Very general, unfair question here, and I have posted/read endless posts on this, but this is why I ask..

I am at the range today and doing some quick target shooting, IDPA type stuff. I was much quicker on target than the guys shooting their L Frames and Rugers. They were kind of annoyed and said something to the effect "well, the k frames may be quicker on target, easier to carry, balance better, whatever--but you'll shoot it loose/wear out the forcing cone/topstrap if you shoot many magnums."

Now I shoot a seemingly endless amount of 158 grain magnums through my K frames and maybe once in a while I have the gunsmith tighten one up or re-time it (like I do with all of my guns over the years--I consider this akin to changing the recoil spring, etc., in a 1911). Granted, I clean my guns, but I have never had any forcing cone or topstrap erosion or anything get "loose." I have shot a good amount of 125 grain loads through them too without any ill effect.

I like the 686, and I love my 27s, but the L Frames feel clunky to me compared to the 19/66 and the 27s are just tanks.. So when I am shooting or carrying magnums I almost always end up with the K Frames. They just seem to point and balance better for me. Many cops and other LEOs I know swear that the first shot is the most important, and that the speed of the followup is less important. I don't have the expertise to judge that but I am definitely quicker on target with the K frame.

__________________
Aaron Terry

Doubt you're going to hurt it much with 158 grain loads. Oh, it will need tightened up from time to time but that's maintainance not damage. It was the light fast bullets that were causing the problems.

I would not worry about the 158gr rounds. Smith and Wesson recommended that the 19/66s use 158gr rounds. On most of the ammo out there the velocity would be in the neigborhood of 1100 to 1250 fps. Light ammo of 125gr or less is 1450 to 1600 fps. Plus the gases escaping the forcing core will wear the forcing core and cause more wear on the top strap. My opinion is ignore you friends.

I have a question for you? Your practicing for IDPA. Do your intend to use the 357 round on your K frame magnum to make the floor? I am wanting to compete in stock service revolver with either my model 10 or model 66. There are several 38 special rounds that will meet the floor rating. I would think you would be more effective shooting 38 specials in you K frame than going to the 357 round. Am I wrong?
Good luck,
roaddog28

Sir, someone posted here a while back that he cracked the forcing cone in a Model 19 using 158-grain magnum loads. I forget now who it was. A search may or may not turn it up easily--this topic comes up so often that the volume of posts would be daunting.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

__________________
Wishin' don't make it so.

It actually is the 125 grain Magnum 357 loads that can cause a cracked forcing cone on the Model 19 and 66 . The K frames were really designed for the 158 grain bullets and they will not damage them. If you shoot a lot of ammo through a K frame it can get loose but they can be easily tightened up by your gunsmith or yourself.

Isn't this the whole story? If they could have gotten you to believe it, they would have told you that the constant battering of K-frames can cause cancer of the hand.

Keep going there - I think you may see another K-frame or two pretty soon.

After reading the facts on this subject there was not any discussion about shooting +p .38 ammo in a .357 refering to the space between lead and the barrel in the cylinder, which is more than any .357 loads , especially important in junk guns like TAURUS, ROSSIE ect. AS I bought one of those titinum taurus pieces of junk and fired 10 rounds threw it and it locked up like a cheap cap gun with 158 factory load. needless to say it is not in my possession anymore after it came back from the factory repair . I replaced it with a model 19-4 after saying all this what type of ammo should I shoot in my 19-4? 158 hp , .38 +p or what ?

My department changed its long standing policy of not issuing handguns in 1978. That year they purchased a number of S&W M-66s, both 4" and 2.5". Concerned about vicarious liability they started qualifying with Magnum ammo in addition to issuing and specifying it for carry. The issue ammo was the Remington 125g JHP while qualification ammo was a locally produced 158g cast RN Magnum load. (They also authorized the 1911 45 ACP and the department was about evenly devided between revolvers and semi-autos at first. By the time I left is was more like 60/40 in favor of the semi-auto.)

In 1981 I was assigned at the chief firearms instructor and it was my job to completely re-vamp the training program. We started actually training in addition to just qualifying so the deputies were shooting 4 times a year instead of just once. Also, at the annual qualification they shot up their factory, carry ammo and were issued new carry rounds upon qualification.

In '86-'87, the last two years before my retirement the then 8-9 year old M66s were starting to fail. Lots of timing and end-shake problems which could be fixed but my recollection is that at least 4 or 5 of them had cracked forcing cones and I believe there was one case of top strap flame cutting the new armorer thought was because of excessive barrel/cylinder gap.

For the first 5 years of their use the M66s never got inspected as the department didn't think it needed a full time armorer. Property officers handled issuing and records keeping. If someone had a problem they just sent the gun back to Smith & Wesson.

Dave

__________________
RSVN '69-'71
PCSD (Ret)

Well I'm no expert but I would say there is no reason to shoot .38spl+p in a .357. That ammo was developed to get greater volocity out of a .38 special, which you already have in a .357. The case is .1 inch shorter which gives the bullet a greater head start before it hits the forcing cone. It has also cleared the case by that time and I would think all that hot burning gas would be passing it and on into the barrel. I just would not do it. But if you have a train load of +P ammo and the only available gun is a .357 I guess you might.

My 19s and 65 are too precious to run full house magnums of any weight through them. For defense I use Buffalo Bore 158grain LSWCHPs in 38+P and for general carry and practice I shoot a 158gr LSWCGC sitting on 12.2 grains of 2400. A 158grain LSWC at a 1K fps is all I need a 357 to do. Need something heavier and hotter I will use a 44.

Smith will (probably) never build a K frame magnum again and I enjoy mine too much to wear them out. Parts are already becoming difficult to locate.

An interesting point of view. The most common round I fire, from my .38s and even my N frame 357s are the lowly 148 grain wadcutters. I've never had one stick in the barrel or fail to go downrange as intended. I don't save my magnums for magnum use.

Many of us fire what we have on hand, or what we have the most of that day.

__________________
Dick Burg

I agree with your view. I have two 66s and only once in a while I shoot 357s. And that is the 158gr that Smith and Wesson recommended. Alot of the forcing cone issues were related to light grain full house 357s with 125gr or less. Also if a person did not take care of the revolver and clean the forcing cone area the built up might also result in a cracked forcing cone. The K frame magnum was a really a model 15 modified to shoot 357s. The model 19 was meant to practice with 38s and shoot 357s for "business"
As far as shooting 158gr ammo a lot in the K frame I have only heard that the forcing cone problem is related to light grain ammo.

roaddog28

I shoot 158 gr. magnums most of the time from my 686 and 27. Rarely, maybe once a year or so, I'll fire 125 gr. magnums from one of those guns. I more or less exclusively shoot .38+P from my 66. I'm not concerned that 158 gr. magnums will damage the gun, but I've discovered that .38+Ps are much more controllable from the relatively light K frame than are 158 gr. magnums, with velocity that is about 80% of what I get from a magnum round. I can get the gun back on target much more quickly with +Ps than with magnum rounds.

I have shot a few thousand rounds of 8.6 gr. Unique with 158gr. jhp in magnum cases through my M66 with no problems whatsoever.
I used it for several years for IPSC.

A theory to help explain K frame Magnum forcing cone splits was voiced by a gunsmith and police armorer from the northwest that used to post a lot here. He thought, and I agree, that lead buildup in the forcing cone could raise pressures when jacketed ammo was then fired.

I have been a cop for almost 30 years and an active shooter longer than that. My department issued and mandated revolvers in .38 and .357 for the first 10 years of my career. Being cheap, lead reloads were practically always used for training and qualification.

Cops who are not active shooters can be somewhat lacadaisical about maintaining their handguns. Of the guys I worked with then, there was just one besides me that knew how to get the lead out of the barrel. A lot of guns were so bad the rifling was barely visible in the rear half of the barrel. As long as the chambers were clean, and the outside of the gun was clean, nobody seemed to care.

A friend who is a well-known pistolsmith has a Model 66 he believes he has shot 25,000 rounds or more of jacketed Magnum loads through. The 125 grainer was his favorite. He replaced the barrel eventually because the rear of the bore was so eroded, but the forcing cone never cracked.

The Model 66 was my choice during that time, and I liked to practice with what I carried. Most of the time I carried Federal 125 grain Magnums and had worked up a handload that duplicated it. I shot more than 1,000 rounds of 125's through several 66's (I had a 2-1/2, 3, 4 and 2 6 inchers) and well over 5,000 rounds through one of them, in addition to at least that many lead bullet loads (most cast and loaded by me, some department ammo) and other jacketed bullet weights, through my most shot Model 66. No cracked forcing cones, just some honest wear to the endshake and timing.

I believe that, if a shooter keeps his K frame Magnum barrel clean, especially removing lead before shooting jacketed bullets, the odds of him ever breakig the barrel are pretty slim. It may happen, but it probably won't.

I shoot 38, 38+p and +p+ in all my K Frames. I function fired them with 357 magnum ( and checked the point of impact) Thats it. I load my K frames with a load of choice from 38+P Speer. 38 hydra Shock 147 +P+ or the same in 357 magnum. I do plenty of shooting with magnums with my L frame.

I think most people on this website would agree the K frame is the best handling and best balance of all the steel frame Smith guns ever made. With that in mind the K frame was really a 38 special revolver. The finest 38 special ever made. The K frame magnum evolved from the target version of the model 10 which was called the model 15 combat masterpiece.The model 19 was named the combat magnum. It was designed to be carryed all day. Its alot lighter than a N frame. I have a N frame and I will tell anybody its not easy to carry it all day. The combat magnum is the best all around revolver ever produced by Smith and Wesson. It was meant to shoot 38 specials for practice and 357s for business. It is without a doubt the most carried revolver by LE in that time era. I believe it was never meant to shoot 357s all the time. I agree that if you stick to the 158gr magnums and take care of the revolver you probably won't split a forcing core. But the more magnums you shoot the greater chance the revolver will shoot loose or go out of time.
I believe if one is going shoot a lot of 357s in various grains and such the person should either buy a L frame or N frame. I don't see any use in subjecting the K frame to full house magnums. It was not designed to take the pressures. I believe shooting 140gr or higher with a velocity of between 1100 to 1300 fps should not be a problem once and awhile. I just would not make a habit of it. I have two K frame magnums, one L frame and on N frame. I just don't see the point in stressing the finest all around revolver Smith ever made to shoot magnums all the time. There are other options out there. I am using them.

Thanks,
roaddog28

Not trying to pick a fight but these kinds of sweeping, all inclusive pronouncements are just not true. I agree the K-frames are excellent 38 Specials but I prefer the N-frame for everything, including 38s in the Heavy Duty and Outdoorsmen. Oh, and I have carried an N-frame all day as a young deputy sheriff. If my department hadn't authorized semiautos I would have continued to carry an N-frame every day for years longer.

Dave

__________________
RSVN '69-'71
PCSD (Ret)

Saying that the K frames are the best is like saying one brand of car is the best, it will start a war that will never end, because there is no right answer.
what size of revolver frame and or caliber is a matter of opinion and personal taste.
there are only a few things that I would say are givens, 158gr. rounds are recommended buy the factory and there is to much data out there to dispute that.
there have been many cases of the hot lighter bullets causing problems on several different areas of a revolver.
each frame size and caliber has its bad points and good points, the best thing to do is use whats best for you.

[QUOTE=BUFF;1221611]
A friend who has a Model 66 believes, he has shot 25,000 rounds or more of jacketed Magnum loads through. The 125 grainer was his favorite, the forcing cone never cracked.
The Model 66 was my choice during that time, and I liked to practice with what I carried. Most of the time I carried Federal 125 grain Magnums and had worked up a handload that duplicated it. I shot more than 1,000 rounds of 125's through several 66's (I had a 2-1/2, 3, 4 and 2 6 inchers) and well over 5,000 rounds through one of them, in addition to at least that many lead bullet loads (most cast and loaded by me, some department ammo) and other jacketed bullet weights, through my most shot Model 66. No cracked forcing cones, just some honest wear to the endshake and timing.QUOTE]
************************************************************


Buff,
Back in the early to mid 70s I carried a 4" 66 and shot a wagon load of 125gr full house loads with nary a hiccup. After about 10m she got a good timing up and new springs...somebody is still shooting her I quess.

Your dead on about the lead build-up causing problems. As well as some guys I have work with were not 'gun men' they thought just wipin' off the outside of yer weapon was cleanin' it...

Like I've stated elsewhere, I'm not a collector, just a user.
And, I use 'em up a lot!

Su Amigo,
Dave

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

I have not worn out a K-frame shooting 158 grain magnums yet, but it has only been thirty eight years of shooting and carrying them. Based on what I read on gunboards.....I'm overdue.

My high time K-frame magnums are a 19-4 with just over 13,000 rounds, and a 66-2 with over 25,000. Who knows how many over that.....I'd guess ALOT as it is my IDPA gun. Most of the rounds through the 66-2 were the dreaded 125 grain 357's. Thats what the agency where she formerly resided issued for duty rounds. She is a little slow to carry up on one charge hole, but locks up like a bank vault. No endshake. The barrel rifling looks new. No problems to report.

The 19-4 had about 4000 357's through it, all 158 grain. It was my issued carry revolver for several years. Not one problem. No stretched top strap, no excessive flame cutting, no endshake.....no nothing. gun looks and performs like new. More accurate than my PC revolvers, yea, really.

I have one other high round count former LEO model 66. It is a high polished 66 no dash. The retired Chicago PD Detective who sold it to me told me that he had "run thousands of 125 grain 357 screamers through it". It has some erosion on the forcing cone and very slight endshake. Locks up tight and is very accurate. That same Detective was the first one to tell me that, "the problems are with the carbon steel 19's not the 66's".

For several years I posted here asking if anyone had ever heard of a 66 with a cracked forcing cone, let alone seen or owned one. Never got a response, until this year. One member posted a pic of his. Now in this thread I read of another "4 or 5". Not many rounds through them (comparitive to my guns) either. Interesting.

My experience with literally hundreds of examples of K-frame magnums, shooting far more often than the "average" shooter, over a lengthy period of time, and I have only seen one model 19 with a cracked forcing cone. It belonged to Panamajack from this forum. Never seen a cracked forcing cone, in person, on another K-frame magnum.

I won't say that it doesn't happen, it has. I too noticed that every photo on the internet I've seen of cracked forcing cones on K-frame magnums showed a poorly cleaned or maintained revolver. Lead build up visible. Carbon deposits around the frame and cone.

IMO this is not a widespread "issue" by any means. If it was there would be more of these seen and talked about. I notice that some of the same folks who get their panties in a bunch about this topic, on several different gunboards, are the same ones who proclaim, "internal locks are not an issue". Yet I've personally seen three revolvers locked up tight from those IL's in the last four years. Wonder which "problem" I think is not an issue?

Keep your K-frame magnums clean and lead free, and shoot all the 158 grain 357's you can afford. Do so, and your grandkids will be shooting and enjoying them. My 0.02, as always YMMV, void where prohibited, consult a physician if it lasts for more than four hours, ect, ect.

Oh, BTW for the inevitable poster who will chime in with "Yea K-frame magnums are weak, thats why they were replaced with the L-frame!!"
Please explain to the class why the K-frame magnums were produced alongside the L-frame magnums, side by side, for over twenty years?

Regards 18DAI.

Wow folks, good thread! Thank you

jb

18DAI, Thanks for putting this in perspective. I totally agree that proper lead removal is a very large issue in revolver cleaning. It probably does not get done as much as it should because it takes a little more work than just running a rod through the barrel and cylinders once and then a wipe down.
In any case I plan on having my 66s for a long time to come, actually I plan on my great grand kids having them for a long time.

In 1986 I broke the forcing cone in my 4" nickel 19. I was shooting 168 gr. cast bullets at the time. The barrel wasn't leaded up as I cleaned it after each shooting session. It cracked at the 6 o-clock position and locked the gun up. I purchased another barrel and swapped them out. I still have but don't shoot it muchany more. BTW I also have a 2 1/2 " 66 from the same era that has never given me a problem. Both of these guns live on cast bullets.

__________________
S&W Accumulator

Sorry Dave, i agree with roadhog - I have owned/shot/carried both K and N frame .357s and the Ks are faster to get into action and easier handling than the Ns. However you do have less felt recoil with the Ns.
Bill Jordan was right in preferring the M19 and his hands were as big as horse feet.

Very well put. These people that say you are more likely to get hit by lightning than have the IL fail.... a lot of people get hit by lightning, seems less have their forcing cone crack

I worked for Austin Behlert in the '80s in Union, NJ. An amateur gunsmith brought in a Model 13 in nickel which he installed a Model 10 barrel (something about his department banning .357's). The forcing cone was pealed back at 6 O'clock. He was shooting Rem 125 JHP's to qualify and the gun locked up. Never saw a problem with 19's or 66's.

To add to what others have said about keeping the forcing cone clean, I also think many of the reports of problems with Model 19s were cropping up during the time of the Super-Vel ultra hot loads being produced.

I have owned my 19-5 for 27 years, I haven't a clue how many rounds I have fired, including some sort of hot handloads, most of the time the bullet weights were 110 and 125 Gr, with a few 158 Gr loads thrown in from time to time, it's still going strong.

In 1970 my first S&Ws were a pair purchased together...an 18 and a 19... The 19 was given a diet of almost only one load... A Lyman/Thompson 155 grain gas checked bullet using AL7 powder at 1200 fps from the 4" barrel.

After 10K rounds it was returned to the factory where it was tightened up and nickeled. Went another 10K rounds and was then traded at a gun show in 1980. Only 6 rounds of .38 Special were ever fired through the gun.

I am not sure it the gun would have done as well with that many rounds of jacketed bullets through it.

Bob