Why no new K-frames?

[1/7GRUNT]

Ask what a perfect revolver is in many opinions and you'll be told the Kframe in 357. I love my 3 inch model 65 and would love to have a modern one to go with it.
So why does S&W not make any new models of the Kframe? Make it aluminum frame or scandium and finish it in melonite , whatever. And no XS big dots, a real fixed sight system.
If they can make steel Jframes couldn't they beef up the forcing cone some too?
Maybe I'm ranting but there's my dream weapon. A brand new no ILS 65 with 3 inch barrel.
Thanks for listening!

 

[Old Fuff]

The lion share of Smith & Wesson's revolver business is .38 Special/.357 Magnum revolvers made on the J-frame. When it comes to the relatively small market for .357's on a larger frame, they created the L-frame expressly for the purpose after having some problems with this cartridge in a K-frame.

The major market for K-frame revolvers in either of the above calibers was law enforcement orders, which now use pistols.

To answer your question, they don't and likely won't because of a lack of orders. But don't give up - because of they're former popularity there are plenty of good ones on the used market.

 

[dnovo]

What he said. Dave

 

[1/7GRUNT]

I will probably just get another used 65. I would carry the one I have but my father carried it plainclothes so there is too much nostalgia for me
Thanks for the insight Fuff. I respect your opinion and enjoy your posts.

 

[dprice3844444]

model 65 3 inch round butt

 

[oldfool]

well, they have "re-introduced" several k-frame models labeled as "classics" in the last few years, though the variants (like barrel length) are real limited, and likely to remain so

how well they really compare to yesteryear, I don't have a clue, and they are sure enough pricey
I stick to the original models myself, like said, lots of 'em out there that can be had

 

[Hondo 60]

S&W, like any business, makes what sells.

If they were selling a lot of K frames, they'd make more choices available.

Right now it's autoloaders & concealed carry guns that are the hot sellers.

 

[Old Fuff]

The "Classic" line of revolvers has met a mixed reception, with some doing well, while others were closed out at, or below cost. In general those made on the K-frame have belonged to the latter group, largely because the price of original models is often close to, or below that ask for the reproduction. It doesn't help when (or if) the buyers in the targeted market often believe that "older is better."

I personally like K-frame's, chambered in nothing more powerful then .38 Special, which I consider to be the ideal cartridge for the platform. My needs are modest, and the used aftermarket has more then enough to fill my desires. Magnum power is seldom necessary, and I've grown too lazy to keep scrubbing lead deposits out of the chambers after shooting "specials."

 

[mgmorden]

I personally like my K-frame model 64 a lot. I don't like snubbies at all - 4" or 6" barrels for me. I also like the bigger grips compared to the J-frames.

Overall though, much like Old Fuff said: it all comes down to business. What the gun enthusiast crowd likes isn't always what sells. If they cut back on production for K-frames that likely just means that the K-frames either weren't selling well, or production was expensive enough that it would have required a price increase that they didn't feel the market would accept.

 

[wlewisiii]

I dearly love my Model 64 4". That said, I could see getting a Model 65 (or 13) to complement it, simply higher power loads during hunting season though. The rest of the time would be .38 special as was the original design intent. The main problem is cost - I can't see paying more than ~$300 for one and certainly not what S&W would want for a new one.

 

[MCgunner]

I'd not buy a new one, anyway. Used is the only way with Smith and Wesson, so i don't care that they don't offer K frame .357s anymore. JMHO, of course.

 

[wrangler5]

I believe S&W found that the K frame just wasn't robust enough for full time 357 use, which is why they developed the L frame - which is large enough for a 7-round 357 cylinder. The first full time 357 DA from Ruger was the Security/Speed Six, which is slightly more burly than a K frame, and of course the successor GP100 is much more robust.

MAYBE with some new metallurgy they could make a K frame that would eat Magnum loads all day. But barring that I'd guess that S&W just isn't real interested in making a gun whose owner's manual has to say "don't shoot 357 too much in this gun." Certainly not with a lifetime warranty that has to fix/replace every gun that goes beyond "too much."

 

[rcmodel]

If they can make steel Frames couldn't they beef up the forcing cone some too?

Not without a total redesign of the K-Frame cylinder opening window.
But then it wouldn't be a K-Frame anymore.
It would be an L-Frame.

There is just barely enough room for six .38 holes & a center pin already.
Then the barrel shank has to have a flat cut on the bottom of it to clear the cylinder gas shield ring. That is the weak spot in the forcing cone you hear about.

They just plain ran out of room on a frame design first used in 1899.

The much later designed J-Frame Chiefs Special barrel shank/forcing cone is almost totally enclosed inside the frame threads, so no gas ring clearance cut is necessary.

rc

 

[I'm3rd]

The "Classic" line of revolvers has met a mixed reception, with some doing well, while others were closed out at, or below cost. In general those made on the K-frame have belonged to the latter group, largely because the price of original models is often close to, or below that ask for the reproduction. It doesn't help when (or if) the buyers in the targeted market often believe that "older is better."

I personally like K-frame's, chambered in nothing more powerful then .38 Special, which I consider to be the ideal cartridge for the platform. My needs are modest, and the used aftermarket has more then enough to fill my desires. Magnum power is seldom necessary, and I've grown too lazy to keep scrubbing lead deposits out of the chambers after shooting "specials."

What you said.

The 4" model 10 in several slightly different versions was the classic cop revolver for a big part of the 20th century, and that's a pretty good recommendation in my book. Many tens of thousands were made and in my neck of the woods they aren't hard to find in decent condition on the used market. In MHO it's one of the most practical all around revolvers you can still find at a reasonable asking price on the used-gun shelf at many LGS. That's likely the result of the unusually large amount of trade-ins by LE agencies during the switch from wheelguns to semiautos several decades ago. That's where my VG/EXC example came from 20-something years ago, and I plan on keeping it until it passes down to my son, hopefully not anytime soon.

 

[earlthegoat2]

They may figure it out when they realize they are losing sales to the used market.

But hey, they are always losing my sales. Im the biggest S&W fan ever who has never once given my money directly or indirectly to that company.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

I'm going to go with the fact that too many full .357's shake the K-frames loose too soon, hence the development and promotion of the L-frame. Once the L-frame was firmly established, S&W decided that the K-frame ought to be phased out, as they were getting too many back for refitting and adjustment, etc. The K-frame is fine if light loads are used MOST of the time, and magnums occasionally (just like alloy frame autos with plus-P's, etc), but not all owners realize and follow that doctrine. It was just easier to phase down the K-frame.

 

[jhvaughan2]

What I do not understand is why they don't give us the equivalent K frame models on the L frame. If cost is an issue then they could stop making the K and just put the sight/barrel profiles from the 19, 14, 15 13, 10 (and SS equivalents)

The L "frame" is not that much bigger than the K, however having only full lug barrels is very limited. Why not a 4" "pencil" barrel .38 L frame? Or for that matter an alloy 2" seven-shot fixed sighted 38 reminiscent of the old model 12?

Well as other's have said there is no market for "utilitarian" revolvers, only CCW, "Collectors" and the "recoil lovers"

 

[evan price]

@jhvaughan2:
The reason is because S&W build things to sell in quantity. As much as we all love our Smith K's, and there would probably be some sales of L-frame 38 Smiths, they know that a 357 takes not much more money to build than a 38 spl. 38 spl has the reputation of being "weak" and 357 is A MAGNUM (roar). So they are taking the easy way out- building the Magnums and anyone who wants to shoot 38's will just do so.

The massive numbers of 10's and 64's were because well, the K was originally designed for 38 spl... and a lot of PDs and security companies standardized on a 38 spl as the duty round. To meet that spec they made a metric crapload of Model 10's and Model 64's. Had that not been the default LE spec gun they would not have made as many. Like nowadays, the .40 S&W caliber Glock is the default LE gun.

Like you said, what's driving the handgun market is the LE market (Which is overwhelmingly going for pistols in 9mm and 40 cal) and the CCW/undercover market (which seems to want snubbies and micro-pistols) and the "I want the biggest gun in the shop" types with the X frames... and that's about it. The real gun nuts aren't being catered to because they aren't profitable when compared to other demographics. People who appreciate a finely crafted S&W model 10 or 64 probably WON'T buy a new one with MIM parts and a Hilary Hole in the side anyway and with all the nice clean examples floating around the used market they are not going to win on price. Who would pay $900 for a brand-NIB model 64-10 with an integral lock? You can get a 64-2 for under $400 nearly NIB.

 

[mgmorden]

You can get a 64-2 for under $400 nearly NIB.

Or even less. Only had it about 2 years, and I paid $225 for my excellent condition 64-3.

Same shop two weeks ago I saw a S&W K-frame 2" snubbie (blued - pretty sure it was a Model 10) for $200.

That's the thing with guns. They last darned near forever when even a moderate effort is put towards caring for them. Combine that with the fact that the guns we use today are largely unchanged from what we've been using for the last 100 years, and the result is a LOT of perfectly serviceable used guns out there in circulation.

 

[rishooter]

K Frame Weakness

I like K frames,but when firing 357's in them,one must keep in mind the smaller amount of steel in the forcing cone due to the flat bottomed design of that part.
N frames never had that problem.
K frames were never intended to be fired continuously using 357's.
L frames,which I don't care for because of the full lug barrel,were intended for sustained 357 use.
It's funny,because the full lug on the Python seems to balance than those on the L frames.
Gimme a 27 or 28 any day over a 586/686.

 

[Brian Williams]

I would love to have a fixed sight Scandium K frame in 357, go ahead and redesign the thing to more fully enclose the barrel shank.
At least S&W could do is to come out with a 3" non-lugged barrel for a fixed sight L frame.

 

[Old Fuff]

Smith & Wesson did (or does - I didn't check to see) make a 7-shot/.357 Magnum based on the L-platform with 1/2 underluged barrels. The model 619 has fixed sights, the 620 comes (came?) with adjustable ones. If they aren't still in the catalog it's because of a lack of orders.

 

[Seven For Sure]

There is a new K frame out, the Night Guard 315. Awsome carry package for the K frame lover.