My Mod 627 Pro series is showing some flame cutting above the cylinder gap after about 1000 (maybe 1500) rounds of mixed loads, mostly less than full power 357 handloads. My other Smiths are all blue steel and don't show this including a Mod 19-3 that I bought in about 1972. I have put thousands of similar rounds through the 19 with no cutting at all.
Is stainless steel less resistant to the flame cutting than regular steel, or is it just this particular gun? Any suggestions for reducing the erosion to prolong the life of this gun?
Scott

It'll be a little more obvious on stainless steel compared to carbon blue, but all revolvers -- particularly those with magnums put through them -- will display some degree of flame cutting. In general it's normal, does not indicate excessive wear or issues, and after a certain point won't etch any farther.

Excessive flamecutting can indicate poor cleaning habits, an out of spec forcing cone-barrel gap allowing large amounts of flame, debris and gas upward, or loads that are too hot. In what I would presume are very rare instances, it might indicate an issue in the production process, like machining or metallurgy.

Could you post quality, close up pictures?

I'll try to get some photos posted soon; quality photos are always a challenge.
Scott

No. Flame cutting is a fact of life, but it is self limiting and won't hurt the gun. It goes only "so" deep and stops.

I shoot 627s a LOT and have no flame cutting. I have noticed that lead can accumulate on the top strap and resemble flame cutting. I agree flame cutting is self limiting and will not progress beyond a point.

Some guns have a divot already made in the top strap when shipped, presumably to limit cutting.

__________________
Bob.
SWCA 1821

The only thing I can think of off hand as to why one particular example of a gun would exhibit more flame cutting than another would be the guns barrel / cylinder gap. The wider the gap the more flame cutting might be occurring due to more hot gases escaping. Lighter weight bullets might and usually will result in more flame cutting than if heavier bullets are shot through a particular gun.

In any event, flame cutting in itself is not much to worry about and there are MANY MANY examples of Smith revolvers with the F/C "insignia".

One would think the really high pressure guns like the supermags
(which include the 460 and 500 mags) would be the most prone to flame cutting.
I have never noticed anything unusual with my DW 445, but I set
the gap to .002 and it's not a 60KPSI round.
How 'bout it X Framers?

===
Nemo

I have heard this old gunsmith's tale: Use a soft lead pencil, a carpenter's pencil for example, to put a layer of graphite on the flame-cut area before shooting. Supposedly helps, but I have no idea if it really does or not.

No harm in trying, though

__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

It seems that some flame resistant coating could be painted onto the vital point. It could be refreshed as necessary.

I got my first Magnum handgun when I was 11 years old, a well-worn but serviceable 4" Model 27. That was 50 years ago, come this April. I begged an uncle to let me shoot it, and he finally gave in, sure I would not be able to handle the noise and recoil; when I outshot him, he gave me the gun! Since then I have fired countless thousands of rounds in many dozens of different magnum handguns.

Now, I will not say flame cutting does not happen; I will say, though, that in all those years I have never seen it on any gun, with the sole exception of one .357 Max Blackhawk belonging to a friend. What I have seen is a few revolvers with bluing worn off in that area of the frame, and a whole lot of them with a hardened ridge of lead/powder residue that LOOKED like flame cutting. Hey, to be fair, it's a hard area to get clean.

Next time you think you see flame cutting, try this: Put a bit of gun oil on the spot and let it soak a while (overnight if possible, but a least an hour or so); meanwhile, fashion a scraper from wood or (better) a short, flattened bit of copper tubing; then, scrape the heck out of the "flame cut" area. I promise you, the vast majority of the time the "cutting" will disappear.

There is an awful lot of good info on forums like this; there is also a whole lot of stuff posted that folks have heard or read many times, and THINK they have seen, that is repeated without any real-life critical examination of the reported phenomenon. IMO, flame cutting is one of these.

__________________
Pisgah

I've seen newer revolvers with a folded piece of metal inserted between the forcing cone and top strap. I asked Smith if I could get that part for mt 686 and they said nope, only comes on new guns.

__________________
Fight socialism. Never stop.

And I may be mistaken, but I think it only comes on guns with Scandium frames.

Just as with titanium cylinders, which receive a special protective coating and must NEVER be cleaned with abrasive products, Scandium is really not suitable for revolver frames without extra protection. It's a clear case of sacrificing durability for the sake of removing a few scant ounces of weight. That's fine if your overriding concern is the lightest possible revolver, but you need to be aware of what you're giving up besides weight.

I went to a gun show this past weekend and, as usual, closely examined perhaps 50 vintage revolvers while I was there for two days. And again as usual, I saw plenty of dirty ones but not a single flame-cut frame. I stand by my comments.

__________________
Pisgah

Bob,

I'm not very familiar with late model revolvers but the early hand ejectors have what's known as a "fouling cup" . . . a carry over from the use of black powder to provide relief for residue to prevent cylinder drag.

Russ

True. I have a 1917 that has the cut, and have seen many earlier hand ejectors with the same. Remember, these revolvers were designed in the late blackpowder/early smokeless powder era, when even smokeless powders were so-called "bulk-load" powders that shared many characteristics with BP, including the heavy fouling. Yes, they were a big improvement over BP, but they've come a long way since. I tend to smile when some folks describe Unique, for instance, as a "dirty" powder; they have no clue what "dirty" really is!

__________________
Pisgah

Supposedly Ruger's reason for discontinuing the 357 Max revolver
was the complaints of flame cutting the frame.
I suspect the real reason was they weren't making any money on them.
Those frames now command a premium and are standard fodder for the custom crowd.
The ones that are left are only going to go up in value.

===
Nemo

I'm surprised at reports of well-used revolvers that display zero flame cutting, and wonder if a definitional issue is in play.

Normal flame cutting, as I understand it, is a fine, thin, shallow line in the top strap directly over the forcing cone-barrel gap. It's negligible, harmless, appears shortly into the revolver's use and -- provided proper loads and cleaning -- once established does not increase. And after a little use all revolvers will have it.

The first couple rows of pictures in this Google Image Search illustrate what I'm talking about: revolver flame cutting - Google Search

Excessive flame cutting -- indicative of an issue -- goes well beyond that shallow, etched line in the top-strap in the pictures above; it has erosion, peening, chipping and marring spreading deeper into as well as out beyond that thin line, and is often accompanied by same on the forcing cone. This is abnormal and a problem.

I'd appreciate seeing pictures of any well-used but cared for revolver that doesn't have normal flame cutting as illustrated above.

I have a Ruger Black Hawk in .357 Maximum and a TC Contender chambered for it as well. The cartridge was conceived as a heavy bullet silhouette knocker. Then some tried 125gr JHPs instead to see how fast they could go. The flame cutting was a result. I think old Bill Ruger just got POed at the complaining and discontinued the gun. Sales were moderate too.

I bought mine to have John Linebaugh convert it to .500 Linebaugh Max but I dawdled until common sense and old age prevailed.

__________________
Bob.
SWCA 1821

"I bought mine to have John Linebaugh convert it to .500 Linebaugh Max but I dawdled until common sense and old age prevailed."

Common sense seems to be a rare and under-appreciated gift these days. You did good.

I would be tempted to convert such a gun to 44 but nothing larger.
I have found the 445SM to be pretty much the limit of what I can handle
and both the DW and TC are huge guns.
At least we don't hear complaints of flame cutting with the T/C guns.

When I get the time I will shoot pix of some top straps and sneak them in here.
Might be a couple of days.

===
Nemo

This is a flame cut on my Ruger SRM (357 Max). The bulk of this was done by less than 50 rounds of h110 with 158s. Since that poorly made mistake in my early history of the Max, I now only shoot 4227 with it which is a stick powder. Since I switched to 4227 (which was more than a few thousand rounds ago), the flame cut has basically stabilized.

The issue is basically ball powders appear to sand blast the barrel gap and cut your frame with little sand like particles of partially burned really really hot pieces of abrasive powder particles.

Ruger stopped (I presume) because folks were trying to load express rounds of 110 grn bullets at over 2000 fps with ball powders. You would cut it pretty quick if you did that. I don't know if it is self limiting or not. Mine seems to have but now I only shoot 4227 and 158's or heavier. Most of the time I now shoot 180's.

I think the lesson is don't shoot ball powders in short cylinders with very high pressure loads. You don't see a lot of 38 specials which have been fired with 231 cut up like this.

__________________
SWCA 1646

With my limited knowledge base I found the link to revolver flame cutting on Google cleared up some questions. Thanks to Hapworth for posting the link.
I was amazed by the apparent size of the fouling cup. Was the fouling cup design common to most all revolvers? The other surprising photos showed damage to the forcing cone area. Question, could/should the forcing cone be countersunk to allow a smoother transition, if so would this lessen the flame cutting of the top strap? I fully realize flame cutting will never be a problem for me, but the action is very interesting.

Good Luck

You are correct, a fouling cup is huge compared to the flame cut. I have a few examples, but frankly I would not add one to a revolver. Just use prudent reloading approach and the flame cut is a non-starter.

__________________
SWCA 1646

Thank you for the above info. Do most of you remove thelead deposit above cylinder gap? If so any more ideas,suggestions on the best way to remove it? Or is ok best left alone? Sonora

I shoot competitively, put a bunch of rds thru my guns and am pretty lazy about doing more than necessary cleaning. The buildup on the top strap above and around the barrel stays 'til it's bad enough to chip off in hunks with a brass scraper/chisel. It doesn't affect anything. Chambers, on the other hand, are thoroughly cleaned before each match.

This is the only real flame cut I could find in any of my revolvers.
It took a lot of doing too. This is one of the first stainless supermags.
I got it in the fall of 1989.
My first few hundred loads were in reformed rifle brass using W680.
I am quite sure they were way over pressure looking at the chronograph results.
I have had to shim the cylinder a couple of times.
I, too, have gone to 4227 powder. Way more forgiving than the ball powder.
Like Mr. Eick's Maximum, the damage to the throat is actually more significant.

My Redhawk which is from 1983, I can see a mark but think it is mostly lead.
It has had thousands of full loads thru it, mostly using W296.

Looking at how thick the top straps are, I would say the flame cut is really a non-issue.
The burned throats; maybe.

+++
Nemo

Attached Images

DanWessonFlameCut.jpg (122.8 KB, 90 views)