k frames and magnum rounds

[18DAI]

I've seen pictures of cracked forcing cones on Colt Pythons. Again, never seen one of those in person. I do recall hearing about a Ruger Six series being damaged by hot handloads. I don't know about Taurus. Perhaps they don't last long enough to destroy by shooting them. Just kidding.

In fact the only cracked forcing cone I've ever personally seen was on a 19 snub belonging to member Panamajack. He dropped it off at my gunsmith for repair and my gunsmith showed it to me. Only one my gunsmith had ever seen in person. I don't recall what dash it was.

Most of the alleged problems seem to occur in 19-5's. The first of the crush fit barrels. There was a batch of barrels with manufacturing defects that were initially pulled from the production line, then later used. I suspect that this contributed to the alleged issue.

There have been cracked forcing cones in just about every dash number of the model 19. Butch Kent did some research on that topic, IIRC.

Poor maintenance and use of hot handloads - or shooting hot factory jacketed 357's after shooting alot of lead rounds - AND not cleaning - you can probably bust up any revolver.

A K-magnum is a mechanical device and as with any mechanical device they wear with use. Like all other mechanical devices, K-frame magnums (and all handguns) need maintenance periodically. Proper cleaning, inspection for excessive wear, ect. That said, I shoot alot more than most and I've yet to wear one out or damage it to any degree. The 4 inch 66-2 that I previously mentioned I've almost shot loose coming closest.

I've seen 19's and a 66 that were "shot loose". Mostly from hot handloads. I've seen one stretched frame on a 19. Same thing - hot handloads. It wouldn't stay timed.

I've come across bulged cylinders in all sorts of revolvers. You can't hold prior owners stupidity against the manufacturer, IMO.

FWIW, I read a post on another board from a fellow named Winchester73. He claimed that back in the day, S&W took a model 66 and fired 250,000 rounds of 125 grain 357 through it. They cleaned it at regular intervals during this test. (he doesn't mention how often) At the end of the test the revolver was fine. It had wear, but still functioned and timed properly. I'd be interested in reading more details about that excercise. Regards 18DAI

 

[BSA]

The history of the K-Frame revolver is well documented so I don't understand the statement that I can't find any proof of the problems with the K-Frame. Bill Jordan documented this in his book.

If you youngsters had been around in the '70's, 1970's that is, you would have heard and seen of plenty of problems with shooting magnum ammunion in K-Frames.

A short primer is the original concept of the Model 19 was officers would shoot wadcutter ammo for practice and qualification and carry magnum loads only for S.D.

In the '70's, 1970's for you youngsters, leo's became concerned about lack of stopping power of the 38 especially due to firefights with the radical organizations of the day and more violent street criminals. Since most officers could not hit squat with magnum loads out of the light K-Frame firearms qualification became serious with use of magnums.

My own department was a good example. Until the mid-late '70's (1970's to you youngsters) officer would use two guns to qualify and carry with.

As PPC was big back then they would show up with highly tuned target guns for range qualification. Then they would walk off the range, shove their duty gun back in the holster and go on duty without firing a shot.

The Model 19's and 66's of the era were not designed for shooting regular use of magum ammunition and developed a history of cracked forcing cones. The general rule of thumb was they were good for about 2,000 rounds (which was a lot of ammunition when you realize qualification was only 50 rounds once a year).

Rapid use of double action combat style shooting caused the battered cylinder locking bolts and cylinder overtravel.

As a result some of us went back to carrying the heavy N-Frame Model 28.

The above problems with the K-Frame led directly to the introduction of the L-Frame which weights about as much as the N-Frame but has the smaller K-Frame grip.

And yes grasshopper I have seen all of this this with my own eyes.

 

[olds442guy]

If you youngsters had been around in the '70's, 1970's that is...

In the '70's, 1970's for you youngsters...

Until the mid-late '70's (1970's to you youngsters)...

And yes grasshopper I have seen all of this this with my own eyes.

Are you clarifying because you've been around since the 1870s and wanted to avoid confusion? Lol... Dude, we're young, not stupid. Most 5 year olds would know what you're referring to by just saying "the '70's".

Sincerely,
A Grasshopper

 

[BigBill]

Back in the early days the S&W M19's would shoot themselves loose if fed a steady diet of magnum loads. I believe any gun with screws in any magnum caliber does the samething when excessive loads are a steady diet.

In wanting different S&W revolvers it doesn't steer me away from buying any model. With normally loaded ammo there all good.


When i was young and stupid the hotter loads the better when reloading. There's a little Tim Allen in all of us at onetime or another. Now i'm older and much wiser so normal loads are much better. I think we all go this route in reloading.

 

[Rapidray]

I am older...

I know of the Pope and Galilo had their little misunderstanding.
I know beans do NOT go into chili.
I'm tired...nap time.

 

[Sebago Son]

Youngsters?

The history of the K-Frame revolver is well documented so I don't understand the statement that I can't find any proof of the problems with the K-Frame. Bill Jordan documented this in his book.

If you youngsters had been around in the '70's, 1970's that is, you would have heard and seen of plenty of problems with shooting magnum ammunion in K-Frames.

A short primer is the original concept of the Model 19 was officers would shoot wadcutter ammo for practice and qualification and carry magnum loads only for S.D.

In the '70's, 1970's for you youngsters, leo's became concerned about lack of stopping power of the 38 especially due to firefights with the radical organizations of the day and more violent street criminals. Since most officers could not hit squat with magnum loads out of the light K-Frame firearms qualification became serious with use of magnums.

My own department was a good example. Until the mid-late '70's (1970's to you youngsters) officer would use two guns to qualify and carry with.

As PPC was big back then they would show up with highly tuned target guns for range qualification. Then they would walk off the range, shove their duty gun back in the holster and go on duty without firing a shot.

The Model 19's and 66's of the era were not designed for shooting regular use of magum ammunition and developed a history of cracked forcing cones. The general rule of thumb was they were good for about 2,000 rounds (which was a lot of ammunition when you realize qualification was only 50 rounds once a year).

Rapid use of double action combat style shooting caused the battered cylinder locking bolts and cylinder overtravel.

As a result some of us went back to carrying the heavy N-Frame Model 28.

The above problems with the K-Frame led directly to the introduction of the L-Frame which weights about as much as the N-Frame but has the smaller K-Frame grip.

And yes grasshopper I have seen all of this this with my own eyes.

There's so much wrong with this post that I won't even bother calling "BS".

BTW, I've been around since the 50's...

 

[blujax01]

I must be the only person in the world who is too lazy (extra recoil) and too cheap to shoot enough .357 ammo to worry about it.

Any reloader can make practice .357 rounds (Nosler SJHP bullets and Unique) for about $11 a box of 50.
Or one may go full house Self Defense (Alliant 2400 and Speer Gold Dot) for about $12.50.
Even cheaper if you cast boolets.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

I have Model 19 that I bought in the BX at Guam in 1967. It has shot everything from 38 tracers to very hot 357 handloads. One time I came upon a box of REMINGTON metal piercing ammo. That is the 357 ammo with the most recoil that I ever fired. I haven't actually fired that many of the lighter bullets which seem to be a problem. I much prefer the Elmer Keith 160s.
My 4 inch Model 19 is still in excellent condition. It has served me well in war and peace. I flew with it on my 3 SEA tours. It is now retired and I will not shoot it again. I do have a few more K and L frames 357s that I do shoot.
And I have seen several older K frames 38s with forcing cone problems. Exactly what caused them I know not.

 

[ltxi]

The history of the K-Frame revolver is well documented so I don't understand the statement that I can't find any proof of the problems with the K-Frame. Bill Jordan documented this in his book.

If you youngsters had been around in the '70's, 1970's that is, you would have heard and seen of plenty of problems with shooting magnum ammunion in K-Frames.

A short primer is the original concept of the Model 19 was officers would shoot wadcutter ammo for practice and qualification and carry magnum loads only for S.D.

In the '70's, 1970's for you youngsters, leo's became concerned about lack of stopping power of the 38 especially due to firefights with the radical organizations of the day and more violent street criminals. Since most officers could not hit squat with magnum loads out of the light K-Frame firearms qualification became serious with use of magnums.

My own department was a good example. Until the mid-late '70's (1970's to you youngsters) officer would use two guns to qualify and carry with.

As PPC was big back then they would show up with highly tuned target guns for range qualification. Then they would walk off the range, shove their duty gun back in the holster and go on duty without firing a shot.

The Model 19's and 66's of the era were not designed for shooting regular use of magum ammunition and developed a history of cracked forcing cones. The general rule of thumb was they were good for about 2,000 rounds (which was a lot of ammunition when you realize qualification was only 50 rounds once a year).

Rapid use of double action combat style shooting caused the battered cylinder locking bolts and cylinder overtravel.

As a result some of us went back to carrying the heavy N-Frame Model 28.

The above problems with the K-Frame led directly to the introduction of the L-Frame which weights about as much as the N-Frame but has the smaller K-Frame grip.

And yes grasshopper I have seen all of this this with my own eyes.

Lighten up guy!

And I'm 70. That would be 70 years old, not the 1970's.

 

[nipster]

I have never had one of my guns develop the issue. But I did own one that had a cracked forcing cone. It was a 13-2 that I found had a cracked forcing cone while inspecting it prior to purchase.

Long story short, I was able to buy the gun for a pretty low price, then bought a used barrel off of gunbroker and had it installed. Under $250 for a 13-2. The bluing on the replacement barrel was not the same bluing as the rest of the gun (I suspect the barrel may have been re-blued at some point), so I traded it off for something else. Made a net "profit" on it and bought another one.

 

[fyimo]

I'm a little confused because based on the opinion here S&W brought out a new line of 357 magnum revolvers in the L frame and that was only because they wanted a full under lug and heavier revolver when they could have just made an engineering change and added it to the Model 19 and 66. Anyway, everything I've read online said that they brought out the L series of revolvers because of problems with the light 357 magnum bullets causing problems with the forcing cones.

 

[nipster]

I'm a little confused because based on the opinion here S&W brought out a new line of 357 magnum revolvers in the L frame and that was only because they wanted a full under lug and heavier revolver when they could have just made an engineering change and added it to the Model 19 and 66. Anyway, everything I've read online said that they brought out the L series of revolvers because of problems with the light 357 magnum bullets causing problems with the forcing cones.

If that was really the case, you would figure they would have discontinued the magnum K frames in 1981 when the L frame was introduced, not 2005 or whenever they did. Ironically they discontinued them after they introduced what was thought to be a fix, a re-designed K frame with a 2 piece barrel and modified yoke.

 

[Sebago Son]

Doen't make much sense...

I'm a little confused because based on the opinion here S&W brought out a new line of 357 magnum revolvers in the L frame and that was only because they wanted a full under lug and heavier revolver when they could have just made an engineering change and added it to the Model 19 and 66. Anyway, everything I've read online said that they brought out the L series of revolvers because of problems with the light 357 magnum bullets causing problems with the forcing cones.

Funny that it took from 1956 until 1983 to find out there was a problem...

 

[CajunBass]

Any reloader can make practice .357 rounds (Nosler SJHP bullets and Unique) for about $11 a box of 50.
Or one may go full house Self Defense (Alliant 2400 and Speer Gold Dot) for about $12.50.
Even cheaper if you cast boolets.

I can load 38 wadcutters even cheaper.

 

[blujax01]

I can load 38 wadcutters even cheaper.

Yep. And those I shoot through one of my .38's

 

[38-44HD45]

Interesting, though mostly uneducational thread. If one is restricted to the use of factory ammo, then overuse of factory 125gr. JHP loads can accelerate wear in any .357 K-frame. Known fact. As to it being a matter of "light bullets," BS, and as to the idea that a small number of hot factory 125gr. loads can be a problem, the BS factor is even higher. Factory loadings of 110 gr. bullets are a non-issue, because they are loaded so light. It is ONLY the factory 125gr. screamers that are an issue at all. I tend to baby my K-frames more than I likely should, just because replacement parts and repairs are a problem. Will a reasonable number of hot 125gr. factory loads ruin or excessively wear a .357 K-frame? Hell, no! This subject is tee-totally worn out. If you have a nice K-frame magnum, don't fear that it will explode if you shoot a few hot, factory 125gr. JHP loads. If you want your K-frame maggie to last a long time, then limit your use of magnum ammo, REGARDLESS of bullet weight. The forcing cone issues are a bigger problem with 125gr.bullets, but insofar as overall wear to the gun, full-power 158gr. loads will beat it up just as much, if not more.

 

[M29since14]

I have a very nice shooter model 66-1 , I have heard numerous times that it wont stand up to a steady diet of magnum rounds as well as gun XXX. I am trying to figure out if this is a statement of fact...

You wouldn't expect a Model 19 to stand up to the same heavy use that a Model 27 probably will, would you? I certainly wouldn't. But having said that, I will add I have been fortunate to have had quite a few Model 19s and Model 66s, for many years (some of them well before widespread use of the www came along), and in spite of all the recent-think that we see on the internet, I have complete confidence in them, for my uses.

My position is that you have more to worry about from an alien invasion from outer space...
Drew

What was it RR once said in a presidential debate a long time ago, "There he goes again!"

FWIW, I read a post on another board from a fellow named Winchester73. He claimed that back in the day, S&W took a model 66 and fired 250,000 rounds of 125 grain 357 through it...

Surely no one acutally believes this, do they? Two-hundred and fifty-thousand rounds...

 

[blujax01]

Interesting, though mostly uneducational thread. If one is restricted to the use of factory ammo, then overuse of factory 125gr. JHP loads can accelerate wear in any .357 K-frame. Known fact. As to it being a matter of "light bullets," BS, and as to the idea that a small number of hot factory 125gr. loads can be a problem, the BS factor is even higher. Factory loadings of 110 gr. bullets are a non-issue, because they are loaded so light. It is ONLY the factory 125gr. screamers that are an issue at all. I tend to baby my K-frames more than I likely should, just because replacement parts and repairs are a problem. Will a reasonable number of hot 125gr. factory loads ruin or excessively wear a .357 K-frame? Hell, no! This subject is tee-totally worn out. If you have a nice K-frame magnum, don't fear that it will explode if you shoot a few hot, factory 125gr. JHP loads. If you want your K-frame maggie to last a long time, then limit your use of magnum ammo, REGARDLESS of bullet weight. The forcing cone issues are a bigger problem with 125gr.bullets, but insofar as overall wear to the gun, full-power 158gr. loads will beat it up just as much, if not more.

Please provide your source for these known facts.

Educate me. Clear up the B.S.

I mean, I'm ready to become a believer and put up with the dirty chambers and reduced accuracy.

But I need data.

Thank you.

 

[notsofast]

I have a N frame 357x8 for high powered magnums. I enjoy my M19 for it's lighter weight and classic style, beautiful and very smooth shooter. I won't shoot any bazooka powered charges with it or any bullets lighter than 158 gr. That's my approach other people may disagree.

 

[dfariswheel]

The only thing I'd add to the subject is that we need to consider what happens if your gun does suffer a damaged forcing cone.
S&W no longer has barrels for many of the older model "K" frames and supplies of usable used barrels are drying up fast.

If you have a damaged barrel you may be left with a good frame and no barrel to replace the damaged one.
In the case of rare guns like my Model 66 with a 3" barrel a cracked forcing cone would be a catastrophe.

I plan on protecting it by shooting only heavier Magnum bullets and doing most of my shooting with .38 Special ammo.