Is the Model 27 the closest thing that S&W has now to the Model 19 Combat Magnum?

You've gotten a lot of great info ...on K, L and N frames...and personally, I like them all for different reasons....and .357 mag is my all time favorite revolver caliber.

The model 27's and 28's (with the 27's having the bright blue or nickel finish vs the 28's having a satin blued finish - making the model 28 the utilitarian version of the model 27 - and it was a little cheaper when they were new) ...when I was a kid, the model 27's were king ! I had relatives in law enforcement ( small town cops, sheriff's, highway patrolmen, game wardens etc ) ....and one carried a Victory pre-mod 10 ( that I still have), a few carried model 19's and most of them carried model 28's .....but a couple of rich uncles...had nickel and blued model 27's ...and they were just great guns ! Being the oldest son, or first grandson in the family, and listening to those men argue about who could shoot, and who couldn't, and which gun was the best ...was a very cool place to hang around ( and be quiet) when I was a kid....

Today I own the one Victory model ...a pair of mod 19's Nickel in 4", three model 66's - 2 in 4" and a 2 1/2", 686's in 4" and 6", model 27's in 4" and 6" and a model 28 6"...( I'm a S&W .357 mag junkie :D )...

To me the K frames mod 19's and 66's are about the same ...they balance about the same.

To me, the L frame 686's ...are just a hair nose heavy ...because of the full length lug...but still nice guns...

To me, the N frames ...especially the model 27's ...are very special guns / and hands down, my favorite S&W revolver of all time - they're a perfect balance of weight, balance and power! (I'm in my office now, but I'm going to the range this afternoon - and sitting on my credenza is a a S&W mod 27-2 4" Nickel and a model 629-5 3" .44 mag ( Trail Boss, an RSR ported gun)...and 6 boxes of .357 mag ammo, and 2 boxes of .44 mag ammo ...for my afternoon amusement ...and some double taps in and out of a holster with each gun....

buy one of each, if you can --- or at least do it over time.../ but buy what you like / what feels best in your hands.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=61640&d=1279815714
a pair mod 19's (nickel) at lower right, a pair of mod 66's at upper right (all 4"), a model 686 6" upper left, a mod 27 6" blued...

http://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=75418&d=1321299925
Mod 27 4" nickel and 6" blued

Its impossible, for me at least, not to like them all !!
 
While the magnum K-frames do have the flat spot at the six o'clock position on the forcing cone, the 38 special K-frames do not.
Click to expand...

All K-Frames have a flat spot ground at the six o' clock position including .38 Specials such as the M15-2 which I'm looking at as I type this. I've also examined other K-Frames including M10, 12, and 14 .38's and pre-model number M&P .38's, and M17 .22 LR, and a pre-model number M&P .32-20 and they all had a flat area ground in the six 'o clock position.
 
As much as I love my Model 27s (and my 28), I really like the way the 19 balances in my hands better. The grip frame also suits my hand a bit better. As others have noted, the heavy underlug of the L frame throws off the balance for me in four inch guns. I've never shot a three inch L frame and that may balance okay.
 
Webley,

My mistake. For some reason I had the idea that only the magnums had the flat spot. I don't know why. When I look at my model 64, the flat is so subtle as to be almost invisible. I was a bit off topic anyway, and my post should have been in the form of a question, as in "Isn't it only the magnums...?"

I have read many of your posts and I respect your knowledge. Apologies.
 
Last edited:
My mistake. For some reason I had the idea that only the magnums had the flat spot. I don't know why. When I look at my model 64, the flat is so subtle as to be almost invisible. I was a bit off topic anyway, and my post should have been in the form of a question, as in "Isn't it only the magnums...?"

I have read many of your posts and I respect your knowledge. Apologies.
Click to expand...

No need to apologize. It is a common misconception and one that I had myself at one time which was what prompted me to examine every K-Frame I can get my hands on for just that feature.

Also, I need to make a small correction to my previous post. The M15 I was looking at (my dad's) is a 15-3 rather than a 15-2. I do note that in comparing the aforementioned M15-3 to my own M66-2 that while the flat spot is present on both, it does seem more prominent on my M66. I'm not sure if this is because the M66 has it's gas ring located on the cylinder rather than yoke (this change was made in 1977) while the M15 is of the older style, or if it's because the flat spot is simply more noticeable on a stainless gun than a blued one.
 
For anyone unfamiliar with the flattened forcing cone, here's a pic of my Model 65:

SW_Model_65-3_DSCN1611-1.jpg
 
shootability v. portability

The last few years my outfit carried revolvers, they went with the L-frame (and 125 mag ammo). The L's were easier to shoot the flamethrowing 125's, but they were big heavy pistols when compared to a K frame. Heck, my issue 4" 686 was heavier than my personally owned 4" .44 Nframe Mtn Gun (not a duty gun, but for comparison purposes)

So we (and S &W) totally ignored Bill Jordans logic for the M19/66 family, a portable, packable .357. Anybody on foot hated the L's, and as cars shrunk, the gear carried by patrol increased, and regretfully, I got bigger, I learned to hate them too. I was glad to see them go.

Wasn't real crazy about the 9mm as the short term replacement though.
 
I love everything about the M27s but the price. When blued with the factory wood grips, they are the most beautiful modern .357 to me other than the M19. However, the combination of looks and durability make them highly desirable and they are quite a bit costlier used than a new 686. The effects of the full lug of the 686 are overrated in my opinion; it handles like a dream and eats hot .357s loads for breakfast. I don't think there is a better S&W workhorse and it is slimmer than the M27 to boot.
 
Its the price that's the killer....

And not just with guns! Sadly, the last few years have not increased the buying power of our dollar.

Cost on the Model 27, like all the older Smiths has gone up a lot in the last couple years. M27s that a couple years ago were going for ~$500 are now doing $700+, and ~$300 M28s are now in the $5-600 range!:eek:

There are three reasons for this.
1) They are no longer made (even the "Classic" new guns are not made exactly the way the old ones were).

2) The are desirable. The older pinned and recessed guns are in demand, even more so than the later versions. They have no lock (not a big deal for some, but a deal breaker for many).

3) Because they can. If you want one, you have to pay the asking price, where you find them. See #1&#2.
 
You sure have that right!

My old 38/44's that I used to pick up for under $300 now routinely are in the $1200+ range. I am happy I picked off as many as I did when they were relatively cheap.

The devaluation of the dollar has really raised the price of fixed assets like a decent collector grade S&W.
 
I even prefer the satin blue to the high luster blue of the top of the line guns.
Click to expand...

Yep, particularly when those 28s have some holster wear on them. All utilitarian, all business. A Model 28 with a worn finish is as menacing a gun as any to behold; they just seem to shout "screw you" with a capital "F" :D . I love mine!

I picked one up last week at the gun store for the first time and was blown away by its sheer mass compared to a Combat Mag or a 686.....686 is heavier than a 19/66 but a 28 makes them all look tiny,ruger included - just look at the pic above,that 28 is bigger everywhere ,its like a 19 on steriods
Click to expand...

I own a K Frame Model 19, an L Frame 686 and an N Frame 28. All with 4" barrels. Believe it or not, balance wise the 19 and 28 feel more similar. The 686's full underlug barrel does feel more muzzle heavy than either the 19 or 28. Granted, the 28 is heavier and the reach to the trigger is longer, but the weight distribution feels similar to the K Frame magnum IMHO.
 
I've heard that the Model 19 Combat Magnum was not made to shoot a steady diet of the the hot high-powered loads and people who ran those hot loads through the 19 basically beat them to death. Paraphrasing from 44 AMP
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4877989&postcount=8


But then why is S&W still making the Model 60 ???

Did the Model 19 Combat Magnum fall between the Model 60 and the 686 and there's just no market for an in-betweener 357 anymore ?
 
I've heard that the Model 19 Combat Magnum was not made to shoot a steady diet of the the hot high-powered loads and people who ran those hot loads through the 19 basically beat them to death.
Click to expand...

The issue with the M19 and other K-Frame Magnums is that in the 70's and 80's, people started shooting 125gr Magnum in them. When the original Combat Magnum (Pre-M19) was introduced in the 1950's, the only commonly available .357 Magnum ammunition was a 158gr LSWC. The gun was deemed to be perfectly adequate for that loading and all was well, for a while. Fast forward to the 1970's and someone got the idea that loading a .357 Magnum with a lighter 125gr JHP and driving it at 1400+ fps would be a more effective SD loading. While the aforementioned loading is indeed very effective, it also causes wear and tear on a revolver in ways that the older 158gr loadings don't.

The lighter, and therefore shorter, bullet has not fully engaged the rifling before it's left the case. This allows for extremely hot gas and burning powder to flow around the bullet into the B/C gap and forcing cone. Also, the lighter bullet requires less pressure to move it out of the case which means that more of the powder will burn in the barrel than a loading with a heavier bullet.

When a steady diet of full-power 125gr Magnums is shot in a K-Frame, a few problems can develop as a result of these different types of wear. Excessive flame cutting of the topstrap was sometimes encountered, though flame cutting is normally self-limiting. The more common problem was that the forcing cone would be eroded and eventually crack at the six o'clock position where it is thinnest. This issue is specific to K-Frames as they are the only S&W revolver which have the flat spot on the bottom of the forcing cone which was discussed earlier in this thread. The primary reason to make the larger L-Frame was to enlarge the frame window in order to negate the need for a flat-bottomed forcing cone.

If, however, you restrict your shooting with a M19 or other K-Frame Magnum to the type of ammo it was designed for (.38 Special or .357 Magnum with 140+gr bullets) your revolver will give you several lifetimes of service. If, however, you want to run a steady diet of 125gr screamers, you'd probably be better served with something besides a K-Frame.

But then why is S&W still making the Model 60 ???
Click to expand...

J-Frames do not suffer from the same forcing cone issues as K-Frames for two reasons. First and foremost, J-Frames do not have flat-bottomed forcing cones although their forcing cones are thinner all the way around. Secondly, the forcing cone of a J-Frame does not extend as far back into the frame window as that of a K-Frame and thus has better frame support.

Did the Model 19 Combat Magnum fall between the Model 60 and the 686 and there's just no market for an in-betweener 357 anymore ?
Click to expand...

I think its a combination of a couple things. Since the vast majority of cops started using semi-autos, the market for medium-sized revolvers has shrunken (though not completely disappeared). A lot of people in the market for a .357 Magnum seem to either want something big and beefy that can handle a steady diet of whatever nuclear-powered ammo they care to stuff in it, or they want something small and light that can be easily carried in their pocket. The other factor that I think led S&W to discontinue the K-Frame Magnums was that they probably got tired of performing warranty work on revolvers from people who couldn't be made to understand that 125gr Magnums and K-Frames don't mix well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top