I currently have a K-frame .357 (a 3" S&W 65LS) and I really like it. Good size for general use. However, I now have all my basic handgun needs as I see them satisfied (K-frame or equivelent revolver in .357 or .38, J-frame or equivelent, small auto, full sized service pistol) sometimes twice (or even thrice) over so I am now fleshing out my collection somewhat.
We have all heard of K-frames having a limited lifetime after prolonged .357mag use (how much is fact and how much of that is myth isn't really important). Well, I now want a .357 that is sturdy enough to hold up to sustained .357 use for a lifetime. Either one of the sturdier medium frames (L-frame Smith or Ruger GP100) or a large frame (Ruger Redhawk, N-frame Smith, Taurus 608) will do.
Here is my question. Many of the larger framed .357s now hold more than 6 rounds (7 in some 686s, 8 in the Taurus 608). This obviously makes for thinner chamber walls (the cylinder is usually the same size, or nearly the same size, as the 6 shot version). Most of the long term strength of these revolvers is in the frame (or so I think). How much will the thinner chamber walls effect the long term durability? Since this is the main reason people usually buy these over the smaller medium frames (the K-frames and equivelent are a bit more handy) I doubt if the manufacturers would do this if it adversely effected durability but you never know.
The regular 686 or 586 are some of my top choices but I am also interested in the 7 shot 686+ and the Taurus 608 so I am very interested in your answers to this question.
We have all heard of K-frames having a limited lifetime after prolonged .357mag use (how much is fact and how much of that is myth isn't really important). Well, I now want a .357 that is sturdy enough to hold up to sustained .357 use for a lifetime. Either one of the sturdier medium frames (L-frame Smith or Ruger GP100) or a large frame (Ruger Redhawk, N-frame Smith, Taurus 608) will do.
Here is my question. Many of the larger framed .357s now hold more than 6 rounds (7 in some 686s, 8 in the Taurus 608). This obviously makes for thinner chamber walls (the cylinder is usually the same size, or nearly the same size, as the 6 shot version). Most of the long term strength of these revolvers is in the frame (or so I think). How much will the thinner chamber walls effect the long term durability? Since this is the main reason people usually buy these over the smaller medium frames (the K-frames and equivelent are a bit more handy) I doubt if the manufacturers would do this if it adversely effected durability but you never know.
The regular 686 or 586 are some of my top choices but I am also interested in the 7 shot 686+ and the Taurus 608 so I am very interested in your answers to this question.