I'm a very casual shooter and find myself needing a K frame S&W. This means I'll be returning to the local range for several months to use new, and also, exercise the other handguns I own. I know little of ammo and because of info I have gotten on this forum I have a question that will probably determine whether I get a used 19 or a new 15.

Am I to believe the current .38 special +P is approximately equivalent to the .38 special in use when the 10-15-19 series was developed?

I understand using .357 mag. exclusively is not the best for the 19.

Note that I am perfectly happy putting holes in paper with Winchester White Box.

Now checking Win. White box specs...

.38 Special +p 130 gr FMJ muzzle 1240/427
.357 Magnum 110 gr JHP muzzle 1295/410

Does this mean using Win. White Box .357 mag would be easier on the older 19 than .38 +P and, .38+p would have no bad effects of the K frame.

Like I say, .357 mag Win. White is fine for me in my Pythons so if it is a powderpuf for the 19, then I would get a 19 else I would lean 15 new in .38 +P

I do have a 1940's k22 & k38 which after 40+ years in storage might come out...is .38 +p Win. White Box OK for that item?

Suggestions for economical heavier range ammo is welcome for my Pythons as well.

The S&W forum has been a great help to me...Thanks to all previous posters on the K frame

Might want to get your ammo facts correct before anything else. Winchester does not make a 38 Special 130FMJ+P load. What you're probably looking at is the 38 Super+P 130FMJ. Two different cartridges all together.

Your money--but if you're just doing casual shooting there is nothing wrong with the M15. I have a Model 19 plus an assortment of other .357s, and 98% of my shooting with them is my .38 Special hand load anyway.

Personally I prefer the lighter weight and balance of the M15 to the M19. Back when I was working I wanted the horsepower of the .357 so that got the nod. Now it doesn't matter so much to me.

First off, welcome to the Forum.
The velocity figure you quote for the .38 +P seems awfully high. I would say out of a 4" barrel it would be around 1000 fps.
In your M19 Combat Magnum there should be no problem shooting .357 Magnum ammo. The only caution commonly heard is the 125 grain loads will cause flame cutting. 158 grain loads should be fine. That said, my M66-1, which is the stainless version of the M19, is always loaded with Federal 125 grain loads. I just don't shoot a tremendous amount of them in my K-Frames.
Jim

Buffalo Bore makes some plus P ammo that approaches .357 mag energies and is safe to use in the M15. Both JHP and hard cast "Keith" style. I like their 150 gr hard cast full wad cutter and its not even plus P. Should be about 1000 fps from a 4in barrel.

rick

There is also the association between lighter bullets in 357 Magnum loads and cracked forcing cones in the K frame. Between that risk and the increase in flame cutting to the top strap I would NEVER use a 110 grain 357 Magnum load in a K frame.

Indeed those of you are right, I wrote down the wrong numbers for the +P, my mistake they were for .38 Super +P

All my logic out the door but glad glad forum got me back on track

Thanks

Really, the difference might be which feels better in your hand and comes to point easier. I found that I couldn't comfortably move from a Python to a M19 (my buddy owned a Python and I carried a M19). The actions were different (backwards for the Colt ) and the triggers just didn't give the same feel.

I loved the Colt's balance but, like I said, I carried the 19.

Welcome to the Forum, a fine and friendly place to ask questions. As to your initial inquiry regarding 19 vs a 15 - they are both wonderful arms. I and many here have both.

Since you have the K-38, perhaps the 19, which can shoot either .38 Special or .357 Mag, would be a good choice. To avoid a ridge of fouling in the chambers some believe regular cleaning and lubrication with Corrosion-X or similar helps to retard such fouling.

As for ammo, I personally prefer 150-~160 gr bullets. I use whatever lead 150-158 gr loads are decent and priced OK. In .38 Special, Magtech 158s and Winchester 150s come to mind. In .357: 158 grs, in no special order, Independence, S&B and Magtech have treated me well, both in revolver and Marlin 1894C carbine. This is for general shooting at targets, paper and as opportunity arises. FWIW, I don't care for 130 gr jacketed, as they don't, for me, shoot to aim point in fixed sight guns; and they wear the barrel more. A lot of fielder's choice here.

If the issue is self protection, for me, .357 would get the nod, with a load of choice and availability.

Hope your selection process goes well. Please let us know the outcome!

Regards,

Dyson

Don't let lead residue build up in the forcing cone of a revolver. It increases pressures, and is one of the factors that has caused some split barrels when .357 loads were then fired. The very hot 125 grain and lighter ,357 bullets are already erosive and the pressure peak is different than for heavier bullets, which also burn more of the powder in the case before the bullet leaves, leaving less burning powder (ejecta) to erode the barrel throat.

I did not just read this off of the Net. For about 30 years, I was a gun writer, with a masthead listing. I got the info directly from S&W reps, and was, I think, the first to publish it, in "Gun Week." I was told that this and the use of Plus P Plus .38 ammo loaded to hot specs to get .357 performance in .38 cases were the primary contributory causes to S&W deciding to introduce the L-frame guns, as the thin bottom portion of the barrel on K-Mags was more likely to crack when the gun is shot extensively with 125 grain magnum ammo, and especially, if the barrel throat was leaded up, as some people will not clean their guns right. One man told me that Plus P Plus ammo was often harder on the guns than even the hot 125 grain magnum loads!

I later confirmed this info by talking with engineers at ammunition companies. They UNIFORMLY recommended that users of K-Mags stick with 158 grain bullets in .357 ammo. I asked about the 140-145 grain bullets, but no one had hard data. But they thought that these were heavy enough to avoid problems like the lighter bullets give at high velocity. The Winchester 145 grain Silvertip has a great street rep, and is the lightest .357 bullet that I'd load for routine defensive carry, unless my agency compelled otherwise.

Another writer (at, "Shooting Times") interviewed the chief of S&W's revolver producton, and published a story saying that the M-66 (stainless version of the M-19) handles barrel erosion better than blued or nickled guns. That is true of stainless revolvers over blued in all models, of course.
This is hardly surprising, for Winchester was using stainless barrels in some .220 Swift rifles for years, as that high velocity round tends to wash out barrel throats. This happened long before all-stainless guns appeared upon the introduction of the M-60 snub .38 in 1965.

I would earnestly suggest that you obtain the M-19 if you want a blued gun and will maintain it properly. Or, the M-66. The four-inch barrel is the most versatile, but if it will be a target and outdoors gun only, the six-inch gives better velocity and less muzzle blast and a longer sight radius. However, a six-inch Combat Magnum is harder to locate. Of course, the gun will be perfect for home defense in either barrel length, but don't fire magnum ammo indoors: the blast may injure your ears. (Indoor range use with proper ear protection is another matter.)


The versatility of the .357 Magnum over a .38 Special revolver prompts me to choose the M-19. It will also recoil slightly less with 38 ammo, as the gun is a trifle heavier. If you carry, the right holster will not let you feel any real weight difference. The right grips will also minimize .357 recoil, which may surprise you, as you seem not to have fired one in many years.

If you camp, hunt, or hike in the outdoors, .357 power may be needed. But the M-15 is a nice gun, too, if you are sure that you'll need only a .38. Keep in mind that these Buffalo Bore cartridges mentioned by someone else are pretty hot. They're for business, not for routine range use. I'm sure they're safe in a .38, but I'd feel better using them in a .357, and honestly, they make some ammo that I'd feel better about shooting in a larger .357, like the L-frame guns, the M-27/28, or a Ruger. I'm sure limited use won't shake a .38 loose, but these are my thoughts.

Simple answer is NO. The standard ammo of yesteryear is the same as the standard pressure ammo of today. There has always been higher performance loads and subsequently higher pressure loads in the .38 spl. Prior to SAAMI's designation of +P high performance .38 special was called "Police Loads", "Hi Speed" or whatever the manufacturer dreamed up to indicate higher pressure. Viewing of the old ballistic tabels show essentially the same velocities as current ammo when adjusted for barrel lenghts and use of solid chamber test barrels. The 38-44 was a precursor to the .357 mag and was intended to be shot only in guns chambered for the .38 with the heavier and larger 44 size frame and cylinder.

Cracking of the forcing cone in .357 mag K frames has been attributed to use of full power .357 magnun 125gr JHP's. Simple solution to the problem is to not use full power .357 mag 125gr ammo. If you want to shoot 125gr JHP's in your K frame then use medium velocity loads by Reminton like the 125gr Golden Sabers or handload your own to around 1,200 to 1,250 fps. If you don't hand load then simply use .357 mag ammo in other weights like 158gr or 140gr.

You can shoot as much .357 mag as you want in a model 19 but like anything else mechanical they wear out quicker if you run 'em hard and fast however that still means years of regular use and many thousands of rounds of ammo.

There has never been any reported problems in K frames with .38 special 125gr ammo.

According to S&W.38 spl +P ammo will not harm any K frame with the model number stamped on the frame made after 1950 but shouldn't be used in earlier guns. I would not use it in your 1940 manufactured pistol. Why use +P for practice in the first place when standard pressure ammo is readily available and kills paper just as good?

You have a typo or something there. The date for S&W-appoved use of Plus P ammo in all-steel guns is 1957, not 1950. This is coincident with their stamping of model numbers in the guns from that date, when metallurgy (sp?) supposedly improved.