S&W K Frame and 180 gr Hardcast
TM
[subject]
Sunday, October 20, 2024, 21:04 (647 days ago)
I have a K Frame with 2.5" barrel, would it stand up to some 180 gr. hardcast loads? I also have a 6" L Frame with a 6" barrel. The L Frame is a bit big to carry while fly fishing, even in a chest holster. I carry while fly fishing for the obvious reasons, 2 legged threats and 4 legged threats, mostly the 4 legged threats, plus the K Frame is easily concealable. Not a steady diet of the hardcast, just to carry while engaged in outdoor activities such as the fly fishing, camping & hiking. Black bear could be thrown into the mix when in certain locations.
It’s pressure rated, but it’s hard on you and the gun.
WB
[subject]
Sunday, October 20, 2024, 21:28 (647 days ago) @ TM
I’ve shot such loads and it flat stings from a 4”. But for rare self defense, if that’s what you want to carry. The platform was designed for regular use with .38 Specials and occasional use with full .357 Mag. They were really salty originally (magnums) then watered down some in the mid-late 70’s. I think the hot 125 gr smacking the forcing cone at the thin barrel threads did the worst damage.
Ruger and S&W both beefed up their platforms in response. The GP and L frames are the result.
125 gr
TM
[subject]
Monday, October 21, 2024, 07:27 (646 days ago) @ WB
Yes, I understand that the hot 125 gr. JHP were the worst offender for causing premature forcing cone wear. Never have shot any and have no plans too. I did pick up a box somewhere along the line and they are still sitting there unopened. Maybe the 6" L frame is the one to consider for the reasons I would carry it, even though a bit cumbersome for fishing etc. I do have a Guide's Choice chest rig for it.
The little K frame is a sweet piece. I have a 4" 66
WB
[subject]
Monday, October 21, 2024, 08:03 (646 days ago) @ TM
I even met Bill Jordan himself once. Huge man! The Police used M15 and M14 (K-38's) for duty and target work. Jordan was one instrumental in getting them to convert it to .357.
For it's intended purpose it's fine. Carry a bunch, shoot (hot loads) a little. In my experience actual game guides,for a professional reference, are not "gun" enthusiasts. It's a tool to have along. Like that guy who killed a Grizz with a 9mm. He is well known, good, and very lucky! I was not impressed with that antic. I want MY guide to pack something more substantial. But as Bob Baker told me, "don't depend on anyone else, it's only you! It's Your skin". A hired guide armed with a video camera filmed Bob dancing with a wounded Bear once!
2.5" K Frame
TM
[subject]
Monday, October 21, 2024, 08:57 (646 days ago) @ WB
Yeah, that 2.5" K frame is a sweet little gun. My has been shot sparringly and it was my first .357, I do not plan on letting it go. I will probably use it for my fly fishing expeditions, unless in MT or WY, have a .44 magnum or .454 Casull for those backcountry trips. It has never seen a "hot load", that's why I was curious about the 180 gr. hardcast
factory loads.
I did the same thing on a little larger scale
WB
[subject]
Monday, October 21, 2024, 09:53 (646 days ago) @ TM
I have two S&W .41 Magnumns and a Ruger Hunter Bisley. My hot loads are 265 gr. LFNGC using 2400 at about 1400 fps? The load manual says it's within SAAMI pressure specs. But BOY HOWDY, it stings your hand like a .44 Magnum from the wood gripped 4" 57 or 3" 657. Many question that heavy a .41 bullet, but I like the longer and slicker B.C. of them over a comparable .44 which makes them penetrate like the devil. Ditto for a heavier 230 gr. in .400 caliber.
The animals would not notice. The object is to penetrate as deeply as possible. The .357 is pretty good but has limits on big bones. That 180 is about as good as you can get. I actually shoot the 200 gr. RCBS FNGC rifle bullet in .38/.357/ and .357 Max. But that is 800/1200/1658 fps from pretty hefty guns. I tried the 200/800 fps in a J-frame duplicating the military load, once! Pressure was OK but I think the military British load was more like 600 fps. Ouch.
For those attempting those figures, go slow. In 4 loading
Gary Reeder
[subject]
Tuesday, October 22, 2024, 14:54 (645 days ago) @ WB
manuals 2400 is shown at a max load of 22 grains for 1350 out of a S&W model 57. And that was a 210 grain bullet. The 250 grain bullet was barely edging 1175 fps. I don't have the specs for a 265 grain but I would guess at close to the same figures. Even the 41 GNR that holds 8 to 10 grains more powder is only pushing 1500 fps in a revolver. Our revolver figures are purposely low in the Redhawk. If we print the actual fps we got at near a max load in the Redhawk in 41 GNR, those figures will almost touch 1900 fps and not all revolvers will handle that, at least not for long.
In the Redhawk, yes it is a super strong revolver, much stronger than an N frame S&W. The gist of this is don't push it. Hot loads with a heavy bullet in an N frame Smith is pushing it, anyway you look at it. Scotty has been loading for his Smiths for many years and knows what he is doing, but if he says 22 grains of 2400 is a good load, a loader new to reloading will say "if his gun will handle 22 grains mine will handle 24". And somebody gets hurt.
I am getting right at 2000 fps in the 41 GNR but that is in my little snubbie 8" TC barrel. In an Encore barrel I believe I could touch 2200 fps but why chance it. My load of 28 grains of 296 with a 210 has taken just about everything I ever want to kill, so why go batshit crazy and get hurt. And why post figures that might get someone else hurt. Take these figures with a grain of salt and go easy, watching for pressure signs and when you see a really flat primer or even a pierced primer you have reached the max that your revolver will handle so back off at least a grain. The gun will live longer and so will you.
I saw Jurras take a nice Black Bear in Murphy NC
Gary Reeder
[subject]
Monday, October 21, 2024, 12:27 (646 days ago) @ TM
with a 6" model 19. He mentioned later that that particular model 19 was his test gun for the Super Vel 357 Magnum ammo and he figured he had 50,000 rounds thru it at a minimum and no throat erosion was evident. This was way back years ago before the experts discovered throat erosion and ammunition to blame it on.
A lot of the bad mouthing of the 125 grain
Gary Reeder
[subject]
Monday, October 21, 2024, 11:38 (646 days ago) @ TM
bullet is pure BS. Lee Jurras of Super Vel proved that the lighter weight bullets did not cause any extreme throat erosion, at least no more than the heavier bullets. His Super Vel ammo was the highest rated one shot kill for law enforcement and pretty much the same for hunters.
I have used his 125 grain bullet in the 357 Maximum and the 180 grain Sierra bullet in the 44 Magnum thru the years using Jurras' loads and if I did my part the deer dropped at the shot and if my memory works only the large heavy hogs with their shield over the neck and shoulders tended to need a bit heavier bullet.
In my 41 GNR I have countless hunters telling me about the killing power of the Sierra 170 grain JHP at 2000 fps on deer. In most cases the deer dropped at the shot. The lighter weight bullet puts out enough shock to drop the animal on the spot.
Several of the Misfits on here have seen the 41 GNR and 210 grain bullet drop almost a full dozen 700 to 1500 lb critters with one shot. Only 2 instances of those eleven Bison, water buffalo, Yak, Watusi and Nilgai taking more than one shot and that was my fault with improper bullet placement.
Most of the people on the internet that say the lightweight bullets cause extreme erosion of the throat are self claimed experts and got the info from another expert with no proof of it.
price of a new S&W 1500, day in the
jthomson
[subject]
Monday, October 21, 2024, 06:08 (646 days ago) @ TM
hospital getting stiched up priceless