Let's look at some of the stainless options...and then let's talk about actually shooting them with .357 Magnum.
S&W Model 60
Starting at the bottom right is a 3" Model 60. I have a 2 1/8" Model 60 as well, but I found that the extra 7/8" of barrel makes no difference in IWB carry and is much more efficient with a .357 Magnum load.
The upsides of the Model 60 are that it has a generally better trigger than the Ruger SP101 and is about 5 oz lighter.
The downsides with the Model 60 is that it's 5 oz lighter than the SP 101 and is less pleasant to shoot with .357 Mag. It's also to as strong and the forcing cone in particular is thin by .357 Mag standards. People worry about forcing cone cracks in K frame .357s that have steady diet of .357 Mag, and the only thing that prevents this from being a common issue with the J Magnum frame .357s is the fact that they are painful to shoot with a full power .357 load. I suspect the S&W engineers realize that not many folks are going to put a steady diet of .357 Mag through a J-Magnum frame revolver.
At a minimum, you're going to want a good recoil absorbing grip on a Model 60 if you plan to shoot very much .357 Mag ammo in it. The Hogue Monogrip works well.
Ruger SP101
As noted above the Ruger SP101 is about 5 oz heavier than a Model 6 with the same length barrel. The SP101 has a grip peg than a grip frame, and the extra weight is located in the under lugged barrel and in a heavier frame, top strap and forcing cone. It's a stronger revolver and better able to tolerate a steady diet of .357 Mag.
Ruger's fire control parts are a little beefier and the triggers on them have a much more mechanical feel. That's not all bad as it's easier to stage a double action trigger pull consistently with a Ruger. The trigger pull on the SP101 is high out of the box, but if you have some mechanical skills it's about a 20 minute process to change out the hammer spring and trigger return springs with a higher set from Wolf. The hammer spring is easy to change, while you'll have to get into the clockwork to swap out the return spring, but most of the improvement comes from the return spring. Once you've swapped it out the over all weight is comparable to a Model 60, but the Model 60 will still feel smoother
S&W Model 66
On the bottom left is a S&W Model 66 with a 2 1/2" barrel. It's as short as you ever want to go with a .357 Magnum from an efficiency standpoint.
The Model 66 increases the weight to 36 oz, fully loaded. I don't the Model 66 to be a problem to carry or conceal in a well made IWB holster with a quality carry belt. The extra weight and size compared to a Model 60 or SP101 doesn't make it uncomfortable to carry or hard to conceal, but it does make it decidedly more pleasant to shoot.
The 2.5" Model 65 and Model 66 are in my opinion the smallest practical .357 Magnum revolvers out there. They have enough size and weight to be accurate and controllable with .357 Magnum and are pleasant enough to shoot with a recoil absorbing grip that you can actually put 50 rounds through them in a range session without developing a flinch.
That said, they still have the forcing cone and crane cut of the Model 19 with a similar potential for forcing cone cracks once the forcing cone starts to erode.
I won't go into the details here, but suffice to say the problem isn't lighter bullets, but rather heavier charges of colloidal ball powder that cause the erosion that leads to the cracks For example, a 125 gr bullet will have a charge of Win 296 or H110 that is about 25% larger than the same charge of the same powder with a 158 gr bullet. If you're going to shoot a lot of .357 Magnum stay with one of the medium burning flake powders - they'll reduce erosion and they'll actually give you less recoil and more velocity in a 2 1/2" to 3" barrel.
Ruger Speed Six (and Service Six and Security Six)
Above the Model 66 is a Ruger Speed Six. The Speed Six is a round butt revolver with fixed sights. The Service Six also had fixed sights and came in 2 3/4" and 4" lengths but had square buy. The Security Six is a square butt revolver with adjustable sights, and came in 2 3/4", 4" and 6" lengths.
Ruger brought them out to compete with Colt and S&W in the law enforcement market and as such designed them in a direct response to the problems police departments were having with a steady diet of .357 Magnum in K frame .357s. The Six series forcing cones are notably heavier, the frame is stronger, and the cylinder is double locked at both the rear and the bottom. They were designed to endure steady use with .357 Magnum and do that job very well. They are built like tanks.
The Ruger fire control parts are larger than on a K-frame, which reflects the use of injection molding to make them - but that extra mass also made them extremely strong and it's very rare to find a Six series pistol that is out of time, pushes off or is otherwise broken.
As noted above, the downside is a slightly more mechanical feel to the trigger. In my experience however in terms of overall quality of trigger pull the Rugers and S&Ws of that era both vary and you'll find they over lap, with some Rugers having better triggers than some S&Ws.
Weight wise the Speed Six will weigh about an once more than a Model 66 fully loaded, with the same style grip. It will also usually fit in the same holster.
Ruger replaced the Six Series with the similar sized GP100, which took the Six series design and added a "peg" grip frame, a crane lock to "improve" an already more than strong enough design, and a full under lug barrel.
S&W 686+
On the top left is a 2 1/2" S&W 686+. It's an L-frame revolver designed to address the cracking problems in the K-frame .357s with the same grip frame, but a slightly larger frame that eliminates the need for the clearance cut for the crane.
They come in both 6 and 7 shot variants with the 7 shot models first showing up in 1996. You'll note the full under lug barrel, which on a 2 1/2" barrel doesn't really make any difference. The 2 1/2" 686+ weighs 40 oz fully loaded - 4 ounces more than the Model 66. I don't find the extra weight a problem in all day IWB carry, assuming a good holster and belt, and while the extra weight isn't all that noticeable in shooting, every little bit extra helps.
In both cases, these 2 1/2" K and L frame .357s will consistently hit an 8" round plate at 25 yards offhand if the shooter does his part, so they have excellent combat accuracy.
---
In my opinion, if you're going to shoot .357 Mag as anything more than a novelty you're going to want a K or L frame revolver - or the similar L frame sized Speed Six or GP100.
If you're going to carry .357 magnum, you should practice with .357 Magnum. However, unless you hand load, that will mean factory loaded ammunition which usually uses one of the slow burning (for a handgun) colloidal ball powders that produce more velocity in a 6 to 8 inch barrel but do nothing for a snub nose - except increase forcing cone erosion.
That makes the K frame a second choice unless you can hand load your own ammo. On the other hand, unless you hand load, you probably won't be able to shoot enough to crack a K-frame as it'll cost you 3 or 4 times as much to buy commercial .357 Mag ammunition.
.38 Special in a +P loading is another option. You'll lose 150-200 fps compared to a .357 Magnum load, but it is more pleasant to shoot and easier on the gun do to the much smaller medium speed powder charges creating much less forcing cone erosion.
S&W Model 60
Starting at the bottom right is a 3" Model 60. I have a 2 1/8" Model 60 as well, but I found that the extra 7/8" of barrel makes no difference in IWB carry and is much more efficient with a .357 Magnum load.
The upsides of the Model 60 are that it has a generally better trigger than the Ruger SP101 and is about 5 oz lighter.
The downsides with the Model 60 is that it's 5 oz lighter than the SP 101 and is less pleasant to shoot with .357 Mag. It's also to as strong and the forcing cone in particular is thin by .357 Mag standards. People worry about forcing cone cracks in K frame .357s that have steady diet of .357 Mag, and the only thing that prevents this from being a common issue with the J Magnum frame .357s is the fact that they are painful to shoot with a full power .357 load. I suspect the S&W engineers realize that not many folks are going to put a steady diet of .357 Mag through a J-Magnum frame revolver.
At a minimum, you're going to want a good recoil absorbing grip on a Model 60 if you plan to shoot very much .357 Mag ammo in it. The Hogue Monogrip works well.
Ruger SP101
As noted above the Ruger SP101 is about 5 oz heavier than a Model 6 with the same length barrel. The SP101 has a grip peg than a grip frame, and the extra weight is located in the under lugged barrel and in a heavier frame, top strap and forcing cone. It's a stronger revolver and better able to tolerate a steady diet of .357 Mag.
Ruger's fire control parts are a little beefier and the triggers on them have a much more mechanical feel. That's not all bad as it's easier to stage a double action trigger pull consistently with a Ruger. The trigger pull on the SP101 is high out of the box, but if you have some mechanical skills it's about a 20 minute process to change out the hammer spring and trigger return springs with a higher set from Wolf. The hammer spring is easy to change, while you'll have to get into the clockwork to swap out the return spring, but most of the improvement comes from the return spring. Once you've swapped it out the over all weight is comparable to a Model 60, but the Model 60 will still feel smoother
S&W Model 66
On the bottom left is a S&W Model 66 with a 2 1/2" barrel. It's as short as you ever want to go with a .357 Magnum from an efficiency standpoint.
The Model 66 increases the weight to 36 oz, fully loaded. I don't the Model 66 to be a problem to carry or conceal in a well made IWB holster with a quality carry belt. The extra weight and size compared to a Model 60 or SP101 doesn't make it uncomfortable to carry or hard to conceal, but it does make it decidedly more pleasant to shoot.
The 2.5" Model 65 and Model 66 are in my opinion the smallest practical .357 Magnum revolvers out there. They have enough size and weight to be accurate and controllable with .357 Magnum and are pleasant enough to shoot with a recoil absorbing grip that you can actually put 50 rounds through them in a range session without developing a flinch.
That said, they still have the forcing cone and crane cut of the Model 19 with a similar potential for forcing cone cracks once the forcing cone starts to erode.
I won't go into the details here, but suffice to say the problem isn't lighter bullets, but rather heavier charges of colloidal ball powder that cause the erosion that leads to the cracks For example, a 125 gr bullet will have a charge of Win 296 or H110 that is about 25% larger than the same charge of the same powder with a 158 gr bullet. If you're going to shoot a lot of .357 Magnum stay with one of the medium burning flake powders - they'll reduce erosion and they'll actually give you less recoil and more velocity in a 2 1/2" to 3" barrel.
Ruger Speed Six (and Service Six and Security Six)
Above the Model 66 is a Ruger Speed Six. The Speed Six is a round butt revolver with fixed sights. The Service Six also had fixed sights and came in 2 3/4" and 4" lengths but had square buy. The Security Six is a square butt revolver with adjustable sights, and came in 2 3/4", 4" and 6" lengths.
Ruger brought them out to compete with Colt and S&W in the law enforcement market and as such designed them in a direct response to the problems police departments were having with a steady diet of .357 Magnum in K frame .357s. The Six series forcing cones are notably heavier, the frame is stronger, and the cylinder is double locked at both the rear and the bottom. They were designed to endure steady use with .357 Magnum and do that job very well. They are built like tanks.
The Ruger fire control parts are larger than on a K-frame, which reflects the use of injection molding to make them - but that extra mass also made them extremely strong and it's very rare to find a Six series pistol that is out of time, pushes off or is otherwise broken.
As noted above, the downside is a slightly more mechanical feel to the trigger. In my experience however in terms of overall quality of trigger pull the Rugers and S&Ws of that era both vary and you'll find they over lap, with some Rugers having better triggers than some S&Ws.
Weight wise the Speed Six will weigh about an once more than a Model 66 fully loaded, with the same style grip. It will also usually fit in the same holster.
Ruger replaced the Six Series with the similar sized GP100, which took the Six series design and added a "peg" grip frame, a crane lock to "improve" an already more than strong enough design, and a full under lug barrel.
S&W 686+
On the top left is a 2 1/2" S&W 686+. It's an L-frame revolver designed to address the cracking problems in the K-frame .357s with the same grip frame, but a slightly larger frame that eliminates the need for the clearance cut for the crane.
They come in both 6 and 7 shot variants with the 7 shot models first showing up in 1996. You'll note the full under lug barrel, which on a 2 1/2" barrel doesn't really make any difference. The 2 1/2" 686+ weighs 40 oz fully loaded - 4 ounces more than the Model 66. I don't find the extra weight a problem in all day IWB carry, assuming a good holster and belt, and while the extra weight isn't all that noticeable in shooting, every little bit extra helps.
In both cases, these 2 1/2" K and L frame .357s will consistently hit an 8" round plate at 25 yards offhand if the shooter does his part, so they have excellent combat accuracy.
---
In my opinion, if you're going to shoot .357 Mag as anything more than a novelty you're going to want a K or L frame revolver - or the similar L frame sized Speed Six or GP100.
If you're going to carry .357 magnum, you should practice with .357 Magnum. However, unless you hand load, that will mean factory loaded ammunition which usually uses one of the slow burning (for a handgun) colloidal ball powders that produce more velocity in a 6 to 8 inch barrel but do nothing for a snub nose - except increase forcing cone erosion.
That makes the K frame a second choice unless you can hand load your own ammo. On the other hand, unless you hand load, you probably won't be able to shoot enough to crack a K-frame as it'll cost you 3 or 4 times as much to buy commercial .357 Mag ammunition.
.38 Special in a +P loading is another option. You'll lose 150-200 fps compared to a .357 Magnum load, but it is more pleasant to shoot and easier on the gun do to the much smaller medium speed powder charges creating much less forcing cone erosion.
