Converting J frame to shoot 9mm
- Thread starter zogger
- Start date
Correct
I don’t know anyone. Manufacturer or gunsmith that would take responsibility for installing, or, telling someone to run a 357 cylinder and ammo in an aluminum 38 frame that’s marked for 38 or 38+p
S&W won’t do a lot in regards to saying X is safe. Remember, we live in a world that McDonald’s was sued because their coffee was hot… and now they have to put a warning on their cups (as well as every other place that serves coffee). No lawyer is ever going to allow their client to open themselves up to liability. Hell, go pay a lawyer for legal advise about any questioned firearms concern… let’s say a modified carry gun. I doubt you’ll find one that says it is ok to add anything to it.
Even if the frames were known to be good to go… S&W isn’t going to “ok” modification of their revolvers. Just think of where we would be if people didn’t push boundaries… can say for one, my favorite revolver caliber wouldn’t be around (.44 Magnum).
For .357 out of a .38 revolver… depends. As was previously mentioned, S&W could make it easy and just put out .38 frames and .357 frames if it was such a death wish. But there are a few examples of S&W using Scandium frames with Titanium cylinders… and chambering it in .38 (342). Different model with a similar build… .357 (340). Why? Because they saw a market.
I will add, if you look into the 942 that S&W did produce… it was an Airweight in 9mm. Literally the only difference between it and my gun is that the 942 was ported. S&W built it, so they must have considered it.
That being said, I’ve been listening to those arguments for years. My 642 is still chugging along… as a few other members’ revolvers. It’s noted, and I’m sure people take it under advisement. But if you want to argue with anyone about liability… go reach out to Pinnacle and TK Custom. Both offer the service with zero warnings… and again, I’ve yet to hear of issues.
If you do have evidence of a converted J-frame going belly up… I definitely would be interested.
Last edited:
"See last post"
Yeah, that post avoided answering the question didn't it
Will you personally take responsibility for someone installing a 357 cylinder and using 357 ammo in an aluminum 38 j frame?
Yep they would market is as 38 or 357 so folks would know they do not have to shoot 357 if they don’t want to
It’s basic manufacturing. Why would you make two different things when you can make one and cover both segments
Specifically when you could put a 500 dollar 357 on the market. Rather than the 1000 dollar 360 series
"See last post"
Yeah, that post avoided answering the question didn't it
If it were engineered for it it would be marked 357 not 38
The stamping on the barrel restricting it to 38 is what the factory rated those frames for. Which is what my stems from is based on
Post the calculations that support your claim that the aluminum j frame is engineered to handle 357 and 9mm
I’d like to read about the 942 you mentioned. Web search doesn’t pop up a good page with info on it. It’s probably the same setup as my 296 was. Airweight as in scandium frame
Fact. That is what they are marked rated for from the factory. No popcorn needed
Now can you answer the two questions I posted that you skirted away from.
Will you personally take responsibility for someone installing a 357 cylinder and using 357 ammo in an aluminum 38 j frame?
Post the calculations that support your claim that the aluminum j frame is engineered to handle 357 and 9mm
Title on top of the pages, written by Supica and Nahas.
That’s pretty cool. Was hoping it was a titanium cylinder hens teeth gun to look around for one
I see it says allow but doesn’t specify aluminum or scandium. That would be an interesting determination to figure out for sure
Aluminum…
942 came out in 1999.
I see that a prototype was done then. Did they also do a production run for the public.
Some of my interest and subsequent reluctance with the 357/9mm in a 38 frame thing comes from many folks contacting me to ask if I will run conversions on my CNC for them. I have the programming already written as I built the fixture and CNC machined a test on an aluminum round to fit moon clips about four years ago.
I’ve never agreed to do it for anyone due to the rating on the aluminum frame guns not being stamped 357/9mm. Only marked 38 If this all proves out to be true that the aluminum frame is actually rated for 357/9mm I may have to start doing the conversion for folks.
If it proves safe to do I’d be thankful to y’all for proving it is safe, as I could probably pull it off at a very reasonable cost for folks cnc machined, reamed, chamfered, polished.
"Post the calculations that support your claim that the aluminum j frame is engineered to handle 357 and 9mm"
You and I both know that I have never made that claim, and that you have never posted anything to support your assertion that the engineering design is inadequate
You and I both know that I have never made that claim, and that you have never posted anything to support your assertion that the engineering design is inadequate
No, it was the one gun that went to Clapp… who didn’t give it any praise. It is currently in a private collection.
Got to remember, the 940 wasn’t a success in any angle. People remember cases sticking, unless you shot +P. Add in J-frames being difficult to shoot, and nobody liking the lighter .357s… it probably was a good thing for S&W to pass than it be a crappy product. Another thing to add, ammunition isn’t where it is now. Hornady crimps are perfect, whereas other companies could lead to crimp jump.
Not arguing/starting stuff, but what round count would you consider “safe?”
Got to remember, the 940 wasn’t a success in any angle. People remember cases sticking, unless you shot +P. Add in J-frames being difficult to shoot, and nobody liking the lighter .357s… it probably was a good thing for S&W to pass than it be a crappy product. Another thing to add, ammunition isn’t where it is now. Hornady crimps are perfect, whereas other companies could lead to crimp jump.
Not arguing/starting stuff, but what round count would you consider “safe?”
Last edited:
"Post the calculations that support your claim that the aluminum j frame is engineered to handle 357 and 9mm"
You and I both know that I have never made that claim, and that you have never posted anything to support your assertion that the engineering design is inadequate
As I posted above on this page. I actually hope I am proven wrong on the true rating of the aluminum frames. I’ve told so many people no over the years when they ask if I convert cylinders for 9mm. I already wrote my CNC program to do it years ago but never have done it for anyone
I’ve always said no cause the aluminum guns aren’t marked for that kind of pressure. Which is all the data that is needed to supoort my assertion.
I’m not here to butt heads with anyone.
But you did claim that the aluminum frame is fine for 357/9mm but no engineering data to support that
Would you endorse putting a 357 cyl with 357 ammo on an aluminum J frame
I’m not arguing either man. I stick with what the guns are marked for. I may be playing it too safe. Who knows
I’m just reluctant since the factory doesn’t make an aluminum framed 357. From a manufacturing and marketplace standpoint it’s hard to believe that smith wouldn’t make an aluminum framed 357 for just a couple bucks more than the 38 only. If the frame would take it in accordance with their engineering standards
It’s be a big win in additional volume sales to say the least. A pocket rocket that would run either 38 or 357 for about 550. Rather than 1000ish for a 340/360. I think the 642 shows about 538 retail on smiths site. It’s be no more than chambering cylinders a little deeper for the longer 357 case
Heck they could mark em 38/357 so even new gun folks know 38 is fine also if they don’t want to sledgehammer their hand with 357
But there has to be a viable reason they don’t make em like that
Maybe it’s also a flame cutting thing. Don’t the scandium 357s have a blast shield up under the top strap. My 329PD does
"But you did claim that the aluminum frame is fine for 357/9mm"
Post a quote, in context.
That said, I've noticed that so far, my three 637-2 titanium cylindered 9mm J-frames have incurred zero damage from 9mm. I have .357 titanium cylinders for them, but don't shoot .357 because 9mm recoil is painful enough.
Post a quote, in context.
That said, I've noticed that so far, my three 637-2 titanium cylindered 9mm J-frames have incurred zero damage from 9mm. I have .357 titanium cylinders for them, but don't shoot .357 because 9mm recoil is painful enough.
Similar threads
- Locked
