+P Through a Model 12: THE TEST...is done!!!!

[Osprey]

Folks,

I've added an administrative update to The Log on page 1, second entry. There have been no additional shots fired, but I did change grips and have included some additional notes of interest.

....

sprey

 

[Osprey]

I stumbled across the 2006 topic about a broke model 38 from The Firing Line. I've linked it here because it speaks of frame cracking right underneath the barrel (something we are looking for in this test). The story here implies that frame cracking such as this may be attributed to the factory over torquing the barrel into the frame. Well worth considering, especially if our subject gun survives the 1,000 round test.

FYI....

sprey

 

[DC7]

Originally posted by Osprey:
...The story here implies that frame cracking such as this may be attributed to the factory over torquing the barrel into the frame.

I can confirm that--it's exactly the reason S&W gave me when I discovered the frame of my unfired 442 was cracked underneath the barrel. I've seen identical cracks on two other NIB Airweights as well. Because the guns were all brand new and unfired, I've come to the conclusion that shooting Airweights with +P ammo is not what causes those frame cracks at all. Cracked frames are likely a pre-existing condition made worse by the stress of shooting ANY ammo.

In the link Osprey noted above, the poster shot 5 rounds of +P the previous owner had loaded in an unfired Model 38, and only then decided to "do a quick inspection". In all likelihood the gun was cracked before he ever started shooting. I strongly suspect most Airweight owners who discover cracks after shooting never inspected that area of the frame before shooting. (I know I never did until I read about the problem here on the forum.) So when they finally notice the crack, they wrongly assume that their ammunition caused the problem.

My own experience with cracked frames leads me to believe that the original concept of this experiment may be flawed--that shooting +P (especially in a K-frame revolver) is not what causes the "infamous cracked frame". It's good, though, that the frame window and b/c gap measurements were added soon after the test began, because that would be the most likely indicator of any problem--not an immediate, catastrophic failure like a blown cylinder or cracked frame, but simply accelerated wear or gradual stretching of the frame. Even then I suspect it could take more than 1000 rounds, and also think that those problems are more likely to occur on a lightweight J-frame instead of the beefier K-frame. So although some members are hoping for solid proof one way or the other, it's unlikely that a single mid-size gun tested for only 1000 rounds will provide any definitive answer to the question of whether or not +P can damage an Airweight.

 

[Gary A]

I have been following discussions about +P in older alloy-framed revolvers with great interest and, in particular, this thread on "The Test" is very interesting. Although I'm aware of the cracked frame issue, I have never read or believed it was a result of over-pressure ammo and never heard that until reading these discussions. I have always read and heard that if there is a problem with +P in older alloy revolvers, it is the possibility of top strap stretching, not frame cracking. I hope this test provides some light on that issue. With the increased thickness of a K-frame topstrap over a J-Frame, however, I am not postive this test will shed any light on +P through older airweight J-Frames. Still, a welcome addition to the information pot by Osprey.
Edited to add: Sorry for re-plowing ground already tilled by DC7.

 

[Poohgyrr]

Originally posted by Osprey:
In the end, I hope this test is perceived as one of the "great things" about the Smith & Wesson Forum and its community of members.
.... Osprey

Please add another "Thank You" for doing this

sprey. It is appreciated.

This test is interesting; I still hope to pick up a 642 someday. I also figure the used M10-7 we picked up should outlive our kids.

 

[Osprey]

Originally posted by DC7:

My own experience with cracked frames leads me to believe that the original concept of this experiment may be flawed--that shooting +P (especially in a K-frame revolver) is not what causes the "infamous cracked frame". It's good, though, that the frame window and b/c gap measurements were added soon after the test began, because that would be the most likely indicator of any problem--not an immediate, catastrophic failure like a blown cylinder or cracked frame, but simply accelerated wear or gradual stretching of the frame. Even then I suspect it could take more than 1000 rounds, and also think that those problems are more likely to occur on a lightweight J-frame instead of the beefier K-frame. So although some members are hoping for solid proof one way or the other, it's unlikely that a single mid-size gun tested for only 1000 rounds will provide any definitive answer to the question of whether or not +P can damage an Airweight.

Now that I have the Firing Line topic and some confirmation from DC7 (and others), I'm feeling a little guilty that my prep work for this test was very sloppy. However, the hypothesis and the test are still as legitimate as a "one time data point" (to quote budrichard who makes some excellent points) test can be. A test can confirm or refute the hypothesis. We began this adventure with many of us (myself included) believing that the subject gun would be dead long before 1,000 rounds. So far, we've only gotten over 1/3 of the way through, but already, I'm starting to experience a bit of a paradigm shift in my thinking.

My hope is to get the test over the half way mark by Christmas and finished within a year. Assuming we get to the end without the terminal effects that many expected to see, then we will enter into the part of the testing process that I believe will be the most difficult....documenting The Conclusion(s). With that, I would like you all to start thinking about that right now.

What can we conclude from our successful firing of 1,000 rounds of +P ammo through a single test gun?

.....

sprey

 

[M29since14]

What can we conclude from our successful firing of 1,000 rounds of +P ammo through a single test gun?

Osprey - The truth is, not much. Remember, this has all been done years ago, with smaller guns (Model 37) and with an acclaimed, independent gunsmith keeping a detailed record of his measurements of the gun as the firing progressed. Truth be told, I think your test should be extended to 2,000 rounds, just to add interest! This is the same as Keith's test, and I believe the old number S&W came up with for an estimated service life of their airweight guns. Even so, you would only be duplicating an earlier test.

Note that I say this fully realizing that when Keith did his test, there was no such thing as +P ammo. But he did, specifically, mention that the ammunition he used included his handloads. I don't think anyone could reasonably doubt that his handloads were other than garden variety 158 gr. RNL. Mr. Keith was not known for advocating such ammunition!

Others more knowledgeable have already pointed out that any test involving only one sample just isn't going to prove much, as Keith's test didn't, but it can still be interesting to us, as hobbyists. One can't draw any real conclusions beyond that. It might be of further interest to shoot this gun until it needs service (probably for excessive endshake) - just to see how many rounds that takes.

 

[Osprey]

More shots fired. I think you'll like this update a lot.

Check it out in The Log on page 1, second entry.

Cheers...

sprey

 

[gaucho1]

As the owner of 2" and 4" rnd. butts,I am following this test with great interest.
My first airwieght was a three inch 37,I
quickly learned to be sparing with "real"
plus-ps(1973).

Seems like the K frame will spread the pain alittle wider,hopefully softer.

Looking for another 37 as we speak.
Thank You

 

[Poohgyrr]

Originally posted by gaucho1: Seems like the K frame will spread the pain a little wider, hopefully softer.

Definitely. Our 2" M10 kicks less than the 2" Chief's Special.

 

[Wingwiper]

Regardless of whether it's 1k or 2k rounds; one gun or ten.... as the owner of a couple of Model 36's, this test is interesting and useful, IMHO

 

[stiab]

The "does my gun make my *** look too big" question asked the most is...Can I shoot +P's in my M-10, 12, 36, 37 etc.

I disagree. To me the queston most asked is whether or not shooting +Ps will DAMAGE THE GUN. I agree with what Smithnut said on this subject, but will have to paraphrase his statement since I am not going back to search for it: to tell someone with a gun you have not seen that it is OK to shoot +P ammo from any time period is not a prudent thing to do on the forum.

Those were not his exact words, but it does convey the same message. Probably 95% of the time it will be OK, but to indicate that IT IS ALWAYS OK may be over reaching.

 

[Osprey]

Stiab,

I believe this is the comment from SmithNut.

Originally posted by SmithNut:
While it's generally thought that today's Plus P is mostly a marketing ploy by some, I'm of the opinion that there have been some stout Plus P and Plus P Plus ammo made over the years.
When someone asks if Plus P is OK to use in their gun, and you say yes, absolutely I believe you are giving naive and poor advise. Who knows what they have, when they bought it, how old it is, etc. The factory says no, there is a reason for that. The lawyers, afterall, are there to keep the company out of trouble due to doing something the gun wasn't designed to do. This discussion isn't about steel framed K frames, it's about the alloy versions. These guns aren't being made today, why? Is it because they are not popular? Maybe, maybe not. It's possible that the guns presented too many problems, whether that be in manufacturing (cracked frames are common, afterall), or from use, or - a combination of both - I'm of of the opinion that S&W is advising against using hot ammo in this gun for a reason.
Regardless, you can do whatever you want with the gun, if you use Plus P in it and it blows up, at a minimum you are out a gun as the factory will not fix it under warranty, if anything worse happens then you may have some medical bills to pay.....
I've got ammo in my stash that was made 30-40-50 years ago and it still shoots great, so who knows what the ammo vintage is that someone is planning on using? Too much risk for me.

Prudent advice...

sprey

 

[stiab]

Yes, that's it, thanks Osprey.

 

[budrichard]

What can we conclude from our successful firing of 1,000 rounds of +P ammo through a single test gun?

Believe me when I say that i am not being contentious but you did ask the question.
When one has NOT finished a test program and begins to think about the results and how to interpret shows a lack of understanding of how properly to conduct such a program. I won't bore you with another anecdote about a person that conducts such tests on Damascus barreled shotguns but suffice it to say, I am the only person that contests his methodolgy and results.
When conducting such a testing program one documents the methodology, results and uses that information to draw conclusions. This is then published in a recognised journal and subjected to 'Peer' review.
Now if you had a degree in Metalurgy or had someone on your team with the engineering/scientific credentials, then you might have some valid conclusions.
But as previously pointed out, the +P specification has been interpreted by many manufactures over the years. Frankly, I have some original Super Vel 110 gr 38 Specials, that i would not fire in a Model 12, not that i would expect catastrophic failure but more of a lock up problem, long term failure is another issue.
So, in short, my opinion is its too early to speculate about conclusions without being finished.-Dick

 

[Osprey]

I'm happy to report the first test update of 2008. I succesfully "processed" 120 rounds of +P ammo tonight. I recommend going to The Log on page 1, second entry, to check out the new data (and the old entries as well). Tonight's session was somewhat diluted by the sharing of range time with a couple of Glocks; a G19 and a recently acquired used G23 that I was trying out for the first time.

I'd also like to mention that today is kind of a milestone of sorts. 15 years ago today (1/16/93), I was sitting in my appartment in Fairfax, VA, when my sister called from a hospital in NY. My father had been admitted and was declining rapidly. That call was followed a couple of hours later with another informing me that my dad, the man who sparked and nutured my interest in firearms (and many other things), had passed away.

Long time forum members are probably experiencing a bit of deja vu. Over the last 15 years, there have been many a reference to the 16th day of January attributed to me. I try to go shooting every year on this date. If dad has internet access I imagine he's enjoying following this test as much as I am conducting it.

I hope you're all still enjoying it too.

Happy New Year...

...

sprey

 

[big50_1]

Osprey-good test of the mdl. 12 and good celebration of fond memories. Way to go!

 

[remat457]

Originally posted by budrichard:
When conducting such a testing program one documents the methodology, results and uses that information to draw conclusions. This is then published in a recognised journal and subjected to 'Peer' review.
Now if you had a degree in Metalurgy or had someone on your team with the engineering/scientific credentials, then you might have some valid conclusions.

Hey, you just nullified the conclusion of every firearm review and so-called "torture" test ever printed in a gun mag (and maybe rightfully so)

To me, the results are worthwhile.

 

[deckert]

As the proud owner of a Model 12 myself, I thank both you and your Dad for this fine, practical test.

I have my own little rituals to honor my Dad, who has also passed, and I believe yours does honor to both of you.

Thank you my friend.

 

[Poohgyrr]

Originally posted by MOONDAWG: If a dog's owner tells me his dog will bite, I'll take his word and not wait for a sceintific answer from the AKC
MOONDAWG

I was drinking a hot cup of coffee and enjoying our crisp, frosty morning when I read this... My chuckle almost made me spill...

I always try to keep things straight and not forget what life is all about.

I think your example is a pretty good way of doing that.