Combat Masterpiece model 15 vs Model 19

mbliss57

mbliss57

US Veteran
Silver Supporter
Joined
Jan 1, 2012
Messages
5,360
Reaction score
8,564
Location
Desert South West
The Model 15? I just started thinking about this today from a marketing and practical standpoint..
Once they came out with the Model 19 why did they keep making the model 15? Same gun, structure of frame (I assume) just a longer cylinder chambered for magnums. If a police force was going to use 38 spl model 15s as a service revolver why not buy the 19? They get magnums if they want them. Or why did S&W keep making the 15? It's the same gun in magnum if you want to shoot 38 spl there is nothing to stop you. OR.. Am I showing my ignorance... is there a frame/ structure difference between the 2?
Please help me learn...
 
Register to hide this ad
Because firing .38 special mostly will cause a ring foul buildup in the chambers , making the longer magnum round difficult to load. The model 15 is a classic revolver. And giving the choice I would choose the 15 all day.
 
They are common guns so they must have been good sellers. I imagine that was the best reason to keep making them. I prefer 15s to 19s, so does Laketime, extrapolate.
 
The 19 or pre 19 came out 6 years 1955 after the Combat Master Piece. (1949) I suppose you are right. They make model 60s in 357 and .38 spl today. As well as other J frames and charge more for the magnums.
The Model 15 and 19 are the same gun with a different cylinders. Any love for the 15 over the 19 is purely economics or sentimentality. At todays prices the 15 is much more economical on the used market. But if I am going to shoot 38 spls from a K frame I would use a model 14 target model or an M&P as they are just as practical..I digress. The 15 vs 19. Economics and marketing. I am satisfied that that is why they made both.
 
I started my LEO career in 1972 and the primary LEO handgun was a revolver. Most agencies were not permitted to carry and use the dreadful and super powerful magnum rounds so the 38 special was still the king. True, you could fire a 38spl in a .357 but you still had a mighty magnum that terrified city councils and county commissions and there was always the fear that officers would carry magnum ammo if it would fit their gun. Also for the departments that furnished weapons to their people the Model 15 and the Model 10 were a few dollars cheaper and that always looked good to governing bodies. My agency issued Model 19s and issued a half box of magnum ammo and a half box of 38spl at qualification each year. Times slowly changed and then auto pistols became the pistol of choice.
 
Thanks .. now we are getting to the real stuff. From today's standpoint my reasoning makes quite a bit of sense.
But "Back in the day"...fear and...
BTW the snub nose 19s and 15s in 2.5" both have shrouded ejectors which is what I was envisioning..but the others Saxon Pig is correct.
 
Tom Kent hit the nail on the head. The word "magnum" frightened police administrators & city councils etc. The .38 Special was a much easier idea to sell to the public.

You have to remember that in years gone by, the .32 was the standard police caliber and considered adequate for the purpose. The .38 Spl. was thought to be a VERY powerful handgun. Most folks perceived the .357 or 45 acp to be capable of unfathomable stopping power. I have had people tell me that a .45 was overkill because all you had to do was hit someone in the arm to lift him off of his feet.:)
 
mbliss57 said:
Thanks .. now we are getting to the real stuff. From today's standpoint my reasoning makes quite a bit of sense.
But "Back in the day"...fear and...
BTW the snub nose 19s and 15s in 2.5" both have shrouded ejectors which is what I was envisioning..but the others Saxon Pig is correct.
Click to expand...

Model 15 snubs were 2" and did NOT have shrouded ejector rods.
 
Law enforcement agencies that mandated the use of 38 Special, and there were plenty that did so, wanted revolvers that would not chamber the Magnum round. Those agencies often did not trust their personnel to not use Magnum ammo. Naturally, use of Magnum ammo by ill-trained personnel could cause all sorts of hand-wringing, and maybe even some liability, in the event of a shooting.

The FBI was a notable exception, issuing the Model 13, and allowing agents properly trained to use Magnum ammo, while requiring (and trusting) those not trained or authorized to use 38 Special ammunition.
 
Muley Gil said:
Model 15 snubs were 2" and did NOT have shrouded ejector rods.
Click to expand...

Google images are not a good source for info:o

But my pic archives are:

19-4

b0d58c6e.jpg
[/URL]

Model 15-3
 
Last edited:
The model 19 has the metal enclosure surrounding the rod; the model 15 has the front lockup point only, no metal underneath or on the right side.

The K magnum frames, yokes and cylinders are slightly larger than the .38 (along with the heavier barrel), so they are not exactly interchangeable. Add to this the cost differential (probably 10-15% at the time for the gun, plus ammo), the need for different holsters if model 15s were already in service, Magnum paranoia, etc., and it is easy to imagine why .38 Specials sold well up until the semi-auto era began.
 
That all makes sense. Thanks for the lessons. I wasn't in LE and didn't even own a handgun in that era. I knew you experts would set the record straight. This is the stuff you can't find in the SCSW.
 
On a side note the 2" snub SB Model 15 has a different barrel, frame and rear site than the 4" so they are actually different guns with the same model 10 cylinder.

The Combat Masterpiece up to the Model 15-4 was a shorter version of the 6" 1946 to 1950 tapered barrel Masterpiece with a buaghman ramp FS, The 15-5 and up has a wide rib barrel and frame.
 
Last edited:
S&W has stated that they used a different steel alloy and different heat treatment on .357 guns and that this steel and treatment were more expensive. I don't think only the .357 cylinders got the tougher steel.

The USAF issued the Model 15 and wanted a gun without .357 recoil. Most airmen issued a revolver had little recoil tolerance, so no .357's.

Holsters for the M-15 and M-19 are usually the same. The underlug wasn't usually a factor. Grips differ. This might matter, but they interchange. Many used replacement grips, anyway, especially Pachmayr and other rubber types.
 
Don't forget that feeding the .357 Magnum was much more expensive than the .38 Special. Police departments are very budget conscious, or at least were back then.

We were issued the model 10. It was considerably cheaper than the Model 15.
 
same here,my first duty gun in 1975 was a 4"model 10...I later traded out for a model 15,4"magnum ammo was a huge no-no at that time,at least here in this part of virginia
 
I have read the 357 cylinders were tempered differently than the 38s. I have never seen documentation that the frames were different. Frankly, I doubt it.

I recall reading the 44 Magnum was developed with a tougher cylinder in a production 1950 44 Target frame. If the 44 didn't require a better frame, why would the 357?
 
Last edited:
There have been some postings here suggesting that all frames are of relatively soft steel, and cylinders are heat-treated to higher tensile strength levels than frames. But no one seems to know that for sure.
 
Tom Kent said:
I started my LEO career in 1972 and the primary LEO handgun was a revolver. Most agencies were not permitted to carry and use the dreadful and super powerful magnum rounds so the 38 special was still the king. True, you could fire a 38spl in a .357 but you still had a mighty magnum that terrified city councils and county commissions and there was always the fear that officers would carry magnum ammo if it would fit their gun. Also for the departments that furnished weapons to their people the Model 15 and the Model 10 were a few dollars cheaper and that always looked good to governing bodies. My agency issued Model 19s and issued a half box of magnum ammo and a half box of 38spl at qualification each year. Times slowly changed and then auto pistols became the pistol of choice.
Click to expand...

True....

In those and prior days, the firearms policy was simple. Quote: " Your handgun had to be a 38 Special with a 4 or 6" barrel in either Colt or Smith & Wesson." Poor old Ruger was just getting off the ground with their double action revolvers in those days.

That was the firearm policy period.....no ifs, ands, or buts......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rob613
38 Combat Masterpiece
2
Replies
22
Views
859
Rob613
Rob613
6GUNSONLY
New shoes for my Combat Masterpiece
Replies
18
Views
1K
StrawHat
StrawHat
W
Dad's Model 15
Replies
4
Views
151
daveboy
D
O
38 Combat Masterpiece
Replies
5
Views
453
Oldengineer
O
O
K38 combat masterpiece
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
pasound
pasound

Latest posts

Back
Top