Which .357 frame is stronger?
- Thread starter 1961MJS
- Start date
nachogrande
Member
UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING REALLY WILD PLANNED FOR IT.
The L frame should hold up fine. During steel challenge/bowling pin matches (5 plates) if you miss one and need the extra shot, you are out of the winners circle anyway (with any 1/2 decent competition), so having an extra round for that type of use does nothing for me. If 1 extra round is of great importance to you for S/D, may as well go with a higher capacity bottom feeder.
The L frame should hold up fine. During steel challenge/bowling pin matches (5 plates) if you miss one and need the extra shot, you are out of the winners circle anyway (with any 1/2 decent competition), so having an extra round for that type of use does nothing for me. If 1 extra round is of great importance to you for S/D, may as well go with a higher capacity bottom feeder.
At the end of a range session, your shooting wrist will have given up before your S&W L-frame gets tired.
At the volumes you will shoot, any 357 will do just fine. I prefer the 586/686 to any of S&W's 357s since they have the long cylinder and do not have the unprotected barrel in the frame found on the 27/28's.
Last edited:
bmcgilvray
Member
"... do not have the unprotected barrel in the frame found on the 27/28's."
?
Model 27's live here as does a Model 586. What's this "unprotected barrel in the frame" business?
?
Model 27's live here as does a Model 586. What's this "unprotected barrel in the frame" business?
cowboy4evr
Member
I'm with you on that one Bob , what the heck is " an unprotected barrel in the frame " ?
Poor choice of words on my part. Notice how the cylinder fills the frame on the 686; on the 27 there is a gap between the cylinder and frame. The barrel protrudes to meet the cylinder. That portion of the barrel is 'unprotected' in relation to that of the 686.
I'm no expert but agree with those that don't think up to 2000 rounds a year is a high round count for a 686.
That being said and as much as I like my 686-4, you're gonna have to move to a GP100 or Redhawk to get "beefier" and maybe gain total confidence of strength.
Of course, your desire to carry may suffer with the added weight.
That being said and as much as I like my 686-4, you're gonna have to move to a GP100 or Redhawk to get "beefier" and maybe gain total confidence of strength.
Of course, your desire to carry may suffer with the added weight.
You should know that the L frame was the first frame size designed specifically for the .357 Magnum cartridge. Though the N frame is a fine weapon, I much prefer the size and feel of the L frame, specifically my 4" 686 no dash, bought new in 1981, when they first became available.
Attachments
Thanks, I hadn't realized that the Model 27 and 28 were N-Frames. I'll look at those also. The 627 V-Comp looks good also, but is a bit more $ and size than I want to walk around with. I haven't seen speed loaders for 8 shots either. The 586 L Comp also looks good, but I'd really rather have a 5 inch barrel, and while I think I could stand a 4 inch barrel, I think a 3 inch would be too short.
Again, thanks for the information. I have a couple more questions.
First of all I realize that 2000 rounds isn't a lot, but they will all be .357 Magnum, not 38 Specials. I have a great Model 19 that I use for match shooting. I target shoot (bullseye), not any form of action pistol, so in my circles 2000 rounds of 357 Mag is a lot, but 10000 rounds of 22LR in a target pistol and 5000 rounds through a .45 ACP isn't much at all.
cowboy4evr wrote "It's sad , folks don't realize the real strengths of the K-frame 357's . It was the " light for caliber " 110-125gr bullets that cracked forcing cones and would , over time shoot them loose . They were using a powder charge with those light bullets that is the same charge weight for the 41 magnum / 210gr bullet and that's in the N-frame ." I read a similar comment elsewhere. This is counter intuitive to me, but in order to keep the revolver running longer, using heavy loads, I need to use a heavier bullet? I plan on using jacketed bullets, which will wear the barrel more quickly, but for my purpose that's what I'll probably shoot. I have 158 grain jacketed hollow points to work up a load with. I guess I answered this one on my own.
My other question involves speed loaders for both a 686 and a 686 plus (7 shot). I have an HKS 6 shot speed loader for the Model 19. I like the Safariland speed loader better and I have 8 or those now for the same gun. The HKS carries the rounds more loosely. I noticed the Speed Beez, speed loader. These appear to be for competition shooting but they do make a belt carrier for $35 a piece. Has anyone used these and if so, how well did they work? Does anyone carry Moon Clips for defensive purposes? This place sets up the revolver for moon clips and has what are effectively pocket protectors for the Moon clips.
Welcome to TK Custom.com & Moonclips.com
Thanks
Again, thanks for the information. I have a couple more questions.
First of all I realize that 2000 rounds isn't a lot, but they will all be .357 Magnum, not 38 Specials. I have a great Model 19 that I use for match shooting. I target shoot (bullseye), not any form of action pistol, so in my circles 2000 rounds of 357 Mag is a lot, but 10000 rounds of 22LR in a target pistol and 5000 rounds through a .45 ACP isn't much at all.
cowboy4evr wrote "It's sad , folks don't realize the real strengths of the K-frame 357's . It was the " light for caliber " 110-125gr bullets that cracked forcing cones and would , over time shoot them loose . They were using a powder charge with those light bullets that is the same charge weight for the 41 magnum / 210gr bullet and that's in the N-frame ." I read a similar comment elsewhere. This is counter intuitive to me, but in order to keep the revolver running longer, using heavy loads, I need to use a heavier bullet? I plan on using jacketed bullets, which will wear the barrel more quickly, but for my purpose that's what I'll probably shoot. I have 158 grain jacketed hollow points to work up a load with. I guess I answered this one on my own.
My other question involves speed loaders for both a 686 and a 686 plus (7 shot). I have an HKS 6 shot speed loader for the Model 19. I like the Safariland speed loader better and I have 8 or those now for the same gun. The HKS carries the rounds more loosely. I noticed the Speed Beez, speed loader. These appear to be for competition shooting but they do make a belt carrier for $35 a piece. Has anyone used these and if so, how well did they work? Does anyone carry Moon Clips for defensive purposes? This place sets up the revolver for moon clips and has what are effectively pocket protectors for the Moon clips.
Welcome to TK Custom.com & Moonclips.com
Thanks
cowboy4evr
Member
The K-frame 19 and 66's were designed to shoot a 158 gr , or heavier bullet . S&W had received so much flak that the 27-28's cylinder was too short to load the " Keith " 173gr " swc in a 357 case . So , with the development of the new , at the time K-frame 357's , they lengthened the cylinder to accept the Keith swc in a 357 case . You don't have to go to a heavier bullet , just use the 158 gr as the lightest . I personally woudn't worry about jacketed bullets causing undue wear on the barrel . The velocity is too slow , not like a high powdered rifle blazing along at over twice the velocity .
The L-frame has the same longer cylinder .
The L-frame has the same longer cylinder .
Last edited:
ContinentalOp
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2009
- Messages
- 6,315
- Reaction score
- 12,813
That only applies to full-power magnum loads, such as the 125gr SJHP at ~1450fps. My understanding is that the light bullets are shorter and move at such a high rate of speed that they cross the cylinder gap into the barrel before the chamber pressure has a chance to drop, resulting in hot gases and unburnt powder hitting the forcing cone. The result is erosion over time. Heavier, longer bullets effectively seal the cylinder gap long enough to keep that from happening.
Light- or medium-power loads, like Remington's Golden Sabre 125gr mid-range .357 Magnum load, as well as .38 Special loads, don't have this issue.
CAJUNLAWYER
Member
I don't think I could afford to wear out either my 66 or my 686's.
BigBill
Absent Comrade
Well the stronger revolver in 357 magnum? Good question.
Back in the mid 70's the m19 was rumored to shoot itself apart with magnum loads. The screws come loose in any revolver that has them I don't care what brand I been there done that.
I was testing my stout reloads when I first started reloading in the mid 70's. Magnum full house loads in 125gr jhp. Through 158gr jhp I tried them all in my colt Python and ruger security six/ police service six. Both revolvers held up well. But there made from quality steels. I feel there is a difference.
The ruger Redhawk in 357 magnum to me is on the top of the heap for shooting many magnum rounds out of it. The ruger security six models in 357 is a close second. I still like the colt Python. But for a ccw magnum revolver I'd go with a ruger gp100 with the 2 3/4" barrel. I've owned and shot my police service six in 357 mag since '76. Never a problem. I'm not a snubbie guy too. My next choice would be a s&w m28 or m27 if you want a smith & Wesson. I remember seeing the Leo's packing the bigger N frame years ago. It's your choice.
Back in the mid 70's the m19 was rumored to shoot itself apart with magnum loads. The screws come loose in any revolver that has them I don't care what brand I been there done that.
I was testing my stout reloads when I first started reloading in the mid 70's. Magnum full house loads in 125gr jhp. Through 158gr jhp I tried them all in my colt Python and ruger security six/ police service six. Both revolvers held up well. But there made from quality steels. I feel there is a difference.
The ruger Redhawk in 357 magnum to me is on the top of the heap for shooting many magnum rounds out of it. The ruger security six models in 357 is a close second. I still like the colt Python. But for a ccw magnum revolver I'd go with a ruger gp100 with the 2 3/4" barrel. I've owned and shot my police service six in 357 mag since '76. Never a problem. I'm not a snubbie guy too. My next choice would be a s&w m28 or m27 if you want a smith & Wesson. I remember seeing the Leo's packing the bigger N frame years ago. It's your choice.
MikeLeitner
Member
Well, it just stands to reason. Regardless of your frame size or the length of your barrel, whenever it protrudes it shouldn't be unprotected.
It is possible
If you cast your bullets from scrounged bullet scrap and reload, it is affordable to load enough 38 Special ammo to wear out an L-frame shooting double action in revolver competition. I write from experience. The barrel was fine, but cylinder notches and hand were showing their age (round count). I had a M586 with 6" barrel and Patridge front sight.
If you cast your bullets from scrounged bullet scrap and reload, it is affordable to load enough 38 Special ammo to wear out an L-frame shooting double action in revolver competition. I write from experience. The barrel was fine, but cylinder notches and hand were showing their age (round count). I had a M586 with 6" barrel and Patridge front sight.
Hi
I ordered the S&W 686 3-5-7 with a five inch barrel. The reasons are as follows:
1. I wanted the longer sight radius of the 5 inch barrel.
2. There didn't seem to be any different in strength of the frame and cylinder between the 6 and 7 shot revolvers.
3. The idea that the un-fluted cylinder was a bit stronger and stiffer seemed like a good idea.
I didn't get the model 27 or 28 mainly because the barrel lengths that S&W currently carries are shorter than what I wanted. I also wanted the full barrel lug, which the model 27 classics don't have. I should have it next week sometime. I'll get pictures as soon as it's at the range.
Later
I ordered the S&W 686 3-5-7 with a five inch barrel. The reasons are as follows:
1. I wanted the longer sight radius of the 5 inch barrel.
2. There didn't seem to be any different in strength of the frame and cylinder between the 6 and 7 shot revolvers.
3. The idea that the un-fluted cylinder was a bit stronger and stiffer seemed like a good idea.
I didn't get the model 27 or 28 mainly because the barrel lengths that S&W currently carries are shorter than what I wanted. I also wanted the full barrel lug, which the model 27 classics don't have. I should have it next week sometime. I'll get pictures as soon as it's at the range.
Later
CAJUNLAWYER
Member
I saw what you did..........Well, it just stands to reason. Regardless of your frame size or the length of your barrel, whenever it protrudes it shouldn't be unprotected.
ditto1958
Member
Similar threads
