[Combat-wombat]

I have a S&W M19 with a 2-inch barrel. I am trying to convince my parents to keep it ready for home defense. If that happens, the question comes up about what ammo would be right for it. Now, I have heard that if fired through a short barrel, defensive loads (hollow point) are ineffective because they do not gain enough velocity to expand well. Is this true? If it is, what should I use in the revolver?






Moderators- feel free to move this. I just wasn't sure because it is mainly about ammunition and could be applied to auto pistols as well.

[jsalcedo]

110grain JHP's are almost explosive in their expansion.

The winchester white box have always performed well for me.

[Lone_Gunman]

In general, 357's are moving fast enough, even from short barrels, to cause expansion.

For slower moving calibers, that is not always the case

[Old Pa]

Well designed 125 gr. hollowpoint with full charge. Hornady XTP, Speer Gold Dot, etc. if you reload. Federal Hydro Shock if you do not. Reloading would also allow you to opt for a low flash powder.

[Gordon]

I'd keep it loaded with .38spl 148 grain wad cutters or 158grain LSWCHP +power .38s as it sounds like you (and family) would be better served by a light recoiling , less blast but still effective load. Get some professional training there is NO MAGIC BULLET.;)

[Rob96]

I also like the Winchester 110gr loading. Not as much blast , flash and recoil as the 125's, but can still get the job done. The Winchester load is also very accurate.

[stans]

We are talking about a S&W model 19. Those 110 and 125 grain JHP loads will damage the forcing cone if shot a lot, ask me how I know. The model 19 was designed for 158 grain loads and was really designed with police departments in mind. Police departments used to train and practice with 38 Special ammo and carry 357 ammo for duty. A model 19 that is shot a lot with 38 Special ammo and only occasionally with magnum ammo will last a very long time.

You did not mention how recoil tolerance of your parents. Most people can handle 38 Special and 38 Special +P loads well, many have difficulty with magnum ammo in snubbies.

[Rob96]

We are talking about a S&W model 19. Those 110 and 125 grain JHP loads will damage the forcing cone if shot a lot, ask me how I know. The model 19 was designed for 158 grain loads and was really designed with police departments in mind

All the more reason to get a Ruger.:neener:

[Lone_Gunman]

Stans,

I have never heard anyone else say that 110 and 125 g loads will damage a Model 19.

Why do you think they will cause damage?

[Rob96]

On the K-frames, if you fire a lot of of the hot lite rounds you can errode the forcing cone.

[Lone_Gunman]

Rob96,

Why will hot light loads do this worse than hot heavy loads?

[Blueduck]

The really hot 125 grain loads do have a reputation of being harder on K-Frame guns, how much of this is hype is up for at least some debate.

Light bullets under very heavy charges hit the forcing cone very fast. If you notice on a K-Frame the forcing cone is cut out on bottom (flat instead of round) making for less support than they say a L or N frame gun. There have been reports of the cone craking in this area back when police shot lots of full power 125 grain bullets through them during qualification in the 70's.

Should note that the current 125 grain loads from major manufacturers are downloaded from the stuff that was out in the 70's when you started hearing about this. I've fired a several hundered rounds of Federal 125 Grain 357's (supposedly the hottest round) through my three K-Frames over the years and never had an issue. I would be hesitant to make it my regular practice load, but recoil, blast and most of all cost kinda take care of that for most people anyway.

[Old Pa]

A competent pistolsmith can extend a Smith's forcing cone. This modification has multiple benefits including less gun battering and less perceived recoil. Lighter bullets generally batter revolvers less; witness the small frame Smiths and Rugers that are frame marked for 125gr .357 only.

[WebHobbit]

Not to beat that dead horse as I have mentioned this in several theads BUT....

The J-Frame Magnums are also very likely to develope forcing cone problems if you fire "hot, light Magums" through it. And it won't take many either. How do I know?

I have fired between 500 & 700 Winchester White box 110 grainers through my 640...I sent this gun to S&W to have it refinsihed (lots of scratches and holster wear I wanted removed)...while there I also requested an action job. They wrote me back to inform me that:

"You have eroded the forcing cone shooting too much hot ammo. The J-frame Magnums are intended for Magnum carry and .38 practice. You should only practice with .38's"

How lame is that????????????????????????

I now carry an SP101. I still have two L-Frames which I stoke with 110 & or 125 Golden Sabers. Hopefully they will hold up.

[WebHobbit]

Lighter bullets generally batter revolvers less; witness the small frame Smiths and Rugers that are frame marked for 125gr .357 only.

No....the lighter, faster bullets are harder on forcing cones. Those early SP101s were marked that way because the .38 spec cylinders couldn't hold .357s loaded with heavier bullets due to length.

The heavy bullets in .357 don't reach that great of a velocity generally speaking.

A competent pistolsmith can extend a Smith's forcing cone.

All the "compentent guys" at S&W did to my 640 was "turn the barrel and recut the cone"...basically they cut off a tiny bit from the end and redid the cone and then screwed it in a bit further.

[Old Pa]

I've owned, loaded for, and shot Smith revolvers for over 30 years. This involves about two dozen across the four common frame sizes. Still have eight or so in the inventory. We are discussing in excess of 100,000 rounds. Glad to have the ones I want now, as the inclusion of the "kiddie lock" into the revolver's lockwork means (for me) that Smith no longer makes revolvers. I speak from my own experience and my extensive reading on the subject.

Never has a Smith revolver back to the factory, as I've been blessed with knowing some excellent pistolsmiths and a good supplier for parts. All the old Smiths used to be shipped with a significantly longer forcing cone cut in the end of the barrel than appears in current production models. Extending the forcing cone is a simple operation with the appropriate specialty reamer and offers the benefits I have enumerated earlier.

WebHobbit: Your comments concerning light bullets v. heavy bullets in the smaller Smith frame sizes contradicts several of my references and my own experience. We obviously have a difference in opinion.

[WebHobbit]

Interesting.

Well, what I've read (and been told over the phone by S&W smiths) was that it's the "flame-thrower effect" of the light-Magnums that eats the forcing-cones. The heavy bullets just don't flame as bad.

I think your theory of light versus heavy would be right on the money with .38 level loads...but not for Magnums.

[Old Pa]

originally posted by WebHobbit
Well, what I've read (and been told over the phone by S&W smiths) was that it's the "flame-thrower effect" of the light-Magnums that eats the forcing-cones. The heavy bullets just don't flame as bad.

I think your theory of light versus heavy would be right on the money with .38 level loads...but not for Magnums.

Well, back in the 70s I loosened up a couple of K frame .357s with some "warp your gums" light bullet loads, but I've been past that for a while now. It seems to me that those takend with velocity in the .357 also like light bullets and large powder charges; this might add up to the effects noted. It would also be part of my explanation for any differences noted between .38SPL and .357MAG.

As for the chronology of things and damage to the forcing cone, we've got bullet hitting and passing the forcing cone before the hot propellant gases arrive; this is why the early Dan Wesson .357 Maximums experienced gas cutting on the frame above the cylinder gap. And it's well established that jacketed bullets are harder on bores than lead bullets.

It's not really "my" theory of light v. heavy bullet weights; it was derived from what I'vre read, heard from experienced pistolsmiths and observed myself over a few decades. I offer it now only to help the threadstarter.

[WebHobbit]

Old Pa:

If you're interested in my experience with the issue read here:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26219

[Combat-wombat]

So I'm thinking a .38 Special +P 129 gr. Hydra Shok JHP. Is that good?

[Blueduck]

Not sure how your feelings on Jello testing are, but here's a link that includes the 129+P Hydra-Shok along with many others from a short bbl FWIW.

http://www.ammolab.com/38spcl_-1.htm

Best,

Blueduck

[jsalcedo]

When I went shopping for my first .357 back in 1985 when there was a lot of hubub about hot 110's eroding forcing cones and cutting the frame above it like a torch.

This effect was mostly attributed to Smith, Colt, Charter arms etc..

I went ahead and bought a cheap Taurus 66 and fired thousands of hot light 110's and 125's expecting to retire it early. Either the Taurus is of higher quality, harder steel or the blowtorch effect is exaggerated.

[Old Pa]

Originally posted by jsalcedo:
I went ahead and bought a cheap Taurus 66 and fired thousands of hot light 110's and 125's expecting to retire it early. Either the Taurus is of higher quality, harder steel or the blowtorch effect is exaggerated.

That would be Choice #2, I think . . . . :neener:

[WebHobbit]

So I'm thinking a .38 Special +P 129 gr. Hydra Shok JHP. Is that good?

http://webhobbit.net/pics/129_1cent.jpg

This is a 129 grain .38 +p round I fired from a 2 inch barreled S&W Centennial .38 Special revolver into a home-made "water-box".

This was a wooden box I built to hold 7 or 8 upright 1 gallon size freezer bags filled with water.

Wish I had pics of the box but this was years before digital cameras were anywhere near the affordable range. :(

[22luvr]

show right on the side of the barrel "not less than 120 gr??" I did a "no-no" by experimenting with RBCD 60 gr totally fragmenting soft points and it only took FIVE of those hot suckers to erode and flame cut the front of my cylinder. With that in mind, I'm of the layman's opinion that those lighter-grained (110-120 gr) flame-throwers can do some serious damage to certain parts of certain guns.

And, Having shot off a full-pressure .357 mag round in an enclosed space without hearing protection, I would never-never-never recommend touching off one in any kind of enclosed space without hearing protection. I would stoke my home defense piece with .38 spcl only, and brother, that's going to be LOUD enough.

I'm going full-circle back to the heavier/slower side for the time-being.

[Dr.Rob]

Buy a few boxes of ammo, try them out.

Which load shoots best from the gun? Which load best suits the recoil threshold of the intended users?

That's your load.

For me, its a 158 gr SJHP.

[Quantrill]

Gordon's post of a 148wadcutter or heavier SWCs are right on the money. I read a survey from another thread here on THR where 148gr WC were specifically mentioned as being a prime stopper in a .38snub. Since yours is a .357mag., I would think that a little heavier bullet would increase your effectiveness. As Gordon said, there is no magic bullet that will do every everything every time. When expansion is doubtful at best, a full diameter lead bullet will do the same job every time. That is more reliable than hoped for possible performance. As an aside, I have owned a model 19 for 30 some years with thousands of .38spec and .357mag through it. Neither it nor any other 19 that I have personally seen have been damaged by .357mag. I am not saying it can't be done, but I don't think that 19s are as damage prone as many say. Quantrill

[WebHobbit]

148 grain full target wadcutters are quite weak in the energy department....any 110-129 grain +p SJHP is better even if it doesn't expand.

If heavy bullets are your fancy than the 158 grain SWHP..the old FBI load is far better than a solid.

Now if you're talking .357 than anything below 180 grains in weight is almost gaurenteed to expand even from a snub barrel.

[Gary A]

I'm always a little confused about what we mean by "hot" 110s. The hot 125s @ 1450 ft/sec I understand, but most factory 110s are rated at 1295 ft/sec from a 4 inch barrel and generally get low to mid 1100s from a two inch barrel. Of course, Cor-Bon claims something like 1550 ft/sec from a 4 inch barrel for its 110 load but Winchester White Box from a 2 inch barrel is about like a 115 9mm from the same length bore (approx 3.5 inches). I just don't quite get how the "modern" 110s could be that hard on a the forcing cone, with the exception of Cor-Bon. Federal 110s subjectively seem to be a bit hotter than the Winchester but the specs are listed the same, I believe. I would choose 158s for my SP101 if I could handle them better. 110s are easy to shoot in the SP101 and I don't see any problems so far. I just don't get how 110 @ 1295 could be anywhere near as hard on the cone as 125 @ 1450 or how 110 @ 1295 could be harder than 145 @ 1295 (Silvertip) or 158 @ 1235. The only difference might be how quickly the speed is reached and how fast the bullet is traveling when it hits the forcing cone. But generally the reputation of the hot 110 is mystifying to me.

[tbeb]

I recommend .357 magnum 110 gr. JHP's. I used to carry Winchester brand in my 2 1/2" S&W Model 66 (same as Model 19 except stainless steel). Federal brand and Remington brand are faster and would be a better choice, but only if you can handle them.

Practice with .38 special ammuntion like 158 gr. lead semi-wadcutters. Shoot 6-12 rounds of the .357 magnum 110 grainers at each practice session. Or, shoot whatever number of the 110's is necessary for you to stay familiar with them. They are louder and have more flash than .38 special ammunition.

[Blueduck]

Strictly second hand web "lore" Gary, but one explanation I've heard is that it's mainly speed, but also that shape somewhat affects how much beating a cone takes. The shorter overall length of 110's means less ogive (I guess the correct term:confused: ) meaning more of smack to the cone as opposed to the smoother entry of longer shells.

Again just a theory I've heard proposed. Like I said personally never experienced the problem with 110's or 125's nor do I know anyone who has FWIW.

[Gordon]

Thats why old pop is big on lengthing forcing cones, and hes right! The hollow base wad cutter actually bridges flash gap , which is good until loaded so hot skirt blows out! One problem with 110 grain bullets is that they hit about a foot lower than 158 grain in .357 or .38 at 50 feet! Fixed sights are generally calibrated for 158 grain bullets. Sorry guys BUT having run 25 years of my own "Strousburg goat tests " on 150 or so pound animals, I want a 158 grain bullet (or more) for quick incapacitation (ruins less meat too ) as a big hole about 3-4 " in just seems to hurt them alot. Maybe pain can shut down a human BUT on an animal at least , at hand gun velocities, it takes a decent size permanent crush(severed and puctured and broke bones) thru the animal IF CNS IS NOT DISRUPTED. Disrupt CNS and a .22 lr behind ear works OK.. As for me a .45acp is what I trust in and yes it ALWAYS works on goats.:D

[twoblink]

125Grainer JHP 357Maggies was my bedside load for my Ruger SP101 for 2 years. Hot, but managable.. The flames out of it is not that bad, but seriously worse than 38's.

That said,

Let me warn anybody who has never shot 357Maggies out of a Ti or even worse, a Scandium! :what:

You will not have a hand left after shooting 5 rounds of that..

3 rounds out of a Taurus Ti made me quit, and I tried 1 shot out of the Scandium's before I gave up..

I want to keep my hands and wrists intact...

[Quantrill]

Check the thread on fully loaded 148gr Wadcutters as a defense load. Personally, I prefer the 168/173 Keith SWC to any chancy possible expanding type bullet out of a snub. Quantrill

[Obiwan]

None of the .357 loads do much better than the best .38 spcl loads out of the short barrel

And they are much more controllable.

And more importantly...more comfortable for practice....which is the best plan of all.

[brownie0486]

My 640-1 357 is stoked with 125gr Corbons.

I practice with 38 reloads.

Brownie

[tiberius]

My 640-1 357 is stoked with 125gr Corbons.

I practice with 38 reloads.

replace "640-1" with "60" and you have my recipe as well.

Its amazing how in one thread we get down to basic agreement that "from a snubby .357 is probably not much more powerful than the most powerful 9mm (+p+), but defintely more powerful than .38+p's" and on this thread onlt two days later we have those that think there's no difference betwenn any of them again.

In regards to .357's vs. .38's,...you don't even need a chronograph to tell that there is a significant power increase. If both bullets are the same weight, than the extra kick you feel means the bullet is travelling faster (same gun of course). I am really interested in chrono and penetration data from a snubby, though to get real figures.

[WebHobbit]

Obiwan muttered this:

None of the .357 loads do much better than the best .38 spcl loads out of the short barrel

What do you base this on??????????

:scrutiny:

Have you read any of the previous posts in this thread?

:confused:

edit: sorry Obiwan....I was confused with this thread:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29628


Which I recommed everyone read as well!



:)

[RustyHammer]

If you hit them between the eyes, expansion doesn't matter!

[care-less]

I personally would not want to fire 357 mag ammo indoors! Nice way to blow out your hearing--- forever! Also, as a home defense handgun, the 357 has too much penetration. You wouldn't want a family member on the other side of the wall behind the bad guy. A lot of 357 ammo will go thru him, the wall, and your relative. Load her up with the 38spl 158g lead semi-wad cutter +p; any make, Federal, Remington, or Winchester.