About the Model 13

[Dennis The B]

...Heres a question for those who....worry, about shooting magnum ammunition in K-frame magnums. Did you ever hear about this alleged "issue" prior to the coming of crush fit barrels and the 19-5 ??? Me neither...

The issues with K frame forcing cones, premature end shake, and top strap flame cutting, were well known in the 1970's. The issue came about with the introduction of Winchester's 125gr JHP load. That well predated the Model 19-5. The "crush" fit was even in place during the pinned barrel era. The pin was merely a carry over from the soft fit era. It's been widely written that S&W started the "crush" fit in the mid-to-late 1950's. When S&W deleted the pin, they were only conforming to what Colt, Ruger, and the rifle makers had been doing for years.

As has been mentioned in many previous threads, S&W accepted the return of a lot of K frame .357 Magnum revolvers, and in some cases, replaced them with Model 28's at the request of the purchasers.

 

[Stu Honea]

I was fortunate to have never encountered any of the problems even though I shot quite a lot of the hot 125gr. loads in a couple of K frames.
Later in my career I found that magnums were much more comfortable in the old N frames. Then came the L Frame.
I carried one of those for several years and also found it easier to control with magnum rounds than the K's.
No one loves K frames more than me,but these days i'll stick with 38+P's in them.
Over the years,local LE has shot a lot of people with the 38 FBI loads with outstanding results,before the big switch to autos. Most all these shootings were with 4 inch service guns.

 

[Rapidray]

You all have good points, but...

There are a lot of great 38 Spl. ammo out there today as compared to 30 years ago! Elmer would have been proud. I have no problem carrying the 38 Spl. in my 49, my 10-6 (the first "13" in 357 magnum." or in my 681. As I have always said in past threads, it is not about a bigger bullet but will always be about shot placement!

 

[M2MikeGolf]

it is not about a bigger bullet but will always be about shot placement!

The voice of reason, the voice of truth. It seems like common sense to some, and what goes hand in hand with that is training, practice and proficiency.

Ever hear of Walter Bell?

 

[Chuck Jones]

I believe the cracked forcing cone issues of K frames is for real. It's more of a problem now because replacement barrels aren't readily available. There is a weak point at the flat cut on the bottom necessary to clear the yoke.

The rest is pure physics, a 158 gn .357 bullet enters (collides with) the forcing cone slower than 125 gn, the collision energy is higher with the lighter faster bullet because energy increases at the square of velocity. There are a few other variables but that's the general principle.

So counterintuitively heavier 158 gn .357s are actually easier on the forcing cone. If you think about it, this also explains why the lighter 125 gn bullet traveling faster has better terminal performance or stopping power (though I hate to use that phrase) on the target.

That said I haven't had one crack, but I'll stick to 158 gn bullets for several reasons, not the least of which is the fixed sights on the model 13 and 65 are regulated for 158 gn and lighter bullets shoot low for me.

/c

 

[Rapidray]

The voice of reason, the voice of truth. It seems like common sense to some, and what goes hand in hand with that is training, practice and proficiency.

Ever hear of Walter Bell?

Training, practice and proficiency...Amen.
Walter Bell. No I do not know this person. Who is he?

 

[M2MikeGolf]

Walter Bell. No I do not know this person. Who is he?

A famous Scottish big game hunter from the early to mid-1900s. He killed 1011 elephants...with a 7x57.

As you might imagine, he was an avid fan of shot placement.

 

[Kavinsky]

I believe the cracked forcing cone issues of K frames is for real. It's more of a problem now because replacement barrels aren't readily available. There is a weak point at the flat cut on the bottom necessary to clear the yoke.

The rest is pure physics, a 158 gn .357 bullet enters (collides with) the forcing cone slower than 125 gn, the collision energy is higher with the lighter faster bullet because energy increases at the square of velocity. There are a few other variables but that's the general principle.

So counterintuitively heavier 158 gn .357s are actually easier on the forcing cone. If you think about it, this also explains why the lighter 125 gn bullet traveling faster has better terminal performance or stopping power (though I hate to use that phrase) on the target.

That said I haven't had one crack, but I'll stick to 158 gn bullets for several reasons, not the least of which is the fixed sights on the model 13 and 65 are regulated for 158 gn and lighter bullets shoot low for me.

/c

well the thing about that is I didnt know about the bit about those hotter 125 grain loads moving at 1500+ and without that piece of information that rule about the no less than a 158 grain thing with the magnums kinda has the potental to spill into a rule of thumb with .38 specials and the .38 +p's as well

kinda making it seem like the thing in a way needs preimium gas like a sports car which would make having a K frame magnum sort of a pain in the *** vs just going with a model 27 or even just a regular K frame like the model 14 and 15 and just making sure you dont use +p's in'em which have been known to give the steel frame J frame guns problems

But now with that information it simply means avoid the hot loads that are close to or over 1500 fps with the K frame magnums and it will take everything else just fine, plus its a much simpler and more logical rule of thumb

and it explains why a ruger GP 101 and a Colt Python were on the casualty list of guns that have had forcing cone cracks from that 125 grain ammo, something I've been wondering about for awhile as well

The voice of reason, the voice of truth. It seems like common sense to some, and what goes hand in hand with that is training, practice and proficiency.

Ever hear of Walter Bell?

true true but you gotta have confidence in the cartridge as well, although your point should come first and the point about the bullet weight and the size of the cartridge second

A famous Scottish big game hunter from the early to mid-1900s. He killed 1011 elephants...with a 7x57.

As you might imagine, he was an avid fan of shot placement.

He didnt happen to have a backup man with a much bigger rifle behind him did he like I see happen with people hunting african game with magnum revolvers nowadays?

 

[M2MikeGolf]

true true but you gotta have confidence in the cartridge as well, although your point should come first and the point about the bullet weight and the size of the cartridge second

Very good point.

He didnt happen to have a backup man with a much bigger rifle behind him did he like I see happen with people hunting african game with magnum revolvers nowadays?

I don't know that Bell used a backup man. Chuckhawks has a more complete story on him W.D.M. Bell and His Elephants. If he used a backup man, I'd be surprised as he appears to have been pretty fearless; he was a pilot in WWI and was known to fly alone in observation planes and shoot at other aircraft with a rifle, and apparently took part in the evacuation of British troops at Dunkirk in 1940.

He really is an exception to most rules (or rules of convention, if you prefer); when he was hunting in the heyday, the big nitro expresses were the cartridge of the time, and considered standard. Bell studied the anatomy of elephants very closely to determine where the shot placement would be fatal, and apparently his studies paid off. He also practiced his techniques with dry firing when not actually hunting. He was pretty much a one shot, one kill kinda' guy, and it may be worth noting that he preferred military ball ammo in his 7x57s and would not use soft point projectiles. I use him as an illustration of how important it is to know a lot more about guns than big bullets and yankin' back the trigger enough times.

However, I agree that there is a point where a cartridge, and caliber, must have the energy to make penetration. Bell just proves that his expertise outweighed the "experts" of the day with his knowledge and skill with his chosen cartridge and weapon, a choice that was considered not capable of acheiving the results that he had. His proficiency, due to his knowledge and practice, led him to be a great success.

 

[Kavinsky]

Yeah I can understand why and I gotta say he had guts doing that

and I wouldnt want to take a .450 nitro to africa with me either not to mention you can actually shoot your retina loose with those higher caliber rifles, although if doing that I'd want atleast a 30-06 or a .300 winchester mag, not a 7x57

and not a featherweight either and it would have to have a 14 inch stock on it