Forcing cone
- Thread starter FilthyHarry
- Start date
hoghunting
New member
How does it shoot? If you're getting groups comparable to your other revolvers, then there doesn't seem to be a problem.
FilthyHarry
Moderator
g.willikers
New member
Are you referring to the distance the barrel extends into the cylinder area?
To provide the correct clearance of barrel to cylinder?
To provide the correct clearance of barrel to cylinder?
FilthyHarry
Moderator
I am referring to
The thickness of the wall of the cone.
The thickness of the wall of the cone.
madmo44mag
New member
If the forcing cone was bad you would be shaving lead or jacket and accuracy would be bad.
g.willikers
New member
The inside diameter is what matters, of course.
FilthyHarry
Moderator
No reaming, no changing...
I'm just surprised that the thickness is so much different, that's all. I didn't know it varied by frame size. Thanks for the input!
I'm just surprised that the thickness is so much different, that's all. I didn't know it varied by frame size. Thanks for the input!
FilthyHarry
Moderator
FilthyHarry
Moderator
A Club?
Is there really a club for haters? I'm not one of them... Two of the three pictured have "the lock." It appears to me the M29 (last post) has a forcing cone thickness that is not as thick as the M610. I only have one L frame, can anyone else share some L frame forcing cones, please?
Is there really a club for haters? I'm not one of them... Two of the three pictured have "the lock." It appears to me the M29 (last post) has a forcing cone thickness that is not as thick as the M610. I only have one L frame, can anyone else share some L frame forcing cones, please?
FilthyHarry said:
I was being a little tongue-in-cheek, but it sometimes it seems like there must be. T'wasn't anything directed towards you personally.
FilthyHarry said:
Your M29 fires bigger bullets than your M610 (.429" vs .400"), so given the same frame, the bigger bore comes at the expense of forcing cone thickness.
FilthyHarry
Moderator
That makes sense
Thanks for the clarification. That looks exactly right! I'm thinking the forcing cone takes the most violent "hit" of any part in the gun.. As the bullet is forced through the inside diameter... Is that how it works?
Thanks for the clarification. That looks exactly right! I'm thinking the forcing cone takes the most violent "hit" of any part in the gun.. As the bullet is forced through the inside diameter... Is that how it works?
Yep, that's pretty much it; and the lighter and faster the bullet, the more "violent" the hit. That's why it's recommended that when you shoot .357magnums through a k-frame, stick with 158, rather than 125 grain bullets, and even then, shoot mostly .38spls through them.
The L-frame was designed to alleviate some of this issue with .357mag ammo, but I suspect it'll once again be an issue when it stepped up to .44mag.
The L-frame was designed to alleviate some of this issue with .357mag ammo, but I suspect it'll once again be an issue when it stepped up to .44mag.
Magnum Wheel Man
New member
BTW... how do you like your 610 ??? how is your head space ???
mine is now one of my favorites, I bought it with every intention of reaming it to 10 mm magnum, which I did, after 3 trips back to S&W, to get the head space to safer measurement ( when my gunsmith buddy measured the head space, he refused to ream the chambers, until it was fixed, I called S&W, & gave them the head space measurement, from my gun smith, & they said it was unsafe to shoot, & for me to send my brand new, un-fired gun back in... the 1st 2 times they futzed with it, & sent it back, not changing the head space at all... the 3rd time I got a hold of the area sales representative , & he included a note to go with my revolver... when I got it back, it was finally as amazing as a new S&W could be...
mine is now one of my favorites, I bought it with every intention of reaming it to 10 mm magnum, which I did, after 3 trips back to S&W, to get the head space to safer measurement ( when my gunsmith buddy measured the head space, he refused to ream the chambers, until it was fixed, I called S&W, & gave them the head space measurement, from my gun smith, & they said it was unsafe to shoot, & for me to send my brand new, un-fired gun back in... the 1st 2 times they futzed with it, & sent it back, not changing the head space at all... the 3rd time I got a hold of the area sales representative , & he included a note to go with my revolver... when I got it back, it was finally as amazing as a new S&W could be...
Back the truck up.
I believe the big visual difference here is mostly due to the fact that the Model 69 and more of the new S&W revolvers are moving to the two-piece sleeved barrel originally rolled out in the monster X-frame revolvers. These new barrel setups are more like the old Dan Wesson rather than the H-U-G-E hunk of steel that Smith & Wesson has used for decades and decades.
Comparing an older 610 with a new to market 69 is trying to gain some insight when THREE major things are different:
--frame size
--bore size
--old tech one-piece barrel vs new tech two-piece sleeved barrel
I agree that the rear end of the 610-2 barrel certainly looks mean and massive, but being that it's a .40cal hole through an N-frame Smith & Wesson, it probably ought to. If you compare to everything you find and it revs you ever higher... find a Model 27 or 28 for some levity. (although, my 28-2 has an outside ring chamfered on it's circumference... the purpose of which I am unsure, but it takes a slight bit of the BEEFY look away from it)
Cool gun.
I believe the big visual difference here is mostly due to the fact that the Model 69 and more of the new S&W revolvers are moving to the two-piece sleeved barrel originally rolled out in the monster X-frame revolvers. These new barrel setups are more like the old Dan Wesson rather than the H-U-G-E hunk of steel that Smith & Wesson has used for decades and decades.
Comparing an older 610 with a new to market 69 is trying to gain some insight when THREE major things are different:
--frame size
--bore size
--old tech one-piece barrel vs new tech two-piece sleeved barrel
I agree that the rear end of the 610-2 barrel certainly looks mean and massive, but being that it's a .40cal hole through an N-frame Smith & Wesson, it probably ought to. If you compare to everything you find and it revs you ever higher... find a Model 27 or 28 for some levity. (although, my 28-2 has an outside ring chamfered on it's circumference... the purpose of which I am unsure, but it takes a slight bit of the BEEFY look away from it)
Cool gun.