How Strong Is the S&W 625 Revolver?

[45shooter]

Just how strong is the S&W 625 revolver?
Is it strong enough to take steady diet of 45ACP +P ammo?
How about 45 Super?

One of my co-worker uses one for hunting and I just learned he usually practices with 230gr 45ACP +P ammo but uses 45 Super for some pratice and when hunting. He said he has fired over 100 rounds of 45 Super in the 625 in past 5-6 years and has not had any problem.

Is this a KB waiting to happen or is the revolver strong enough to take it?

 

[Preacherman]

I had Clark Custom Guns do a .460 Rowland conversion on one of mine. That's a heck of a lot more pressure than .45 Super, and Clarks do the conversions all the time with no trouble - just bore out the cylinder to take the longer round. I'd say it's plenty strong enough for that.

 

[Erich]

Mine has certainly held up as well.

 

[meef]

How strong......?

Well, with Remington 185 gr. JHP +P it's able to press 534 ft/lbs.

 

[45shooter]

Thank you all for your reply.
Same frame is used to make 44Magnums so I guess they are built to take it.

 

[Erich]

Whoa, but do not ever get the idea that you can take it to that level - the .45 round is substantially thicker than the .44s, which means there's less metal surrounding it - especially in those bolt cuts.

 

[Colt46]

It's an N-Frame

That is plenty strong. The cylinder would be the weak point in the overall equation. Tread lightly with that one. Unless you are an experianced handloader I'd not try to wring too much from the ACP cylinder. Cheaper to buy a ruger.

 

[GRIZ22]

The problem may not be the strength of your gun but the strength of the brass. I have no experience with 45 Super but if you try to duplicate those loads in 45 ACP brass you'd be looking for problems.

 

[SnWnMe]

Ruger makes DA 45ACP revolvers?

 

[Tom C.]

The problem with the Model 25-2 is not the frame, but the cylinder. The diameter of the cylinder of my 25-2 is 1.700”. The diameter of my 625-8JM is 1.711”. The diameter of my Ruger Blackhawks is 1.730” and the Redhawk is 1.780”. The chamber pattern is about identical for all of them. The Smith has the bolt notch right in the middle of the chamber area, perhaps weakening it a little more.
The bottom line: I like my 25-2 too much to hotrod it. If I want more power, I will go with a .44 mag or a Ruger .45 Colt.

 

[jonsidneyb]

When I see 625 I always think of the .45 Long Colt but I know that these came in both flavors.

What I have always wanted was a a 625 that I could use both .45 Long Colt and .45 ACP in.

 

[Erich]

I just loaded up some 255-grainers in .45 AR cases - just like a .45 Colt load, but uses less powder!

 

[Stainz]

Erich,

It is interesting how folks regularly load .45 AR's for 'hotter' performance than .45 Colt from a S&W. Of course, the former is derived from the 21kpsi+ .45 ACP, while the SAAMI spec for the .45 Colt is 14 kpsi. My example of 6.1 gr of Titegroup under a 255gr LSWC in a .45 Colt case at just less than 800fps from a 4" 625MG pales in comparison to my milder 4.8gr in the .45 AR case for 829 fps... or my hot load of 5.3gr, which tickles 900 fps. Some folks will push that 255gr LSWC to 950 fps!

One comment re strength. Yes, the bolt depression marks the thinnest skin. But - next is the web separating the chambers. Here is a real oddity... that measurement is greater (.062") in my 625MG than my .45 Colt Redhawk (.059")... and the Redhawk has a cast vs the S&W's forged/heat treated cylinder. The cylinder OD of 1.782" of the Redhawk trumps the 1.710" of the S&W - and they will use the same speedloaders, so the outer walls can be thicker (.070" for the 625 and .102" for the RH). I believe that both were originally designed for .44 sized cartridges, anyway. Still, the solid frame of the RH will withstand more heavy pounding... probably never a problem at .45 Colt levels, but I wouldn't subject one of my 625's to .460 Rowland pressures!

Stainz

 

[highlander 5]

there is something else to consider on cylinder strength the type of steel and the how its heat treated.
Case in point though slightly off point,Ruger makes the only 6 shot 454 Casull by using a steel made specificly for them and a special heat treatment for same. cylinder for different manufacturers may and will have slightly different dimensions but in the long run its the material that it's made from that counts.BTW I seem to remember reading or seeing that when the 357 mag first came out they used a different heat treatment for the cylinders

 

[Erich]

Quite right on the steel comments, gents. Stainz, I agree that I don't want to push my 625 up into the "magnum performance" country - it's a great revolver for doing what it does as it is. I'm fine with even a regular diet of .45 acp +P loads, but I don't ever want to try to get beyond that - I've got other guns for the high pressure stuff.

As an aside: It sure is a pleasure to reload the .45 AR. Short cases don't require a lot of oomph on the lever, large pistol primers have always felt easier to seat than small ones (something you notice after thousands and thousands of them), fat cases mean that my clumsy fumblefingers can handle them with ease, fat bullets mean that I feel positively dextrous in loading them, and Unique just meters so well for me.

 

[rolltide]

Nothing against S&W, they make some great guns, but the N frame is known to shoot loose with heavy 44 mag loads. I don't think a few 45acp +P would do any harm, but I am not sure a steady diet would be recommended. I really don't think an exploding gun is much of a possibilty as long as loads are reasonable, but shooting loose over time would be my biggest concern.

Roll Tide

 

[Stainz]

highlander 5,

S-R did some real work developing their .454 SRH, hi-tech SS and all. Machining it is a problem - but they managed. I bought my 7.5" SRH in .454 years ago partly because of their developmental work... a 120+ kpsi revolver! )f course, the purists will tell you it takes more metal - for mere mortal SS, like FA uses. Admittedly, however, the grade of SS Ruger uses the most is best known for it's casting properties. Compare that to the same grade drawn/forged and heat-treated, and their is no comparison. Also, as I found when my local pusher ordered my 5.5" .45 RH new, and I had to take it, they get air bubbles. Several such burst bubbles, the epitome of a casting flaw, were noted on my RH's cylinder - even between the bores... not awe-inspiring QC. Within a month, I had it back - with another new cylinder, etc - and a slicker action. I'll take S&W... their approach for the .500 Magnum line was simple... more metal!

rolltide,

The 29/629 .44 Magnum family went through several 'improvements' over the years, most notably the 'Endurance Package'. Even initially, they were made to SAAMI .44 Magnum spec's... and would enjoy a long life so utilized. After the enhancements, they were certainly long-life revolvers - within SAAMI spec's. Again, the old addage "If you need more - get a larger caliber!" holds true. The Redhawk - and the even stronger Super Redhawk - are certainly capable of much more than SAAMI spec's. A new 629 - or 29 - is a fine .44 Magnum. The folks who shook the older one's apart likely did so with hot loads. And, of course, BEWARE THE THUMB!

Erich,

Ah, another fumble thumb-er! I do like those .45 AR's... no chance of a friend mistakenly trying to load those in his bottom-feeder. Another similar sized cartridge I enjoy reloading and shooting is the .44 Russian... if it wasn't for that thick rim, I'd have ruined a few in reloading! Yes, LP primers are easier to load... unless you try to put them in .454 Casull cases - oops(They take SR primers.).

Stainz AU '75!

PS For those of you outside of Alabama... Auburn beat Alabama for the fifth time in a row last Saturday - thus the 'thumb' is now raised along with the other four fingers. AU/UA - you are given a choice only at birth in this state!

 

[10-Ring]

I've been told that the wheelgun can handle the 45 super - which is one reason why it's still on my wish list