That is really cool! I'm fairly certain that I read that early on they did chamber some Model 10s for .357 mag, but then swiched to a model 19 designation. This could be totally wrong of course, but I thought it was interesting. I imagine that if it worked for that early batch it should work for future revolvers. It would be foolish to have two separate batches of frames and let one get improper heat treatment and the other get a slightly better one.
S&W Model 10-5 Missaligned cylinder and cylinder-barrel gap issue
- Thread starter ct241
- Start date
Another thing that makes me believe all frames would receive the same HT is that they must be finish machined after the HT in that HT causes small dimensional changes in the piece as the carbon and iron atoms are rearranged during HT as the crystal like matrix is reformed(sorry no such thing as a steel molecule). Thats when they would machine things like side plate joints, adjustable sight grooves etc. Having inventories of differently HT J, K, Land N frames would be a nightmare to track through the various machining processes.
I remember some one being against machining a frame to accept ajustable sights. Now why would it matter is I did it or S&W did it. If you take a K frame and machine it to accept adjustable sights It will measure the same as a factory one. When I did it I used a factory adjustable sight K frame to get the measurements to make my cuts on the model 10 frame.
The are revolvers not some super secret spy plane.
I remember some one being against machining a frame to accept ajustable sights. Now why would it matter is I did it or S&W did it. If you take a K frame and machine it to accept adjustable sights It will measure the same as a factory one. When I did it I used a factory adjustable sight K frame to get the measurements to make my cuts on the model 10 frame.
The are revolvers not some super secret spy plane.
Similar threads
