ones but I still trust it absolutely and I love the damn thing and the forcing cone doesnt look weak either, but the N frames arent known to have this issue to begin with, atleast to my knowledge.


and I think its a basic quality control issue where sometimes the steel would be thicker in that area than others and its possibile that maybe because of the longer barrel with the gunblast guys gun, which is a 6 the forcing cone was thicker than on the 4 inch ones with his particular example

and I wouldnt think that's just the reason why it was like that on them, its just one of the factors I noted, but notice how those guns are still usabile and in a repairabile state, still the 158 grain rule is probably the best possibile choice for ammo for it to lower the chances of that happening

mixed in with the earlierst one you can find

with my pre 1980 rule its because of what happened with the 686 my father bought back then, first 6 shots of magnum ammo and the thing locked up on him and I've been hearing this and that report about smiths not being as good as they used to be with the modern ones and ones of the same era as the 686, and about 4 other 686's with the same problem that happened to my father on here.

basically I think its a shot in the dark whether or not you get a good revolver that's a post 1980 regardless of the model for those reasons, including the guns there making nowadays, plus the keylock that never should have been added in the first place.

semi autos discluded as honestly while I've heard the horror stories and seen them with their revovlers the semi auto pistols they make seem to be what the revolvers used to be, damn near bulletproof.



so my rule is generally try and find a dash 2 or earlier and so far I have yet to get a lemon or a problem child of a smith and wesson like the 1980's K22 with it and I'm going to apply the same logic to the hunt for a model 19.


and besides with the exception of the model 29 where I shoot 180's instead of 240 because of the noise it makes I'd be trying to use only the 158's anyways as I like the number better than 124 and I make a point to shoot the heaviest avalabile factory ammo for all my guns.


Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Stuart View Post
Guys. Um. I was having more fun reading this thread when we were just talking about how much we like K frames.

Back to the OP;
I'll fish out some pics of my 3 K's:
2.5" 66 38/357 - oops, posted that on page 2.
3" 10-4 .38 only - Aussie trade in - BTW; there's another batch of 3 inchers on Bud's out there today!
4" 64-5 great all around shooter. This is what I train people with. You just can't go wrong with a 64.

Just look at those 66 collections earlier in the thread! Any one of those will last your lifetime and your kids, and their kids, and their kids....
fair enough I just didnt want to leave my viewpoint unexplained to anyone reading it.

Last edited by Kavinsky; 12-10-2011 at 08:56 PM.
Reply With Quote