Model 19-4 Questions

[Lightfoot30]

#1) Supposedly the 19-4 was the last model 19 with the Pinned Barrel & Recessed Cylinder.

When these (pre 19-5) guns are advertised for sale, the ads almost always brag about the "Pinned Barrel & Recessed Cylinders".

What's the big deal about these features, or is it just because that was the last model 19 to have them?

#2) It's always been my understanding that all pre 19-4 models of the MODEL 19, have had a problem with the "Top Strap" above the barrel tending to break or crack at its front end if firing a steady diet of 357 Magnum.

I always see it being recommended that Pre model 19-4's use 38 sp for normal target, practice & plinking, so as to not over stress this top strap weakness problem.

Supposedly, this problem was solved with the introduction of models 19-4 and later.

So, here's my question: Why then do I always see Pre 19-4 models selling for a considerably higher price at places like GunBroker?

Is it simply due to an older, and possibly more rare gun? Or, is it simply that the seller doesn't advertise this defect, and the buyer doesn't know any better?

 

[Birdgun]

For me, the pinned barrel and recessed cylinder chambers represent a period of time when S&W was at its pinnacle of manufacturing quality.

It's the forcing cone that tends to crack. The steady diet of .357 mags in a model 19 has been discussed here ad nauseam. Essentially the prevailing wisdom is; don't shoot a steady diet of 125 grain hot .357 magnum loads as it will crack the forcing cone.

I'd be proud to own a 19-5 which has neither a pinned barrel nor recessed cylinder chambers. I do own a 19-3 and love the revolver.

Oh, I also consider the S&W Model 19 "Combat Magnum" as the best revolver ever made.

S&W Model 19-3 "Combat Magnum"

Welcome to the forum Lightfoot30.

God bless,
Birdgun

 

[Lightfoot30]

I understood the top strap weakness problem was solved with the 19-4. Can anyone verify this?

 

[UncleEd]

Birdgun pretty much says it.

As for me, I've never particularly liked the recessed chambers
because the inside of the rims do tend to collect a little bit
gunk from some ammo and this doesn't allow fully seating
a cartridge. It's a matter of a little more maintenance.

And when all is said and done, the recesses really are not
needed.

 

[Lightfoot30]

For me, the pinned barrel and recessed cylinder represent a period of time when S&W was at its pinnacle of manufacturing quality.

The steady diet of .357 mags in a model 19 has been discussed here ad nauseam. Essentially the prevailing wisdom is; don't shoot a steady diet of 125 grain hot .357 magnum loads.

I'd be proud to own a 19-5. I do own a 19-3 and love the revolver.

Oh, I also consider the S&W Model 19 "Combat Magnum" as the best revolver ever made.

S&W Model 19-3 "Combat Magnum"

God bless,
Birdgun

Thanks BirdGun,
I own a heavily used former LEO carried 19-3, that I only shoot the 38 sp with.

I also own a Never Fired 19-4, that I am thinking about using for shooting 357's for practice, because there's a huge difference between firing 38 v/s 357 mags.

I figure if you're gonna have a nightstand gun loaded with 357 mag, you better be proficient with it.

 

[cporfe]

Massad Ayoob is doing a blog on Backwoods Home Magazine website. His most recent posting, last Thursday, speaks of the two Md 19's, a dash 3 and dash 4, he's using during this months training cycle. I just wish I had kept the Md 19's I bought when I was young rather then sell them off to pay for child visitation expenses. The things you do for your kids. I too have looked for replacements on Gunbroker, but they are expensive for a used gun especially with the potential downside of too many magnums through the gun. But, if I could actually see and inspect the gun first, who knows. I do agree the P&R guns seem to have more effort put into the manufacture. And in Massad's post he comments on his dash 4 having a really sweet factory trigger!

Good luck on getting a really nice Md 19!

 

[daddio202]

Why not just practice with mag loads in the 158 grain bullet. Many thousands of this cartrdge can be shot from ANY model 19 without negative effects upon gun. The longer bullet reduces the cylinder gap expulsion of hot gases during ignition. The model 19 is a comprise of weight and firepower. To me also the model 19 is the pinnacle of modern revolvers. The only thing would not shoot in my 19-3 is a full house 125 grain just to be on the safe side.

 

[Lightfoot30]

Why not just practice with mag loads in the 158 grain bullet. Many thousands of this cartrdge can be shot from ANY model 19 without negative effects upon gun. The longer bullet reduces the cylinder gap expulsion of hot gases during ignition. The model 19 is a comprise of weight and firepower. To me also the model 19 is the pinnacle of modern revolvers. The only thing would not shoot in my 19-3 is a full house 125 grain just to be on the safe side.

Is that because the faster velocity of the lighter (125 gr) bullet is hotter and exerts more strain on the gun or it's forcing cone, or top strap than the slower, heavier 158 gr bullet?

 

[Targets Guy]

First I have heard about any top strap problem.

I love my 19-2. Just pure fun to shoot.

 

[Lightfoot30]

My 19-4 (commemorative) and 19-3 (Former Leo) shooter

 

[daddio202]

Is that because the faster velocity of the lighter (125 gr) bullet is hotter and exerts more strain on the gun or it's forcing cone, or top strap than the slower, heavier 158 gr bullet?

It's because the 158 grain is longer so while it is crossing the gap between cylinder and barrel it is effectively blocking the gases (plasma) from coming out into that area. With the 125 grain being smaller (shorter) there is miliseconds more time with that space open allowing more of it out. Combined with the slightly slower magnum powders in which the explosion is following the bullet up the barrel. The reason you will get more velocity out of a longer barrel your just allowing the explosion to further propel the bullet as it travels down barrel. Some of the powder manufacturers recommend the use of heavier (longer) bullets with use of their slower burning magnum powders.

 

[M29since14]

I have never heard of 19s cracking top straps. I guess anything can happen on occasion, but that is one "myth" that borders on ridiculous, to me.

Yes, 19-4s are great guns. That said, I agree with Birdgun that the 19-5s are also pretty darned nice. I have both, use both, and like both. If you want a P&R gun, there's nothing wrong with that. For a gun I plan to use, I wouldn't pay an extra dollar for a 19-4 over a 19-5 - if both were the same, fitting and cosmetically.

 

[scooter123]

I understood the top strap weakness problem was solved with the 19-4. Can anyone verify this?

Don't know who told you about this supposed "Top Strap Weakness" but it's the first time I've ever heard anything about this and I've been shooting the model 19 since 1974. What has been widely reported is that the Forcing Cone on the K frame 358 Magnums cracking due to the flat on the bottom of the barrel extension into the frame window. If that crack is ignored/neglected long enough it can lead to the frame cracking in the cutout for the yoke.

As for the cause of the Forcing Cone cracking according to several reports this wasn't seen until the development of Super Vel 125 grain high velocity 357 Magnums. Today's thinking to keep this from happening is to limit 357 Magnum ammunition to loads featuring 158 grain bullets which were the only ammunition available when the model 19 was introduced. In a 4 inch model 19 these loads are brisk enough in recoil to keep most shooters using 38 special for the bulk of the shooting and the hot stuff only comes out on special occasions.

 

[Warren Sear]

It is not a question of "a steady diet of 357 Magnum ammo", which I see written so often, but the total number of magnum rounds fired. It matters nothing how many 38 Specials get fired in between.

One of my very favorite handguns is a Model 66-1, the stainless version of the Model 19. I usually shoot a mild hand load of Unique or 2400 powder with a 150 or 158 grain SWC cast bullet loaded in magnum cases.

I consider them 38 Specials that can shoot a certain, but unknown, number of 357's without being damaged. The real problem is shooting 125 grain or lighter full magnum loads in them. I think any current manufacture 158 grain 357 Magnum ammo is safe to use.

 

[Grayfox]

To emphasize what Birdgun already said, I also think that "Pinned and recessed" is more about the guns of that time period rather than any structural advantage. The older guns are just more desirable to many of us.

The 19-5 didn't "fix" anything. It simply did away with the pinned and recessed features. I've heard of 19-5s and later guns having the same forcing cone problems as the earlier versions.

I don't think there is any "defect". The Model 19 was built and intended to shoot .38s for practice and Magnums for carry and occasional use. Its primary purpose was to give LEOs a lighter, easier to carry .357 magnum revolver.

The forcing cone problem can almost always be traced back to the shooter using a lot of the lighter (125gr or less) magnum loads. These guns were never intended for that as those loads didn't exist when the Model 19 was designed.

Further, I think the forcing cone issue has been overblown. Yes, it does happen, but not as much as many people seem to think.

If it bothers you, just don't buy one. Get a L or N frame and shoot whatever loads you want without worry.

 

[oldbrownhat]

...I do agree the P&R guns seem to have more effort put into the manufacture. And in Massad's post he comments on his dash 4 having a really sweet factory trigger!

I picked up a 19-4 last year, Ser # 65K7xxx, which puts it near the end of that model's production, I think. I was surprised that the trigger wasn't nearly as nice as my 14-3 (1967), which is light and smooth. I took it apart and was even more surprised to see how rough the rebound block was, as well as the frame behind it. I did a lot of polishing in the appropriate places and it's getting better, but the Model 14 still has it beat.

Oddly, there are almost no wear marks on the 19, aside from the bluing having worn off on either side of the muzzle and of course the cylinder drag mark. There were some odd marks on the bluing on the cylinder, which I've pretty much managed to polish off and retouch. The forcing cone area and top strap look nearly new, so I'm thinking that it may have been fired very little and perhaps not stored all that carefully. I haven't fired it much myself, partly due to some eyesight issues, but am doing a lot of dry-firing, which is helping it smooth out. The pull is heavier than on my Model 14 but I doubt I'll mess with it.

Birdgun, that 19-3 looks nearly new in the pic, with just enough "patina of age" to give it a little character. And the oiled (?) finish on the grips is much nicer than the finish on mine.

 

[mrsig]

I have a special place in my heart for the 19-4 as it was the first gun I ever owned and carried it as a younger auxiliary police officer (much younger)! I still remember the day I got it from a police supply store in Chattanooga. Then when I left the area I sold it and have kicked myself for years. Now retired I went on a mission several months ago to acquire another near perfect 19-4 and after weeks of sifting thru offerings I finally sprung for a near NIB (actually with the box) copy and feel a deep sense of nastiliga and great fond memories. PS, it was not cheap but worth every penny!

 

[KEN L]

I understood the top strap weakness problem was solved with the 19-4. Can anyone verify this?

From whence does this understanding come from?? I've never heard of it.

 

[Warren Sear]

^^^It comes from unsubstantiated internet myth, and there is nothing behind it.