K vs J Frame forcing cones

rc_p120

rc_p120

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Location
Toronto, Canada
Might be a simple question but why is it that new production J frames are made for .357 magnum loads but K frames, which are larger, are still not recommended for steady use with magnum rounds? Does the J frame have the tapered forcing cone like the K frames do or is it full?

Seems strange that the smaller gun can handle it but the K's have issues.. Revolver guys, can you shed some light? Thanks!
 
as Ganderite said....no one shoots 357 regularly thru a J frame in any amount unless they love nerve damage....the thought of it in one of the titanium/scandium frame ones (13 oz empty) makes me cringe....and i like a bit of recoil.
 
The J frame guns are also all 5 shot guns. That likely has something to do with the forcing cone issue. And as mentioned I seriously doubt you see any J frames being used regularly for lots of shooting with full house .357's. Hell, I've gotten to shoot a prohib rated buddy's J frame with .38Spl and that was enough for me.

The kick is big but a big part of the hit to the hand is based on the small size of the grip hitting you harder and more painfully. It's that small contact area that reaches in and hurts just parts of the hand where with the big X frame guns the large grips spread out the recoil energy. It's also the reason why after shooting a .38Spl in my buddy's gun that I would not try that same gun with .357Mag. It's just too small a set of grips and would push into and distort my hand too much.

All the .357Mag J frames are also prohibited AFAIK. I have never seen a 4.2 inch J frame S&W. However we are starting to see some 4.2" Ruger SP101 size guns.
 
BCRider said:
The J frame guns are also all 5 shot guns. That likely has something to do with the forcing cone issue. And as mentioned I seriously doubt you see any J frames being used regularly for lots of shooting with full house .357's. Hell, I've gotten to shoot a prohib rated buddy's J frame with .38Spl and that was enough for me.

The kick is big but a big part of the hit to the hand is based on the small size of the grip hitting you harder and more painfully. It's that small contact area that reaches in and hurts just parts of the hand where with the big X frame guns the large grips spread out the recoil energy. It's also the reason why after shooting a .38Spl in my buddy's gun that I would not try that same gun with .357Mag. It's just too small a set of grips and would push into and distort my hand too much.

All the .357Mag J frames are also prohibited AFAIK. I have never seen a 4.2 inch J frame S&W. However we are starting to see some 4.2" Ruger SP101 size guns.
Click to expand...

Makes sense, with my ruger Blackhawk convertible in 357 mag you can feel it a bit more then my 586 because the grips are so tiny.

How about the Derringer in 45-70! I've only seen one youtube video of someone firing it.
 
this is probably why Jerry has nerve damage in his hand and can't feel his trigger finger any more after shooting S&W for 30+ years and getting the world records for fastest revolver shooter
 
Not very many people shoot only 357's in their K frame revolvers either. It's not just the recoil, but the muzzle blast gets a bit annoying.
 
I've done it - 5 Federal 125 grain 357 SJHP's out of a 357 Centennial Airweight. Never again. Not only is the flash and blast nearly thermonuclear, it leaves a visible bruise all the way down the palm of your hand. I've shot all sorts of handguns, including Casulls, 50 Desert Eagles, and single shot hunting handguns in 223 and 308, nothing even comes remotely close to the violence of that combo.
 
Okay, aside from comfort issues is there any mechanical/engineering difference between them or is the J-frame just as vulnerable to cracked forcing cones as the K-frame is?? I know the K has that weird, tapered forcing cone which weakens it. I've always been curious if the J is just the same.
 
All forcing cones are tapered, that's why they call 'em cones :) smart aleck aside, i suspect they would be, perhaps even more so, but no one ever fires enough through them to make it an issue. New model K's should be good to go with the better metallurgy and heat treating now available.

The forcing cone on smith guns is pretty much identical, i suspect the main cause of the cracking was the supporting frame giving way in fatigue due to the battering
 
The unthreaded portion of the barrel shank is longer the K-frame: although, it is slightly thicker by approximately 20 thou. Would think that the frame supports the cone better on the J frame since it starts very close to where the frame begins. I've noticed that on more recent 357's, including N frames, the bore is free of rifling until the barrel is under the frame and then the "forcing" into the rifling begins. Might be part of the reason why the factory doesn't want non-warranty station folks installing "magnum" barrels on revolvers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom