Smith & Wesson model 19 stories
- Thread starter GaryED50
- Start date
While I'm sure it has happened, I have never seen one myself. Now I will admit that I buy all my guns from a dealer with a good reputation and they don't put anything questionable out in the display case.
Somebody else will come along and explain why the 19 got the reputation. They've probably got the story set up for cut and paste. I don't.
Short version is that extensive use of light bullet 357's (under 140 grains) using fast/hot buring powder will/might/can crack the forcing cone. Bullets in the 158 grain range, which is what was common when the gun was designed, are said to be OK. Personally I don't know.
I shoot 99.99% 38 specials in mine. Not because I'm worried about the guns, but because I'm too cheap to use 357's for punching a hole in a piece of paper. Just don't see any need for it.
I've owned a half dozen 19's over the years. Probably my favorite handgun.
Model 19 (no dash) shipped 1961
19-4 from I beleive 1974, but my memory might not be right on that.
Somebody else will come along and explain why the 19 got the reputation. They've probably got the story set up for cut and paste. I don't.
Short version is that extensive use of light bullet 357's (under 140 grains) using fast/hot buring powder will/might/can crack the forcing cone. Bullets in the 158 grain range, which is what was common when the gun was designed, are said to be OK. Personally I don't know.
I shoot 99.99% 38 specials in mine. Not because I'm worried about the guns, but because I'm too cheap to use 357's for punching a hole in a piece of paper. Just don't see any need for it.
I've owned a half dozen 19's over the years. Probably my favorite handgun.
Model 19 (no dash) shipped 1961
19-4 from I beleive 1974, but my memory might not be right on that.
In my observations the 19-5 is the one that fails most often. First one with crush fit barrel. Coincidence?
A smith told me he saw that most failed 19s had severe carbon deposits in forcing cone and he theorized this caused hot spots leading to cracking. Interesting theory.
It's not just using 125 Magnum ammo as many say. They have cracked with 158 ammo and at least one failed using 38 target loads. I think it's either flawed barrels or carbon build up.
I have a 19-3 shipped in 1970. Spent 19 years as a federal agent's sidearm and he sold it to me. It has never been fed anything but full power 125 Magnums. No problems so far. I suggest keeping a 19 very clean.
A smith told me he saw that most failed 19s had severe carbon deposits in forcing cone and he theorized this caused hot spots leading to cracking. Interesting theory.
It's not just using 125 Magnum ammo as many say. They have cracked with 158 ammo and at least one failed using 38 target loads. I think it's either flawed barrels or carbon build up.
I have a 19-3 shipped in 1970. Spent 19 years as a federal agent's sidearm and he sold it to me. It has never been fed anything but full power 125 Magnums. No problems so far. I suggest keeping a 19 very clean.
I have owned two model 19s, one model 66 and one model 13.2. I have used all types of ammo from 125 to 158 gr. I have never experienced a cracked forcing cone. I believe Saxon Pig has the best answer. I have read where some 19-5 model 19s have had problems. But I feel a lot of cracked forcing cones are do to lack of cleaning at the forcing cone. I purchase almost all used revolvers. The common thing I see on used revolvers, they are very dirty and have carbon deposits at the forcing cone.
I clean my revolvers after every range trip. I pay close attention to the forcing cone area. I believe the model 19 can shoot many rounds of 357 magnums as long as they are sane loads and the revolver is kept clean.
I clean my revolvers after every range trip. I pay close attention to the forcing cone area. I believe the model 19 can shoot many rounds of 357 magnums as long as they are sane loads and the revolver is kept clean.
I was an armorer to a number of local PDs, Sheriff's Depts, Parks and Rec, District Attorney's investigators, etc etc who all used 19's and 66's back then.
None of them ever had showed up with a gun with a cracked forcing cone, and their ammo's pretty evenly distributed between 110 grain, 125 grain, and 158 grain ammo.
I wouldn't worry about it.
None of them ever had showed up with a gun with a cracked forcing cone, and their ammo's pretty evenly distributed between 110 grain, 125 grain, and 158 grain ammo.
I wouldn't worry about it.
trigger643
New member
over the years I've encountered several model 19's with cracked forcing cones and it's about the first place I inspect when looking to buy one.
Here's Jerry explaining the problem and S&W's solution.
Starting about minute 13:48
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cbVl3cDMTY#t=987
Here's Jerry explaining the problem and S&W's solution.
Starting about minute 13:48
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cbVl3cDMTY#t=987
Cracked forcing cones, flame cut topstraps, they have happened. The model 19 forcing cone has a relief cut that most other guns don't have, and troubles became noticeable (above the statistical average failure rate).
Shooting large amounts of the 125gr JHP ammo was becoming the common practice and since guns were failing at a higher rate than before, (and nothing else had really changed) the hot 125s got the blame.
S&W didn't design a K frame .357, exactly, they took a K frame and adapted it to the .357 Magnum. When you do something like that, there are limitations.
Things worked pretty well for a long time, giving officers am easier pistol to carry, day in and day out, and still able to use .357 Magnum ammo when required. "Practice with .38s and save the .357 for serious use" was the mantra for many years.
Trouble is, when you run your engine at "war emergency overboost" too long, bad things tend to happen.
The Model 19 is a fine gun, but its not a .357 mag in the sense an N frame is. Not even close.
Also, note that a number of guns came out of S&W with problems after Bangor Punta took over. When they stopped pinning the barrels, more than a few guns wound up going back to S&W for repairs.
A friend got an 8 3/8" M629. Nice gun, except after a few hundred rounds, the barrel started to unscrew. This was in the early 80s, with an unpinned gun. The barrel was noticeably canted. Gun went back to S&W. Came back a few weeks later, barrel straight, and S&W saying "nothing wrong".
If you don't have a need, or a want to shoot .357 Magnum at the levels it began at, the model 19 is a pretty good gun. If you do want original full .357 Mag power, the 19 is NOT the gun to do it in.
Shooting large amounts of the 125gr JHP ammo was becoming the common practice and since guns were failing at a higher rate than before, (and nothing else had really changed) the hot 125s got the blame.
S&W didn't design a K frame .357, exactly, they took a K frame and adapted it to the .357 Magnum. When you do something like that, there are limitations.
Things worked pretty well for a long time, giving officers am easier pistol to carry, day in and day out, and still able to use .357 Magnum ammo when required. "Practice with .38s and save the .357 for serious use" was the mantra for many years.
Trouble is, when you run your engine at "war emergency overboost" too long, bad things tend to happen.
The Model 19 is a fine gun, but its not a .357 mag in the sense an N frame is. Not even close.
Also, note that a number of guns came out of S&W with problems after Bangor Punta took over. When they stopped pinning the barrels, more than a few guns wound up going back to S&W for repairs.
A friend got an 8 3/8" M629. Nice gun, except after a few hundred rounds, the barrel started to unscrew. This was in the early 80s, with an unpinned gun. The barrel was noticeably canted. Gun went back to S&W. Came back a few weeks later, barrel straight, and S&W saying "nothing wrong".
If you don't have a need, or a want to shoot .357 Magnum at the levels it began at, the model 19 is a pretty good gun. If you do want original full .357 Mag power, the 19 is NOT the gun to do it in.
trigger643
New member
Bangor Punta acquired S&W in 1965, and over the next 15 years increased product offerings to the military, law enforcement and civilian markets, increased sales, expanded production and established S&W as the preeminent American hand gun manufacturer, surpassing Colt and eclipsing all other American handgun manufacturers in production, quality, pricing and market share.
However, by 1980 S&W's management had grown fat ... and slow to recognize changing market focus. What do they say? Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered?
Upstarts like Glock and Beretta with their Wonder 9's were early to the game and by 1987 the company was fast approaching the ropes. Tompkin steps in and buys Bangor Punta, saving the parent and the subsidiary from duplicating Colt's crash and burn, but only barely and with much weeping, wailing and gnashing to teeth...
I proffer that some of the best guns ever produced were under Bangor Punta, at least for the first 15 years, 1965-1980. Beautiful quality all through the 1960's and 1970's...
The 1980's and 90's on the otherhand, well I'm not too keen on those production years and generally ignore them.
http://www.company-histories.com/Smith-Wesson-Corporation-Company-History.html
Trigger, I will agree totally with the 1980 date as the general point things were noticeably going downhill. The 60s-70s guns are the "gold standard" to me.
I have a (slightly irrational) dislike for K frame and smaller .357 Magnums. Not because there is anything really wrong with them, but because I blame them (their popularity) for the downloading of the .357 Magnum cartridge.
You can fire original power level .357 loads in a model 19, but you won't easily get the cases out of the cylinder. Tools might be necessary (small hammer..)
Fire the same stuff out of an N frame, and things work normally.
The solution to that problem that we got was a less powerful .357 Magnum, one that could work in smaller framed guns.
And, also, all of the problems that did happen doesn't mean that they will happen to your gun, lots of 19s have eaten bazillions of magnum rounds and not failed. The fact that some have, only means yours could, not that it will.
I have a (slightly irrational) dislike for K frame and smaller .357 Magnums. Not because there is anything really wrong with them, but because I blame them (their popularity) for the downloading of the .357 Magnum cartridge.
You can fire original power level .357 loads in a model 19, but you won't easily get the cases out of the cylinder. Tools might be necessary (small hammer..)
Fire the same stuff out of an N frame, and things work normally.
The solution to that problem that we got was a less powerful .357 Magnum, one that could work in smaller framed guns.
And, also, all of the problems that did happen doesn't mean that they will happen to your gun, lots of 19s have eaten bazillions of magnum rounds and not failed. The fact that some have, only means yours could, not that it will.
trigger643
New member
44 Amp, we are of like mind on the K frame magnums. I enjoy my 19s and 66s, but have rarely shot magnum loads out of them, not because I feel I can't, just that for casual shooting I like .38sp wadcutters -- a cartridge load the K frame seems to favor.
When shooting magnum loads, I much prefer an N frame 27 or 28. I only have 3 S&W's made after 1979, and of these none is older than 2012. This is intentional.
When shooting magnum loads, I much prefer an N frame 27 or 28. I only have 3 S&W's made after 1979, and of these none is older than 2012. This is intentional.
Model 19 Smith
Love my Model 19 with Target Hammer, Target Trigger, Target Sites and Target Stocks, all done years ago at S&W Springfield. Only light loads go through it and it has never failed me.
Back in Supervel days only those and Magnums went in my N Frame Model 27.
Bob
Love my Model 19 with Target Hammer, Target Trigger, Target Sites and Target Stocks, all done years ago at S&W Springfield. Only light loads go through it and it has never failed me.
Back in Supervel days only those and Magnums went in my N Frame Model 27.
Bob
I bought a S&W M19 4" in 1971. IT has just a bit under 50M rounds through it as we speak. It is almost equally divided between 38SPL and 357MAG handloads. MOST of the 38SPL's are/were 38/44 handloads which yap right at the heals of 357MAG factory ammunition.
The forcing cone is well warn but perfectly servicable.
The velocities of this 4" M19 are 100fps faster. or more !, that aLL of the one hundred or so 6" 357MAG sixguns I've run up against it in testing going back 40+ years.
NOW, when the BBL goes it will be replaced with a new one so there is for damnsure no rerason to worry about the sillyness of "BBL life." I can barely wait !!
And so it goes...
The forcing cone is well warn but perfectly servicable.
The velocities of this 4" M19 are 100fps faster. or more !, that aLL of the one hundred or so 6" 357MAG sixguns I've run up against it in testing going back 40+ years.
NOW, when the BBL goes it will be replaced with a new one so there is for damnsure no rerason to worry about the sillyness of "BBL life." I can barely wait !!
And so it goes...
Yeah, carbon deposits. The stuff that accumulates on the metal from firing. It gets hot during subsequent shooting and can be like a blow torch directing heat into the metal beneath it. Same thing happens in an engine when carbon builds up on piston tops first causing detonation as the hot spots ignite the fuel/air mixture prematurely then if it gets bad enough it can damage the piston.
90%...10%...too much math for me. I was an art major. The one pictured has fired 100% 125 grain full power JHPs. So far no problems.
90%...10%...too much math for me. I was an art major. The one pictured has fired 100% 125 grain full power JHPs. So far no problems.
orionengnr
New member
I have a well-used no-dash 4" M-66 (and had a lightly used M-19 until I started downsizing and selling guns I don't shoot).
The M-66 has a lot of use, and most of the rounds through it since I've owned it have been "real" .357 Mag rounds.
It is far more pleasant to carry than an N-frame, and is many times more pleasant to shoot than a J-frame. For me, the 4" K-frame Magnum is the perfect balance of size, weight, recoil management, etc., in a .357 revolver.
If I were forced to sell all of my guns (both handguns and long guns) my M-66 would be one of the very last to go. That is not based upon emotion, but upon utility and trust factor.
The M-66 has a lot of use, and most of the rounds through it since I've owned it have been "real" .357 Mag rounds.
It is far more pleasant to carry than an N-frame, and is many times more pleasant to shoot than a J-frame. For me, the 4" K-frame Magnum is the perfect balance of size, weight, recoil management, etc., in a .357 revolver.
Hmmm...interesting theory, and it makes a bit of sense...however, I've never heard that one, and I'd sure like a citation.
If I were forced to sell all of my guns (both handguns and long guns) my M-66 would be one of the very last to go. That is not based upon emotion, but upon utility and trust factor.
Last edited:
Agree. Ed's Red with a good scrubbing of the outer diameter of the forcing cone and the occasional swipe down the barrel with Lewis Lead remover tool does well to keep the forcing cone area clean.
The forcing cone on the new K Frame magnums is very interesting. I always figured they could do it, after all Taurus did on their 66, which had very similar dimensions to the S&W K frame. Now if they would just offer a non ILS version, I'd at least consider buying new. Nah, too many good old ones still around for less money.