|
|
11-28-2012, 03:28 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
snub nose m&p
I have an old M&P ser. C 4302xx. It has a pinned barrel and a screw in front of the trigger guard. Can someone give me a date of manufacture, and is it safe for +P ammo?
|
11-28-2012, 03:43 PM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: AL Wiregrass
Posts: 7,224
Likes: 34,841
Liked 10,790 Times in 3,676 Posts
|
|
1960. Yes, you can shoot +P in it, but I prefer semi-wadcutters for target practice. Open the cylinder and see the Mod. 10- stamping. Should be 10-1. Is it a heavy barrel, 4" by any chance?
__________________
Guy
SWHF #474 SWCA LM#2629
|
11-28-2012, 10:29 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 8,988
Likes: 16,215
Liked 19,839 Times in 4,479 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiregrassguy
1960. Yes, you can shoot +P in it, but I prefer semi-wadcutters for target practice. Open the cylinder and see the Mod. 10- stamping. Should be 10-1. Is it a heavy barrel, 4" by any chance?
|
I'm watching for the reply (early 4" HB).
|
11-29-2012, 12:40 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: West Central IL
Posts: 22,804
Likes: 18,554
Liked 22,424 Times in 8,277 Posts
|
|
I'm going to say 1958 for this one as I have a 4" M&P 4 screw # C45939X
which is marked Mod 10 (no dash) and is a standard barrel.
__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244
|
12-27-2012, 01:54 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
This is a 2" with a round butt and a round front sight, and there is no mod 10 stamp under the crane.
|
12-27-2012, 03:17 PM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: AL Wiregrass
Posts: 7,224
Likes: 34,841
Liked 10,790 Times in 3,676 Posts
|
|
The serial number ranges in the SCSW must be off by 3 years if that snubbie was made in 1957. rbb, can you post some pictures?
__________________
Guy
SWHF #474 SWCA LM#2629
|
12-27-2012, 04:36 PM
|
US Veteran Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 20,361
Likes: 24,260
Liked 16,154 Times in 7,408 Posts
|
|
The short answer to your real question is that it is NOT waranted or recommended for Plus P. The factory has advised that until Model numbers were used, guns are not deemed suitable for Plus P. No frame number, no Plus P. Really simple!
Dr. Pig and others may differ, but that is the factory line. And the bit about Model numbers refers ONLY to steel frames, not light alloy ones. Until quite recently, no light alloy frames were certified for Plus P ammo. They stretch and they crack!
Even if your gun was shipped after 1957, the date when Models appeared, if YOUR gun was not marked it is probably made of steel before the metallurgy changed. They used up existing parts before making new ones. Snubs, in particular, seem to have been using old parts, which is why (I think) so many still had the half moon shaped front sights as late as they did.
Probably the cylinder bears the brunt of pressure, and you have no way of knowing the metallurgy of your cylinder. But the forcing cone also takes some of that added pressure.
Now, to complicate matters, some maintain that current Plus P ammo (but not some older ones) actually is loaded no hotter than old standard rounds were.
Someone will be along to tell you that they've fired Plus P in older guns with no problems. I'm just telling you what S&W officially says. I DO think that the older, softer steels will cause cylinder endshake to occur sooner than an equivalent amount of use with newer guns will cause. The more you fire warm ammo, the sooner wear will occur.
Now, Saxon Pig (member) and perhaps others will tell you their spiel. But if I were you, I wouldn't trust anything he says. For one thing, he wears a beard. I have trouble trusting people who hide their faces. Heck, Osama bin Laden wore a beard!
Last edited by Texas Star; 12-27-2012 at 04:42 PM.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
12-27-2012, 11:41 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
I mentioned a round butt on this thread earlier, but I misspoke. I have two m&p snubies and this is not the round butt.
I keep getting an error message when trying to upload pictures. I think the file size on an individual picture is too great. Help!
|
12-28-2012, 12:30 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: N GA
Posts: 4,466
Likes: 204
Liked 3,613 Times in 1,498 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbb
I mentioned a round butt on this thread earlier, but I misspoke. I have two m&p snubies and this is not the round butt.
I keep getting an error message when trying to upload pictures. I think the file size on an individual picture is too great. Help!
|
Post your pics to a site like Photobucket. They will automatically re-size them and then you can post them here.
|
12-28-2012, 12:43 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 13,996
Likes: 5,007
Liked 7,702 Times in 2,624 Posts
|
|
Here are photos of this revolver that rbb sent me.
__________________
David Wilson
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
12-28-2012, 09:01 AM
|
|
SWCA Member Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The kidney of Dixie.
Posts: 10,509
Likes: 49
Liked 13,410 Times in 3,290 Posts
|
|
Made right before model numbers assigned.
+P is a standard pressure load (despite what some mistakenly believe) and is safe in any quality made gun in good condition. The notion of using model numbers as a cut-off for +P is ridiculous as +P did not exist in 1957 and these is no difference between the last gun made without a number and the first one made with the number except for the number.
Here's a pair of similar guns that are a few years older.
BTW- many rounds of my loads that far exceed +P pressures have rolled off their backs.
__________________
No life story has happy end.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
12-28-2012, 11:45 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
I also have a round butt model, similar to the one in the phto. 5 screws, but a different shaped hammer. I can't see over the hammer spur with it down, I can only see the rear sight with it at full cock. I think it is a 1905, 4th chg. it is shown on another post with a date question.
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|