Thoughts on the 3" Model 60's Durability

[moxie]

Let's put this in perspective.

Is the SP-101 beefier and therefore more durable? Maybe.

But, ask yourself, you with the drawer full of S&W revolvers, when's the last time you wore one of them out?

Get the gun you like and don't look back.

 

[Erich]

But, ask yourself, you with the drawer full of S&W revolvers, when's the last time you wore one of them out?

Well, make sure you don't cycle the DA trigger too fast. When I was managing a decent-sized gun store in the late Eighties and we handled large police department trade-ins, I saw manydozens of out-of-time S&W magnum revolvers. I've only had one S&W revolver come out of time myself (a Model 13 that was not abused), but that's an easy fix.

Anyway, is that "worn out"? Or is it generally pilot-error wear-and-tear? FWIW, as far as serious wear goes (as was stated above), there are things that can go wrong other than the cylinder (compare the forcing cones . . .), but it's unlikely.

I've yet to see a worn-out or out-of-time SP.

 

[M3Stuart]

You can't go wrong with either.

I have a 60-9 2" and a 642 pro. IMHO; few people would enjoy shooting .357 out of a m60.

Really, if you want to intentionally hurt your hand (and damage yourself), just shoot hot .38 specials out of a 642. At least that way you won't ALSO go DEAF from the noise you'll get from shooting .357s out of it.

Hey, where's the pics in this thread?!? 60-9 wearing Hogue Bantam grips.

 

[Edmo]

Thanks for all of the replies...

I'm not a glutton for recoil punishment, but rather just wondering how "dainty" the 3" 60 would be with full power loads. After talking with the mentioned gunsmith, it sounded like this gun was almost a magnum in name only and prone to the various problems you can get when you stuff too much power into too small of gun.

I already have several revolvers I take along with me in the woods, but they all are heavier than the Model 60 would be. One which was with me in the woods of Alaska is my "flinch-master". This gun is a 4" 629 Mountain Gun and with full power 44 Mag loads it is a handful. Magnum rounds now see more duty as woods rounds and my lighter 44 handloads get the range time. The power (and weight) of this gun isn't needed for woods protection now that I live in Arkansas where the bitey-scratchy critters don't grow as big.

I know S&W makes lightweight snubbies in .357 so I would think a stainless gun with a longer barrel would less snappy and likely stronger over time than the alloy snubs. The 3" Model 60 would be a lighter gun than my 686 or 629 for all day carry in the woods. Additionally, the 3" barrel would give me a sight radius advantage over a snubbie and provide a little more time to burn powder before it turns into the fireball blast from the nose.

I just thought it was a neat concept for a revolver - Thinner, lighter, yet with a 3" barrel and good sights. I wouldn't employ it in a primary self defense role, but rather a light general purpose sidearm for in the woods.

Edmo

 

[BIKER DAVE]

I currently own a model 60 in .357mag with a 2'' bbl. I carry it with .357's, but prefer to shoot .38's.Years ago a friend and I had model 66's, we used to shoot handloaded 125 gr. .357's constantly.Never knew you weren't supposed to shoot that load through them.His forcing cone cracked.Luckily mine didn't.If a k frame couldn't handle .357's I fail to see how a j frame is going to hold up with any bullet weight full house .357 loads.I have a couple of model 27's that I shoot my .357's through with no worries.Still shoot my model 66 too, but with diffferent loads and not as many.

 

[colt_saa]

It is way too early to know what the ultimate durability/lifespan of the J-magnum design is. It was only introduced 17 years ago.

I have several J-Magnums. I have owned them since the day they came out. My ankle gun changed to a J-magnum as soon as possible.

I use several as training firearms. My oldest J-magnum only has a little over 7000 full magnums through it so far. Many of us have qualified with that J-magnum or another with full magnum ammunition.

These are not supposed to be fun to shoot. They are supposed to be easy to carry and provide as much power as possible to help get you out of a bad situation

My only 3" J-magnum is a model 60 pro. It is too new to make a durability comment on. Less than a 1000 Magnums so far.

 

[chief38]

I never thought that J Frames (regardless of bbl. length) should be shot with 357 Magnums. Just too much recoil, muzzle flash, unburned powder coming out of the barrel therefore most of the velocity advantage of a 357 is wasted because the powder is burning outside the barrel. A J Frame really is at it's best with the one of the top rated 38 special +P's and like Buffalo Bore, Speer Gold Dots or the tried & true Rem. R38S12 FBI load. If you want to shoot occasional .357's then a M65, M66, M19 with 2 1/2 - 3" tubes is a better way to go.
Just my .02 cents.......

 

[mbliss57]

I never thought that J Frames (regardless of bbl. length) should be shot with 357 Magnums. Just too much recoil, muzzle flash, unburned powder coming out of the barrel therefore most of the velocity advantage of a 357 is wasted because the powder is burning outside the barrel. A J Frame really is at it's best with the one of the top rated 38 special +P's and like Buffalo Bore, Speer Gold Dots or the tried & true Rem. R38S12 FBI load. If you want to shoot occasional .357's then a M65, M66, M19 with 2 1/2 - 3" tubes is a better way to go.
Just my .02 cents.......

My previous post was about whether a J frame could handle the .357 from an engineering standpoint..frame & cylinder.
Many seem to think it cannot & I disagree strongly.
But your suggesting that it is not the best frame (actually barrel length) from a a ballistics standpoint I completely agree with that. I think a 4" is the minimum tube size to get really good benefit from the round and a 6" is better. You get some benefit from a 3" but the round was made to be used in 4" tubes or longer for maximum benefit.

 

[Erich]

Just for the record: I have absolute confidence that the S&W J-frame .357s can handle the cartridge from an engineering standpoint.

But the call of the original question was regarding long-term durability in comparison to the Ruger SP-101 . . . and I feel the lighter S&W loses out there.

 

[gbuhrmaster]

M60 3" 38 special

In 1991 I purchased an M60 3",in 38 special to replace my M36,2", in .22 LR as my trail gun. Low power 38 SWC lead bullets are cheap to reload, as easy to shoot as .22s and the 3" bbl increases velocity over the 2", points better, and still is easy to conceal. For anti-social carry I load +P 125 grainers. The recoil is mild and very accurate. This is a gun I will never part with.

 

[jwk]

The Ruger is definitely a stronger beast than the J frame. That is theory anyway because my guess is that you will wear out your hands and wrists and a couple of your buddies' hands and wrists before you wear out a J frame shooting full house .357s.

I'd pick the one you like best and not worry about it. If you do ever wear it out, it's a tool so replace it. I realize that goes against the grain of some folks here but I see all firearms as tools to be used. If something is so rare that I can't use it as it was intended to be used, I probably don't need to own it (unless I'm buying it solely for an investment which looking at N frame prices, I wish I had bought up a lot of them and put them away instead of putting $ in a mutual fund).

S&W + = adjustable sights and a better trigger. Also light weight which makes carry easier.

Ruger + = More weight for less recoil. If you are fixed sight fan, the Ruger has them. One thing I saw recently was a SP with an AO Big Dot tritium front sight and what looked like a Novak low mount rear sight. While that isn't going to give you a precise sight picture for us "mature" shooters it is a set of sights that can be seen without glasses which is a plus.

 

[snowman.45]

I have an SP101 and a 640. Both are excellent guns. The Ruger, as has been mentioned in previous posts, is heavier and bulkier. I use mine when I need to conceal a handgun in which I can carry heavy .357 loads in the mountains. The 640 is also quite a nice handgun. I generally carry 158 gr. rounds, although I'm trying to find some more 135 GDHP SB for it also. I wouldn't hesitate to carry it, either. However, and this is just my personal rule, if I'm going to carry anything really heavy and hot in .357 (180 gr. and above), I'll carry the Ruger.