S&W 31-1

[CZ93X62]

Well, Glaciers.......maybe 'Abomination' was a bridge too far as well. Sorry about that.

I'm going to see and hear a bunch of J-frame 357s on Tuesday at annual retiree quals. These noisy little things remain very popular as carry arms with us fogies and with current personnel as well. Quals was supposed to occur in mid-February in La Quinta and didn't--some County scheduling snafu. So things were moved west to the Academy range. There will be a mobile BBQ lunch served, which have been GREAT. Tri-tip and yardbird instead of carne y pollo asada, and cob corn and baked beans in place of frijoles y arroz, but I'm multi-cultural. It's all good.

 

[Glaciers]

Well CZ you must have mistaken me for someone who gets offended easily. You have to seriously work at offending me.

But you are right on the money about 357’s in the little Smiths. I only use 357’s on a rare occasion mostly to remind me that I can, but, shouldn’t.

 

[TXTad]

Well CZ you must have mistaken me for someone who gets offended easily. You have to seriously work at offending me.

But you are right on the money about 357’s in the little Smiths. I only use 357’s on a rare occasion mostly to remind me that I can, but, shouldn’t.

I do wish someone would market some 25,000 to 30,000 psi .357 loads for defense.

 

[CZ93X62]

That sounds 38/44-ish, and would be a great niche to occupy by a company like Buffalo Bore.

As reloaders, we can make this happen easily. With the commersh cartridges......it's a niche that isn't chased.

When SAAMI revised the pressure standards c. 1990, the Magnum revolver calibers lost a step or two. I applaud tighter standards and enhanced user safety, certainly. The by-products of these adulterations (let's call these what they are, OK?) enabled such product intros as the Win '73 Pasta Repros in 44 Magnum and the J-frames in 357 Magnum. Are these additions 'Good things'? I dunno.

If we can slow down the 357/158s and 44/240s from 1450 FPS to 1250 FPS and still maintain a straight face, I see no reason to NOT revise it downward maybe 10% more to hit TXTad's strike zone. Just that move alone might prevent J-frame 357 users' thumbs from migrating toward the crooks of their elbows as time goes on.

 

[Petrol & Powder]

On the topic of J-frames, as Al correctly points out, the J-frame was a growth of the I-frame to allow the 38 Special to work in that platform. I suppose S&W could have created a completely new frame and had something along the line of a Detective Special with a 6-shot cylinder but that likely would have been very close to the K-frame and probably not worth an entire new frame size just for that one application. So, we got an extended I-frame and a five-shot cylinder J-frame when chambered for 38 Special. This resulted in a revolver that is about as small as you can go in that chambering. If an ultra-compact DA revolver chambered in 38 Special is your goal – the J-frame meets that goal. The Chief’s Special, AKA Model 36 and all its offspring was a good idea but like many concepts, you have to keep things in perspective. Its strength is its small size.

The J-frame is rather stout for its size. The barrel shank barely protrudes through the frame, resulting in a strong forcing cone. The cylinder locking notches are offset so that they do not weaken the cylinder over the chambers. The overall gun is small but with only 5 chambers in the cylinder, it’s beefy enough to have decent strength. A 6 round cylinder would have required a larger frame and probably ended up with thinner chamber walls.

I do think that .357 magnum in the J-frame is really pushing the envelope. Yes, it works and there is enough reserve strength in a steel J-frame to take some abuse, but I think 357 mag is a bridge too far in that platform. The Ruger SP101 is only slightly larger than the J-frame Smiths but it is much more suitable for magnum loadings.

The lightweight J-frames are far stronger than most people give them credit for BUT .357 magnum is really not practical in the lightweight J-frames. Not only is the cartridge hard on the gun, but it’s also hard on the user.

 

[RicinYakima]

Think I will weigh in at this point. I have a S&W 60-10 that I am very fond of for carrying, about the ideal trail gun. Yes it has a 3" barrel, yes it has an underlug, yes it is all stainless steel and yes it has adjustable sights. Yes I have to carry it in a holster, except Duluth Trading Company jeans with the deep heavy canvas pockets.

For me, this is the best of the 357 J frames. While I have shot my 200 grain rifle loads in it, it was not fun. 125 grains 357 loads are even worse for me. So I have settled for a 150+ SWC at a chronographed 1000 f/s.

For the two inch barrel jobs, I think the hot loaded 32 H&R's are a better choice for concealed carry.

 

[TXTad]

Think I will weigh in at this point. I have a S&W 60-10 that I am very fond of for carrying, about the ideal trail gun. Yes it has a 3" barrel, yes it has an underlug, yes it is all stainless steel and yes it has adjustable sights. Yes I have to carry it in a holster, except Duluth Trading Company jeans with the deep heavy canvas pockets.

For me, this is the best of the 357 J frames. While I have shot my 200 grain rifle loads in it, it was not fun. 125 grains 357 loads are even worse for me. So I have settled for a 150+ SWC at a chronographed 1000 f/s.

For the two inch barrel jobs, I think the hot loaded 32 H&R's are a better choice for concealed carry.

I have the same gun and that is an excellent load for it. Such a handy little thing, but it'll sting you if you load it wrong.

 

[Petrol & Powder]

Rick, I will not agree with you on the hot 32 H&R mag in a 2" revolver, but I'll sign on to everything else you wrote.

 

[TXTad]

I'm definitely going to get the Accurate 31-095W wadcutter mold that Petrol & Powder suggested.

Arsenal has two interesting ones: 32- 98 Gr. SWC KEITH and 32-98 SWC RCBS CLONE. I think I like the RCBS one better. There is also their 115gr Ranch Dog, but while that's probably good for .327 and maybe even .32 H&R, I think it's a bit much for .32 S&W Long.

Accurate has a few interesting ones:

• 31-101E - super wide meplat, but not quite a wadcutter.
• 31-101R - RNFP, maybe like what Colt loaded in their version of the caliber?
• 31-101L - Oh! A bit like Lyman's 358432.
• 31-100RT - Another good RNFP?
• 31-100F - Modern WFN.

I guess this is going to be harder than I thought!

 

[RicinYakima]

Be careful the crimp groove spacing, as it can become an issue.

 

[beagle]

I’ve got a model 30, a m31 and a Single Six Mag in the house. One of my favorite bullets was an Ideal 308244. 90 grain RN for the old .30 Luger. It cast big and was the “best” in all three. Alas, I traded it off before I found that out. Keep your eyes open./beagle

 

[LEC Guy]

I shoot and load quite a bit of .32 Long. I used to buy the Hornady .32 WC in the 400 ct. boxes but they have become difficult to find. I cast all my .32's now and use the RCBS 98 grain WC and the older 84 grain WC. The Full WC's work very well in the H&R 732.

Bruce