christcorp
Member
First, let me say that this forum is excellent. Also, I have read all the posts here concerning my question, but I can't seem to get a definitive answer. So, here goes.
The question concerns the "K" frame S&W and the supposed "Weakness" of it when shooting a lot of 357 mags. Specifically the 125g type. There seems to be 3 groups responding.
1st group says that in FACT the "K" can NOT handle a steady diet of 357 magnum ammo. Especially the 125g. Supposedly it with weaken and/or stretch the frame, and cracks or harms the cone. That being the reason for the invention of the "L" frame.
2nd group says that it ONLY affected the very first "K" frames that came out; Model 19 circa 1955; but since then, S&W has fixed any problems. And even then, it was only with "HANDLOADS" and that is NEVER was a problem with factory loads.
3rd group says that there has never really been a problem, and that a couple of production problems in some guns, which any product can have some lemons, are to blame for a bad reputation for the "K" frame which is supposedly totally bogus. That in fact, the "K" can shoot 357 mag ammo just as reliably as the "L" frame, the Rugers, or anyone else.
Now, the question posed is; If the model 19 was introduced in 1955 +/- a year, and the model 66 was released in 1971; and the model 13 and 65 were introduced in 1974; is the "SUPPOSED" problem with shooting 357 mag inherit to ALL these models of "K" frame or is it isolated to just the model 19 prior to the 1970's? Has in fact, the model 13/65/66 also had affected cones and frames because of 357 mag ammo? All posts and readings I have found, mention either the "K" frame generically, or specifically mention the model 19 which has been around the longest. I haven't seen or heard about any model 13/65/66 having a problem.
I have been shooting and training others to shoot for a long time. I believe in practicing with what you plan to shoot. No hidden surprises. (God I hated it in the 70's when the military tried to save money by putting in .22 cal adapters in the M-16 so they could save money on ammo when the troops were qualifying.) Anyway, I prefer to shoot 357 mag ammo in my 357 mag model 13. Preferably 125g HP. This is what I will use, therefore that is what I want to practice with. Granted, if the family wants to go out shooting on a Saturday, I will probably use 38 specials because it's cheaper and won't kick my daughter or wife's butt. But for all intent and purpose, I want to shoot the mags through it.
So, what are the thoughts here? FWIW, I am not the type that goes through 1000 rounds a month. I would say closer to about 1000 a year, or about 100 rounds a month. Again, I want it to be factory mag rounds. Preferably 125g ammo. Later... Mike....
P.S. I posted a partial similar question in another thread a couple of days ago, but hadn't gotten a response. I didn't want to hijack their thread. However, someone did give their comments just prior to me posting this new thread. I would still like people's opinions on this so I don't hijack the other thread. Thx... Mike.....
The question concerns the "K" frame S&W and the supposed "Weakness" of it when shooting a lot of 357 mags. Specifically the 125g type. There seems to be 3 groups responding.
1st group says that in FACT the "K" can NOT handle a steady diet of 357 magnum ammo. Especially the 125g. Supposedly it with weaken and/or stretch the frame, and cracks or harms the cone. That being the reason for the invention of the "L" frame.
2nd group says that it ONLY affected the very first "K" frames that came out; Model 19 circa 1955; but since then, S&W has fixed any problems. And even then, it was only with "HANDLOADS" and that is NEVER was a problem with factory loads.
3rd group says that there has never really been a problem, and that a couple of production problems in some guns, which any product can have some lemons, are to blame for a bad reputation for the "K" frame which is supposedly totally bogus. That in fact, the "K" can shoot 357 mag ammo just as reliably as the "L" frame, the Rugers, or anyone else.
Now, the question posed is; If the model 19 was introduced in 1955 +/- a year, and the model 66 was released in 1971; and the model 13 and 65 were introduced in 1974; is the "SUPPOSED" problem with shooting 357 mag inherit to ALL these models of "K" frame or is it isolated to just the model 19 prior to the 1970's? Has in fact, the model 13/65/66 also had affected cones and frames because of 357 mag ammo? All posts and readings I have found, mention either the "K" frame generically, or specifically mention the model 19 which has been around the longest. I haven't seen or heard about any model 13/65/66 having a problem.
I have been shooting and training others to shoot for a long time. I believe in practicing with what you plan to shoot. No hidden surprises. (God I hated it in the 70's when the military tried to save money by putting in .22 cal adapters in the M-16 so they could save money on ammo when the troops were qualifying.) Anyway, I prefer to shoot 357 mag ammo in my 357 mag model 13. Preferably 125g HP. This is what I will use, therefore that is what I want to practice with. Granted, if the family wants to go out shooting on a Saturday, I will probably use 38 specials because it's cheaper and won't kick my daughter or wife's butt. But for all intent and purpose, I want to shoot the mags through it.
So, what are the thoughts here? FWIW, I am not the type that goes through 1000 rounds a month. I would say closer to about 1000 a year, or about 100 rounds a month. Again, I want it to be factory mag rounds. Preferably 125g ammo. Later... Mike....
P.S. I posted a partial similar question in another thread a couple of days ago, but hadn't gotten a response. I didn't want to hijack their thread. However, someone did give their comments just prior to me posting this new thread. I would still like people's opinions on this so I don't hijack the other thread. Thx... Mike.....
Last edited: