Bajadoc
US Veteran
I'm trying to wear mine out. Can't seem to do it.
Can a 19-4 handle a steady diet of factory 357?
- Thread starter Bripro68
- Start date
Alk8944
US Veteran
William "Bill" Jordan of the U.S. Border Patrol convinced Douglas B. Wesson. the then President of Smith & Wesson, to introduce the "Combat Magnum". The gun was as you see it today, 4" K-Frame with the extractor rod shroud added for weight, to make recoil more bearable. His expressed desire was for a gun capable of limited use with full power .357 Magnum ammunition but to be used primarily with .38 Special ammunition. Remember that .38-44 Hi-Speed was available at that time.
While many argue that the cracked barrel shanks are an uncommon occurrence there has been plenty anecdotal evidence presented on this forum over the past few years to cause me to believe it is not as uncommon as some believe. I have seen a few over the years, one belonging to a close friend! Replacement barrels in any length are virtually impossible to find! I know you didn't ask about the 110-125 gr. loads, but I will not use them in an Model 19 I own.
As mentioned, it is your gun to do with as you please. That said, even with nearly 60 years of shooting just about any caliber you can name, and, probably, many you can't, I find that loads of ca. 1000 FPS are just about all I care to shoot more than just a few at a time in any revolver. Why not use the gun in the fashion it was originally designed, it should last virtually forever that way. Buy an L-Frame or N-Frame to shoot full-snort loads in if you want to shoot exclusively full power .357s.
Can a Model 19 handle a steady diet of .357 Magnum, maybe. Will your model 19 tolerate exclusive use with .357 Magnum ammunition, possibly. How many rounds? Just one less than the one that causes a failure! Your choice!
While many argue that the cracked barrel shanks are an uncommon occurrence there has been plenty anecdotal evidence presented on this forum over the past few years to cause me to believe it is not as uncommon as some believe. I have seen a few over the years, one belonging to a close friend! Replacement barrels in any length are virtually impossible to find! I know you didn't ask about the 110-125 gr. loads, but I will not use them in an Model 19 I own.
As mentioned, it is your gun to do with as you please. That said, even with nearly 60 years of shooting just about any caliber you can name, and, probably, many you can't, I find that loads of ca. 1000 FPS are just about all I care to shoot more than just a few at a time in any revolver. Why not use the gun in the fashion it was originally designed, it should last virtually forever that way. Buy an L-Frame or N-Frame to shoot full-snort loads in if you want to shoot exclusively full power .357s.
Can a Model 19 handle a steady diet of .357 Magnum, maybe. Will your model 19 tolerate exclusive use with .357 Magnum ammunition, possibly. How many rounds? Just one less than the one that causes a failure! Your choice!
Last edited:
Texas Star
US Veteran
I get tired of answering this, but here we go again...
Bill Jordan told me in person that he expected some 10-15% of ammo fired in a Combat Magnum would be .357's. Most then and now fire more .38 ammo in any .357 not mandated to be used all the time with full loads.
Some forces now require qualifying with full loads if they are carried on duty. I'd fire them often enough to be sure of qualifying, but not otherwise, unless I needed the power, perhaps in bear or cougar country. In Florida, you might want warmer loads on big pythons. Ditto where alligators or other crocodilians may be a menace.
Now, Jordan said what he did, and he knew what he expected from the design when it originated. But his friend Skeeter Skelton used his M-19's enough with reasonable low end .357 loads that he finally accepted that the M-19 was plenty durable with reasonable use and he largely retired his beloved M-27's for his M-19. But Skeeter used mainly a very hot .38-44 handload that is now considered to be a low end .357 load. I don't think he ever used many 125 grain .357 smoker rounds as were loaded until recent years.
Those appeared in the 1960's, originally under the Super Vel brand.
I used some early Remington and Federal and Super Vel ammo in my M-19's and quickly decided that they were too hot for those smaller guns. I relegated them to use in my Model 27 and 28. Then, I decided that I didn't really need them at all, and went back to 140-158 grain JHP in all .357 use.
From what I've heard, Dallas PD and the FBI both found Winchester's 145 grain .357 Silvertips to be so positive in their effects on felons that I didn't feel the need to abuse my
.357's with 125 grain blowtorch ammo.
In 1981, I was invited by S&W's PR man to attend a session at the sheriff's range where company reps would let us fire the forthcoming L-frame guns. Of course, both the various cops there and I, as a trade press member, were suitably brainwashed with promotional info.
These reps were candid about K-framed .357's suffering from heavy use with the very hot 125 grain and lighter .357 loads. BUT they also told me that a lot of the guns that gave trouble had been shot a lot with Plus P Plus .38 Special ammo. This stuff was loaded only to the specs of the departments that ordered it. It has never been released for commercial sale. The ONLY reason for this stuff is that some agencies were afraid of "community activists" objecting to cops using .357 ammo. So they loaded this very hot ammo and issued it for use in .357 guns. Thus, they could tell the media that they issued .38 ammo. I was told that this ammo was AT LEAST as abusive to K-frame guns as was the hot 125 grain .357 stuff. That it exists and some gets out to the public is one reason why I contest Saxon Pig's posts saying that Plus P, without qualifications, is okay for even early .38 Special guns. Some ninnies don't read ammo boxes carefully and others buy loose ammo and shoot it.
I do believe that dirty forcing cones, with powder residue, increase pressures from hot loads and may well contribute to those throats cracking.
Now, I have recently seen photos of Ruger GP-100 barrels with severely eroded throats from firing a lot of hot 125 grain bullets in .357 cases. If this heavy use affects a sturdy GP Ruger, what do you think it will do to a smaller K-frame S&W barrel with the thinner flat on the bottom?!
My answer is to avoid very hot, lightweight bullets and to use any magnum ammo in reasonable quantities. Occasional firing to remain familiar with the recoil and blast and to be sure it's hitting where it should is enough. Beyond that, use .357 loads in the field as you see the need.
Keep in mind that the good traditional K-frame guns are no longer made. Buy spares and use them in reasonable ways. But I don't worry about firing them in normal use with modest amounts of full .357 loads. I do use 140-158 grain bullets.
I haven't time now to go into why the lighter bullets are a problem. But they are, in full magnum loads. Both S&W and several ammo companies' engineers said so, and told me why.
Bill Jordan told me in person that he expected some 10-15% of ammo fired in a Combat Magnum would be .357's. Most then and now fire more .38 ammo in any .357 not mandated to be used all the time with full loads.
Some forces now require qualifying with full loads if they are carried on duty. I'd fire them often enough to be sure of qualifying, but not otherwise, unless I needed the power, perhaps in bear or cougar country. In Florida, you might want warmer loads on big pythons. Ditto where alligators or other crocodilians may be a menace.
Now, Jordan said what he did, and he knew what he expected from the design when it originated. But his friend Skeeter Skelton used his M-19's enough with reasonable low end .357 loads that he finally accepted that the M-19 was plenty durable with reasonable use and he largely retired his beloved M-27's for his M-19. But Skeeter used mainly a very hot .38-44 handload that is now considered to be a low end .357 load. I don't think he ever used many 125 grain .357 smoker rounds as were loaded until recent years.
Those appeared in the 1960's, originally under the Super Vel brand.
I used some early Remington and Federal and Super Vel ammo in my M-19's and quickly decided that they were too hot for those smaller guns. I relegated them to use in my Model 27 and 28. Then, I decided that I didn't really need them at all, and went back to 140-158 grain JHP in all .357 use.
From what I've heard, Dallas PD and the FBI both found Winchester's 145 grain .357 Silvertips to be so positive in their effects on felons that I didn't feel the need to abuse my
.357's with 125 grain blowtorch ammo.
In 1981, I was invited by S&W's PR man to attend a session at the sheriff's range where company reps would let us fire the forthcoming L-frame guns. Of course, both the various cops there and I, as a trade press member, were suitably brainwashed with promotional info.
These reps were candid about K-framed .357's suffering from heavy use with the very hot 125 grain and lighter .357 loads. BUT they also told me that a lot of the guns that gave trouble had been shot a lot with Plus P Plus .38 Special ammo. This stuff was loaded only to the specs of the departments that ordered it. It has never been released for commercial sale. The ONLY reason for this stuff is that some agencies were afraid of "community activists" objecting to cops using .357 ammo. So they loaded this very hot ammo and issued it for use in .357 guns. Thus, they could tell the media that they issued .38 ammo. I was told that this ammo was AT LEAST as abusive to K-frame guns as was the hot 125 grain .357 stuff. That it exists and some gets out to the public is one reason why I contest Saxon Pig's posts saying that Plus P, without qualifications, is okay for even early .38 Special guns. Some ninnies don't read ammo boxes carefully and others buy loose ammo and shoot it.
I do believe that dirty forcing cones, with powder residue, increase pressures from hot loads and may well contribute to those throats cracking.
Now, I have recently seen photos of Ruger GP-100 barrels with severely eroded throats from firing a lot of hot 125 grain bullets in .357 cases. If this heavy use affects a sturdy GP Ruger, what do you think it will do to a smaller K-frame S&W barrel with the thinner flat on the bottom?!
My answer is to avoid very hot, lightweight bullets and to use any magnum ammo in reasonable quantities. Occasional firing to remain familiar with the recoil and blast and to be sure it's hitting where it should is enough. Beyond that, use .357 loads in the field as you see the need.
Keep in mind that the good traditional K-frame guns are no longer made. Buy spares and use them in reasonable ways. But I don't worry about firing them in normal use with modest amounts of full .357 loads. I do use 140-158 grain bullets.
I haven't time now to go into why the lighter bullets are a problem. But they are, in full magnum loads. Both S&W and several ammo companies' engineers said so, and told me why.
Last edited:
Excellent information, again, in Texas Star's post above. Most pointedly "use them in reasonable ways".
I have both 66's and 19's that I shoot at the range regularly and have done so since I was first a LE back in the early 70's. My normal routine is to take one of my favorites and put 2-3 boxes of .38 Spl +P rounds through it followed by 15-20 rounds of full .357 magnum through it. I very seldom shoot anything lighter than 158 grain, my favorite field carry round being the Buffalo Bore 158 grain hard cast. Following my shooting routine I then take the gun home and give it what my Grandfather used to call a "good Christian" cleaning.
As I said, I have done this for over 40 years and have never had any issue with either a Model 19 or a Model 66 and I have literally put thousands of rounds down range with them.
As someone said above, if you are a competitive shooter and it is your intention to put thousands and thousands of .357 rounds down range then, by all means, get yourself a L or N frame revolver to do so.
If, on the other hand, you are simply a recreational shooter occasionally going to the range to shoot a box or two. That Model 19 will be around a lot longer than either of us will.
Enjoy the thing. That's what it was made for.
Bob
I have both 66's and 19's that I shoot at the range regularly and have done so since I was first a LE back in the early 70's. My normal routine is to take one of my favorites and put 2-3 boxes of .38 Spl +P rounds through it followed by 15-20 rounds of full .357 magnum through it. I very seldom shoot anything lighter than 158 grain, my favorite field carry round being the Buffalo Bore 158 grain hard cast. Following my shooting routine I then take the gun home and give it what my Grandfather used to call a "good Christian" cleaning.
As I said, I have done this for over 40 years and have never had any issue with either a Model 19 or a Model 66 and I have literally put thousands of rounds down range with them.
As someone said above, if you are a competitive shooter and it is your intention to put thousands and thousands of .357 rounds down range then, by all means, get yourself a L or N frame revolver to do so.
If, on the other hand, you are simply a recreational shooter occasionally going to the range to shoot a box or two. That Model 19 will be around a lot longer than either of us will.
Enjoy the thing. That's what it was made for.
Bob
Art Doc
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
All of my comments on +P are based on the mainstream, current production ammo. Specialty ammo must be considered separately.
+P+ has no standard so must be approached with caution. Each manufacturer will have its own +P+ standards. My only experience with factory +P+ 38 Special left me severely underwhelmed. A 110 JHP round that clocked a pathetic 890 FPS from a 4" revolver. Again, +P+ must be examined case by case. And I do read the label information, BTW, thoroughly.
I have loaded a 110 JHP to a clocked 1405 FPS from a 4" Model 10. I don't think this load is harmful to the gun but it shot 8" high at 25 yards making it unusable for self defense. The 125 at 1150 shoots much closer to POA with fixed sites.
Everybody just do what you want. I am really, really tired of this discussion.
+P+ has no standard so must be approached with caution. Each manufacturer will have its own +P+ standards. My only experience with factory +P+ 38 Special left me severely underwhelmed. A 110 JHP round that clocked a pathetic 890 FPS from a 4" revolver. Again, +P+ must be examined case by case. And I do read the label information, BTW, thoroughly.
I have loaded a 110 JHP to a clocked 1405 FPS from a 4" Model 10. I don't think this load is harmful to the gun but it shot 8" high at 25 yards making it unusable for self defense. The 125 at 1150 shoots much closer to POA with fixed sites.
Everybody just do what you want. I am really, really tired of this discussion.
shil
Member
Yup. But my 19's cone cracked with about 200 rounds of Winchester factory 125 grain loads. It was re-barreled by the the factory without charge, but this was in the late '70's. When I take it out of mothballs on occasion, it gets midrange 158 lead handloads in .357 cases and full-power (though not maximum-published) 158 jacketed. I work test loads up to maximum-published for the specific bullet but after establishing that they are safe and cause no problems, I back the charge off a few tenths. I have a modest supply of factory Federal 125's I jealously guard but they're restricted to my 686. I must confess I haven't bought factory .357 ammo in ages.
shil
Member
Saxon, with all respect to you, I don't even want to KNOW what load you are using to clock a 110 grainer out of a 4" Model 10!
Patience, my friend. I believe that one our collective functions in this marvelous forum is to teach.
05CarbonDRZ
Member
1405fps out of a .38spl.....WOW!
Art Doc
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
shil- I wouldn't own a gun I had to baby or failed to inspire confidence. If I can't shoot any ammo out of it, I don't see the point of having it. That's why I divested myself of all my pre-1925 S&Ws a few years back. Didn't trust the metallurgy. Then last year I went back on my own promise and bought a 32-20 made in 1910. No tempering on cylinder.
I decided not to baby it. I load the same ammo I would shoot in a later revolver of that caliber. So far no problems.
I decided not to baby it. I load the same ammo I would shoot in a later revolver of that caliber. So far no problems.
DWalt
Member
That's actually fairly simple to do, and in fact I have loaded heavier bullets in .38 Special cases to full .357 Magnum velocities. That doesn't make it safe or desirable to use in all guns, as chamber pressures are very high. Due to numerous reports of split barrel throats with high-velocity light bullet loads, I want nothing to do with them.
I will confirm that +P+ loads do not comply with any established industry SAAMI chamber pressure standards. You are strictly on your own if you use those.
Engine49guy
Member
All good info here and ultimately once informed its now your call.
IMO while S&W did beef up the K frame to handle the .357 round the K frame had an Achilles heel that required the barrel to be cut flat at the 6 O-clock position to clear the yoke and cylinder,
This weak link apparently did not pose a problem with the 158 grain factory loads of 1955 but years later when lighter 125 grain bullets were being marketed at higher speeds reports of cracked K Magnum forcing cones at the 6 O-clock position began to surface.
Ultimately the culprit was discovered and the larger L frame 357 (without that 6 O-clock thinning cut) apparently became the solution.
Also I have never heard 19-5's are any more prone to forcing cone breakage than other revisions and the method of "Crush fitting" 19-5 barrels was reportedly no different than previous revisions with the exception that their frames are not drilled for a barrel set pin .
All just my opinion ; )
IMO while S&W did beef up the K frame to handle the .357 round the K frame had an Achilles heel that required the barrel to be cut flat at the 6 O-clock position to clear the yoke and cylinder,
This weak link apparently did not pose a problem with the 158 grain factory loads of 1955 but years later when lighter 125 grain bullets were being marketed at higher speeds reports of cracked K Magnum forcing cones at the 6 O-clock position began to surface.
Ultimately the culprit was discovered and the larger L frame 357 (without that 6 O-clock thinning cut) apparently became the solution.
Also I have never heard 19-5's are any more prone to forcing cone breakage than other revisions and the method of "Crush fitting" 19-5 barrels was reportedly no different than previous revisions with the exception that their frames are not drilled for a barrel set pin .
All just my opinion ; )
Last edited:
Art Doc
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
As I keep saying over and over, so many guys discuss the 125 ammo as the culprit but in fact 19s have split with 158s and even 38 Specials. I saw a list of known 19 failures and there a couple of -3s and -4s but 80% were -5s. I don't know why for sure, but that was the first unpinned barrel. I ask, coincidence? I don't know.
PS- Don't forget that 357 ammo has been downloaded over the decades. Factory stuff today is milder than what was sold 40 years ago (and I think 125 loads have been around for a long time). Why weren't they splitting in 1960? This seems to be a relatively new phenomenon.
PS- Don't forget that 357 ammo has been downloaded over the decades. Factory stuff today is milder than what was sold 40 years ago (and I think 125 loads have been around for a long time). Why weren't they splitting in 1960? This seems to be a relatively new phenomenon.
Doug M.
Member
I concur that the current factory ammo is downloaded, and I am not sure when the smoking hot 125s came along, but it was well after the Combat Magnum was introduced. I suspect Lee Jurras was a big influence in that, since he was the first high profile advocate of lighter, faster ammo. I suspect one of the reasons that the barrel issue did not show up until the early 70s, as I recall, is the shift in LE firearms training after the lessons of Newhall. It was not until after that incident that train as you will fight was understood to mean that training had to be done with duty ammo. Add in more volume of shooting, and the stresses went up a bunch.
I think the hottest .357 ammo I ever shot was in the early 70's, some stuff called Super Vel. I don't know what the numbers on that stuff was, except that it was 125 grain JHP, but, I do remember, after firing the first round, thinking "DAMN!"
I'm not expert for sure, but I don't think there is any commercial ammo that hot on the market these days. Not even Buffalo Bore, which I shoot regularly, is as hot as what I remember that stuff to be.
Bob
I'm not expert for sure, but I don't think there is any commercial ammo that hot on the market these days. Not even Buffalo Bore, which I shoot regularly, is as hot as what I remember that stuff to be.
Bob
Last edited:
Centurian77
Member
Picked up a new unfired, no drag line 19-4 2 1/2". Actually just stopped by to read this thread to be sure it was safe with some 158gr .357's I have.
Thanks,
C77
Thanks,
C77
Last edited:
I don't think I would fire a steady diet of .357 mag ammo in a 19-4. Keep in mind there are not a lot of parts out there if you need something. Even though .357 ammo has been downloaded shooting mag ammo will accelerate wear.
For CCW I'd carry it with mag ammo, for range use I'd shoot .38 Spl. Do this and you'll pass this gun on to your kids.
For CCW I'd carry it with mag ammo, for range use I'd shoot .38 Spl. Do this and you'll pass this gun on to your kids.
Pisgah
Member
Choose what you believe --
-- 1 box of full-house .357s and a Model 19 will fall to pieces; or,
-- Put a million rounds through it and it'll still be as good as new.
As with most extremes, the truth is somewhere in the middle. In all likelihood, an average shooter with a Model 19 will never be able to shoot enough .357 rounds in his lifetime to find out "how many rounds" it will take to ruin it. But, it'll likely be a few less than with an N-frame.
-- 1 box of full-house .357s and a Model 19 will fall to pieces; or,
-- Put a million rounds through it and it'll still be as good as new.
As with most extremes, the truth is somewhere in the middle. In all likelihood, an average shooter with a Model 19 will never be able to shoot enough .357 rounds in his lifetime to find out "how many rounds" it will take to ruin it. But, it'll likely be a few less than with an N-frame.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 7,796
- Reaction score
- 7,225
As an old fart, I'll chime in with some "how it was done in the old days" information that may bear on the situation.
Back in them than days (pre-Newhall), virtually all training and qualification was done with .38s. In many cases, .38 wadcutters. Duty ammo was duty ammo and didn't differ significantly-except for those departments that issued/authorized .357. Qualification might or might not be with .357 if that was the duty ammo.
Now after the academy (using academy guns), the average LEO would fire maybe 50-100 rounds per year. Over a 20 year career, that would be 1000-2000 rounds, give or take, plus whatever might be fired on duty. This is the environment the 19 was designed in/for.
After the Newhall incident and some lawsuits, the liability insurance carriers and trainers insisted that ALL training and qualification be done with whatever full power ammo would be used on duty. In addition, training got ramped up and the round counts escalated.
It was at this time that various handguns (not just the 19) started experiencing accelerated wear and breakage. I went through a training regime in the late 1980's. We used 681's and Federal 125 gr JHP .357 for everything. Round count was ~300 (or more) rounds per day. For a month. Staying current was approaching 1000 rounds per year for all training cycles and qualification. The duty guns didn't break, but boy were some of the older ones loose! The worst ones would go back to S&W for rebuild.
Given something like I've just described, I can understand 19's breaking. This would be especially true in cases where .38 +P+ was in use for reasons stated above.
Back in them than days (pre-Newhall), virtually all training and qualification was done with .38s. In many cases, .38 wadcutters. Duty ammo was duty ammo and didn't differ significantly-except for those departments that issued/authorized .357. Qualification might or might not be with .357 if that was the duty ammo.
Now after the academy (using academy guns), the average LEO would fire maybe 50-100 rounds per year. Over a 20 year career, that would be 1000-2000 rounds, give or take, plus whatever might be fired on duty. This is the environment the 19 was designed in/for.
After the Newhall incident and some lawsuits, the liability insurance carriers and trainers insisted that ALL training and qualification be done with whatever full power ammo would be used on duty. In addition, training got ramped up and the round counts escalated.
It was at this time that various handguns (not just the 19) started experiencing accelerated wear and breakage. I went through a training regime in the late 1980's. We used 681's and Federal 125 gr JHP .357 for everything. Round count was ~300 (or more) rounds per day. For a month. Staying current was approaching 1000 rounds per year for all training cycles and qualification. The duty guns didn't break, but boy were some of the older ones loose! The worst ones would go back to S&W for rebuild.
Given something like I've just described, I can understand 19's breaking. This would be especially true in cases where .38 +P+ was in use for reasons stated above.
Last edited:
sigp220.45
US Veteran
Zombie thread resurrection!
I wouldn't worry about shooting .357s in a .357 revolver.
I avoid 125 grain loads in mine, but I'll enjoy everything else.
I wouldn't worry about shooting .357s in a .357 revolver.
I avoid 125 grain loads in mine, but I'll enjoy everything else.
one eye joe
US Veteran
Dennis IS RIGHT ON THE MONEY ! ! ! THE "AVERAGE SHOOTER" WOULD NOT BE SUBJECTING A NICE REVOLVER, TO A STEADY DIET OF THE HOTTEST .357 FACTORY LOADS. WHAT WOULD BE THE PURPOSE OF BEATING UP YOUR GUN AND YOUR WRIST, IN SUCH A FASHION ? ? ?
IF ITS ANY CONSOLATION---S&W HAS STATED THAT ANY NUMBERED MODEL OF THEIR REVOLVERS, IS SAFE FOR USE WITH FACTORY .38SPL+P LOADS.....
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
