• You are using the old High Contrast theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Lifespan of an airweight J-Frame?

Status
Not open for further replies.

M&PVolk

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
522
Anyone know how many rounds the average 642/637 will take before being shot out? I like to fire +p and enjoy practicing with them. How many rounds can I expect out of one of these? Are the scandium guns capable of
having more rounds put through them?
 
I've wondered this as well. There are lots of old examples as stated above, but the Airweight also tends to be a gun that doesn't get fired a lot.

I think flame cutting is a big concern with the scandium framed models, which is why they have the top strap shielded.
 
I've not had any experience with extended shooting of the Airweight / aluminum-framed versions, but I think I have read--here, in the THR forums--of owners having up to 2000+ rounds through theirs, shooting plus-p loads, with no apparent ill effects. The 442 I had bought, barely used, I put about 500 rounds of 38+P or 38-CIP rounds through with no ill effects.

I have shot a 640 approximately 18-20,000 rounds, mostly with plus-p loads but with perhaps up to 5% of hotter 357 Magnum loads, with no ill effects.

I've shot perhaps 2100 rounds through my M&P 340--i.e., a scandium frame--most of which were 38+P or 357-case 158-gr. reloads running up to 900 fps. That one had a stretched chamber--arguably, a defect but possibly an overpressure load--and the frame still met specifications. AFAICT, the scandium-framed guns will have a life expectancy similar to the SS-framed 640 or 60, for example.

The 357 scandium-framed guns do have that SS flame shield--but I know of few people who shoot full-house 125-gr factory rounds (the ones that do flame-cutting, at least by reputation) from a lightweight.

With this in mind, a 360 (sku #16030)--that the one scandium-frame 2" 38 Special would be the best combination of all for longevity. But the aluminum Airweights--well, those models are their base model after all.

Jim H.
 
I have a 4 year old M638 that gets shot several times a month at the range with an average of 50 rounds a session and it's still tight as a drum. (well over 2000 rounds or so)
 
I remember reading a test in one of the gun rags back before the internet (I think it was Guns & Ammo) where the author took two Airweights, I want to say Bodyguards, but I'm not sure, and subjected them to shooting with +P LSWCHP ammunition to see how long it took to wear them out. This was back before any J-frames were stamped +P by S&W. As I recall, somewhere in the neighborhood of 5000 rounds both guns started to show frame stretching.
 
I don't like the airweights, but 20,000 rounds of any defensive load would greatly surprise me. The Smith 19 began showing problems after 2,000 magnum loads and frame stretching after about 5,000 rounds. One of the tech people at the NRA retired his after having it retimed twice. By the third time, the frame had stretched to the point where it had, in effect, worn out. He subsequently reported thiis in an article on .357s, in which he featured his own Ruger Security-Six, which although about the same size and weight as the 19, had a solid frame and a stronger cylinder and topstrap.

Rugers have been known to stand in excess of 30,000 hot magnum rounds through them, but I don't know of any documented cases of S&W designs witstanding that many. I'd think the L- and N-frames could do it, but I'd be surprised if an airweight could. Just sayin'...
 
Confederate: note that the 18-20K rounds I have shot were in the 640--i.e., the SS 357 j-frame, not an airweight.

The vast majority--perhaps 75%--of these were rounds testing various powders and bullets built to "GDSB 38+P standards"--e.g., up to about 900 fps (2" barrel) with a 135-gr. bullet. Another 15% or so are testing variants of "the FBI load"--a 38+P 158-gr. round built to run about 800-820 fps from a 2" barrel. Another 5% or so were testing loads of what I call an "FBI900"--pushing a 158 gr. LSWC-HP to about 900 fps, built in a 357 case. Finally, I did do some 357 reloads testing various powders--notably, Ramshot's Silhouette--all the way up to max powder recipes.

In summary, probably less than 2% of the rounds fired were at pressures over 30,000 PSI, I would guess. That "vast majority" were in the 14,000-22/24,000 range. I am no revolver expert, but to my eye and examination in cleaning, there is no significant wear. On an Airweight, with its usual aluminum frame, I'll bet there would be noticable stretching.

[At about round 300, S&W also fit a new cylinder to this gun following the firing of five overpressure rounds (about 18-gr. of AA#7 under a Speer 135-gr. JHP; I reported the incident for discussion here, in an old post). Upon return, the barrel-cylinder gap was at .005. It remains at that now, with some endshake. The trigger is a j-frame delight, of course, especially in the afternoons....:)]

But, you've got my curiosity up: I'm gonna read up in my Kuehnhausen (sp) manual to see if I can measure it up myself some.

Jim H.
 
Last edited:
I have never heard of one being shot out... however, S&W has a lifetime warranty, so if anything gets shot out of spec you can send it back for repair.
 
I fired more than 4,000 rounds (mostly range loads) from my 637 before its firing pin quite suddenly lost all interest in striking primers. My problem had nothing to do with overtorqued barrels, stretched frames, MIM parts or the internal lock. As reported by S&W, its firing pin bushing had failed. For reasons known only to them, they chose to fix it by replacing the entire frame, serial number and all. This triggered federal law, which required that the revolver be sent to my FFA instead of me, followed by the full background check, fingerprint, ten day wait and all. S&W charged me nothing, and paid shipping both ways.

I have not heard of another case of firing pin bushing failure, so I consider this to be a one-off.

Cordially, Jack
 
I have never heard of one being shot out... however, S&W has a lifetime warranty, so if anything gets shot out of spec you can send it back for repair.
Problem with that is, if the revolver needs frame work and will have to be replaced and it's a no-lock gun you aren't going to get a no-lock gun back. What good is a life time anything if you send in a good gun and get one back that's dangerous? I guess it could be sold off since it's new. :(
 
I have one 442 that had to go back for a new hand after about 2K rounds. Another 442 had a strange pitting issue that required a new frame after about 500 rounds. Both were fired exclusively with std. pressure factory ammo.
 
What good is a life time anything if you send in a good gun and get one back that's dangerous?
Your tinfoil's too tight.

Sent 'em a used 65 that had some serious mechanical problems (got it for a song), and they cut me a HUGE bargain on a brand new firearm that had "the lock"--and y'know what? The lock hasn't come out of the firearm and devoured my soul, nor has it done anything for which it was not intended.
 
Problem with that is, if the revolver needs frame work and will have to be replaced and it's a no-lock gun you aren't going to get a no-lock gun back. What good is a life time anything if you send in a good gun and get one back that's dangerous? I guess it could be sold off since it's new.

Well... if the frame is gone beyond repair, then the gun is useless anyway. Whats wrong with getting a brand new gun? Do you have a better solution? I am thinking that reprogramming and retooling to make you a no-lock frame is not a real option.

As much as I hate the lock... I'm just trying to be reasonable.
 
Well, we got ten posts in before someone had to pick at the Infernal Lock. As the majority of my S&Ws have the IL - including the 642-2 I bet my life on - it's a non-issue here.

I have worried over the lifespan of my 296 AirLite TI (.44 Special big brother of my 642) and 642 Airweight. Both have seen thousands of rounds through them... and I felt everyone thru that 296 - it's little boots and that big backstrap don't help so much with the recoil. Same with the 642 to a smaller extent. Still - I have far more fun firearms to plink with. Even my latest 'house gun', a SS 4" 64-8, makes a great plinker. I am concerned re topstrap wear, frame stretching, yoke wear. Sure, that lifetime protection is great. Maybe I'll cut back to 500 rounds/year... it'll take 20yr to get there - I'll be in my eighties. Man, thinking about shooting all of those .44 Specials when I am really old... that sucks!

Heck, I am not going to worry about it. I'll keep blasting enough SD rounds to stay current in each - and if I want to shoot some mild .38s, I'll just do it! And... I refuse to worry about that IL!

Stainz
 
I fired more than 4,000 rounds (mostly range loads) from my 637 before its firing pin quite suddenly lost all interest in striking primers. My problem had nothing to do with overtorqued barrels, stretched frames, MIM parts or the internal lock. As reported by S&W, its firing pin bushing had failed. For reasons known only to them, they chose to fix it by replacing the entire frame, serial number and all. This triggered federal law, which required that the revolver be sent to my FFA instead of me, followed by the full background check, fingerprint, ten day wait and all. S&W charged me nothing, and paid shipping both ways.

I have not heard of another case of firing pin bushing failure, so I consider this to be a one-off.

Cordially, Jack

might be due to the crush fit/'cold weld' fit of the steel bushing inside an opening of an aluminum frame...the aluminum probably couldn't handle the stress of forcing out the bushing and stress of another crush fit/cold weld; another possibility crossed my mind...perhaps they did a resonance scan or x-ray and discovered microscopic stress fractures in the aluminum frame around the opening where the bushing is fit which could cause a failure and pending litigation by injured person(s)
 
Your tinfoil's too tight.

Sent 'em a used 65 that had some serious mechanical problems (got it for a song), and they cut me a HUGE bargain on a brand new firearm that had "the lock"--and y'know what? The lock hasn't come out of the firearm and devoured my soul, nor has it done anything for which it was not intended.
Eightball,
Disagreeing with me is fine. Thinking I'm totally wrong is fine. Respectful decent is welcomed but there's no reason for the tinfoil crack or the belittling last sentence either. :rolleyes: I would hope for more here at THR.

Sorry I brought up anything about the lock. I was only warning those who might not know about getting back a gun that isn't what you sent them.
 
kmrstntn said: might be due to the crush fit/'cold weld' fit of the steel bushing inside an opening of an aluminum frame...the aluminum probably couldn't handle the stress of forcing out the bushing and stress of another crush fit/cold weld; another possibility crossed my mind...perhaps they did a resonance scan or x-ray and discovered microscopic stress fractures in the aluminum frame around the opening where the bushing is fit which could cause a failure and pending litigation by injured person(s)

That's a very good reason. Thanks.

Cordially, Jack
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top