Jim Watson
Member
$ure you could.
S&W model 19 with cracked forcing cone
- Thread starter gila_dog1
- Start date
- Status
I think I have one. If I get back to you I still have it, if not I no longer have it.
The Happy Kaboomer
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2012
- Messages
- 380
Mine cracked and locked up the cylinder in 1986. Mine is nickel. I bought another 4 in nickel barrel and made my own frame blocks. I tapped out the barrel pin and wrapped the barrel in leather and used a wrench to take it off. Installed the new barrel in reverse order. BC gap was perfect. Didn't have file the back of the barrel.
NEVER. Put the barrel in a vice and use a hammer handle through the frame opening to unscrew it.....NEVER. You'll twist the frame!!!!!!!! Use frame blocks to support the front of the frame in a vise and wrap the barrel and use a wrench(I used an adjustable Cresent) to unscrew the barrel.
NEVER. Put the barrel in a vice and use a hammer handle through the frame opening to unscrew it.....NEVER. You'll twist the frame!!!!!!!! Use frame blocks to support the front of the frame in a vise and wrap the barrel and use a wrench(I used an adjustable Cresent) to unscrew the barrel.
Attachments
Last edited:
Palladan44
Member
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2020
- Messages
- 1,897
I wonder if any M-19 anywhere ever cracked the forcing cone......only using 158gr. bullets.
Word on the street is the 125 gr or 110gr magnums caused the cracking. It's also interesting that these 110gr and 125gr. 357 loads are remarkably violent on recoil, noise and muzzle flash, etc.
Todays Remington UMC 125gr JHP-SP are direct descendants of these loads from back in the day that was alleged to cause all these cracked cones.
Word on the street is the 125 gr or 110gr magnums caused the cracking. It's also interesting that these 110gr and 125gr. 357 loads are remarkably violent on recoil, noise and muzzle flash, etc.
Todays Remington UMC 125gr JHP-SP are direct descendants of these loads from back in the day that was alleged to cause all these cracked cones.
Yes. I cracked the forcing cone on my Model 19 with a steady diet of full power, 158 grain jacketed bullets. I was using the revolver for IHMSA handgun Silhouette competition in standing and revolver classes.
This was back around 1980.
Fortunately, S&W replaced the barrel on their dime except for shipping costs to S&W.
Yes, the current production Moder 19 and 66’s do not have the flat on the bottom of the barrel and are much more capable of handling the full power loads.
S&W redesigned the frame to accomplish this. As far as I know, even if the barrels would screw into older frames, you would still end up with the flait to provide space for the crane.
Jim Watson
Member
Do I hear a cracked frame from 158 gr CAST Magnums?
Would be possible to modify crane and/or frame, so new barrel without bottom flat could be used on older M19 and M66? In case of barrel replacement on older revolvers, how S&W handles this issue?
The current production Model 19 Classic uses the two piece barrel common to many current production S&W revolvers. I'm sure the method to attach the barrel to the frame is different than with the old one piece barrel.
Wth the cracked forcing cone on a Model 19, I think S&W just considers you SOL these days.
Last edited:
See Post #5
https://www.smithandwessonforums.com/threads/model-19-classic-improved-focing-cone.198793/
"The Happy Kaboomer" said he only shot 150 grain or heavier cast bullets in his Model 19 and cracked the forcing cone.
gotboostvr
Member
I treat my old M19-3 4" pretty gently any more, mostly 158gr "not quite magnums, but more than 38+P".
I've also got a spare barrel and cylinder sitting in my parts box too, just in case though.
I've also got a spare barrel and cylinder sitting in my parts box too, just in case though.
The Happy Kaboomer
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2012
- Messages
- 380
Not necessarily so.....That was the rumor.........Mine cracked using 150 gr cast bullets and #2400.
The only S&W I have now is 686-3. However, for shooting 158 grains at something like 1100 fps, M19/M66 with 6" barrel is "as good as it gets". Same goes for Ruger Security Six. There is something in balance of those revolvers, they just feel right.
Thanks, I just found more info about 2 piece barrel here http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/114250-m66-7-barrel-sleeved-durability.html .
Do they do that on all barrel lengths? Apparently, this makes revolver considerably more accurate. Some stated that this is because of barrel tension so it vibrates less. Could be, but I would say that another important factor is no barrel choking in threaded area where screwed into frame. Some time ago I had seen video about shooting one of those top open CB revolvers. Accuracy was remarkable, on a par with quite accurate center-fire revolvers. I would say that a contributing factor is that top open revolvers do not have any barrel choking as the most full frame revolvers do. In that respect, "Taylor Throating" could be the answer to barrel choking in threaded area:
"From Jim Stroh's Alpha Precision website:
http://www.alphaprecisioninc.com/revolver/default.htm (FYI link doesn't work, at least from my area, Onty)
"Essentially, the barrel throat is lengthened one and one half to two calibers, and enlarged to slightly over groove diameter. The throat serves as the throat in a rifle barrel, enabling the bullet to become perfectly aligned with the bore before engaging the rifling. The "choking" effect present from tightening the barrel into the frame is removed as well. The rifling leade is a very gentle 1 ½ degrees. On average, when tested before and after using a Ransom Rest, 50 yard groups have been reduced 40 to 50%. The improvement is there using both cast and jacket bullets. I have not detected a change in velocity using cast bullets. Before and after chronographing is within standard deviation of each test. Using jacket bullets, there is a slight loss, less than 50 fps in all the tests I’ve conducted. If the barrel cylinder gap is adjusted to minimum at the same time the Taylor Throating is done, there will not be a velocity loss with jacket bullets, usually a gain of 25 to 50 fps.
I am convinced Taylor Throating produces the greatest accuracy improvement value available. Line-bore chambering will produce the most accurate revolvers, but the cost is prohibitive for many. When the barrel is accurately recrowned; the forcing cone recut concentric to the bore; Taylor Throating is almost as accurate as line-bore chambering with a savings of several hundred dollars."
From https://singleactions.proboards.com/post/26356/quote/2587
Also,more here https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/65216-taylor-thoating/ .
Last edited:
Short answer is no, it is not safe.
The Happy Kaboomer
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2012
- Messages
- 380
Mine cracked using 150 gr cast lead bullets pushed #2400 powder.
When I discovered the forcing cone on my Model 19 was cracked it was around 1981-1982 time frame.We had moved to Aiken, SC, and joined a private range that held IHMSA handgun silhouette matches.
As I have already said, I was shooting a steady diet of 158 grain jacketed at full power levels from my Model 19 for the matches.
At the time, the 125 grain, jacketed full power magnum loads were coming into vogue for self defense. I could see that folks shot alot more 125 grain full power 357 Magnum loads in their Model 19's and the perception that the 125 grain magnum loads were the cause oif the forcing cone cracking became the main reason for the Model 19 failure mode.
In reality, the Model 19 had a design flaw in the barrel/frame design. A steady diet of fukl power magnum loads would eventually crack the forcing cone of the revolver regardless of the bullet weight if shot at full power ammunition.
My original 6" Model 19 and my later aquisition 4" and 2-1/2" models only getn 38 Special level ammunition shot in them kloiaded in 357 Magnum length cases. I do not want to damage a barrel on thye old models these days.
A new model 19 is on my list of wants but the are many other revolvers that are ahead on the list.
- Status
