44 Mag in a LH M624?

[Token]

Nope. Not thinner. Look at a 44 nag mtn gun.

Was just going to mention that, doesn't the 629 Mountain Gun use a slim profile 625 barrel?

I am certainly not qualified to recommend action on such mechanics and materials issues, but I would think the barrel of a 624 would not be the weak point when considering Magnum use. Personally, I would not do it, but I would think the cylinder and maybe the frame would be of larger concern.

On the plus side (with regards to an over bored cylinder), I do some light .44 Mag loads. .44 Mag brass that I load to .44 Special power levels for target and plinking use. After I have loaded .44 Mag brass a few times I take it out of the full house line-up and move it to "Lite" lots. At full house load levels you have a pretty limited life cycle on the brass before it fails, but on Lite loads you can run the brass for a very long time. I have some 1980's IMI .44 Mag brass that I have loaded over 30 times, 4 times at Mag levels and the rest at Lite loads.

Having a Magnum bored cylinder in a Special gun would accommodate those loads nicely. Of course, at the risk of someone, sometime, stuffing the wrong ammo in it.

T!

 

[CajunBass]

I once bought a Model 19-8 that was MARKED as a 38 Special on the side of the barrel. Part of a canceled order for a South American police agency that apparently wanted Model 19's, but wanted them in 38 Special only. Word was they were made up from the last of the Model 19 parts that could be scrounged up and put together. True or not, I have no idea. The one I had would chamber 357 ammo with no problem. Others I was told/read would only chamber 38 Special. Cylinder was the same length as a normal Model 19 cylinder. I have no doubt it WAS in fact a Model 19 Cylinder, but that "38 Special Only" on the barrel was enough to keep me from using it with 357 ammo.

But then I don't shoot 357's in guns chambered for 357's a lot. Even when I use 357 brass, they're not really close to magnum charges. Same for 44 Magnums. Almost always 44 Specials. Paper targets don't take a lot of killing.

 

[Brian Parrish]

Failures?

Nope. Not thinner. Look at a 44 nag mtn gun.

When any other models of handguns fail, the family is quick to point out the shooter's foolishness in shooting "hot handloads". So I went searching around the gun blogosphere to find if anyone has blown up a 624 with such handloads. Are you aware of anyone who has actually pushed a 624 to failure? I have read stories of "severe gas erosion around the forcing cone" from hot handloads. I found plenty of articles about revolvers in general which seem to apply to any and all revolvers and include photos of guns which are never thought of as capable of such failure.

 

[stansdds]

Barrel rupture in revolvers is normally due to the presence of one or more bullets stuck in the barrel or some other barrel obstruction, then another shot with proper functioning ammo sends another bullet through the barrel. The result is usually a bulged barrel, but with enough pressure, a rupture is possible.

Ammo that operates at pressures beyond the design limits of a revolver will bulge the cylinder in the weakest spot, this would be the cylinder stop notch in S&W's 6-shot revolvers. Beyond that, a chamber bulge and ultimately the exterior wall of the chamber failing and you have a catastrophic rupture of the cylinder.

 

[steelslaver]

And the 624 barrel is quite a bit thinner than the 29.
It seems to me that the 624 would be perfect for warm 44 specials and/or "modest" magnums.

Another commenter here on another thread, can't remember who, said that Keith destroyed exactly two revolvers and he explained in detail exactly how and why he did it.

Barrel shank that sticks that threads into the frame and sticks into the frame window are all the same diameter on N frames and that is the thinnest part of the barrel and is exposed to the most pressure. The thickness of barrel past the frame is a non issue, All the frames have the same width back strap and frame dimensions. Go look at how thick the actual barrel is on a 2 piece barrel in a model 69. Even 500 mag barrels are thinner than a 624 barrel is in front of frame

It would make absolutely no sense what so ever for machining, cost, inventory, tracking or time to heat treat the materials any bit different. The only possible improvement that can be made to the steel is to reset the grain size after forging and that must be done prior to hardening as opposed to simply forging hardening, tempering steps. NOT AFTER. Plus if you heat treat a part with critical dimensions they WILL change as the steels grain structure is changed. The cylinders are not forged to shape, but the round stock they are machined from was forged from a billet into round stock.

I am sure S&W can have that round stock delivered in quantity with whatever Component Elements Properties and final heat treatment from the mill.

During heat treatment you are changing the carbon to iron structure. If you take a perfect 1x1x1 cube of steel and then do a heat treat, it would no longer be a perfect cube. Same thing would happen with a finished cylinder.