Safe magnum round for S&W 19

I would not think so. If you use a soft point as a hunting round, it may work, but it will almost certainly fail as a self defense round. The 125 grain became so popular because it actually expanded, which most 158 grain hollow points would not. A soft point is even less likely to expand as the velocity would be at least 200 feet per second lower.
I would go with the 110 grain Remington sjhp. They should expand and recoil will be lighter than the 125 grain jhp as will muzzle blast and noise.

Jim

I would just use 38 special.

My understanding is that the fast 125's were causing the problems. IIRC, the 158's were supposed to cause less wear.

I just shoot 38's out of my medium-framed DA 357 revolvers, though I might load them with 357's for SD. If I want to shoot 357's at the range I bring my Blackhawk.

Stick with bullet weights 140 and above. Hornady, Federal, and Remington amomg others make 158 grain defensive ammo. The much touted hydrashok comes in that flavor as well.

I cracked the forcing cone on my Model 19 with a steady diet of full power 158 grain loads. I was shooting IHMSA silhouette with the gun so it did see a fair amount of use before the failure.

S&W repaired the revolver but this was back in the early 1980s.

I do not care to shoot magnum loads anymore. I load and shoot 158 grain cast bullets at about 950 fps. Easier on my 357 Magnum guns and more important, easier on my wrist.

Check the recent "SP101 - 2.25" Barrel - which .357 load?" thread. Recommendations would be the same.

My 19 is fed Buffalo Bore 158 grain .38+p outdoorsman Keith style hardcast wadcutters as well as their .357 short barrel low flash 140 grain Barnes XPB round.

Both clock around 1100 ft/s.

Forcing cone is beautiful.

As to why they crack, there are all sorts of explanations out there, each one anecdotally valid but none rigorously tested, unless there is a white paper out there on the issue. We all agree it has to do with gas and the flat spot on the cone... I can't guarantee the above loads will relate to the longevity of your firearm but they are medium powered loads that are nice to shoot in that frame.

Most 158 gr of today's loads are extremely watered down from the 1550 fps loads of yesteryear. You will be fine with today's loads.

Back in the old days the general rule of thumb was the Model 19 would need a major rebuild after 2,000 rounds of 125 gr. Magnums.

The L-Frame was designed especially to deal with this problem. Smaller more comfortable K-Frame grip and beefier barrel, forcing cone and fame for handling a steady diet of magnums.

Any full-power 357 load will be harder on the gun than 38 +p. But 158gr. loads are indeed much easier on the gun due to the length of the projectile. The 125gr. bullets are short enough that they leave the case mouth before reaching the forcing cone, allowing flame to pass the bullet and torch the edge of the forcing cone, eroding it and in extreme cases cracking it. The length of the 158gr. projectile achieves a seal at the forcing cone before the bullet leaves the case mouth, drastically reducing the exposure of the forcing cone and top strap and all but eliminating cracking or flame-cutting of the top strap.

Obviously the recoil force is much greater with full-power 158s than 38s, and this force will still accelerate wear. But it's unlikely you'll crack a forcing cone unless the round count is high and/or they are shot very quickly, getting the gun very hot.

I have read this theory but have not seen it backed up. One fatal flaw is that it does not take into account the shape of the bullet. The shape of the bullet would alter the modeling of it's position over the gap independent of bullet weight. Take, for example, a long-nosed bullet like the 110 grain Barnes Tac-XP vs. a very flat 150 grain full wadcutter.

Other theories presented are buildup of lead and corrosion on the cone; heat, as you mention; and even variation in the hardness of the cones during different manufacturing periods.

To date, no theory has been proven and the relative number of k frames reported to crack and receive public attention seems weighted greater than the prevalence of this condition among service revolvers of that period may justify.

Additionally, a general over-building of revolvers was the trend from that period and onward, as can been seen by Ruger's transition from the security six platform to the GP100.

All to say the response below may be true, but has not been supported beyond a sort of collective wisdom on the matter.

I wish we could go deeper on it to see how all of the factors come into play... it could be those failing are a perfect storm of multiple issues.

For my part, I have seen beefier revolvers fail than my 19...

ray15 said:

Any full-power 357 load will be harder on the gun than 38 +p. But 158gr. loads are indeed much easier on the gun due to the length of the projectile. The 125gr. bullets are short enough that they leave the case mouth before reaching the forcing cone, allowing flame to pass the bullet and torch the edge of the forcing cone, eroding it and in extreme cases cracking it. The length of the 158gr. projectile achieves a seal at the forcing cone before the bullet leaves the case mouth, drastically reducing the exposure of the forcing cone and top strap and all but eliminating cracking or flame-cutting of the top strap.

Obviously the recoil force is much greater with full-power 158s than 38s, and this force will still accelerate wear. But it's unlikely you'll crack a forcing cone unless the round count is high and/or they are shot very quickly, getting the gun very hot.

Click to expand...

Even though most .357 mag.. ammo is loaded down from the original loadings, I still would not take the chance. The rule of thumb with the K frame magnums was to practice with .38 specials & carry magnums if you wanted. I wore one out with about 350 rounds of Remington 125 jhp back in the 80's. S & W replaced the barrel, cylinder & other parts free of charge & the gunsmith put a hand written note in the box with the gun. "These guns were not designed for a steady diet of magnum ammo. Practice with 38's & carry magnums."

Tony_the_tiger said:

All to say the response below may be true, but has not been supported beyond a sort of collective wisdom on the matter. For my part, I have seen beefier revolvers fail than my 19...

Click to expand...

I have a GP100 with a eroded forcing cone that has a small chunk missing - when you have the unobstructed flame-cutting action the length of the 125gr. bullets allow you can kill any revolver with rapid-fire.

ray15 said:

I have a GP100 with a eroded forcing cone that has a small chunk missing - when you have the unobstructed flame-cutting action the length of the 125gr. bullets allow you can kill any revolver with rapid-fire.

View attachment 802862 View attachment 802863

Click to expand...

I have also seen a 327 and a 627 fail as well when subjected to such use.

The Evangelist Cowboy said:

I have also seen a 327 and a 627 fail as well when subjected to such use.

Click to expand...

I've stopped using Titegroup in 125gr. 38 special loads also. The shorter case makes this factor all the worse. 5.0gr. of TG with a 125gr. plated bullet makes a dandy +P load - as well as a massive sheet of flame out the cylinder gap clearly visible in broad daylight. I probably should use 357 cases for the 38-level loads too but have so much good 38 brass and not so much 357.