This is an old question and I used the search function but that was no help. I also believe I know the answer but can't find my source for it. So the question...

Why was the cylinder recessed on the 357 magnum and later on other magnums as they came along, the 44 and 41. I know that by 1980 or so it was dropped. Never used in the L frame and phased out of the N and K .357s.

If there is an old thread that links to this someone post a link please.

tipoc

Here's an article from the American Rifleman about pinned and recessed Smith & Wesson revolvers. Take it for what it's worth:

Pinned and Recess Smith & Wesson Revolvers

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

Anything to cut down the cost! They have done a heck of a lot of cost cutting things since then. There is a reason many people like the older offerings!

__________________
14 S&W Revs none with locks!

Here's a thread on the topic.....

Recessed vs. non-recessed cylinder...

__________________
Ret. LE, FA Instr, S&W Armorer

Thanks but...

It's my opinion that the recessed cylinder was seen as an extra measure of safety by S&W in those days as opposed to it being a custom feature (on guns with many custom features). The thing is proving that they saw it that way. I can infer it and even show that it makes some sense given the newer pressures that the gun and round were operating at. But I can't find a reference directly to that. That's what i'm looking for or the reverse, if that's the case.

Bottom line - no difference in strength or accuracy. Theoretically, non-recessed rims may be more reliable, as there is less chance of debris getting under the cartridge rim, and causing the cartridge to rub against the breech face, possibly affecting the cylinders ability to rotate.

Might? make a difference when using full power loads in old balloon head cases, but that's not applicable to the modern magnums. I don't believe Colt or Ruger ever used recessed cylinders in their magnum revolvers.

Larry

If you want a new gun with recessed cylinder, there are good shops that will do it for a reasonable fee, but this fee is far higher than it would be for S&W to offer it as an option but since it complicates inventory, you are on your own.

Now I'm under the impression that the recess is only for moon clips and never heard of any other reasons for having them. After reading here and looking at the video I feel that I may be mistaken.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Just about all here are missing the point of the question. Why was the cylinder originally recessed? and proof of the why.

tipoc

I think it was an added feature to tout on the new Magnum as each caliber was released. Just marketing.

__________________
No life story has happy end.

That's what I think.
The guys on the other board are saying it is a functional feature to contain the Magnums.

OK, SP show me why that was the case. Why do you think that?

tipoc

tipoc,

I agree.

I don't think the documentation you seek exists, other than the AR article referenced above which seems as correct as any other source. With regard to S&W specifically, the best and only knowledgeable opinion will probably come from Roy Jinks.

The 357 Mag was introduced as a flagship premium revolver back in the day. I have no doubt that Smith felt recessed chambers offered an extra measure of safety, or appearance of extra safety, or extra panache that justified a little extra production cost in their first magnum hand ejector. None of it's previous HE or their pre hand ejector revolvers had recessed chambers, although they were built in the days of 'folded head' inside primed center fire and rim fire cases, followed by balloon head cases using smokeless powders until around sometime in the late 30s/early40s when solid head cases were introduced.

Just like Smith learned around 1935 that 22 HV ammo was not safe in non-recessed chambers, eventually they concluded recessed magnum chambers were no longer necessary and/or no longer justified the extra minimal production cost by 1982. As did other name brands such as Ruger.

The cartridge most highly in need of recessed chambers in revolvers to this day is the 22 WMR due to it's folded head case and high pressure. Ruger in fact concluded way back in 1959 they could not safely even cut a firing pin groove thru the 22 magnum chamber recesses w/o experiencing case head blowouts.

And very recently the .17 Hornady Super Mag Rim Fire no doubt would require recessed chambers, albeit a moot point being only a rifle round, it not being chambered in any revolvers.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I'm not sure if any early .357 ammo was ever loaded in balloon head cases, but that would've been a good enough reason for recessed chambers. That, and/or S&W thought it would be likely that balloon head .38 Special brass might get hot-rodded by handloaders....

Mark

__________________
S&W Forum Member #721

Mark,

I agree, I have looked for balloon head 357 cases, and although I have some very old original cartridges they all have the cannelure just above the rim, of course indication they are solid head. I have never found a balloon head case of any brand or vintage with the cannelure.

Interesting to note that the 38-44 loads for the Heavy Duty and Outdoorsman are all balloon head cases early on, but I don't know of any of their cyls that have recessed chambers.

The 357 may just have introduced the solid head case.

Many other non-magnum cartridges were produced with balloon heads into the 1950s.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I think my 647 (17 HMR) is recessed but I'm not home so can't confirm it. Here's a link to a Shooting Times articles that provides a little info about rimfire recessed cylinders.

Smith & Wesson's .17 HMR Model 647 Offers High Quality & Incredible Accuracy

Jeff
SWCA #1457

I'm sure it is. Sorry, I was referring to the .17 Super Mag. rifle only cartridge.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

There is a lot of mis-information about what a balloon head case is. The original (and correct) balloon head existed only during when the cartridge case was of the "folded type, and the head was about the same thickness as the case walls - sort of like a .22 RF case is. Many of the 19th century BP loads had true balloon heads. The next step was to use a semi-balloon head, where the metal in the head was thicker than that of the balloon head case, but the primer pocket stood above the head. Strangely, at the time, some manufacturers called them "Solid Head." Those are what most today call balloon head cases. I've never seen anything which provides much information as to when the semi-balloon head case was phased out in favor of the solid head, but in some calibers by some manufacturers, the semi-balloon head case hung on until after WWII. I have seen semi-balloon cases in .38 Special, .38 S&W, and, .44 Special (and quite a few of those - I even loaded and used some .44 Special SBH cases back in my CAS days). I have never seen a semi-balloon cartridge case in .357 or .44 Magnum, and I really doubt any of them were ever made.

....comes along that knows exactly what they are talking about.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

I don't KNOW the answer---only what I've read----from the pens of some very "hip dudes" (if perhaps somewhat obscure outside of the lunatic fringe of "our" world).

In the beginning------mid 1920's thereabouts, somebody (Remington is my recollection) made a "new and improved" .22 Long Rifle cartridge. "New and improved" means it went faster. That which made it go faster also blew out some rims every now and again. Panic set in----and reigned supreme. Any number of problem solvers set out to create a solution. Alas, not all of them had been to Problem Solving School.

Just about the first thing one learns in Problem Solving School is to make sure you're solving the real problem----rather than spending time and money treating symptoms. So---S&W said something like "STOP THE PRESSES!!"----and redesigned the Straight Line, such that it was the very first handgun with a recessed chamber----which was all well and good; but the dogs wouldn't eat it.

Remington took a slightly different approach. They stopped using cheap brass, started using the high priced spread---and all was well. Not inclined to admit nor even hint at the possibility they might have jumped the gun a little, others continued to sing the praises of recessed chambers----failing to mention they're a little difficult to make/keep squeaky clean.

The foregoing is truth. I freely admit it has been presented in a somewhat snarky fashion, but make no apologies. Every now and again I get irritated with folks who are disinclined to admit their mistakes---like going full steam ahead with something called the Straight Line---when the great unwashed they were trying to sell them to wanted a (real) "heavy frame" .22 target revolver------like the K-22 First Model----which came along about ten years later.

Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with folks who make mistakes. If they didn't make mistakes, they wouldn't be doing anything. I do have a problem with those who make mistakes while wearing blinders.

And finally---and about time----THE END!

Ralph Tremaine

Because it looks cool!

Like so many things over time, the correctness of a "name" is relative to a thing's place in time.

Today we know cartridge cases of the:
* folded head, rim fire and inside primed center fire (formerly balloon head),
* balloon head (formerly known as semi solid head/ semi balloon head, and solid head), and
* the current solid head.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Are we talking about recessing individual chambers to contain the rim of the cartridge, or having the entire back of the cylinder recessed with about a 1/8" rim around the outside perimeter.

Now the recessed cylinder openings I can see providing support for balloon head brass and other weak designs, but I swannee to gosh I thought when the whole back of the cylinder was recessed it was for moon clips. There are machine shops that do this for a few hundred $$.

Pardon me, I'm not being stubborn, but I wonder if we are talking about the same thing.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

The subject is the individually recessed charge holes of the .357 Magnum from introduction through the Model 27-2.

I think they are cosmetic, a distinction for the top of the line; along with the checkered topstrap and rib.

The only other explanation that holds water is that they wanted to protect an adventurous reloader who put gross overloads in semi-balloon .38 Specials. Phil Sharpe published .38 Special loads to 35,000 psi, 97% of .357. By then, .38s were being made solid head, but there was no doubt a lot of old brass around.

Didn't S&W introduce recessed case heads into their revolver line in their 22 revolvers sometime in the 1920's, at least 10 years before the RM?

Froggie

Yes, but they were needed there as high velocity .22 LR was really pushing the envelope. I once read that the first production lot of Winchester Super X was loaded hot for the Models 61 and 63. They had to tone it down to keep from hammering cheaper guns.

Recessed chambered 22 revolver cylinders were introduced on the Model K-22 in 1931, and on the .22/32 Kit Gun with its introduction in 1935.

The .22/32 Target models were changed to recessed chambers also in 1935 reportedly at ~ # 525600, by change order dated Jan 7,1935 on the next soft fitting order. They have been reported as low as # 384570 (1923) but those are believed to have been retrofitted cylinders.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

That is in fact correct and supplied to the authors of the SCS&W by yours truly. I failed to make note of the * on the gun and never made the connection to a replaced cylinder until after the error was published. I have since notified the authors and hopefully this error will be corrected in the soon to be published 4th edition. Sorry boys and girls. Sometimes you just don't know what you don't know.

One of the real examples of "don't believe everything that you read".

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

My understanding behind the recessed chambers was to prevent gasses from leaking out from around the rim fire cases rim if it ruptured. In theory the gas would be held by the recess and forced back into the case and out of the case mouth instead of between the cylinder face and recoil shield.

This process was repeated with the magnum revolvers due to their increased pressure loads. In the 1980's this process was apparently deemed unnecessary due to advances in metallurgy and as a cost saving measure.

This is merely my understanding and yours may differ.

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

Don't know where I got this but I've always thought it had to do with the way things really where in the early days of the .357.

With the advent of the .357, brass was scarce. Many shooters put up .357 loads in .38 brass. Indeed many may be familiar with Skeeter Skelton's favorite .357 load, put up in .38 brass with a Lyman 358156. This bullet has two crimp grooves and he'd seat it out, using the lower crimp groove.

The .357 grew out of the .38/44. Back in those days many cases still around where of balloon-head construction where the case heads are not as strong as our modern brass. S&W came up with the recessed rim in a nod to the reality of how their customers were using their product in the real world.

Brass was a precious thing back then, it was held on too.

I was present when a friend's son had a 22 case rupture in my 617. He still had some brass to dig out of his hand, it slightly damaged the star but other than that no damage.

I have had three 22 rim fire cartridges rupture, and have a true appreciation for the recessed cylinder. I hope I have had my share and will not see it happen again.

No worries, because I've seen a few early #'d 22/32 targets with un-numbered cylinders with recessed chambers but no star and no rework date, apparently replaced by gunsmiths or owners. So your published observations are not incorrect entirely!

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Thanks Jim for the mea culpa. As long as folks realize that these are anomalies and do not change the understanding that from the factory this change happened around serial number 525600 in April of 1935. Interestingly, I have 525618 in my database and it was reported to not have the recesses.

Like most things S&W, there is never a hard date or serial number, just close proximities.

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

"...this change happened around serial number 525600 in April of 1935."

Is that SN consistent with the 1935 date?

About ten posts down is a post about early .44 magnum advertising. One of the deluxe features mentioned in the ad was the term "embedded headspace". In light of the this thread, I found that interesting. Randy

Like anything S&W regarding dates and serial numbers, I have guns with higher numbers shipped as early as 1931.

525,618
525,668 6/15/1931
525,730 12/X/1933
525,738 4/8/1935
525,792 11/30/1934
525,876
525,991 12/X/1931

Here is a sampling from my database.

To add to the confusion, 525618 is the only one that I have a definitive answer about regarding the recessed chambers and it did NOT have them.

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

Let me add a little something. If I remember correctly, the K22 was actually the first gun that used a recessed cylinder. While obviously not a magnum caliber, DB Wesson designed it to prevent rupturing case heads that were fired in revolvers. Apparently, some ammo companies had introduced much hotter .22 ammo, that was injuring shooters, just before the introduction of the K22. Also, I think I remember that Wesson, while worried about customer safety, also wanted to get the K22 to market quickly, so he never patented his new design! The first K22 came out in January of 1931.

I realize the OP asked about magnums, but this was the actual beginning of the recessed cylinder.

__________________
Miss My Buddy crsides!!

I happened to be reading a newly acquired copy of Julian S. Hatcher's book "Textbook of Pistols and Revolvers" originally printed in 1935.

This is a quote from the book "In order to handle this cartridge with absolute safety, the extra precaution has been taken of recessing the cylinder so that it completely surrounds the head of the cartridge the same as it does in the K-.22" p50.

On page 48 of the same book, he writes that in June 1934 he and Douglas Wesson were discussing Wesson's project of building an high velocity cartridge around the 160 grain bullet. If I recall correctly, he received reg 2.

In any event this is about as close to the horses mouth as we are able to get. :-)

__________________
Richard Gillespie
FBINA 102

I was about to go nuts here.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Off topic, but I can not help myself.
Years ago I read a debate between two men, such as Hatcher and Yard about the advantages of a cartridge that head spaces on the rim rather than on the neck or shoulder. Do any of you remember this discussion?

No I don't but it seems an awfully trivial topic to "debate".

They're obviously acknowledged as no longer needed for safety by the manufacturers except for rimfires, and I like seeing at a glance where that empty chamber(s) is(are), if any.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I got busy with other things but I also did a bit more poking around on this topic, meaning the reason for the recessed cylinders of the early .357 Magnums.

My contention for years has been that the feature was there for a reason and not just cosmetic.

Today we take the .357 magnum and it's power for granted but at the time it was introduced it was a game changer. It operated at pressures unheard of for a revolver. It operated at pressures of a semi auto with smokeless powder which was unheard of in any commercially produced wheelgun at the time.

Phil Sharpe in his "Complete Guide to Handloading" covers the development of the loads, first for the 38/44 and later for the .357. The testing of both gun and loads and bullet design was extensive. He frequently comments, as do many others, on the previously unheard of pressures involved in the development of this cartridge

Julian Hatcher in his 1935 "Textbook of Pistols and Revolvers" comments on the first use of the recessed cylinder in chapter two of his book in the section on the K-22:

"This gun was first designed when Remington brought out their Hi-Speed .22 caliber ammunition in 1930. This very greatly improved .22 caliber cartridge was sold with a caution against using in pistols or revolvers where the head of the cartridge is unsupported and there might be danger of injury to the shooter from burst heads due to the very high pressure necessary to get the increased velocity...he built this new gun specially for the recently designed high speed ammunition. The heat treated cylinders that Smith & Wesson had been using for some time had of course more than ample strength for the cartridge; the only weak point was the rim. This point Major Wesson took care of by producing a countersunk cylinder with recesses for the cartridge heads, so that the rims of the cartridges are supported all around, and the danger that the fingers will be cut or burned by escaping gas, or that the adjacent cartridges in the cylinder will be prematurely exploded, is absolutely avoided."

A few pages later, in his section on the new .357 Magnum, Hatcher returns to the counterbored chambers. After a discussion of the power of the new cartridge Hatcher adds;

"In order to handle this cartridge with absolute safety, the extra precaution has been taken of recessing the cylinder so that it completely surrounds the head of the cartridge the same as it does in the K-22."

Well the door ain't completely closed yet but it's awful close. Julian Hatcher knew his stuff and he said there was a reason for the recessed chambers.

tipoc

Well I've kept poking. I poked here...

Elmer Keith Memorial Website|Guns and Ammo Archives

I looked at the November 1935 issue of American Rifleman at an article by Keith. Note the second paragraph;

http://www.elmerkeithshoot.org/Ameri...n/Keith357.pdf


It reads;

"The cylinder is recessed for the shell-heads, as is the case with the K-22 revolver. Smith & Wesson were the pioneers in bringing out this feature in their excellent K-22 Model, and have now adopted it for the .357 Magnum. It is a very good feature, and will be appreciated particularly by handloaders, as it absolutely precludes the risk of injury to the shooter or a bystander from particles of flying brass in case the head of a shell cracks off or bursts."

Keith goes on to recount how he once had the head of a 45 Colt blackpowder cartridge blow off and cut his finger to the bone.

We take the .357 for granted today. It's known and comfortable, hard to look back on a time it was new and unknown.

Door should be closed now.

Hatcher said..."Of course this cartridge is brand new at this time and it is to be expected that some changes will be made in the ballistics as experience is gained; but there is no reason to anticipate any further changes in the gun."

That held mostly true till 1982 or so.

tipoc

Very well done sir! I congratulate you on a well written, documented, knowledgeable work of art that we can all gain an understanding of the complex nature of the handguns we love so well.

Thank You!

Just found this great thread while trying to solve this very issue. Thank you to all the contributors!

My thanks as well...I've always had my own assumptions (now confirmed), but I've added information and sources now...And I also quickly looked up sources for Gen. Hatcher's book (previously unheard of by me) and found the only remaining leather bound Palladium Press 1st edition left at Amazon...It's now being shipped to me for inclusion on my shelf of other Hatcher offerings, and likely the best $20 I'll spend today......Ben

__________________
Cogito, ergo BOOM!...

But the M27 isn't the only model to have them, every K and N frame magnum caliber model from 1935 to 1982 has them (rimfires are a separate issue).

Maybe from the perspective of better designed ammunition, recessed cylinders aren't necessary any more, but I believe the main reason they were discontinued was for machining and production costs, and that reflects a desire by a manufacturer to only make the gun as good as it has to be. Much like a car builder saying, "we could put nice alloy wheels on this model, but the stamped steel wheels are also round, hold the tire on, are much cheaper, and we can make it look almost as good by sticking a shiny tin cap over the outside".

Whether or not they ever had anything more than an aesthetic purpose, it was an elegant feature, and I like them. Sure, a bit harder to clean, but it's deserving of a bit more attention to detail. Obviously, I like P&R.

I believe some Old Model Ruger Blackhawks and Super Blackhawks in .41 and .44 Magnum and .45 Colt had recessed cylinders.

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

From Jim Watson "The subject is the individually recessed charge holes of the .357 Magnum from introduction through the Model 27-2."

I think they are cosmetic, a distinction for the top of the line; along with the checkered topstrap and rib."

The Model 28, introduced in 1954, also had recessed cylinders and did not have the the checkered topstrap and no serrations on the barrel rib or other features of the M27. That feature, recessed cylinders, was removed in the same years on both models.

The heat treatment of S&W magnum guns had improved in the post war period. The strength of cylinders and cartridges also improved as more 357 Magnum rounds were fired and designs and powder improved.

As this thread has shown the recessed cylinders were not primarily for decoration. At a certain point S&W saved money by removing the recessed cylinders and also no longer needed them on teh guns.

Same reason that the 357 originally came out in an N frame instead of an K. They did not not have the capabilities to fully understand test and get the most out of the materials they were using. Nor did they fully understand what would happen with 357 pressures in a revolver So, they always error on the side of caution. The size of the gun, the recessed cylinder etc. Much improved processes and controls, better testing equipment for the steel, the pressures and millions off rounds of experience and now you can get a Scandium alloy 357 J frame and there is no way they are stronger than the steel in a 1935 K frame. Measure the cylinder walls and top strap cross section and then convince me the alloy is 2 times stronger. Go lets look at the specs on scandium alloy, because even the highest grades do not equal that of spec 4140 and they make J frame 357s using it.

I suspect it's because the large caliber rimfire cartridges had a tendency to fail at the rims with a result of a pretty hefty flame front burning some hands. So what does that have to do with centerfire cartridges 70 years later? Nothing at all. Until some Marketing type gets their teeth into it. Gotta have those cylinders recessed because the Magnums are so powerful they could separate at a perfectly solid rims. Yeah, it's all about Marketing. Any time you see perfectly functional design smothered in visual fluff you can bet it's the work of some Marketing Hack.