S&W Chiefs Special 60-7 (.38 Spl., stainless steel) and +P ammo.

Zeabed

Active member
Joined
Jun 9, 2002
Messages
27
Reaction score
27
I carry a 60-7 in .38 Special with +P factory loads. It was my understanding that this generation of 60s can handle +P loads. But now and then I read arguments to the contrary.

I remember that someone mentioned something about the thickness of the steel as a build characteristic of a +P-able Chiefs Special. The point made sense to me, but my 60-7 is not as thick as prescribed in that particular section. Do you think there's any definitive way of putting this controversy to rest?
 
1. It’s generally accepted that any numbered S&W model (e.g. 60) can handle +P.

2. 60-7’s have an additional heat-treating over earlier models, and are stronger.

3. Standards have eroded such that many modern +P’s are really just what used to be a standard load back when.

4. People still keep worrying about it.

So no, I don’t think there’s any way to solve this controversy.
 
1. It’s generally accepted that any numbered S&W model (e.g. 60) can handle +P.

2. 60-7’s have an additional heat-treating over earlier models, and are stronger.

3. Standards have eroded such that many modern +P’s are really just what used to be a standard load back when.

4. People still keep worrying about it.

So no, I don’t think there’s any way to solve this controversy.

Thanks for confirming that. I'd add that "generally accepted" beliefs have declined in reliability in recent years, at least in my estimation. I've found arguments pro and con, all based on generally accepted views on this issue. Nothing definitive from S&W itself. Thanks for your kind reply and I agree that this controversy will remain unresolved. Btw, my carry ammo is 1990s vintage +P for LE use, in all its pristine hotness of old.
 
Last edited:
I don't mean to hijack the thread, but reading it brought a question to my mind concerning the Model 36 (no dash) I just acquired. I've read the early J frames did not have heat treated cylinders and shouldn't be fed +P.
mikerjf commented above that model number S&W's can handle +P.
I don't plan to shoot +P anyway, just curious when the heat treating became standard on the J's.
 
I've shot plenty of +P including some older loads through my 60-3. Never an issue and that gun times perfectly and locks up like the proverbial vault.
I don't make a habit out of it and shoot mostly .38 at the range, but wouldn't hesitate to put some +P though it.
 
I don't mean to hijack the thread, but reading it brought a question to my mind concerning the Model 36 (no dash) I just acquired. I've read the early J frames did not have heat treated cylinders and shouldn't be fed +P.
mikerjf commented above that model number S&W's can handle +P.
I don't plan to shoot +P anyway, just curious when the heat treating became standard on the J's.


Reading St. Elmer's writings on the then brand new Baby Chief and .38-44 loads took away any credence I'd ever give someone claiming J-Frames ever couldn't handle +P ammo.
 
I don't mean to hijack the thread, but reading it brought a question to my mind concerning the Model 36 (no dash) I just acquired. I've read the early J frames did not have heat treated cylinders and shouldn't be fed +P.
mikerjf commented above that model number S&W's can handle +P.
I don't plan to shoot +P anyway, just curious when the heat treating became standard on the J's.

Actually it's a very good point. Iirc, S&W began numbering its models in 1957-58 (?). I don't think that they were heat-treated that early in the game for +P worthiness, specifically. Then again, if regular .38 Spl loads back in the day were hotter than today's version of the +P, it's all almost a moot point.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top