I like the K-frame revolvers in any caliber, even .22. (Remember the K-22? Arguably the best .22 target revolver ever made.)
The K guns in .357 were never intended for a steady diet of full power 357; they were intended as a smaller, lighter duty gun that could be fired with moderate quantities of .357. But as .357 loads, especially handloads, became hotter and hotter, the rear of the barrels began to show cracks. The barrel tenon of the K frame guns has a half-moon shape cut out, never a problem with .38 Special or reasonable pressure .357 loads, but a problem with super hot loads.
Rumors abound. I know of no K frame revolvers that blew up, no frames that broke or fell apart, no lethal explosions. No "hundreds of thousands of cylinders are deadly bombs" (as one anti-S&W writer claimed). Simply the usual tendency to believe that if x grains of powder is good, x+ grains just must be better.
Jim
The K guns in .357 were never intended for a steady diet of full power 357; they were intended as a smaller, lighter duty gun that could be fired with moderate quantities of .357. But as .357 loads, especially handloads, became hotter and hotter, the rear of the barrels began to show cracks. The barrel tenon of the K frame guns has a half-moon shape cut out, never a problem with .38 Special or reasonable pressure .357 loads, but a problem with super hot loads.
Rumors abound. I know of no K frame revolvers that blew up, no frames that broke or fell apart, no lethal explosions. No "hundreds of thousands of cylinders are deadly bombs" (as one anti-S&W writer claimed). Simply the usual tendency to believe that if x grains of powder is good, x+ grains just must be better.
Jim