S&W sweetness... which one?

[Driftwood Johnson]

Thanks for the heads up. Damn, I never knew or heard of these problems with K frames. I would have just assumed these things would eat all the full house loads you could give em..... that's slightly disconcerting.

I don't mean to discourage you.

For many years, K frame S&W revolvers had a clearance cut on the bottom of the forcing cone. The clearance cut was there to clear the gas ring on the cylinder or the yoke. The clearance cut resulted in the metal being a little bit thinner at the bottom of the forcing cone.

Here is a photo of the clearance cut on the bottom of my 357 Mag Model 19-3, that I have owned for almost 50 years.






And here is a cracked forcing cone on somebody else's Model 19. I pulled this photo off the web.






That is not to say that you are going to get a cracked forcing cone the first time you fire light, high velocity bullets in a K frame 357 Magnum revolver. I have been shooting mine for close to 50 years, but I will admit that most of the ammo I have put through it over the years has been 38 Special, not 357 Mag. If you stick with standard 357 Mag ammo with 158 grain bullets you should be fine. Most evidence seems to point to the 110 grain bullets being a problem. Again, your forcing cone will probably be fine, but put enough light, high velocity bullets through it and you might have a problem.

This is why the L frame was invented. There is enough space that a clearance cut is not required on the bottom of the forcing cone. There is no clearance cut on the bottom of the forcing cone on this L frame Model 686-6.






There is no clearance cut on the bottom of the forcing cone of a N frame Smith either, such as the Model 29 you are looking at.

Most recently, S&W redesigned their K frame revolvers slightly, eliminating the clearance cut, but I suspect that Model 66 was made long before the redesign.

 

[Tallball]

My friend is in his 50's. He shoots his Model 66 a lot. He got it from his dad, who shot it a lot. It still functioned perfectly when I shot it two days ago.

 

[Styx]

Thanks for the heads up. Damn, I never knew or heard of these problems with K frames. I would have just assumed these things would eat all the full house loads you could give em..... that's slightly disconcerting.

The new product Model 66 do not have issues with 357. The older prelocks do.

You can get a newer production S&W Model 66 Combat Magnum which are on a K frame are also going for around $800 too.

 

[Riomouse911]

I think the 66 is a great service revolver. For the same reason I'm planning on purchasing a S&W 69 44mag. Carry often with reasonable practice sessions with 44mag's.

I did just that a few months ago. I found the 5- shot 4” L frame wasn’t as bad in recoil as I feared with mid-range .44 Mag loads.



Then I just had to add a 6.5” S&W 624 to pair with the Blackhawk and 3” GP 100.



Again, the 66 is an awesome gun. If .38/.357 is what you are looking for, and the gun passes the inspection (forcing cone, end shake, lockup, etc.) $800 is about what we would expect to pay today for a nice one.

Let us know what you decide… then a range report when you are able to go shoot .

Stay safe.

 

[wcwhitey]

Thanks for the heads up. Damn, I never knew or heard of these problems with K frames. I would have just assumed these things would eat all the full house loads you could give em..... that's slightly disconcerting.

Like I said earlier if you read enough you will find a problem with any gun. The K frames are good ones, I have two 66’s and they are pure delight. Ask about a Python someone will tell you they go of time, some do! Still a beautiful gun. That Model 29 is not made for pounding all day with top end .44 Mag either, everything wears out eventually. That Model 66 depending on the dash number could be 50 years old but never shot, read the revolver check out thread in this section.

 

[gila_dog1]

I like that .357 mag. Being a stainless steel K frame it would make an excellent all weather carry gun for backcountry wandering, like I do. And so what about the money? Spend it on something sweet like that, and you'll never regret it.
Re K frames being too weak to handle .357 magnums, that was a little bit true a long time ago, but the new ones use better steel, so don't worry about that. I have an old one (a model 19) that's been shot hard for many years and is still going strong. The new ones are better.

 

[Thomasss]

Unless you really know the Model 29, I would go with the 66. A 66 is easier to determine how well it has been handled in the past. This Model 29 is a little under priced unless it is a newer model like in 2012. Another issue is mod. 29-3 was the first model to be unpinned and it took S&W a few mod. 29s to figure out how to compensate for an unpinned barrel. Their barrels screw on clockwise looking from the muzzle. If the sight plain isn't tight and in exact perfect alignment from the receiver to the barrel, then there is a problem Houston.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Re K frames being too weak to handle .357 magnums, that was a little bit true a long time ago, but the new ones use better steel, so don't worry about that. I have an old one (a model 19) that's been shot hard for many years and is still going strong. The new ones are better.

Judging from the grips in the photo of the Model 66, it is not very new. S&W has not put grips like that on their revolvers for a long time, probably since the 1990s. The strength of the steel has nothing to do with how well the older K frames can handle a steady diet of 357 Magnum ammunition, it is all about the clearance cut at the bottom of the forcing cone, as I showed in the photos I posted earlier. The Model 66s that S&W is producing today may have the gas ring redesigned to eliminate the clearance cut at the bottom of the forcing cone, but the one in the photo is not one of those.

I too have K frame 357 Magnum revolvers, I have been shooting my Model 19-3 for almost 50 years, I also have a Model 65-3, made in 1982 and a Model 13-2, made in 1979. These all have the relief cut at the bottom of the forcing cone. I ain't split one yet, but I limit the amount of 357 Magnum ammo I fire through them.

Model 19-3, purchased new in 1975.






Model 65-3, shipped in 1982.






Model 13-2, shipped in 1979.






Clearance cut on Model 19-3






Clearance cut on Model 13-2






Clearance cut on a K-38 from the 1950s. S&W was putting this clearance cut on 38 Special revolvers since about 1905. It was never a problem with a 38 Special revolver. When S&W first started making the 357 Combat Model (later known as the Model 19) that is when the problem started happening.






The 357 Combat Magnum was never designed for a steady diet of 357 Magnum ammunition. It was meant to take the place of the much heavier N frame 357 Magnums such as the Model 27, which could be shot all day with the hottest 357 Mag ammo, but were very heavy for an officer to carry all day. Hence the birth of the 357 Combat Magnum in 1955, as a duty weapon meant to be fired sparingly with 357 Magnum ammo.

 

[Rexster]

Considering one of these two, leaning toward the 66 because it's only $400 over budget, lol. My better half gave me the green light to pick something out this year since it's been awhile since I picked something out.

I basically have no interest in any new autos save for a few very specific guns that I always look for, but I've basically been scanning my LGS page waiting for something to jump out at me and lo and behold, these beauties.

Yikes, don't really have any business getting into $1K wheelgun on a whim but I am definitely thinking about what it'd be like if I did. which one would you choose and the 66 is a pretty good deal if its been a safe weight, no?

View attachment 1094377

Well, LGS = Local Gun Shop. So, I would handle both, and then choose, based upon condition, fit & finish, condition, which one “feels better,” and, finally condition. Then, if all of the preceding are equal, I would go with the .357 Mag choice, for versatility, but probably not use it to shoot much, if any, max-pressure 125-grain JHP ammo. (Others have covered the forcing cone durability issue, when using 125-grain .357 duty ammo, so I will not repeat it here.)

I will admit some personal bias, because I am a retired Texas peace officer, who started LEO-ing with S&W DA sixguns, and few things are as “Texas/Southwest lawman” as an S&W Combat Magnum. I reckon that an S&W Model 29 is more “Interior West/Northwest outdoorsman.”

I have factored-out that I have K/L-Frame-sized hands, because this is a personal factor. If I were to buy a Model 29, I would have to fire it single-action, only, in order to get the trigger within reach of my index finger. If I am going to have to cock a hammer, anyway, I would opt for a true single-action sixgun. (I did plenty of damage to my right hand, especially the thumb and wrist joints, using an offset grip, to fire N-Frames DA, during the Eighties.)