I know this has been discussed with regard to model 10s, but I wonder if the same metallurgy concerns will be raised with stainless k frames.
I have an opportunity to pick up a NOS model 66 cylinder and 2.5" barrel for a very reasonable price. I also have a late 1990's 4" model 64 that I would like, if possible, to convert to .357. The cost of the parts, labor, and model 64 come out less than the price for 2.5" model 66s that I've seen, so the cost barrier is avoided.
The new barrel would relieve the forcing cone gap concerns that have been raised with just converting the cylinder.
Unless I'm missing other concerns, the only barrier left would be the strength of the 64's frame when firing .357 loads. I don't know if stainless undergoes the same treatment as the steel in model 10s. I also don't have a K magnum frame to measure and compare with my 64.
I realize it would essentially end up with a 2.5" model 66 stamped model as a model 64 (or, more likely, just a bastardized model 64), but I'm intrigued by the thought of essentially arriving at one of my "dream" guns at a substantial cost savings. I also remember reading somewhere (probably here) that some VERY early model 64s had been chambered for .357 in a special order.
Let me know if I'm on to something here or if I should abandon the idea and be happy with my safe, reliable, and ultimately adequately potent, albeit slightly anemic, model 64.
*Another question: if .357 is a no-go, would swapping out the 64's 4" barrel for the 66's 2.5" barrel pose any problems?
I have an opportunity to pick up a NOS model 66 cylinder and 2.5" barrel for a very reasonable price. I also have a late 1990's 4" model 64 that I would like, if possible, to convert to .357. The cost of the parts, labor, and model 64 come out less than the price for 2.5" model 66s that I've seen, so the cost barrier is avoided.
The new barrel would relieve the forcing cone gap concerns that have been raised with just converting the cylinder.
Unless I'm missing other concerns, the only barrier left would be the strength of the 64's frame when firing .357 loads. I don't know if stainless undergoes the same treatment as the steel in model 10s. I also don't have a K magnum frame to measure and compare with my 64.
I realize it would essentially end up with a 2.5" model 66 stamped model as a model 64 (or, more likely, just a bastardized model 64), but I'm intrigued by the thought of essentially arriving at one of my "dream" guns at a substantial cost savings. I also remember reading somewhere (probably here) that some VERY early model 64s had been chambered for .357 in a special order.
Let me know if I'm on to something here or if I should abandon the idea and be happy with my safe, reliable, and ultimately adequately potent, albeit slightly anemic, model 64.
*Another question: if .357 is a no-go, would swapping out the 64's 4" barrel for the 66's 2.5" barrel pose any problems?