“Space Age” Revolvers and .357 Magnum Ammo

[Cataphract]

Hi All,

I wanted folks opinions on the light weight revolvers chambered in .357 caliber. Do you trust these lighter materials to handle .357 and .38 +p ammo? Has anyone had a frame break on them? I kind of lean towards caution and say that if I am going to shoot .38 +p, I want a revolver rated for .357. If I am going to shoot .357, I’d feel more comfortable with a steel frame. Any idea insights are appreciated!

 

[robertrwalsh]

I have shot my GFs light weight snubbie .357. It was REAL unpleasant with full power ammo so I sure wasn't going to shoot enough of it to be a problem.

 

[YkcorCal]

I have read the cylinders have limits on the bullet weights, as in don't go below 125gr. bullet weight, as such ammo in .357 Magnum can cause problems. An internet search will show the articles. I was researching it when considering the 8 shot .357 S&W revolvers. I have zero personal knowledge as to owning one. I'm sure others here can help!

 

[stansdds]

When I selected a J-frame for carry, I went with a Model 640-1. Chambered in 357 Magnum, but all stainless steel. The cylinder is not really the problem in the lightweight J-frames. The lightweight frames are more prone to cracking along the thinnest spot beneath the barrel in the crane cutout area. I'm sure the lightweight frames will stretch sooner than the steel frames with full power magnum loads. Even with all steel construction, the little J-frame is still a real handful when firing full power magnum loads. I prefer reduced power magnum loads or 38 Special +P in my 640-1.

 

[Breakaway500]

Thousands of .357 Magnum rounds through my TRR8 (327) with no issues.I shoot all bullet weights and configurations. Feels like the day I bought it new;perfect. I'd post a picture but nobody wants to see an old nasty rubber gripped, holo sighted revolver...

 

[Oldfrt]

I have a Charter Arms Mag Pug it's not the most comfortable gun to shoot 158 grain 357's in. I haven't shot it much only got it just before world went to ****, it does well with 38sp.

 

[mikerjf]

If you want that 357 to do you any good you're going to have to practice with it... and that practice will be a whole lot happier for your hand with a steel frame gun.

 

[gr7070]

Hi All,

I wanted folks opinions on the light weight revolvers chambered in .357 caliber. Do you trust these lighter materials to handle .357 and .38 +p ammo? Has anyone had a frame break on them? I kind of lean towards caution and say that if I am going to shoot .38 +p, I want a revolver rated for .357. If I am going to shoot .357, I’d feel more comfortable with a steel frame. Any idea insights are appreciated!

I think the engineers who design these know better than anyone of us with opinions based on no facts or reasoning.

I don't mean this is critical of you. Just that they've actually run numbers and done full size tests.

They also have a lot to lose if they're wrong.

 

[Pef]

I don't have concerns about structural integrity of lightweight scandium guns.

But try staying on target with a very lightweight revolver shooting .357s. And then try to stay on target using only one hand (which may be the way you are forced to use your gun during a self defense situation).

It's why I carry an airweight with 158gr standard .38's. Much more tame, much easier to control.

 

[uncleted327]

I have no concerns with my 360. Scandium frame, stainless cylinder. They've been around long enough to have a good track record. Even if I never planned to shoot magnums I'd still get one just for the pinned sight and fully shrouded ejector alone.

 

[Gearhead Jim]

I have a 340PD .357 with the titanium cylinder. It is marked "No less than 120 gr bullet".

Looking to reduce the recoil level somewhat, I tried 50 rds of 110 Magnum loads, mixed Remington and Winchester.

The front face of the cylinder looked like it had been attacked with a wood rasp- lots of scrapes and gouges, must be from the high pressure/high temperature/high volume of gasses from the light weight Magnum loads. I sent the gun back to S&W and they installed a new cylinder, can't recall if they charged me for it.

Shooting 125 gr magnums is brutal on the hands (I use small grips for pocket carry), std velocity 110 gr handloads were not bad and no cylinder face erosion.

 

[waffles]

I have a 340SC. Aside from the other issues (frame wore down to the point the cylinder can escape rearwards, which unless it's the yoke stretching contributing, is not an issue related to shooting) it's absolutely miserable to shoot .357s out of, to the point of bruising in some people, and drawing blood between my thumb and the rest of the fingers after a box. It's not bad with .38 +P, though not super pleasant. What I found best for practice was my stockpile of .38SPL M41 ball, just a nice, light, 130gr .38SPL load for most practice, with a few cylinders of full house .357 magnum to finish out the day for practice more equivalent to the real world.

 

[357-RevolverGuy]

The lighter frame 357's will definitely have more felt recoil than their steel counterpart. One reason to invest in a good set of grips.

 

[GaryHK]

Eventually, at a certain weight point (xx ounces, probably different for everyone) lighter is not better and you are going to pay for it either on your hand or with frame failure. Either of which renders the gun into a useless, light paperweight.

Just my opinion

 

[waffles]

Eventually, at a certain weight point (xx ounces, probably different for everyone) lighter is not better and you are going to pay for it either on your hand or with frame failure. Either of which renders the gun into a useless, light paperweight.

Just my opinion

I agree with you as a shooter, but the scandium Js are stupid light, to the point where I can (or could) drop mine into a pocket for a walk to the store for beer, drop in a fanny pack when I was going to go for a run, or any number of similar situations, where I otherwise would be unarmed. You're going to feel it for sure, but I'd hope in a defensive situation my hand's comfort would be low on the list of concerns.

 

[GaryHK]

I agree with you as a shooter, but the scandium Js are stupid light, to the point where I can (or could) drop mine into a pocket for a walk to the store for beer, drop in a fanny pack when I was going to go for a run, or any number of similar situations, where I otherwise would be unarmed. You're going to feel it for sure, but I'd hope in a defensive situation my hand's comfort would be low on the list of concerns.

I get all of this.

My issue with blast and recoil is that if it is so bad that it causes you to flinch, that learned behavior will be magnified 10x in an actual self defense situation.

 

[Sevens]

I’ll add only that the difference between .38 Special and .38 Special+P is so -TINY- that if there was a “do-over” then I can assure you they would have done it differently and they would have made .38 Special+P stronger/faster/higher pressure because it’s so small that it is nearly irrelevant.

Maximum chamber pressure is an agreed upon industry standard and regulated by SAAMI. If the gun maker and the ammo maker stick to the standard, then you are looking at this:

.38 Special: 17,000psi peak pressure
.38 Spl+P: 18,500psi peak pressure
.357 Magnum: 35,000psi peak pressure

If we are talking about an heirloom revolver made in 1908 or a cheap pot-metal junker like an RG or Clerke, that’s a different conversation. But if we are talking a modern revolver made by any reputable gunmaker and using modern materials and heat treating, then your comfort level of needing a .357 Magnum revolver for shooting the absolutely sedate .38 Special +P is, by the numbers, far beyond overkill.

If we were arguing straight numbers and you would only wish to use a .357 revolver for .38+P, then the same numbers would tell you that you have no comfort level for EVER shooting any .357 Magnum round in any .357 Magnum revolver.

There is a lot to be said for comfort level and I would never suggest to ignore your comfort level. I would however suggest that you take a genuine look at the numbers and adjust your comfort level.

 

[cmj8591]

I bought this 360 shortly after they were released. It has had a ton of full power 357 through it and more 38 than I can count. No issues whatsoever. It is the most challenging gun to shoot that I own and I have lots of 44mag and a 500 to compare it to. I don't consider it a recreational gun. It's not a gun that I just bring to the range to shoot. The rounds that go through it are to maintain my proficiency. As a carry gun, I can't think of anything that beats it. I have settled on a Vedder IWB as my regular carry. I also use an old Bianchi thumb break leather belt holster that I use to carry when I'm hunting, ATVing or snowmobiling. My regular carry ammo is different than what is in the photo. I carry old school, Winchester 158 grain lead SWC. In an up close shoot out, which is what you are carrying this for, you will be so focused that you won't hear the blast or feel the recoil.

 

[psquarejr]

I have not seen or heard of a true failure related to the metallurgy of the lighter revolver materials. If I remember correctly, S&W warns of firing lightweight bullets (110gr) in a scandium frame because of the flame cutting is worse on a scandium revolver, not because the frame is going to crack from harsh loads. If I am wrong, I will not be offended if someone corrects me. I have a 386PD and a TRR8 that I have no issues with firing 148gr wadcutters or 158gr semi-wadcutters, hollowpoints or FMJFP bullets. Accuracy is better in both revolvers with the .357 loads compared to normal or +P 38 special loads.

 

[colt_saa]

Your thread title “Space Age” Revolvers and .357 Magnum Ammoalmost makes this sound like some newfangled idea.

Scandium framed Magnum revolvers' have been with us for roughly a Quarter Century so far. The three snubbies below are chambered in 357 Magnum, 41 Magnum and 10MM Magnum. It is wonderful to be able to carry a lightweight package around while still knowing so much power is on tap if needed

I currently own 8 Smith & Wesson Scandium framed revolvers and 3 Taurus Total Titanium revolvers. I will (and have) stake my life on any of them

Over the decades Tens of Thousands of magnum rounds have been put through these light weight pistols.

I have carried a 357 Magnum J-frame with my almost every day of my life since 1996. I have J-frames in various weights and configurations. While I am totally comfortable with a Scandium framed gun's reliability, when it comes to shooting my preference is for an all steel revolver to mitigate some of the recoil and I used to always carry the heaviest revolver that my clothing makes possible. However I have just become to comfortable with the M&P 340 and that is usually what goes with me

My first Model 340 has well over 7,000 full Magnum rounds through it so far. I qualified with that as a backup gun every year. Over that same timespan perhaps 100 of my fellow Troopers used the 340 to try the off-duty gun qualification course of fire. Some passed and some did not

As to guns breaking, ALL guns are susceptible to breaking no matter what they are manufactured from. I have had more steel Smith & Wesson revolvers break on me than Scandium or alloy framed revolvers

ALL Smith & Wesson alloy framed revolvers (including Scandium) are susceptible to frame cracking under the barrel. It has been going one for more than 7 Decades now. This type of crack is not a catastrophic failure point and the Factory has always stood behind it. When it comes to the frame crack under the barrel, I had it happen to a 1950s M&P lightweight and to a 2004 manufactured Model 327. When the revolvers came back from repair, I went back to using them