[firestar]

I have only seen K-frame S&Ws .357s that were shot loose, is it weaker than the other frames in other cals? I'm sure any gun can be worn out if shot enough but it seems that K-frame S&W .357s just can't handle as much as most of their other models. Has anyone else noticed this problem?

[Mike Irwin]

This has been covered here and on TFL many times.

It's well known that the K-frame .357 Mags. don't stand up to a steady diet of full-bore Magnum ammo as well as heavier guns.

That's why the L-frame 586/686 & 581/681s were brought out, to add more metal to critical areas and increase long-term performance.

The benefit you get from having a K-frame in .357 Mag. is simply the finest combination of power, reliability, portability, and ergonomics ever designed.

[Old Fuff]

The original "K" frame .357 Magnum (model 19) was intended to be used with .38 Special cartridges for training and practice and 357 rounds when carried on duty. But the time came when officers were required to train and practice with the "duty cartridge." In response S&W came out with the slightly heavier "L" frame which could - at least in theory - stand up to unlimited 357 use. In recent years the company redesigned and beefed up the "K" frame so it is now more "magum friendly." At the same time many ammunition companies have been downloading their line of .357 rounds.

I like carrying the lighter "K" frame Magnums, but I am careful in selecting ammunition. If I decided to use nothing but the hottest magnum loads I would opt of a larger "L" or "N" frame. As it is I have no doubts that my 19's will outlive me for a long time.

[firestar]

In recent years the company redesigned and beefed up the "K" frame so it is now more "magum friendly.

How recent? My 19-5 was made in 1983, was it beefed up by then? I shoot mostly med-low powered .357 wadcutters for target and JHPs for fun but I shoot quite a lot of the wadcutters, will I have a problem? I bought the gun used but it didn't look like it had seen much action at all. I have put about 400 rounds through it in the few months that I have had it and I would guess that it didn't even have 400 rounds through it when I bought it. The lock up was nice and tight and still is.

I'm just wondering if I am going to wear out this gun by shooting 1000 rounds a year out of it of low-med powered wadcutters or is it a problem only if I use heavy loads?

[Jim March]

The major K-frame 357 weakness is at the forcing cone (rear of the barrel). A lot of "hot stuff" will cause it to wear and then crack.

The worst is full-house, jacketed, 125grainers. Even hot 158s at the same energy level aren't as bad, because the round isn't moving as fast at that critical early area of the barrel.

So, if you're using moderate lead 148s/158s or similar, even if they're 357s, you're a lot better off (up to a point - the "old school" 1937 load with 158s moving at 1,500fps were largely abandoned because of what they'd do to a K-frame).

You didn't give the bullet weight you're dealing with and whether or not they're jacketed. Wadcutters are usually 148s, and often lead, but I've seen jacketed too.

A cracked forcing cone means a new barrel. But at least that's doable.

The other major thing that eventually happens is, the frame stretches. Watch your "back and forth" cylinder play (as opposed to rotational play) and barrel gaps, if they're opening those are your first warning signs and you can back off most of your fodder to 38Spl spec if desired. Once a frame is stretched too far, it's toast.

The crane can wear, but that's fixable. Most everything is, 'cept the frame. Don't "wrist snap" the cylinder closed, that's hell on the crane.

1,000 moderate wadcutters a year doesn't sound too bad though...'specially if they're lead and/or 148grain+.

[Desert Dog]

...two words...

Ruger GP100

[firestar]

This is a target gun (6" with TS, TH, trigger stop, etc). I mostly shoot 148gr lead HBWC but I often use .357 cases instead of .38spl because I get a little bit better accuracy out of .357s. I load about 7grains of Unique.

Can I shoot 1000 rounds a year for the next 30-40 years without it failing? That is all I really need out of any gun. 30-40K with no major problems, if a gun can do that, I'm happy. I don't see that i will ever have the time or money to put 100K through any one gun except for a .22lr which I have done.

[Jim March]

With THOSE loads, I'd expect it to do even more than 40k :).

If you really want to be cautious, measure your barrel/cylinder gap with a feeler gauge and keep notes once a year.

As the cylinder and crane wear, they'll "bounce around in the frame" on firing. This can be corrected early, the gun "tightened up", and if done before the gun ever gets sloppy, the frame will be good for 200,000 rounds or more. But shoot it sloppy and you won't get anywhere near that.

[Sir Galahad]

Maybe not exactly what you're looking for answer-wise, but I have a S&W M66 that I shoot only 158gr. .357 mag ammo in and, a few thousand rounds later, still as tight as the day I bought it.

[P95Carry]

Hardly need to post .. all been said.

But yeah IMO the ''K'' ... beaut tho it is .. is gonna be trashed with steady diet of hot mag loads. Too light by far.

''L'' is good .. ''N'' is way better ........ :)

[surfinUSA]

The K frame is stronger than most people that have never had one give it credit for. I've seen K frames stand up to steady diets of 357 over years of use just fine, incuding loads made up by crazy friends that I would be afraid to shoot in any gun.

I've always felt the tha L frame (also a great gun) was some what of a marketing gimmick on the part of S&W. Here we are 20 some years after the L frames introduction, yet the K frame in magnum configuration is still available and still selling well.

Alot of the K frame's preceived weakness was on the part of users in the 50s that believed the magnun needed to be on an N frame. The reality, especially with todays modern heat treatment and steal alloys is that K frames are fine for magnum use and always have been. They may not be as pleasant to shoot with magnums as an L or an N frame but its unlikely most of the shooters that ask these questions will ever shoot any gun enough to wear it out.

[Old Fuff]

Firestar:

Your 148gr. HBWC/7grs. of Unique load is a mild one, well suited for target shooting. So far as the gun is concerned, you will die of old age long before it does. Shoot it and have fun.

[Majic]

As posted before, K-frames were great till the age of the hot 125 grainers. Forcing cones started cracking and Smith beefed up the crane area with the L-frame to address that problem.

[mikey357]

...well, I must be the exception to the "Rule", 'cause I've "worn out" not one but TWO Model 19's...both with less than 15,000 rounds total, and only 15% or so of those being Magnums...I've got over 35,000 rounds thru my oldest L-frame...a six-inch 586...and besides needing a re-blue--BADLY--it is NEARLY as tight as the day it left Springfield...maybe the L-frame was/is a little MORE than just marketing hype???....mikey357

[Jim March]

Mikey: were those by any chance early stainless guns? S&W's first stainless wasn't all that good, and gave stainless guns a poor rep until Ruger and then Freedom Arms salvaged the concept. (S&W got better later, from what I understand.)

[Tamara]

Model 19's are very rarely stainless. ;)

[russlate]

I "wore out" a 2 1/2" M19 - fore and aft play on the cylinder. Took twenty years to do so. Been retired for ten years but want to get it tightened and put back into service, if just to check it out and then leave loaded next to the bed. Even now, it's the pistol I've put more rounds thru than all the other centerfires put together.

Got an unpinned, unrecessed Hwy. Patrol that's sitting there waiting to be shot, and a new-in-box unfired blued 19 kept just to remind me of when S&W could still make guns .

[Jim March]

Sigh.

I *know* that, too.

Now THAT is a brainfart.

:banghead:

:p

[popeye]

"Mikey: were those by any chance early stainless guns? S&W's first stainless wasn't all that good, and gave stainless guns a poor rep until Ruger and then Freedom Arms salvaged the concept. (S&W got better later, from what I understand.)"

I bought a Mod 60 in 1969. Never fired it. But 11 (not sessions, but individual pulls) dry fires and the hammer broke off just below were the spur joins. Had it repaired and sold it.

I currently have 4, 19's. All are 95-99%. 2, 2.5 inchers, one blue one nickle. 2, 4 inchers one blue, one nickle (my baby). All but one P&R. I rarely shoot magnums through them. Why all the interest in magnums? Too much muzzle flash n recoil. 158 gr. LSWC's are great defensive loads for the average person. I've got a 686-4 if I feel the "need for speed" why run a risk of damaging a K-frame?

[WebHobbit]

158 gr. LSWC's are great defensive loads for the average person.

Huh?

:scrutiny:

That's a terrible choice for "human targets". Almost ANY hollow-point (.38+p & up) would be better than a solid round for SD.

Killing/Hunting needs are far different than defensive needs (usually).

[Tamara]

Okay, so make it 158gr LSWC-HP +P's, then. ;)

[WebHobbit]

OK.

It's a deal. ;)

But I still say if you plan to load/shoot .38sthan you'd be better (to ring evey bit of velocity you can) off by getting a .38 Special (K-frame or whatever) than buy a .357 and force the wee little round to jump the extra distance.

When your dealing with such low velocities that even .38+p can offer you need every FPS you can manage!

[JERRY]

i have a model 65 that is tigher than prom night!!

though i'd trade it for a 681 just because i like the way the full barrel lug looks.

[mikey357]

Jim--Your "Brainfart" aside, NO, they were NOT stainless 66's...but I bought the 19's for exactly the reasons you gave...I didn't have much confidence in the early 66's, either...FWIW, I've got several 686's with a lot of rounds thru 'em with no problems, but I've never put very many rounds thru the few 66's I've had....mikey357

[MR.G]

I have several model 19 and 66 K frames. One 19 is a 1975 that has been shot a lot, both .38 and .357. You would not believe it if you saw the gun. Everything is tight as new. One 1990 model 66 has been shot a lot also, and still is tight. The 66 has seen a fair amount of.357. Forcing cones are in great shape on all of them, and the gaps are still what they should be. I never knew that the K frames were weak, until I read about it on the internet.

[popeye]

1. I am impressed by the knowledge and intelligence (sp?) of the members of this site and TFL.
2. I am not as knowledgable or intellegent (sp?) as most of the members of this site or TFL.
3. I'm 56 and a gun owner since age 21.
4. I'm puzzled by the "take it to the limit .357" attitude for a carry gun. (for a civilian).
5. How many here have actually shot someone in self defense?
6. I worked as a repair person in the worst part of Chicago for 35 yrs. (ending last year) at 4-5 locacations in that area per day. Never had a problem.
7. I've had 3 friends in the gun business shot and killed in 2 different gun stores in the last 5 yrs. They were all heavily armed. The "perps" got the "drop" on them.
8. 90% of the time the "perp" will catch you unawares and you're screwed. (there are alway's exceptions, as in, knowing you're being followed).
9. I have a carry permit and can carry any handgun made.
10. I rarely carry, the exception being when I walk my dog. Dog fighting is big around here and when they.re done with the Pits they turn them loose.
11. If you shoot someone with a super-duper, gut manglin, .357. (hopefully you hit the intended recipiant and not some kid 2 blocks away) the court's in today's world will mangle you. (I know....."Better tried by 12, than buried by 6")
12. If you cant "knock 'em down" with a 158 gr. LSWC or HP you're way overmatched and should be carrying an M4.

[goon]

I had a 686 that I put about 4000 rounds through before I sold it. At that time, the gun was getting out of time. That was corrected, and I have since learned that revolvers will usually need to be retimed occassionally.
Nearly all of my rounds were balls to the walls .357 handloads. They rang my ears and vibrated my teeth every time, and the gun still would have been no worse for the wear after a little maintenance. I don't shoot as much as more because I don't have time to reload as much.
I would bet that a good S&W will outlast most of us.
I look forward to getting a M-19 with a 6" barrel. I think it would make a good plinker.:D