Myth? Shooting .357 Exclusively

[Rolf]

I just heard what I thought to be not only absurd but illogical.
This was passed on by an "instructor" to a buddy of mine who is getting into guns now.

"Shooting .357's exclusively will damage your gun eventually".

I have a new Model 27 N-Frame .357 with the 6-1/2" barrel (bright blue/walnut grips) which I bought JUST for shooting .357. For me, that's what makes this gun SO much fun!

Myth? Fact?

[DeadWhiteGoose]

Shooting anything out of any gun will "damage" it "eventually". It's one of those theories that's really easy to say because it's true to a degree

[Pizza Bob]

Constant use of magnum rounds will accelerate the normal wear & tear on a gun. Your "instructor's" statement was a little disingenuous. You have one of the most heavy duty firearms, for use in that caliber, that you can buy. You will be passing it down to future generations.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

[Decker]

N-frames are used for .44mag as well, so I highly doubt that any lil' 'ol .357mag is going to tear up a model 27.

What he is probably referring to is the very true history of the Model 19's which are K frames, and do loosen up over time if you shoot lots of full house .357 through them.

I bought my Model 19 brand new in the early 70's, and it is the reason I got into reloading.
I wanted to stay with .357, but I also wanted to tone it down some. So I don't shoot .38 out of it, I shoot .357's that are loaded near the bottom of whatever powder recipe I use that day.

Again, a Model 27 can handle .357 as much as you want to put through it.
General maintenance and normal wear, however, is still to be dealt with. Even shooting .38spec through it exclusively will loosen things up over time, so just keep it maintained and clean and watch for any timing issues that may or may not show up in the future.
That goes for all revolvers of all calibers.

[HarrishMasher]

Shoot enough rounds through any gun of any caliber and it will break or wear out the parts on the gun. Use any mechanical device long enough and it will break or wear out. I don't know how else to say this but, DUH!

And yes of course shooting 357 will wear your gun out faster than shooting 38s. Again, DUH!

How many rounds? Probably more than you will ever shoot in your lifetime through your S&W. But you may well break a part or spring during your lifetime of regular shooting. That would not surprise me. But shoot it to the point it can not be made serviceable again? I don't think that is going to happen. I haven't seen many of those. Seen some pretty neglected guns though.

[sellersm]

Hmmm, I make up some .357 magnum loads that are as light, or lighter, than .38 special! I'm guessing my revolver will outlast me...

As has been said, "DUH!".

You were correct to consider this "advice" to be 'absurd and illogical'!

[Officerblue]

My model 64 has a staggering half a million rounds. My Colt King Cobra has 50,000+ rounds at 70% magnum loads but I have a 629 44magnum with 100,000 rounds at 95% magnum loads. To "break" a revolver rated for magnum loads would take forever. On a good weekend my family will go through a couple thousand rounds in a 8-10 hours of family shooting. Take care of your guns and they will take care of you.
Enjoy

[sw282]

Rolf---0ver on the 'Cast Boolits' forum theres a thread entitled
''75,000 rds in my Model 27'' by 'texas fly boy'... 27 is an N frame gun too. Now the thread is a few years old, but as far as l know that 27 is STILL going strong.. The thread shows quite a few close up pix of the gun too. l don't think l would would worry about your 27 biting the dust too soon...
lf yours is a newer 27 its ''Guaranteed for LIFE'' by the factory..

btw.. l think 'texas fly boy' is a member of this forum

[Rolf]

I guess my initial knee-jerk reaction was, if a gun is designed around a particular caliber then it should be able to handle it.

An analogy would be, a car engine designed to run on diesel will be build more robust in order to take the higher compression than a gas engine modified to run on diesel.

[reddog81]

You will spend much more in ammo or reloading components than you spent on the gun if you shoot it enough to break it. (assuming no defective parts).

For example 50,000 rounds of .357 @.$50 a piece is going to cost you $25,000. If you shoot that much you should be able to afford a new gun at that point...

[tug700]

Yes, regarding a Smith model 19. Bill Jordan was a major contributor in the design of the Model 19. Bill said a "model 19 is designed to be carried a lot and shot a little." The consensus of the time was to practice with regular 38 special rounds and carry magnums. Later, the consensus was to avoid the high veloicy 125 grain magnum.

[dipperdave]

Your Model 27 will handle .357 magnum loads quite nicely and thousands of them. As others have mentioned, the N frame handles more powerful calibers just fine.

Shoot your Model 27 and enjoy it.

[Nightowl]

Damage is a lot different that normal wear that will take place when shooting any gun. Heavy loads will produce wear faster than light loads on some parts. From my experience, the two most common wear issues are endshake and wear on the ratchets. Endshake is a five minute repair for someone who knows how to do it and has the tools. Timing issues are mostly fixed with a new, wider hand. Neither repair is expensive. Finding a gunsmith or sending it in is the expensive part. As referenced, the expense of a couple boxes of .357 should cover most repairs. Happy shooting. By the way, the 27 is the Cadillac of Smiths, has been around for 80 years and is still going strong in the 627 iteration.

[05CarbonDRZ]

Originally Posted by tug700

Yes, regarding a Smith model 19. Bill Jordan was a major contributor in the design of the Model 19. Bill said a "model 19 is designed to be carried a lot and carried a little." The consensus of the time was to practice with regular 38 special rounds and carry magnums. Later, the consensus was to avoid the high veloicy 125 grain magnum.

I think you meant "Carried a lot and FIRED a Little"

[gen3guy]

Yes. Shooting .357s exclusively will eventually wear out that model 27. You will be long gone when that happens.

[Engine49guy]

While you didnt mention which .357 model your friend was using your Model 27 utilizes the N frame which IIRC was originally built for .44 and .45 calibers sometime around the turn of the century.

When the predecessor to the .357 Mag known as the ".38-44 HD" was introduced around 1931 S&W's N frame was their most robust frame and a logical choice,
The .357 "Registered Magnum" appears in 1935 and is offered in the "N" frame as well with the addition of recessed chambers and raised checkered barrel rib.

FF to 1955 the new .357 Combat Magnum was engineered on an improved stronger K Magnum frame as an alternative to the heavier N frame,
IIRC while fine with 148 grain ammo damaged forcing cones at the 6 O clock position appear a few years later and are attributed to newer HV 125 grain loads.

Around 1980 the "L" frame is introduced sized right between the K and N frames and essentially purpose built for the .357 Magnum .

Interestingly after the L frame S&W engineered a J frame .357 as well as a J frame .357 airweight .

This is just meant to demonstrate that all S&W .357 frames are not created equal,

The story: years ago while on a fire engine apparatus committee the Detroit Diesel rep asked me "How much HP do you want in your new motors ?"
Taken by surprise I said "What do you mean ?" we want the series 60.... "Yes but we can build them with 400 , 500, 600 HP...basicly its what YOU want"....
Surprised again I asked "Wouldnt we want more HP ? " remembering that if enough is good more is better and too much usually just about right...
"Well the higher the HP the shorter the service life".....
This theory basicly applies to all machines as well as guns,
The smaller , lighter and more powerful they are the shorter the service life .

[shawn mccarver]

Don't believe everything you hear at the "LGS" or from the "range officer" or CCW "instructor."

[BB57]

As noted the frame makes a difference.

An N frame will last the practical equivalent of forever.

A K frame, like the Model 19 won't tolerate nearly as many .357 rounds as an N frame, due to the reduction in metal in the frame and a forcing cone that is relieved at the bottom and prone to stress cracks.

(However, the Ruger Security/Speed/Police Six series revolvers with just 4 more ounces of steel in the frame and a heavier forcing cone also appear to last essentially forever with a steady diet of .357 Magnums.)

J Magnum frame .357s will also shoot themselves loose with high round counts of .357s, but S&W seems to have successfully bet that most owners will break before the pistol and self limit the number of fuel bore .357s they put through a J Magnum frame revolver.

[Mark6005]

Officerblue am I correctly reading 500,000 rounds from your m64? Very impressive as I have one purchased through a state police training center. said to have several thousand thru it but the condition didn't deter me at all. It was very well maintained and I've seen many guns in poor condition privately owned. I assume part of the training was cleaning maintaining etc. I was told by a training officer every 2 years the guns were gone thru and rebuilt as needed. I have no reason to doubt that as it functions as new but the wood stocks have been replaced with hogues. An inexpensive Smith example but truly a fine shooting revolver.

[g8rb8]

Originally Posted by Rolf

...........

"Shooting .357's exclusively will damage your gun eventually".

....

That's like saying "constant living eventually leads to death."

Any object that moves, encounters friction, encounters weather or anything else that acts upon it will eventually sustain wear (damage). It's all just a matter of degree.

[ClayCow]

So confused by your instructors statement of pointing out the obvious. Breathing will eventually lead to death...ok

[Rolf]

OP here - The ammo of choice for me is the Federal American Eagle 158gr JSP. I really like it and hopefully this is an easy one for my 27 to digest. I've seen comments regarding 125gr but not 158.

[Dave Lively]

Originally Posted by Rolf

An analogy would be, a car engine designed to run on diesel will be build more robust in order to take the higher compression than a gas engine modified to run on diesel.

I take it you are you too young to remember the diesel engine cars GM made in the late 70s or early 80s. They apparently just took all the old high compression parts left over from before emission regulations and made notoriously unreliable and short lived diesels from them to cash in on what was something of a fad.

I always heard the model 19 was really a good 38 special that could also fire magnums on occasion. But a steady diet of thousands of full power .357s would wear them out. Your gun is built on a stronger frame and should be fine.

I think there is a lot to be said for a lighter gun if you are not going to shoot mostly magnums. That is what I do with .44s. I really like my S&W 69 but I normally shoot .44 specials and a load that is somewhere between a stout special and a weak magnum. I never shoot more than a cylinder or two of full power magnums in a range session but wanted a gun that can handle them for when I carry the gun while in the woods. If I was going to shoot nothing but magnums I would have bought a heavier but stronger gun like you did with your 27.

[Motor1]

Originally Posted by Rolf

I guess my initial knee-jerk reaction was, if a gun is designed around a particular caliber then it should be able to handle it.

An analogy would be, a car engine designed to run on diesel will be build more robust in order to take the higher compression than a gas engine modified to run on diesel.

Maybe you misread it. It seems to me he got the analogy correct. But in this case the gas engine converted to diesel would be the model 19.

My understanding was the model 19 was designed for the state police. It was a light weight service pistol with the ability to shoot the high performance .357 magnum cartridge.

Practice shooting was done with .38 special ammo.

A steady diet of full power .357 will and did loosen up the model 19. A very good friend used to shoot silhouette with his model 19. He was fully aware of its limitations but shot it too well to give it up. I'm pretty sure he had it rebuilt by S&W twice in about a 10 year span.

The heavier M27 should be fine.

Motor

[Rolf]

Originally Posted by Dave Lively

I take it you are you too young to remember the diesel engine cars GM made in the late 70s or early 80s.

Well no, I was born in 1955 and I do recall those cars. That was my point.
I also remember the odd/even days that determined when you could buy gas.

[flagman1776]

I'd have no worry about excessive wear on an N frame 357 (M27, 28 & more recent SS versions). Your M27 will outlive you.
The late Col Jeff Cooper stated in his book "Cooper on Handguns" that someone who trained with him shot exclussively full 357s through his lighter K framed service guns. It did accellerate wear (timing) so the person maintained 3 guns. One in service, one as backup, & one in the shop being tuned up as necessary. But it was necessary for that individual to maintain the high state of readiness his profession required.

[hoc9sw]

My Security Six has outlived my AC joints. I wouldn't worry too much about it, just maintain it like you care to keep it.

[Dr Denby]

My 27-2 will shoot any thing I put into it.

It is still as tight as ever after 30 years and the barrel just as purty

[BigBill]

Originally Posted by hoc9sw

My Security Six has outlived my AC joints. I wouldn't worry too much about it, just maintain it like you care to keep it.

My '76 security six has over eating a steady diet of standard Magnum loads and stout Magnum loads with leadcast inbetween.
Never any throat wear on my Rugers.

I found it useless to shoot jacketed bullets all the time at paper. I load leadcast now for the range. After the shoot I practice with half a box of jacketed just 25rds.

[Bajadoc]

I wish I can get out and shoot enough to wear out my guns. I'm trying.

[jstanfield103]

Ok, so I am now curious because no one has mentioned the L frames on a steady diet of 357

[kbm6893]

I wish there was some qualifications an "instructor" had to possess to become one. Because I've heard some wacky stuff come out of instructors mouths. "A safety will get you killed". "You don't even need to aim a shotgun. The spray will get him".

And gullible new shooters don't know any better so they just repeat it as if it was gospel.

[BB57]

Originally Posted by kbm6893

I wish there was some qualifications an "instructor" had to possess to become one. Because I've heard some wacky stuff come out of instructors mouths. "A safety will get you killed". "You don't even need to aim a shotgun. The spray will get him".

And gullible new shooters don't know any better so they just repeat it as if it was gospel.

Apparently all you need is an instructor belt, the rest of the "operator" wardrobe and maybe a beard to be an "instructor".

Sadly, being an instructor today has little to do with any shooting related knowledge, skills or ability, nor does it have much to do with being able to actually impart that knowledge, skill and ability to others in an effective and efficient manner.

As of the gullible new shooters - I've found that it's increasingly common today for people who buy into the "authority" method of knowing something - the person knows it because someone they regard as an authority said it.

That's the least sophisticated and the least rigorous way of knowing something, but it requires a lot less work or critical thinking ability than the more rigorous methods such as the logic, the scientific method (observation and testing), or philosophy.

The internet certainly doesn't help as someone, for example, can claim they've put 10,000 rounds of .357 Magnum though their K-frame, when the actual total might be closer to 5,000 rounds total with a large percentage of the rounds being .38 Specials or .38 special equivalent loads in a .357 case, and/or many of those .357 loads may have been more than .38 +P but still far less than full power loads. It's not that people lie exactly, they just often mis-remember, or leave out facts they don't think are pertinent. But once it's out there on the internet, it becomes truth, especially if it's repeated a lot, because people buy into the logical fallacy that if they hear something a lot it must be true.

[kbm6893]

Originally Posted by BB57

Apparently all you need is an instructor belt, the rest of the "operator" wardrobe and maybe a beard to be an "instructor".

Sadly, being an instructor today has little to do with any shooting related knowledge, skills or ability, nor does it have much to do with being able to actually impart that knowledge, skill and ability to others in an effective and efficient manner.

As of the gullible new shooters - I've found that it's increasingly common today for people who buy into the "authority" method of knowing something - the person knows it because someone they regard as an authority said it.

That's the least sophisticated and the least rigorous way of knowing something, but it requires a lot less work or critical thinking ability than the more rigorous methods such as the logic, the scientific method (observation and testing), or philosophy.

The internet certainly doesn't help as someone, for example, can claim they've put 10,000 rounds of .357 Magnum though their K-frame, when the actual total might be closer to 5,000 rounds total with a large percentage of the rounds being .38 Specials or .38 special equivalent loads in a .357 case, and/or many of those .357 loads may have been more than .38 +P but still far less than full power loads. It's not that people lie exactly, they just often mis-remember, or leave out facts they don't think are pertinent. But once it's out there on the internet, it becomes truth, especially if it's repeated a lot, because people buy into the logical fallacy that if they hear something a lot it must be true.

Exactly. There was another guy on another forum whose instructor told him to carry his beretta px4 with the hammer back on a live round and safety off. Said it was no different than a Glock and the longer DA trigger could get him killed and it would be easier to make a head shot with the hammer back. So this guy is walking around for like 3 months with his gun like that!

[dr. K]

Smith built it chambered in .357 and guaranteed they'd fix it for as long as you own it. I'd say use it for what you bought it for, because that's what it's designed for. If something goes wrong, call Smith. They will keep up their end of the deal. Also maybe ask your "instructor" how many .357 revolvers he/ she has personally worn out from using them as they were designed to be used. I imagine you'd hear a "well, uh..." before a bunch of mumbling and a quick change of subject.