K Frame Question

[off road]

What was the reason for largely discontinuing the K frame? I had a couple back in the day, M19 (4") and a 66 (2.5"). The idea was that you would practice with .38's, shoot only limited numbers of .357's, and load .357's for serious work.

Anyway, with modern metalurgy and heat treatment, we can now shoot .357's in little J-frames for heaven's sake....so why not do the same for the K frames as well? Now they are limited to only .38 and .22.

 

[john traveler]

Improved metallurgy was not enough to overcome the perceived weakness of the K frame magnums.

At the 6 0'clock position of the barrel breech (forcing cone) is a flat area machined to allow the cylinder gas ring/crane gas ring to close with cylinder locked. This is the location where barrel breech cracking almost always happens.

S&W decision to stop production of K frame magnums was no doubt due to the popularity of the replacement model L frames and to put to rest future liability for K frame magnum failures.

 

[Knightrider03m]

From what I understand, you can shoot a M19 with .357s all day long as long as the weight of the bullet was 158gn or above.

I've shot mines about 300-400 times and only 50 of those rounds were .38s.

 

[OKFC05]

The idea was that you would practice with .38's, shoot only limited numbers of .357's, and load .357's for serious work.

From what I saw at the range, many younger shooters had "magnumitis" and were shooting a steady diet of hot .357 loads in K frames--some still are. The L-frame is much more suitable for that use, particularly on the thin forcing cone. Even the J frame is better supported.

 

[k22fan]

From what I understand, you can shoot a M19 with .357s all day long as long as the weight of the bullet was 158gn or above.

I've shot mines about 300-400 times and only 50 of those rounds were .38s.

I've only seen one gentleman crack his 19's forcing cone and it took so many magnums that I am not the least bit worried about cracking mine. He did however crack two barrels on the same 19 firing almost exclusively 158 gr. jacketed bullets over the book maximum or near maximum charges of H-110 and W-W 296. He'd bring a US .30 cal. GI ammo can full of them to the range on Saturday, shoot them all, then do it again on Sunday, week after week. The forcing cones of both barrels were obviously erroded thinner long before they cracked. S&W replaced the two barrels for free. Each time they gave him his choice of repalcement barrel length. After it came back with the 3rd new barrel he sold it and bought a Ruger GP 100 & a 27. The 19's timing and lock up never did deteriorate noticeably, but S&W may have adjusted it each time they had it.

125 gr. magnums may have aquired their reputation for cracking K frame forcing cones worse than heavier bullets only because most police departments changed to 125 gr. magnums at the same time that they quit using .38s for practice. Whether or not that is the case, if you don't even shoot your 19 enough to errode the tool marks off its forcing cone, I don't think you need worry about it cracking.

Best Regards,
Gil

 

[Maximumbob54]

I would love to know how much it was costing them to keep giving away new barrels and the cost in the installation of them. I bet those two factors alone had them aching to shut down the 19/66 production lines for years. I think a better option would have been to put a max velocity stamp on it like we are starting to see in some of the alloy revolvers today. And I would still like to see a Combat Magnum clone on the L frame where it looks just like a ever so slightly beefed up 66 but it's really a 686. I don't see why you can only get the 686 with the full lug barrel. It's hard for me to believe they gave us the 619 and 620 as the replacements when they had the two part barrels. They seem much more like new products when you figure they could have just been one part barrels and it would have carried over the change much better with less flack from the die hard's. So why did they drop them?

MONEY.

 

[Bullseye Smith]

Here is one thousand words :

 

[off road]

Actually, I gave the 66 to my son, where it soldiers on albeit mostly with standard pressure .38 loads.

 

[roaddog28]

This continuing discussion reminds me of using 38 +Ps in the model 10 and 64. There is enough research on the internet confirming the cracking of the forcing cone on the K frame magnum. The reasons for this are many. Some suggest it has to be the light 125 grain full magnums. Others suggest most revolvers that developed the problem were worn out and not properly maintain. It really comes down to this. A person that has a model 13, 19, 65 or 66 makes a decision whether to shoot magnums through these revolvers. For most people they will never put enough 357 rounds through their K frame magnum to have a problem. Proper cleaning of the forcing cone and just common sense will be enough so most people will never experience a cracked forcing cone.
I have three K frame magnums and do shoot 357 magnums in them. I will admit that I shoot only 158 gr rounds through them. I don't shoot a lot of magnums in them because I have a 686, 28 and a Ruger GP100. They all were built to handle a steady diet 357 magnums. The model 19 and 66 were not design to shoot magnums all the time. Can a person shoot magnums in their K frames? Yes. For me I just use common sense.

Howard

 

[off road]

I am always looking for the smallest lightest reasonable package that will do the job. For me, the J-frame is sometime not enough, and the L/N-frames are to much. The K-frame is right there in the sweet spot between the two.

Would love to see something like the 315NG where I could occasionally shoot .357's, as a trail gun.

 

[Fkimble]

I just yesterday saw a pic of a 686 mountain gun. I thought it wa a typo, looked just like a 67( no full under lug). Looks like it would be a big seller. Would love to have one with a heavy barrel like a 66, but for carry, the thinner barrel would be great.

 

[snw19_357]

Here is one thousand words :

Love that picture!! How many times after it was eroded and cracked did that have to be fired with Magnums to make that canyon?
I like the file marks on the flat spot. Had to keep filing it down to get that darn cylinder closed to keep firing it.

 

[G.T. Smith]

Every picture that I have seen of cracked forcing cones, were of dirty looking ones. I think that the key to avoiding failures in that area and others, is to keep that forcing cone as clean as possible. That is easy for me because I clean mine every time I am done with a shooting session. It never gets to that point. I shoot only 158 gr. .357's or 125 gr. .38 special +P's, and the forcing cone looks like new. The gun hasn't loosened up as far as I can tell. Those cracked cones had me worried for a long time, but i don't think about it much anymore, as all of the ones I have seen were nasty.
Just my hillbilly observation.
Peace,
gordon

 

[angels-zero]

This has been posted somewhere..

But here is a good take on the topic:

Use of Magnum Loads in S&W Model 19 and Other K-Frame Magnums

and

http://www.gunblast.com/Butch_SW-Model19.htm

 

[David LaPell]

It's the reason I shoot N frame .357's.

 

[remat457]

For me, the J-frame is sometime not enough, and the L/N-frames are to much. The K-frame is right there in the sweet spot between the two.

This pretty much sums it up for me also!