I've been a shooter since about 1970. In 1972 I bought a new Model 19 with a 2 1/2 bbl and, although I sold it about 10 years later, in my head it's always been the gun I'd go to again - if I needed another .38spl revolver.

I realize that 1972 is a long time ago (for all of us) but let me tell you about my experiences with the 19. I shot the hell out of it, usually shooting .38spl with only a few magnums here and there. In those days I was interested in taking a course with Jeff Cooper and corresponded regularly with one of his "deputies." When he asked what revolver I had I replied the Model 19.

He specifically told me that the Model 19 was really not the .357 magnum revolver everyone thought it was. ".357 magnum in the Model 19 is to be shot seldom or not at all to avoid cracking the frame and/or forcing cone." I asked him if that was the general opinion there (i.e., Jeff Cooper's opinion) and he said "absolutely." Clearly, they weren't fan's of the K-frame shooting .357 magnum.

Thereafter, I followed his direction. Despite the fact that I wanted to master the .357 magnum, I shot 99% .38spl. Let me tell you, the Model 19s in the those days were just beautiful firearms; the size, the weight - and that bluing!

So it was like having an 8 cylinder car on a long road where the speed limit is 20mph; you simply couldn't use it for its intended purpose. I'm quite sure (no data of course) that the new Model 19 can probably shoot thousands of rounds of .357 magnum without difficulty, but those old beautiful ones? It was so long ago I can't even remember if that was one of the reasons I sold mine. Moreover, design- and finish-wise, the new one is a completely different animal. YMMV, of course.

Just some history from an older shooter.

Regards to all -

Rich

I never met Cooper but he seemed like a curmudgeon from the tales I have heard.
But if he saw a K frame or two cracking after blasting thousands of 357 in his training school Im sure he would report that they were all garbage.
Probably didnt help that the 586 was released right around the corner.

Mine shoots mostly 357 and keeps on ticking.

There is no doubt that is the truth about any original K frame 357. It is widely documented they wouldn’t handle thousands of rounds without issue.

__________________
-Matt

Not surprised at all about it and thanks for your response. Makes me suspect that an N-frame .357 magnum, while bigger and less desirable to carry for 12 hours, is really the most efficient platform for the .357 magnum round.

First revolver I ever bought was a S&W 19 w/ four inch barrel. Nickel plated. Gorgeous revolver. God only knows how many rounds it fired. Lot's of .38 Special and .357 Mag. Never had a problem out of it. After I graduated seminary, I gave that revolver to my father. It was the best present I could think of to give him. Just beautiful. One night he used it to stop a couple of fellows from making off with the Mercury outboard motor off his fishing boat. Happily he fired one round and they ran like rabbits. The motor was left in the back yard. Good for them my father wasn't really interested in hitting them. Later while working in the yard I found the spent bullet. Cool. Sincerely. bruce.

__________________
<><

1972 again...
About a month out of the academy I fired my my
Model19 with mags.
Second round locked her up.

Range LT. had it fixed in about 10 minutes and said..
"It's good....don't worry about it."
Well...I did worry about it.

Flipped it and bought a Model 27 two weeks later.

I believe if you do a search in the
S&W Forum you'll find several threads
explaining why the older Model 19s
failed. Chief culprit was the use of
lightweight magnums such as the
125 grainers.

__________________
Ubi Est Mea

I have owned easily 6 K frame Magnums over the years. Probably more. I was told by the factory to limit my .357 to occasional use and 158 grain only. I know there are some who have shot thousands of .357 in them, but there is no doubt Magnum ammo in a K frame was an issue. Why else would they have come up with an L frame? The whole point of the K frame was .357 without the N frame bulk. Why would they go heavier and make an L frame if they didn’t need to?

In my lifetime in firearms I have heard a lot of stories about certain guns. Most of the stories are circulated by guys who never owned that particular gun or have any experience with it.The guys who have owned and shot them usually report they are fine guns. It continues today.Dont listen to heresay

1972? Seems like only yesterday. That's the year I graduated from high school. 7 years later, I bought a used 6" M19-2; had to be from at least 1963 because that was when the 6" was introduced, but I didn't know any of that, or care. I also never heard anything about forcing cones cracking from any other shooters. Internet didn't exist, and I didn't read the gun magazines much. I was shooting on my prison unit's pistol team at PPC matches, and the go-to gun was the M19. Lots of guys were building them with heavier barrels and doing action jobs, and punching dime-size holes in a B27's X-ring from 25 yards with them. I was in over my head, couldn't afford the custom work, so after a year I traded it for a 4" M66-1 and moved to the service revolver class, where it was stock guns.

Now, at matches, everybody was practicing with and using wadcutters at the matches, so no real danger of over pressure rounds or extreme MV's, but the top shooters probably put 3-5K through their guns a year to be competitive, and I know I was doing around 1000. But I also shot a lot of 158 grain JHP magnum loads, because that's what we were issued for duty. For my own use, I liked the 125 JHP, so I shot a lot of those, too. Can't say it was in the thousands, but it was in the hundreds. Most of the other guys on the team did the same thing, and I don't remember anyone ever saying they'd blown their gun up or cracked the forcing cone, and I hadn't either. That was all in a 5 year period. I kept that M66-1 until 2005, and it quit getting wadcutters and got nothing but 125's mostly, all factory loaded ammo, never had any issues.

After selling the M66 (and boy did I regret it a year or so later). I finally found another M19 in 2014, a 4" dash-3. I still had not heard anything about forcing cone cracks, because I hadn't yet become an enthusiast about S&W's, learning about their history or "weaknesses", but that one started the ball rolling in that respect. I had already put a healthy dose of 125's through it (this time my own reloads) when I started reading on the forums about the forcing cones and shooting magnums in a K frame. I figured, if S&W stamped magnum on the barrel, it was good to go using them in the gun, but a kernel of doubt started forming. Now, every time I let loose with a cylinder full of 125's at the range, I'd inspect the forcing cone carefully when reloading, or cleaning the gun later. I started getting paranoid about 125's, so I finally quit using them and only loaded 158's, but was still using full power loads.

Now, I have a N frame .357 to use for the heavy stuff, and have relegated the M19 to downloaded 158's, and my "new" M66-1 snub also gets a reduced power magnum load. I guess it's better safe than sorry nowadays, since repair work on these classic guns is so expensive and parts difficult to find, but throughout my K-frame history and experience, I've still yet to have or see an issue with them. I'd love to know how many M19's/M65's/M66's were made up to around 1990, and of those, how many had a cracked forcing cone from any cause. I think it might be a smaller percentage than everyone thinks.

The S&W K-frame 357 Magnum's came about through a collaboration between S&W and famed BPS agent, Bill Jordan. At that time, practice by LEO's was with 38 Special ammo, 357 Magnum ammo was used sparingly and the standard load was a 158 grain bullet. The K-frame 357 held up in a reasonable fashion. As departments transitioned to practicing and qualifying with duty ammo and the introduction of the lightweight 110 and 125 grain loads powered by colloidal ball powders, the K-frame 357 did show its weakness, primarily the portion of the forcing cone that was milled away for crane clearance.

The N-frame and the L-frame have full diameter forcing cones and are less prone to cracking. The current production K-frame 357's have been redesigned so as to have full diameter forcing cones. I think the current production K-frame 357's will hold up much better with a diet of 357 Magnum ammo.

I do have a Model 19-3 and I stopped shooting 110 and 125 grain full power magnum ammo when I noticed erosion at the edge of its forcing cone.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

This link was shared with me in a thread where I asked where to start with buying a S&W revolver and the model 19 got a lot of recommendations. Its by an old police armorer on the differences between the old 19 and the new 19 with insights on where they used to break. I found it well worth my time.
The new S&W Model 19 Classic ~ A S&W Armorer's Review - YouTube

__________________
Who watches the watchers?

The model 19 was designed in the early 1950s as a police revolver that was easier/lighter to carry than the N-frame. "carried a lot; shot a little"

Most dept's still carried .38 special ammo .... almost all qualified with .38 special .... some carried .357 on duty (more State Police or Highway Patrols and Sheriffs west of the Mississippi and south of the Mason Dixon line . In those days you could choose any .357 round and it was a 158gr bullet.

The 70s brought on a revolution in ammo design moving toward lighter faster 125 and 110 grain ammo Which was hard on the K-frame magnums with its flat bottom forcing cone. Causing some to crack.

Is it an urban legend? NO Did it/will it happen to every 19/66 No.

Ranks up there with the cracked Beretta slides in the 80s by SEALS using
thousands of rounds of Submachine gun ammo

I regularly carry a 3" 66...... in urban environments I load 125gr +P .38 hollow points ...... out it Penn's Woods 158 gr soft points.

Remember No handgun round is a magic laser .....double tap

The Revolver Guy has an recent article with information from one of the engineers behind the L-frame, and it reveals something I had never heard before. During the 19-3 (and no-dash 66), period, the gas ring was moved from the cylinder to the yoke for a while. The change required more material to be machined off of the famous barrel flat that is considered to be the weakest point on those guns. It was also this period that saw an increase in the use of magnums for Law Enforcement training AND a shift towards use of lighter bullets like the 125 grain JHP in .357.

I think most of us knew about the last two factors, but the change in the barrel flat was new to me. The poor Combat Magnum got a triple whammy!

The Smith & Wesson L-Frame Story - RevolverGuy.Com

I can’t recall exactly when I bought my original Model 19. It’s a -3 version, purchased new, and I still have it. It was probably acquired in the mid-70s. Back then, it seems everyone understood what the gun was all about. I don’t think anyone I knew looked at it as a full-time .357. Everyone shot mostly .38s and only occasionally used .357s, just as the gun was designed to do. It’s appeal was in its compact design and lightweight. (And back then almost all factory .357s were 158-grain, Super Vels being the notable exception.) When, thirty years later, I started reading here about all the troubles with the Model 19 and how people were using them, my thoughts were, “No wonder!”

I can’t say I haven’t seen a cracked Model 19. I think I’ve seen two or three. By far the majority of the 19s I have been around did exactly what they were designed to do. I’d like to try one of the new ones, but my eyes, tuned into guns from the 60s and 70s, haven’t adapted to the looks of the new production guns, yet. They may be tough, but to me they are not exactly beauty queens.

The K frame 357's were the main stay of LE when I came on the job and being the Range Master, I seen a lot of them used and abused but never seen one cracked at the forcing cone or shot loose. I own several 19s today including my first gun, a 6 inch 19 and they all shoot and function fine.
The average shooter will never shoot their guns enough to wear them out.

I was going to post but I see that you quoted my post on this topic already, thanks. It winds me up a little when people say it’s hearsay or urban legend, since it happened to me not once but twice.

Anyway I don’t hold a grudge since I recently bought a nice 6” mod 19-3 from 1970 and a 1972 4” mod 66

And I still have that 6” mod 66-3 from 1988

But to me they’re .38 special guns now

I only met him once at a SHOT Show where he was signing autographs on his book along with his daughter...To say the least, he was a character......Ben

__________________
Cogito, ergo BOOM!...

Have shot Thousands of 357s in my Blue 19 that I bought in Guam.
That includes a lot of Handloads.
I was mostly following the Gospel of Elmer, heavy Bullets.
When I cast bullets, I had Elmer’s 150, 160 and 174 Grain Molds.
Loaded so much 2400 that I saw it laying on the bench.
Later, took that 19 to SEA.
Went lightweight! Carried 130 Grain Issued Ammo.
That Gun is Retired. It’s done it’s Duty!
I have plenty of other guns to shoot.

Attached Images

F70C7783-E42A-4114-845D-B57E80D10C7D.jpg (47.8 KB, 109 views)

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

Thousands of .357 Magnum rounds shot through this 19-3 including some scary hot reloads from friends. Still as smooth and accurate as day one.

I know it's a model 19 because it says so on the buttplate..

It still gets shot a lot..with full power rounds. It ain't scared and neither am I.

Attached Images

	IMG_4328.jpg (126.9 KB, 163 views)
	IMG_4329.jpg (73.3 KB, 193 views)

I had a six inch 19 in the mid 70s,that was my main shooter. Magnum Smiths were very hard to find at that time,you know. Well, I loaded em hot back them. Lost count of how many thousand rounds went through it,but no damage to report

I too have a Model 19 that has seen its share of .357 magnums, factory and handload. Again the bulk of those have been heavy bullets, like the 358429. No cracks.

I tried a few of the fire breathing 125 grain screamers when our local PD went to them. The firearms instructor there was big "train like you fight" proponent and all their practice and range qualification was done with that ammo. No powder puff wadcutters on his range.

Seems to me that was about the time they saw some problems. Within a couple of years, he retired and the department decided the 9mm was the "finger of death" and went with some flavor of Glock.

I still think the widespread use of the hot 125 grain .357 ammo that became popular around the late Seventies damaged more revolvers than the classic 158 grain SWC loads did.

I don't understand the need some have to fire only the most powerful rounds possible from a given firearm, when often a more moderate round is more effective for a given purpose. An example is full house .357 magnums out of a 2 inch J frame. Not the most efficient use of powder. The K frame magnums were never designed for the exclusive use of magnum ammo and never for the later light weight high velocity loads. I still think it was an excellent duty weapon compromise.

My 19-3 gets .38 158's....an old buddys brother bought a new 66 back in the day and the only rounds it shot were hot and hotter 357's...good thing for him, you could easily still find barrels when it cracked.....no fault of the gun...

Forum member Nyeti has posted elsewhere his experiences with K, L, and N frames based on a lot of rounds downrange. My recollection is that he largely restricts his K frames to shooting .38s. I do too, for many reasons - but I appreciate the fact that I can shoot .357s out of my M66 if I find it to be of value to do so.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

The K-frames were terrible! I have a service of taking them off peoples hands; I’ll even throw a few bucks your way if they are really nice and the frames aren’t all cracked up and the forcing cones destroyed.

Just kidding…. In 50 years of shooting I’ve never had a problem with a K-frame. Of course I’m sure, like with anything mechanical, there have been problems with some.

I have posted this before. 1986. Shooting my 4" nickel 19 with 150 gr cast reloads. forcing cone split and locked up the gun. I bought a replacement barrel. Made frame blocks and changed it out. Hardest part of the job was getting the barrel pin out. Still got it. Still shoot it......some.
BTW: My 66 from that era(that I still have) has never given any problems.

Attached Images

	100_1202.jpg (97.8 KB, 129 views)
	100_1203.jpg (78.7 KB, 143 views)

__________________
S&W Accumulator

I guess this is one of those reoccurring topics. Anyhow, the departments I was with, we practiced with 38s. For quals, if you wanted to carry 38s you qualified with 38s and had numerous trys. If you wanted to carry mags you got one try. If you failed you had to qualify with 38s, unless of course you were high brass, in which case some accommodation would be made. Overall it seemed mostly reasonable.

My first duty revolvers were Colt Trooper MKIII's and then the S&W M66, but our duty loads were always .38 Spl. +P.
Now, being young, a gun geek and reloader, I ran lots of magnums of all bullet weights through my 66 and it never seemed to balk.

- Now, I'm wondering how much internet traffic could win the topic of most discussed? - M19's forcing cone cracking or the whole 'Can my .38 shoot +P's?
It may very well be a toss-up.

__________________
Ret'd LEO
SWCA #2275

That is exactly the way I understand it too, the 125 grain loads caused the majority of the issues. Not to say the others won't cause problems but the 125 gr. seem to be the biggest culprit.

Lots of contenders for "most discussed" threads. Results are always the same and always predictable. Nothing changes. Some participants have much experience and know what they're talking, some have little experience which isn't worth much, some have no experience but they are Internet-educated on the subject; again, not worth much, while others have no knowledge of the subject matter and won't ever, but can't pass up the competitive opportunity to argue a point.

As for bullet weights in a .357 Magnum (or .38 Special) revolver, why use any weight other than what the cartridge was designed for - 158 grains? The only real disadvantage I can see is the heavier bullet will cause slightly greater recoil than a lighter bullet, something easily managed with practice.

Will run a distant second to "What caliber for bear?"

__________________
Bill

I think the forcing cone on the Python isnt much stouter than the 19s. Is there a similar problem with Pythons?

Colt forcing cones have been known to crack, as have forcing cones on Rugers. From the pictures I've seen, regardless of which maker or model of revolver, they all significant erosion of the forcing cone. I'm talking about erosion that extends to about half the thickness of the forcing cone. When you get to that degree of erosion with the K-frame S&W, you are looking at a very thin bit of uneroded steel at the bottom of the forcing cone.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Forcing cone issues aside, the M19 was to give Cops 357 mag power in a package that was sensible to carry all day. The magnum loads are hard on them regardless of bullet weight. It’s the old trade off, less weight for less durability. The bulk of these revolvers owned by the public never are shot enough to make this a factor. Only guys that shoot magnum loads are cops and hunters.

How about new j frame magnums. Thinner cone than 19/66? Cone cracking can occur but I suspect greatly overstated on the internet

With today's ammo prices and availability, all of my K-frames are likely safe........

Sent from my LGMP260 using Tapatalk

+1. I agree, my agency went to the 38 Special +P+ based on CHP’s research (CHP even made a training film). We carried Model 28’s at the time. I don’t remember any failures with the round.

Because its fun.

Wouldn't that be like owing a really fast car and never holding the pedal to the floor??

I had two 19-2s, a 4" and a 6".

For some reason I didn't cared for the 4" and sold the 6" ANIB.

I love my 6" 66-1 that has had 1000s of .357s go down the barrel.

I thought the problem with the 19s forcing cone was caused by shooting early extremely hot LE loads??

__________________
Kenny
Endeavor to persevere.

As with other posters, my first service weapon in civilian LE was a blue 19, I qualified with 38 158 gr but carried and shot on my own the red hot SuperVel 357. That forcing cone cracked. I found a deal on a nickel 19, same course of events. Same result. Duh!!!. I changed agencies to the US Marshal Service and got a 2.5 inch Model 66-1. The ejector rod would not reliably eject 357. Started shooting 38+p 158 gr. lead SWCHP. A family change forced me to sell most of my guns. My 66-1 went to another LEO and I told him what I had found out about ammo. I recently found and reacquired my old 66-1. No forcing cone damage and it still loves 38+P lead SWCHP. Although at 69 yrs old, its more fun to shoot standard power 38. In between I've owned L and N frames, magically both gain weight over the course of a shift !!!! The above posters who said the 19 & 66 were meant to be carried a lot, shot a lot with 38s and sparingly with Magnums are correct. Further, they make great 38+P guns. To those posters who have shot 1000s of 357 125 gr magnums through their K frame older 19 & 66s with no damage, I say even a blind hog finds an acorn sometimes !!!

I have had at least a half dozen K-frame 357's over quite a few years . They were stamped on the side of the barrel " 357 magnum " so that is what they all have gotten . It didn't say , " shoot 38 special most of the time and 357 sparingly " !!! Most of my rounds consist of either the Keith 173 gr swc (crimped in the crimp groove in 357 case ) or a cast 180 gr bullet . Most of the " Keith " bullet loads consist of 7.0 grs of Unique or 13.5 grs of 2400 . My 180 gr cast loads are always the same , 13.5 grs of H-110 , which is a max load using current load data . I have never and never will shoot 125 gr bullets in my 357's of any make or model . I have never cracked a forcing cone and never shot one " loose " . I clean my guns after each range session , thoroughly . Regards Paul

The problem was the 125 grain .357 rounds caused erosion of the forcing cone and some M19s suffered cracked forcing cones.

In the past, police departments trained with .38 specials, but then the officers loaded up with magnum rounds. A number of departments went to "qualify with your duty ammo" and in addition, started shooting more throughout the year, as opposed to a single yearly qualification.

Shooting all of this light bulleted ammo caused some M19s to have cracked cones.

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

I never shot 125 gr bullets at anytime. See my post. At the time all shot in all my 357's were cast bullet reloads at about 3/4 throttle..........Stuff happens......

__________________
S&W Accumulator

Mike SC , in your case you just got a bad barrel . Probably a hairline fracture in the forcing cone area causing it to split . It had nothing to do with your loads , in my opinion . Regards Paul

This is the 66-1 that my brother carried his first 10 years in LE.

I am by no means a gun expert but I'm quite sure that my brother BUFF was.

This is his post here in the forum back on February 16th 2016.

"As regards flame cutting, I quit believing it to be a real problem a long time ago. I carried a 6 inch Model 66 as my duty weapon for about 10 years. As a gun nut, I practiced a lot with it, and for most of that time, I used 125 grain .357's in it. It was either Federal factory or my handload of Sierra, Speer or Hornaday 125's and W-296 powder. Supposedly, the flamethrower of ammunition choices.

As expected, the gun loosened up some and the forcing cone shows some wear, but while the topstrap is marked, the mark never got deeper after becoming noticeable. Not a strength issue.

Don't worry about it."

In another one of his posts he commented that he put at least 100 practice rounds a month thru it.

This one has been fired a lot.

I know it happens but not to all of them.

__________________
Kenny
Endeavor to persevere.

I have two 19s a 6" CHP Commemorative (19-4, 1979) and a 4" (19, 1958). I've put thousands of .38 special rounds through both of them and I have to admit, not too many .357s mainly because I didn't have a need to. They're both very accurate revolvers and have served me well.

__________________
Ed

...was that cutout at the bottom of the forcing cone that had a tendency to crack. Hot, 125 gr bullet loads were blamed for most of the trouble. I gathered that 158 to 180 grain bullets were best suited for it. Reloading was a plus because you can load less than full power but still considerably more powerful than a .38, probably with little worry of the gun holding up. A load like the 12.5 grains of 2400 with a 158 grain bullet would be great.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Keep most loads below 30000 psi and probably much less likelihood of problems . You can still get very good performance at that level. That’s what I do but I am a Handloader

Ball powders like H-110/W296 are significant factors in erosion.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA