How sturdy is the Smith & Wesson model 65 3 inch?

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is a fixed sight K-Frame M&P, the same as the Model 19 / 66 adjustable sighted version.

As such, it suffers from the same design compromises that had to be made to make a 6-shot .357 that size. But a lot of cops carried & shot the same one throughout a carrier, and retired with it still working just fine.

It will give you a lifetime of use for normal shooting.
But if your idea of "a lot" is thousands of rounds of max .357 loads a year, I'd get something else.

1224.jpg
rcmodel
 
rcmodel pretty much summed everything up quite well. :)

I cannot think of anything to add.

BTW, the 3" 65 is becoming extremely popular and prices are rising steadily.
 
I now own my late father's 65 3inch that he carried as a Topeka PD sergeant. It does nightstand HD duty these days but we take it out a couple times a year.

I'm looking for a second one for carry. I would hate to lose Dad's as evidence should I be forced to use it in a CCW scenario.
 
You will hate it!! Please tell me where it is so I can make sure no one else gets stuck with such a thing!:evil:
 
if you can afford shoot enough ammo to wear it out, you can afford to get annother one... that being said, im not letting go of my 3 in 65 LS or 3 in 13!

although if i came upon a 3 inch 686 id jup on it.
 
The gun will last much longer (perhaps your lifetime) and will be much more pleasant to shoot if you shoot .38 special +P ammo. As has already been posted, if you do want to shoot .357 stay with 158 grain loads.
 
I bought mine used about 4 years ago
so i don't know the total round.I
have put over 4,000 rounds thru mine
with no ill effects.

Most were moly coated 158gr LSWC's
reloads that run about 1230fps from
the 3" barrel.The rest were factory
158gr JHP/JSP's from various makers.

I've stayed away from the lighter
110-130gr loads as they are not very
accurate from my 65-3.

If you don't abuse them 357mag k-
frames will last a long time without
being babied.
 
I have recently bought a Model 65 in 4" stainless. It shoots great and feels very comfortable in the hand. I have noticed there seems to be a preference for the 3" model on this thread and others I have read. Typically a longer barrel is considered desirable for velocity and aim. What's the rest of the story?
 
What's the rest of the story?
Concealability and carryability, I think. Just a tad longer than the typical snub barrel, with a larger grip for (in theory) easier shooting... it's basically a snubby on steroids. Less painful to shoot magnums out of a heavier gun, too.
 
practice with .38's and carry .357's, its the constant banging with lighter 125 bullets in the .357 that eat them up, but this does not mean you can not shoot the 125's as occasional fodder. I have a model 13, (same gun in blue) which is 30 pl us years old and its tight as can be, but only shoots 357's a cylinder or so full at each range session. The rest is stout 38 special loads.
 
Slight detour;
Is a late 80's Model 10 in .38 the on par strength wise with the K framed .357's? Technically isn't it the same gun with the exception of the full length .357 chargeholes?
 
NO.

The Model 10 cylinder is 1.56" long.
The K-frame .357 cylinders are 1.62".

The .38 Spl. guns have more unsupported barrel shank sticking through the frame.

The Magnum frames are slightly thicker in a few critical places.

There may or may not be differences in heat treating the frame & cylinder, but nobody except S&W can prove it.

1224.jpg
rcmodel
 
I don't know where the Idea that a K-Frame cannot withstand .357 and 38 +p the gun was designed to fire a lifetime of both in the Mod 65 especially. I personally carried at mod 65 3" for over 15 years on duty and shot thousands of rounds of .357 and 38 +p and the gun showed very little ware. My models 19, 66, & 67 all have been feed a diet of 38 +p and 38 +p+ and .357 and show no ware what so ever. The Combat Masterpiece and Combat Magnum are greatest modern revolvers of all time.
 
I think Clark should weigh in on this. No one has abused a K-frame like him.
 
This 1982, model 65-2 3" has seen thousands (8k+) of rounds of everything I could put in it, heavy duty 110g, 125g, 158g, H-110, 2400, Unique, Bullseye, never a problem although being a little more calm these days and not looking for flame thrower effects I've tamed them down a bit, it's my wife's favorite range pistol for 357.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0001 copy.JPG
    IMG_0001 copy.JPG
    62.6 KB · Views: 78
I've been hearing the story about S&W K frames not being up to the full house .357's but have yet to find the limit for either of my 66's. One is a early 1980's 66-2 and the other a 66-5 made some time around 2003 I think. Both have had a very steady diet of 125 gr. XTP's on top of a 20 gr. charge of H110/296.
I saw some where that S&W responded to the claims that forcing cones were failing with hot 125's in the K frames, so S&W ran 250,000 rounds of full house 125's through a K frame and the firearm was uneffected. They stated that the presumed cause was due to lead build up, and general dirty forcing cones causing the damaging pressures responsible for the forcing cone fractures.
 
Don't know, but I'd love to find out. I've got a wonderful 4" 64-5 and would love to find either a 65 or 13 to complement it. Alas, though the spirit is willing the wallet is weak.
 
I don't know where the Idea that a K-Frame cannot withstand .357 and 38 +p the gun was designed to fire a lifetime of both in the Mod 65 especially. I personally carried at mod 65 3" for over 15 years on duty and shot thousands of rounds of .357 and 38 +p and the gun showed very little ware. My models 19, 66, & 67 all have been feed a diet of 38 +p and 38 +p+ and .357 and show no ware what so ever. The Combat Masterpiece and Combat Magnum are greatest modern revolvers of all time.
Thanks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top