New S&W K-frame .357?

Status
Not open for further replies.
We all know it's not a true K frame. If it were there would be no ILS, forged instead of MIM parts and not fitted with a 2 piece 4.25" barrel either. This is why I said "new" K frame. I think my wager is safe.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the dimensions of the frame and cylinder, not the internal materials and the lawyer add-ons.

If the frame window and the yoke/crane assembly is K-Frame SIZE...that flat has to be cut on the bottom of the forcing cone in order for the cylinder to close.

In any event, if the shooter does the bulk of his/her shooting with lead bullets, the forcing cone won't be an issue.
 
IMO this problem has nothing to do with the revolver - it's because everybody believes that they "need" to use flamethrower loads in it. And when someone points out that it may be abusive to the gun they still insist on using flamethrower loads and whine about how the gun is damaged from doing so and the gun should be "improved" so they can use flamethrower loads. Madness.
 
I know it's an old and oft-repeated complaint, but IMHO by including that silly lock the suits at S&W missed an opportunity to introduce a better product.
 
I don't think there was anything terribly wrong with the old designs (if people didn't abuse them). On almost every gun forum you read there appear questions almost every day of "Can I use +P ammo in....?" There's your problem. If you need more gun, get another gun. Don't try to solve the problem by using hotter loads. Mechanical devices have physical limits. Exceeding those limits only creates more problems. I went through the whole +P flamethrower load thing when I first got into this game many years ago. After beating a new gun to death with my handloads I came to my senses. I still have that gun as a reminder.
 
Last edited:
To those wondering about people using revolvers in IDPA...

I run a 4" 19-3 with T grips and sanded down factory magna's out of some Bianchi leather. Being in my mid-twenties I get some strange looks, but I just couldn't shoot my Gl*ck 34 worth a crap.
Rj4ji.jpg
 
Last edited:
IMO this problem has nothing to do with the revolver - it's because everybody believes that they "need" to use flamethrower loads in it. And when someone points out that it may be abusive to the gun they still insist on using flamethrower loads and whine about how the gun is damaged from doing so and the gun should be "improved" so they can use flamethrower loads. Madness.
Click to expand...

Word.
 
I've handled these new "K-magnums" and I'm not so impressed.

The two I've handled, model 66's they were, seemed pretty stiff and one had noticeable cylinder play OTB. I also think that the finish choice is ugly. The bead blast SS and the black controls don't make for a pretty revolver. Why not traditional satin satinless everything? Would look much better and wouldn't be much more expensive at all. Also ditch the internal lock and recontour the frame in it's absense.

I think Smith missed the boat on this one. However, I like the new M69 .44 magnum L-frame. It is inovative and to me isn't like it's supposed to be a reintroduction, so the new finish doesn't bother me as bad. I think I'd rather get a Model 69 and stock it with hot .44 special hollow points for defense. IMHO 5 .44 specials beat 6 .357 magnums. No matter how fast you push the .357, it's still a smaller bullet than the .44 special, and there are some loads out there for .44 special that really have some gumption and would be extremely effective for defense.

But I digress. At first I was overjoyed and shaking in my boatstraps to know Smith was reintroducing the K-frame Model 66 .357 magnum. But I don't really so much care for the execution. My hunt for an old pre-lock model 66 continues!
 
The K frame was for easy carriage and getting in and out of cars. The original S&W 357 Magnum was an N frame. The guys who said carry much and shoot little were right.
 
"IMHO 5 .44 Specials beat 6 .357 Magnums." I like the way you think, sir.
 
Imused to shoot a lot more than I do now, and put close to 10,000 rounds through a 6" model 10. About 1,000 were magnums. At this point , the barrel cylinder gap got too wide and the gun started to spit lead.
Most of the shooting was with 38 special hand loads.

Most of the magnum loads were heavy, but a number were Golden Sabers, 125 middle power loads, or 110 gr. Loads. There are obviously limits to how many magnums you can put through the gun.
 
Especially if they're mostly 110-125 grain loads. The expanding gases hit your forcing cone like a white hot Freightliner. Ever use an oxy-acetylene cutting torch?
 
and put close to 10,000 rounds through a 6" model 10. About 1,000 were magnums
Click to expand...
Well, theres your problem!

The Model 10 was only ever chambered in .38 Special.

A steady diet of .357 Mag would probably Not be good for it!!

But they won't even fit in the cylinder!

rc
 
Yep. The Standard Catalog of S&W mentions that in 1972, several thousand Model 10-6s where chambered in and marked as .357 magnum for the New York State Police.
 
peacebutready - Personally, I'm tired of sending guns back.
Click to expand...

I'm tired of waiting months for gunsmithing, but S&W and Taurus have returned guns lickety split. It is very easy to arrange. The Rugers are inherently kind of a work in progress and need gunsmithing more than return/rework. I say that more for the DA than SA guns. I don't mean to imply that quality-by-rework is okay.
 
Sorry ...model 19

I didn't hammer the 357s into the model 19. It was a typo on my IPad.
 
1911Tuner said:
If it's a true K-Frame...you'll lose your bet.

The reason for the cut was to allow the crane to clear the forcing cone in the K-Frame window.
Click to expand...

I have not seen a current manufacturer Model 66 but my Model 67 made in 2013 has the flat cut in the bottom of the barrel. I know, it is a 38 Special but I would be surprised that Smith and Wesson would make a special K frame for just the Model 66.

Of course, S&W may have updated the K frame design after the production run for my Model 67.

Also, I have a Classic Model 14, circa 2010-2011, and a Model 66, circa 2003, and both have the flat cut in the bottom of the barrel.

I will keep my eyes out for a new Model 66 but I probably won't see one for another year here in Knoxville. :)

As another note, I cracked the forcing cone in my Model 19 in the early eighties due to a steady diet of full magnum loads with 158 grain JHPs. I used it to shoot IHMSA silhouette competition for a while.

After S&W graciously replaced the barrel, I have limited the amount of heavy loads shot through the revolver. I can get my full house jollies shooting my wife's 586.
 
I have not seen a current manufacturer Model 66 but my Model 67 made in 2013 has the flat cut in the bottom of the barrel. I know, it is a 38 Special but I would be surprised that Smith and Wesson would make a special K frame for just the Model 66.
Click to expand...

The caliber is irrelevant. Eyeball the front of the cylinder while moving it in and out of the frame, and you'll see exactly why that flat is there. If it weren't, the cylinder wouldn't enter the frame.
 
peacebutready said:
Personally, I'm tired of sending guns back.
Click to expand...


Me, unless it is an unreasonably short time, having a gun repaired free because I had the opportunity to "shoot" it out, by putting too much ammo downrange with it, seems like a win/win.
 
1911Tuner said:
The caliber is irrelevant. Eyeball the front of the cylinder while moving it in and out of the frame, and you'll see exactly why that flat is there. If it weren't, the cylinder wouldn't enter the frame.
Click to expand...

I agree, that was the point i was trying to make, the K frames of recent manufacture that i have have the flat machined in the barrel.

I'd assume the new Model 66 is the same, but I have not seen one in the metal (my folks were from Missouri:)).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
  • Locked
K-Frame Endurance Question
Replies
7
Views
771
Jim March
J
dave_the_swede
  • Locked
Smith and Wesson new K-frames forcing cones
Replies
13
Views
3K
cfullgraf
cfullgraf
D
  • Locked
Sound off if you haven't destroyed your K frame with magnum loads...
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Gary in Pennsylvania
G
J
  • Locked
S&W L-Frames - are they really that weak?
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Jim March
J
Sergei Mosin
  • Locked
S&W Model 69 durability
Replies
20
Views
9K
eldon519
E
Back
Top