Durability of Smith .357 N frames shot DA

[RON in PA]

Several threads in the recent past have alluded to timing problems with Smith .357 N frames when shot DA, ie, battered cylinder locking bolts and bolt windows. This all due to the great momentum of the heavy cylinder.

My question is: can one shoot these guns (models 27 & 28) DA without damage if one doesn't try to shoot like Jerry Miculek, but shoots at a more relaxed pace?
Or would it be better to shoot SA only.

Thanks.

 

[Majic]

It's just the fast double action shooting that will cause the premature wear.

 

[Hal]

using a D/A - "thumb-buster" style only is a real good way to get hurt bad in a gunfight... or worse..

'sides,,,thumbing back the hammer fast is going to put as much if not more stress on the gun that rapid D/A fire.

Your accuracy will probably be all shot to soot long before you get near maximum rate of fire. Just start out slow D/A trying to put 'em all in the center,,,when you do,,pick up the pace until they stop going in the center.

If you get to the same rate as Jerry or "Jelly" ("Jelly" Bryce), not to worry.
Smith and Wesson will be only too glad to furnish you all the hardware you desire.... probably gratis.

 

[Lone Star]

This is a valid concern, but the late Skeeter Skelton preferred the M27 with five-inch barrel to any other .357, although he did very often substitute a M19 or a .45 auto in his later years. That suggests that the M27/28 will hold its timing better than one might think, just looking at the heavy cylinder. Elmer Keith also did a lot of fast DA shooting with N-frame .38/44's and .357's.

In my experience, the N-frame is much more durable than a Colt .357, but will need re-timing sooner than a K or L-frame S&W. The Ruger DA .357's seem even more durable.

Lone Star

 

[Peter M. Eick]

That big heavy cylinder is the concern. The faster you DA it, the more the little cylinder stop has to hold still. It tends to peen the cylinder stop notches. None of my 5 screw N frames have bad peening, but my 1939 Registered Magnum has some peening you can feel with your fingernail.

I guess the question should be more how much and how fast do you want to do it? Is it going to hurt it? Yes, just how bad and how fast.

 

[Old Fuff]

Peter:


Referring to your Registered 357 Magnum and other older .38/44 revolvers.

If you look at the right side of the cylinder stop ball (the part of the cylinder stop that sticks up through the frame and locks the cylinder) you will see a little groove cut in it on the right side which is even with the frame. The purpose of this groove is to remove the surface where it would otherwise batter the edge of the cylinder stop notch in the cylinder. This didn't cure the problem but it did reduce it. The older S&W N-frame revolvers (so-called "5 screw models) had a spring & plunger arrangement that tensioned the cylinder stop and was held in with the 5th screw in the front of the trigger guard. If the stop was timed for a slightly early release and a stronger spring was used, the cylinder stop ball would act as a brake, and this would also reduce battering.

They don't make them that way anymore, which is the reason that registered Magnum and the other N-frame .38 revolvers you have cost so much these days.

Knowledgeable people are willing to pay ...

And now you know another reason why.

 

[JoeHatley]

I've been shooting this S&W model 28 almost exclusively double action for many years.



Timing is still great. Note only a faint drag line and no peening in the notches.

I doubt I'll ever wear this gun out...

Joe

 

[PlayTheAces]

I've been shooting this S&W model 28 almost exclusively double action for many years.

To second what Joe just said, I've been shooting my own 28 for just over thirty years now, both double and single action, and have had no issues with it, timing or otherwise. I fully expect it to last another thirty years.

 

[Standing Wolf]

I doubt I'll ever wear this gun out...

Yeah, but trying sure is fun, eh?

 

[J Miller]

My Mdl 28 has been retimed three times in the 25 years I've had it. I shoot double action mostly and it does beat the crap out of them. The locking bolt notches have been reworked once and will need it again.
.357 N frames are bad at this. Because of the aformentioned heavy cylinder.
It does apear that some people have better luck with theirs than most. Either that or some guns are just more prone to this problem than others.

Rather than shooting mine single action only, I'm gonna retire it and buy a GP100. They are much more durable.


Joe

 

[thatguy]

You know, it amazes me how many posts on these forums I see regarding wearing out or breaking guns. I got my first gun in 1967 and in the past 37 years I have owned about 300 guns, all of which I shot the hell out of every chance I got, using full power ammunition, and I can't recall any gun ever breaking. Wait, the front sight did fly off a .458 one time but that was because of a shoddy soldering job at the factory and it let go under recoil. Other than that, I have never had or seen a K frame .357 Smith break or wear out from using magnum ammo, nor have I had or seen a Python go out of time, nor have I had or seen a quality .38 Special revolver damaged by factory +P ammo, nor have I had or seen any of the other numerous problems and concerns I read about from nervous shooters. I suspect that actually breaking a Colt or a Ruger or a S&W is a pretty rare thing and almost requires a flaw in manufacturing, extreme carelessness or maybe even a deliberate attempt at abuse. N frame Smiths being battered by the cylinder rotating? Give me a break! I have several N frame Smiths that are 50 years of age or older that have seen a tremendous amount of use including a pre-Model 27 that has fired countless thousands of full-power magnum ammo. It has little finish left from being carried daily during a 30 year career by a police officer but mechanically it is just as sound now as it was when it was shipped from the factory on March 6, 1956. I still shoot this gun regularly and it works just fine. So do the others of similar vintage. I believe that I would spend exactly ZERO time worrying about an N frame S&W being battered to death by the inertia of its own cylinder turning.

 

[ChristopherG]

Here's where one of those 8-hole guns makes a lot of sense. The shorter distance moved should mean lower speed -- less momentum to stop at lock-up. And obviously two more chambers drilled through the cylinder make for less mass, which again means less momentum.

I want one of them bad.

PS--You guys who suggest it's not a problem; Do you shoot a lot of Bill-drills and El Prez's? It's fast-action stuff, IPSC, IDPA, & ICORE, that pounds that little bolt stop, not ordinary DA shooting.

 

[surfinUSA]

Thatguy,

I agree 100%. I have had very good luck with my guns. Some day a may wear out a K frame magnum but it hasn't happened yet. When it does I'll send it back for repairs.

What shocks me is the number of threads from people that have no problems but are crying about what could possibly go wrong.

I say buy a quality gun and enjoy it. If it breaks have it repaired but don't waste your time worring about problems that don't exist.

 

[Majic]

If there wasn't a real possibility of the K-frames not being durable with certain loads then why did S&W design the L-frame?
S&W uses an old design that as shooting and loads changed over the years various problems cropped up. The K-frame was a .38sp design that was strengthened to handle the .357mag. The standard round was the 158 grainers. When the round evolved to the 110gr and the 125 gr magnums a weakness showed up. That was corrected with the L-frame.
The N-frame found it's first problems when the silhouette shooters started using the powerful heavy bullet loads. The revolvers were "enhanced" with durability features to compete with other makers revolvers. Then the fast paced shooting games showed another situation that the revolver wasn't designed for that resulted in premature wear.
If any firearm is shot in the manner which it was designed and using the ammo it was designed around then it should have a long life. Push it beyond it's design specs and you should look for problems to pop up.

 

[Gunrunner]

I wish I could say my M27 5" was still shooting good. I bought it new in 1976, 2 years later sold it to a co-worker, and 8 years later bought it back when he was broke. I paid a lot less to him as the cylinder had some play in it, and I thought I'd be able to get it fixed. Had it to 2 gunsmiths and it would be tight for a while, and then get loose on 3 chambers. I don't know what the heck that co-worker shot in it or how he shot it, but it's never been right since then. But I love this gun, and wish I'd never sold it to that idiot, and will always keep it. I know S&W will only put a new un-recessed cylinder on it and I won't do that.

Now my other Smith's haven't had problems, even though I've shot them a heck of a lot over the years. But they're 44's. I need to get me a 686 one of these days.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Thanks for the education old fuff. I will have to pull out the Registered when I get back and look for what you describe. I do not really remember it that well.

Where do you think the slight peening on the cylinder stop cutouts in the cylinder are coming from then? You can just barely feel them with your fingernail and none of my other 5 screws have that lip.

Thanks for the advice, but it will be a couple of weeks till I can pull the registered and look at it.

 

[Old Fuff]

To answer your questions I'd have to examine the gun. It may be that the cylinder stop has been replaced with a later one that doesn't have the groove I mentioned. Or the cylinder stop plunger spring might be weak, or even shortened by a previous owner that didn't know any better. The Magnum cylinders were made from a special steel and then double heat treated. As a result they should resist peening better then a .38 Special cylinder. Get a good magnifying glass and do a little looking. You may find a clue.

 

[thatguy]

Majic, basic physics (which hasn't changed since Sir Isaac Newton wrote the rules hundreds of years ago) states that every action creates an opposite and EQUAL reaction. Hence, the recoil (and in theory, the pounding to the gun) would be GREATER with the 158 loads and LESS with the 125 loads since the heavier bullets generate more recoil energy due to their greater mass. Saying that the L frame was introduced to cure the battering of the new 125 grain loads doesn't make sense to me since they don't recoil as badly as the heavier loads.

I have heard that the problem with the hot lighter bullet loads is from flame cutting to the forcing cone due to the increased flash these loads produce. Maybe that's true, I don't know. What I do know is that I have been using these loads in M19s and M13s for many years without effect at this point. As for why S&W brought out the L frame, well, I've been asking that myself for about 20 years. I personally saw no need for the L frame and kept my K frame magnums and I have been very happy with them. So far, no bulged cylinders, or ruptured forcing cones, or stretched frames and I do not shoot .38 Specials in magnums. They get full-power loads, only. I shoot .38s in my .38s.

Everyone is free to do what they want with their guns. I choose to use mine as intended with the ammo they were meant to use. I just can't believe all this Chicken Little stuff about guns breraking all the time. When I hear people talking such utter nonsense as N frame Smiths beating themselves to death by being used in double action mode I am simply amazed at the paranoia. Maybe I don't worry enough, but so far no problem. In 37 years I haven't broken anything yet but I'll be sure to let you know if something lets go.

 

[HSMITH]

thatguy, I have personally shot a M28 4" extensively. I shoot hard fast DA for 99.9% of my shooting. I don't like the term, but 'combat' type shooting would best describe it. Draw, put lead on target as fast as possible, multiple shots. Reload and repeat all afternoon/night/whatever. 300-600 rounds per session, one to 3 sessions per week.

My M28 was nearly new when I bought it, barely visable turn line and no wear on the recoil plate at all. It spit lead within 3500 rounds, one month after I started shooting it. I had it re-timed by a S&W factory trained armorer, and it was tight as could be, probably tighter than it was new. I got almost 5000 rounds out of it before it was spitting again, but this time it would sometimes 'kick back' and spin backwards just enough to unlock on firing. I took it in to another smith for an opinion on repair, since it didn't hold up it must have been the fault of the gunsmith that fixed it right? Nope, this time the notches were peened out enough that an oversized stop had to fitted. The frame slot was also peened out. I talked to several more smiths and called the factory and talked to them. They said to a man it was 'normal' and unavoidable with the shooting I do. I was advised to get a K or L-frame.

This problem of N-frames getting torn up with hard use is real, it has happened to enough people that it can't be discounted. It won't happen to everyone, since a relatively small number of people shoot their N-frames in a manner that will damage them.

I have a M19 that replaced the M28, it has somewhere around 35K rounds through it now and it is starting to loosen up a little. A little endshake, a little rotational play that wasn't there when I got it, but it doesn't spit or unlock yet.

 

[Majic]

thatguy,
Apparently you added the battering effect. The forcing cone issue is real as they have been known to crack and split with certain loads. If you haven't seen it then good, but others have. The L-frame was enlarged in the frame to eliminate the cut in the K-frame's forcing cone where the problem shows up. This was apparent as no other .357mag revolver on the market had that problem when the hot light loads became the fashion.
The real nonsense of any of this is that just because you haven't personally seen a problem it just doesn't exist. You must understand the limits of your revolvers and treat them as such like many others (myself included), but there are some shooters who push the envelope and accellerate wear on their guns.
N-frames will shoot out of time faster than the smaller framed S&W if shot a certain way. If this amazes you then think of it as one of life's little surprises and hope it never happens to you. Things do happen in the world that we may never see, no matter how old we are or how much experience we have.

 

[thatguy]

"Several threads in the recent past have alluded to timing problems with Smith .357 N frames when shot DA, ie, battered cylinder locking bolts and bolt windows. This all due to the great momentum of the heavy cylinder.

My question is: can one shoot these guns (models 27 & 28) DA without damage if one doesn't try to shoot like Jerry Miculek, but shoots at a more relaxed pace? Or would it be better to shoot SA only."

Majic, please read Ron in PA's opening post on this thread (copied above). He is asking about "battering" N frames by firing double action and that's what I was referring to in my reply. I added nothing about this. I did bring up the burned forcing cone issue because this is a complaint that I have heard others make. Like I said, this might be a real concern although I have not seen it happen to anyone I know nor has it ever happened to me. I never said it never happened, I only said what my experience has been in the matter. I don't presume to speak for others. I did see a post with pictures of a split cone on a K frame that was supposed to have occurred due to using hot 125 grain ammo. I do not know for a fact that this was the cause but this is what was stated in the post. But this still seems to be a fairly rare event and like I said, may be due to manufacturing defects in some guns or perhaps the owners are doing something that promotes this failuire without realizing it.

I realize that just because I haven't seen it (this DA battering) doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but this is the first I have heard of this complaint. If this report is true, I am surprised that I have never seen it or heard of it before now given my history and experience with these guns. The truth is, the story strikes me as so unlikely to occur that I am having a hard time taking it seriously. But, I invite you to prove me wrong.

Guns are mechanical devices and can fail. They will also wear. But it has been my experience that maybe one shooter in 10,000 actually shoots a gun enough to really wear it out. Given proper care a quality gun will likely outlive your grandchildren.

You speak of "some shooters pushing the envelope" and wearing out their N frame revolvers faster than K frame guns. I am sorry, and I do not mean to be insulting, but I will need to see some proof of this. If you can cite some source for information that supports the notion that firing N frame S&Ws double action accelerates timing problems please provide it. There's no shortage of hearsay and anecdotal evidence of problems with guns, but this doesn't necessarily make it true. I recall standing in a shop listening to a gunsmith advise a customer to steer clear of Pythons because they go out of time so readily. So I asked him how many Pythons had been brought to him in the past 30 years for service. What a surprise! None! But there he was telling people how they break down all the time.

It is not your contention that N frames wear out in DA mode that amazes me (frankly, I don't believe that). What amazes me, and if you read my first post carefully you'll see that I am quite clear on this, is how many people are posting concerns about guns breaking. Not posts about guns actually breaking, mind you, which are extremely rare, but posts about rumors and stories of guns that fail for all manner of reason. The fragility of the K frame magnum has been the most popular subject for these posts but now I am seeing similar worries over N frame guns.

By the way, wouldn't the large frame Colt revolvers also suffer from this ailment? I have several large frame Colts dating from 1917 to 1949 and all have seen uncounted rounds fired in DA mode with none having any trouble from battered cylinder stops or related parts. Of course, they fail to exhibit any timing problems at all and that's not supposed to happen with old Colts according to many people.

I think too much energy is being spent on worrying about boogeymen. Now we have people asking if maybe N frame revolvers should not be fired at all in DA mode (again, see Ron in PA's original post). Good Lord! S&W has been making N frames for nearly 100 years and if there were serious problems with using them in DA mode I would think such troubles would be well documented by this point and I would like to think that I would have heard of it before now. But, as you note, I don't know everything there is to know. What I do know is that I want to see something concrete before I subscribe to rumors and begin declaring that the sky is falling.

 

[Majic]

It is not the normal double action shooting that causes the wear. It's when you pull the trigger as fast as you can keep it on target like in the action shooting games of today that the wear shows up. It's not a worry, just a warning so many of the fine old revolvers don't get subjected to this. The parts needed to correct these guns are now beginning to be in short supply. Peen your recessed cylinder beyond repair and there may not be another one to replace it without considerable expense. The guns used today are the newer Model 625 and the 8 shot Model 627. Both have lighter cylinders that tend to hold up better in the action paced games. Both also have readily available parts if needed.
Colt's by design locks up tighter than a S&W, but to achieve this it has to use 2 small parts. These parts do wear if shot extremely fast and the timing is lost. That gunsmith you refered to may not have been certified with Colts and knew to not try to work on one. It is a diferent design than a S&W and not all 'smiths work on them (or should not that is).
If you read this thread you will see several posters talking of the N-frame problems and they all point to one style of shooting. You want concrete evidence? Call S&W and ask them if there are any ill effects to shooting the N-frame in the fast double action shooting.

 

[Old Fuff]

Since no one has pointed this out yet I will take the opportunity...

Colt revolvers have the cylinder bolt (which S&W calls the "cylinder stop") offset so that the notch in the cylinder is located in the web between chambers. Because of this the notches can be made deeper and better resist peening. Smith and Wesson revolver cylinders have the notch directly under the chamber, and as a result they aren't made so deep.

Another thing not touched on is the practice of some to use lighter main and rebound springs. This in effect makes it possible to pull the trigger faster, which revolves the cylinder faster, and if the gun isn’t timed for fast double-action the result may be excessive peening of the notches.

Any time you have the cylinder revolving at a faster-then-usual speed, and it is suddenly stopped by the interaction of a block (the cylinder stop ball) entering a notch in the cylinder, battering or peening is a probable result.

 

[ChristopherG]

Very interesting note on the Colts, Fuff--thanks for sharing that. I'm surprised HSMITH hasn't come by this thread--he's got some direct experience with this phenom, IIRC.

 

[Old Fuff]

HSMITH has posted some useful comments. Go back a few posts.

In reply to HSMITH:

Your experience, which is obviously considerable, is what I would expect. Any S&W revolver can be "adjusted" (retimed and some other things) for extensive double-action shooting to reduce the effect of peening over time, and frequent tune-ups help. However peening can't be eliminated under these circumstances.

Back during the latter years of the 19th century Smith & Wesson addressed this problem by milling a second and wider notch next to the cylinder stop cuts. They then press fitted and staked a hardened insert into this second slot. When the cylinder was finished the insert was so finely fitted that one couldn't see it, except with a magnifying glass - or at least that's the way it is with me. As a result I have seen (and owned) many well-used .32 and .38 top-break revolvers that still locked up like a bank vault.

Of course no one would do such a thing today.