S&W Model 19/66 Durability

[JacktheJarhead]

I wanted to find out some information on the Model 19/66 as far as durability. I have heard over the years that the 19/66 could not stand up to a steady diet of .357. It was told to me that they were designed to shoot .38 Special for practice and .357 on a limited basis. Is this still true? With the introduction of newer material and manufacturing I was thinking that this would take care of that issue. I am looking to get a 19 or 66 with a 2 1/2 barrel for carry. But I like to shoot what I carry. I have been an N-Frame fan for many years but have not seen any N-Frame .357 round-butt and 2 1/2 barrel. Your help would be appreciated.

 

[Coyote33]

I was thinking the same way, but then someone brought this into the picture:

Which current production revolver for carry?

New Smith triggers are 14lbs ? I’m so screwed…. Unfortunately the new J frames are noticeably heavier then the LCR's. You can do a trigger job to smooth them up. Also springs and an extended firing pin do wonders to bring the trigger pull weight down and not lose reliability. But that is a...

www.northeastshooters.com

 

[gerrycaruso]

Wasn't the L frame designed to solve the durability issues of the K frame? Is the 586, 686 or 686+ too big?

 

[pastera]

I have a 19-3
Zero reason to feed it a steady diet of 357 for practice. 38 special is much cheaper and fine to practice with.
It's a snubby so at distances praticle for a 2.5" barrel you aren't going to see a significant change. Nor is the recoil from 357 punishing in that gun so throwing in a few 357s in the training ammo mix will give you a feel for it.

 

[gerrycaruso]

I have S&W revolvers in J, K, L, N and X frame and don't see much difference in size between K and L.

 

[Skeeter]

Shooting a lot of 357, especially hot 357 caused the forcing cone to crack in some k frame guns. The weak spot is the bottom flat portion of the cone. Smith & Wesson guys will know more & probably will chime in but they did move towards correcting the problem as they progressed through versions of k frames. I THINK there was an iteration or two in the older k frames where they moved to a rounded forcing cone.
I don’t think it’s an issue in current production guns.

 

[Asaltweapon]

My very first pistol in 81 was a 66 that was on a pretty steady hot diet of hand loads.
It didn’t care for the abuse.

 

[M1911]

Are you really going to shoot a lot of full house .357 through a K-frame snubnose?

 

[Asaltweapon]

Are you really going to shoot a lot of full house .357 through a K-frame snubbose?

God I hope not.

 

[whatluck]

Shooting a lot of 357, especially hot 357 caused the forcing cone to crack in some k frame guns. The weak spot is the bottom flat portion of the cone. Smith & Wesson guys will know more & probably will chime in but they did move towards correcting the problem as they progressed through versions of k frames. I THINK there was an iteration or two in the older k frames where they moved to a rounded forcing cone.
I don’t think it’s an issue in current production guns.

The scandium j-frames will also crack at the forcing cone, the cone/frame metals are dissimilar.

 

[EJFudd]

Are you really going to shoot a lot of full house .357 through a K-frame snubbose?

Better him than me. My hands and ears can't handle that kind of unnecessary punishment anymore.

But if he really wants that sort of punishment in an S&W, an L-frame or N-frame would probably be a better choice.

 

[M1911]

Better him than me. My hands and ears can't handle that kind of unnecessary punishment anymore.

You and me both.

 

[JacktheJarhead]

Thanks for the information. I have shot a scandium framed snubbie with .357 and I thought one round through it was more than enough. As far as firing a steady diet, more like a mix. Shoot .38 Special and then a box of .357. Recoil is not a problem, I have shot a 66 2.5 with .357 and I did not think it was that bad. Someone said an N-Frame would be better, I have a Model 28, which is my favorite .357. But a bit on the large side to carry. But part of the question was, I have never seen a 2.5-3 inch barreled N-Frame except for the older ones before they had the numbering system. They are expensive. So if anyone knows of a shorter barreled N-Frame let me know. I have looked at the L-Frame but have not found an older one, not too crazy about the newer S&W revolvers. That is my opinion, yours may vary. Thank you to all who contributed. I will look at both the L-Frame and the K-Frame.

 

[EJFudd]

I have looked at the L-Frame but have not found an older one, not too crazy about the newer S&W revolvers. That is my opinion, yours may vary.

I think most would agree with you. Go with an older "pre-lock" 586 or 686, if at all possible.

There are some issues to be aware of with the earliest models, so it would be good to research the various "dash" versions (i.e., no dash, -1, -2, -3) before buying.

 

[appraiser]

Even with Pachmayer grips I found my old Model 13 to be a bear when using .357 loads, it was much happier with .38 Spl +P's

Since the 13 and 19 are near identical guns I don't expect that the 19 is going to be a better experience at least for me.

 

[Zappa]

I have been an N-Frame fan for many years but have not seen any N-Frame .357 round-butt and 2 1/2 barrel.

Ever see a model 627 ???

Smith & Wesson Performance Center Model 627 357 Magnum 2.62in Stainless Revolver - 8 Rounds

Smith & Wesson Model 627 Revolver -Performance Center guns originate from standard designs or are created from the ground up. From hand-cutting and fitting to fine tuning for precision, these firearms are top performers. Products from the Performance Center are the ultimate expression of...

www.sportsmans.com

 

[PatMcD]

I was told by an ex-cop gunshop owner that the 686 was the perfect carry gun. He said "lets be honest; you don't really want to shoot anybody, BUT, sometimes, somebody needs a good pistol-whipping. Afterwards, with the 686, you just run it under some hot tap water, and all those little pieces of the guys' face will flush right out. And you don't have to worry about it rusting too much."

 

[JacktheJarhead]

Ever see a model 627 ???

Smith & Wesson Performance Center Model 627 357 Magnum 2.62in Stainless Revolver - 8 Rounds

Smith & Wesson Model 627 Revolver -Performance Center guns originate from standard designs or are created from the ground up. From hand-cutting and fitting to fine tuning for precision, these firearms are top performers. Products from the Performance Center are the ultimate expression of...

www.sportsmans.com

Not this version! Thanks.

 

[straightshooterjake]

S&W discontinued the K-frame 357 magnum guns in about 2005, and then reintroduced the model 66 in about 2014. None of the earlier guns are strong enough to take a steady diet of magnum rounds.

When they brought the model 66 back in 2014, it was significantly redesigned, and reportedly these guns can take a steady diet of magnum rounds. There are actually lots of changes on the new model 66, and in some ways, it is a new revolver design that still keeps the old external dimensions. For example, the yoke latches with a detent, and there is no lock at the end of the ejector rod.

I believe the new model 66 revolvers are marked 66-8. And this new beefed up K-frame is one of the few cases where a new S&W may actually be better than an old one.

If you really want to run a lot of 357 rounds and also prefer older S&W revolvers, then I would look at an L-frame 686.

 

[45Badger]

Forcing cones on K Frames did not like hot and light loads. At some point in time people got all excited about shooting 125-130gr bullets at smoking hot velocities out of their K Frames. I think that fad passed. Shoot all the 158gr you want.

 

[Picton]

Years ago, when I was thinking about this same question, the "that's why Ruger made the GP100" answer made enough sense to me that I did more research and went with the Ruger.

Because I've got a bunch of .38spl S&W revolvers, and when I feel like firing .357, I want to shoot .357 instead of .38spl. Received wisdom from the ancients indicates that the Rugers handle that better than the Smiths, historically. Plus, they're cheaper!

YMMV, and to be fair, I really only carry my Ruger when hiking.

 

[JacktheJarhead]

S&W discontinued the K-frame 357 magnum guns in about 2005, and then reintroduced the model 66 in about 2014. None of the earlier guns are strong enough to take a steady diet of magnum rounds.

When they brought the model 66 back in 2014, it was significantly redesigned, and reportedly these guns can take a steady diet of magnum rounds. There are actually lots of changes on the new model 66, and in some ways, it is a new revolver design that still keeps the old external dimensions. For example, the yoke latches with a detent, and there is no lock at the end of the ejector rod.

I believe the new model 66 revolvers are marked 66-8. And this new beefed up K-frame is one of the few cases where a new S&W may actually be better than an old one.

If you really want to run a lot of 357 rounds and also prefer older S&W revolvers, then I would look at an L-frame 686.

Thanks for the information!!

 

[Coyote33]

S&W ... reintroduced the model 66 in about 2014

Is it identical to their older ones, or did they make any changes to address potential issues? I'd guess they possibly used better steel if nothing else, if there were frame cracking issues.

 

[Asaltweapon]

Forcing cones on K Frames did not like hot and light loads. At some point in time people got all excited about shooting 125-130gr bullets at smoking hot velocities out of their K Frames. I think that fad passed. Shoot all the 158gr you want.

It was still fun loading those hot lite rounds.

 

[milktree]

Is it identical to their older ones, or did they make any changes to address potential issues? I'd guess they possibly used better steel if nothing else, if there were frame cracking issues.

Did you even read the post you quoted?

 

[Coyote33]

Did you even read the post you quoted?

I guess not. But I did now. Whoops. Thanks.

 

[RKG]

I have S&W revolvers in J, K, L, N and X frame and don't see much difference in size between K and L.

K and L have the same grips. The L-Frame window is a tad larger, so as to allow the barrel to clear the yoke without the flat that one sees at the 6 o'clock position on a K-Frame barrel. Where barrels split, it was at this flat.

 

[RKG]

Thanks for the information. I have shot a scandium framed snubbie with .357 and I thought one round through it was more than enough. As far as firing a steady diet, more like a mix. Shoot .38 Special and then a box of .357. Recoil is not a problem, I have shot a 66 2.5 with .357 and I did not think it was that bad. Someone said an N-Frame would be better, I have a Model 28, which is my favorite .357. But a bit on the large side to carry. But part of the question was, I have never seen a 2.5-3 inch barreled N-Frame except for the older ones before they had the numbering system. They are expensive. So if anyone knows of a shorter barreled N-Frame let me know. I have looked at the L-Frame but have not found an older one, not too crazy about the newer S&W revolvers. That is my opinion, yours may vary. Thank you to all who contributed. I will look at both the L-Frame and the K-Frame.

I have a 2-1/2" M24 in .44 Special and a 2-1/2" M28 in .357; without getting out my books, I think both date from the 1980s or early 1990s, so they did exist post-model numbers. I tend to agree with EJFudd re: newer S&Ws.

 

[JacktheJarhead]

I have a 2.5 inch 624 and a 4 inch M28. The 624 is probably 1984 or 1985 manufacture. That is when they were made for Lew Horton. Do you have the original holster the M24 came with? I have never seen a M28 with a 2.5 inch barrel. I have heard they exist, but never seen one. My brother has had bad luck with the Performance Center snubs, so I am staying away from them.