Can a Smith and Wesson Model 25 handle "heavy" loads?

Up to about 25,000 and the S&W will live and long happy life

By "heavy" you mean a 250gr bullet at just over 1,000fps, yes.

As noted, keep them under 25,000psi and you AND the pistol will be happy.

Ed

Linebaugh says so and tested it thoroughly, but personally I'd limit it to bullets under 280 grains and load to 45 ACP pressure (21,000 CUP/PSI), ESPECIALLY an older one.

Speer lists loads listed up to 25,000 CUP; I'd definitely keep them under that.

The cylinder walls at the bolt notches are thin, even in an early 29. Later models like the Mountain Gun appear better designed; a lot better bolt, bolt notch and hand system, if you are firing a lot of rounds.

The difference between 1,300 fps and 950 from a 45 Colt with solids on deer sized stuff is less than marginal...

A 250 hardcast moving around 1,000 fps will let the air out of most anything you come up against.........

My 25-7 loves that load!

when I first got my 25-5, many years ago, I just fed it what I wanted. Heavy loads were no problem.
Today, I take it easier on the old gal, but there does not seem to be any harm after touching off thousands of 250 grain,, 1000+ fps loads.

My perspective is this:

I don't "abuse" my guns. That being said, I don't worry about wearing them out. I have couple N frames that have many thousands of rounds through them. if I shoot them loose, I have the end shake, or whatever else taken care of.

Life is WAY too short, and can end in a BLINK, or a flash. So enjoy the heck out of the revolver. If you shoot it to the point of complete disrepair, with moderate to upper loads, hang it on the wall, go get another and keep on enjoying such things while you can.

We should all be so lucky to wear out a half dozen guns before we are done. I knew men who will never have that chance.

Dying with a safe full of barely used guns. Not much of a point to me.

Cheers

I tend to agree with Mackay. The S&W 45 Colt shuld be able to get 1200FPS with a 250 grain hard cast without undue stress IMHO with the correct powder

13 grs of HS-6 and the RCBS 270 SAA (goes 283 grs as purchased) goes a bit over 1000 fps in my 4" 25-5. A a fairly mild load that will do all I will ever need from the combo. That bullet has become my go to in my 45 Colt's.

+1. This load should handle almost any hunting chore. If you need more, there's always the .475's and .500's.

Here is an article by John Linebaugh specifically about your Model 25 and what it can take.

http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=12

++ 1

Paul

Yep. I've had two revolvers "shoot loose" on me over time, one being a S&W. I sent it back to S&W and they repaired and re-timed the revolver for a nominal charge, and fairly quickly, too.

FWIW, I have found that my truly heavy loads (eg, 300 gr LBT @ 1325 fps, a "Linebaugh" load)that are manageable in one of my Bisley's are intolerable in my 625 Mountain Gun. The heaviest loads I run in any of my N-frames are considerably below that threshold... in 45 Colt, ~270 gr cast bullets running at ~1100 fps.

I go below that these days Doc. The load I shoot in my Smith is usually a 250 grain LSWC running right at 900 fps. It will go end to end through a fairly good sized pig, and in Florida, there is nothing that won't fall, and quickly, to one of those fat slugs.
Long ago, I realized that for me, if I need more than that, I'll reach for a rifle.

I am going the exact opposite - going slower for plinking fun and maybe small game.

The trick to this is not having to adjust the sights. The way that is achieved is by using Cowboy 45 Special brass. I am shooting 200gr SWC over 5.2gr of Unique and it has the same POI at 10y as 255gr SWC over 9gr of Unique.

This lets me shoot my lovely N frame lots more using less powder and lead alloy. These days, it matters because I dunno when I can get next batch of reloading components...

I think the model 25 is the same N frame as the Model 29 44 mag.

should be good.

Right, Sam, when I said those were the heaviest loads I'd run in my 625, I didn't mean to imply that's my standard load, but it's the load I've carried in bear country for the past few years. It's a lot lighter than the heavy loads I used to run in my Bisleys/Blackhawks, and I hardly ever run those any more.

For the most part I run a 265-270 gr bullet at about 1000 fps. I've got several bullets in this class that shoot well and I can't seem to decide which one is "the one" so I can sell the rest the moulds! I'm still playing with load development with my latest mould, a converted LBT-WFN hollowpoint mould... so far I need about 1000 fps to get them to expand reliably with the alloys I have on hand.

These are only slightly warmer than the standard factory loads, but I find them more accurate out to 60-80 yards, which is about my maximum hunting range with my 45's.

"The load I shoot in my Smith is usually a 250 grain LSWC running right at 900 fps. It will go end to end through a fairly good sized pig, and in Florida, there is nothing that won't fall, and quickly, to one of those fat slugs.
Long ago, I realized that for me, if I need more than that, I'll reach for a rifle."

+1. It can be fun to hot rod the .45 colt, but 900fps has been a sweet spot for accuracy and effectiveness in my experience.

Ella

Not really heavy, but I shot 20 grs 296 with the 300 gr Sierra fnsp bullet for years out of my Smith till a Bud bought it from me.

Gunner

Another note, some may not know, but that 300 gr Sierra was one TSOB of a bullet, and very accurate to.

well, since i have some .45colt brass tumbling right now, i looked up an article from handloader magazine, no 246, april/may 2007 by brian pearce. On the s&w model 25, his writing said as quotes, "loads in the 20,000 psi range will prove useful for U.S. Firearms revolvers that are 100% american made(after the year 2000), Colt New Service, Ruger New Vaquero and Smith & Wesson post WWII N Frames, including Models 25 and 625 mountain guns. Loads in the 32000 cup range should be limited to Ruger Blackhawk, Vaquero, colt anaconda or other modern revolvers designed to stand up to this pressure level. The article was about loading for the S.A.A. 270 grain bullet, as cast to about 283grains. There were a variety of loads presented in three different pressure ranges. In the one for the 25-5 one i have been using throws that bullet at 1012 to 1093 with the powder recommended. As i have that saa but also in a pentad hollowpoint fired into about a four inch book in completely penetrated and expanded to about .95of an inch. Works for me.

actually this is shown in pearce's article, and the above load is splitting the deck between low and high on the suggested charge of the named powder. It is in the 20,000 psi category.

to take this as a hi jack in another direction. I have a box of speer gold dot 250 hollow points. The loads i am picking up run it at about 750 to 800fps. Talk about pokey. But they are suppose to penetrate 14inches of gellatin, and open to around .75.
I think of that, then i think of my home made cast 280 grain saa keith bullet hollowpoint moving at 1000fps. I guess there is such a thing as overpenetration in an urban environment.

WRONG The first N frames were the 38/44 ,which

were the first 357 loaded to near mag loads ,which brought about the REG MAG

that S&W brought out in 35,then the Mod 37,28 ect.

The Mod 25 though big framed will not take the high pressures the 29 will.

Many have abandoned there mod 25 because the 45acp has the same balistics.

Now the New Blackhawk will take any 45 colt loads you care to load!
Bob

While they are the same size frame and look alike, I have been told the frame of the 25 is not made to the same robustness of the 29.

That being said, the .45 Colt is a fine cartridge that gets the job done without having to be a firebreathing dragon at high pressures. Personally I prefer a double action wheelgun when in remote areas. If I ever have a set to with an ornery critter....a double is easier to manipulate with one hand. Faster too.....

Like I said before, a 250 gr hardcast moving 1,000 fps or a little more, will perforate most anything you need it to....

When I went looking for a model 25 I specifically searched for a 25-7 until I found one. Makes a perfect hunting revolver....for me!

The N frame was introduced by Smith and Wesson in 1907 with the "Triple Lock" .44 Special double action. That pre-dates the Registered Magnums in .357 introduced in 1935 and also the .38-44 Heavy-Duty in "38 High Speed" introduced in 1930. The Model 25 in 45 Colt was at first thought to be no more sturdy than a Colt SAA in the same caliber, which indeed has the same factory ballistics as a 45 ACP. In the past couple of decades though, due to research by Brian Pearce and others, the model 25 is thought to be able to handle higher pressures and take advantage of the 45 Colt's greater case capacity.

The conventional wisdom is now that a model 25 while not being able to take the pressures of a model 29 can generate velocities higher than one in 45 ACP.

Perhaps others here can tell you more about the specifics of the metallurgy involved but I don't think there has ever been any differences in the solidity of the frames. The slight difference between the ability of the two guns to handle higher pressures is due to the thinness of the cylinder walls of the 45 calibers being greater than that of the .429 caliber revolvers. I'm guessing that a .44 Special even is probably capable of handling greater pressures. It was not uncommon for Keith and his peers to load them up to at least 1200 fps as opposed to recent conventional wisdom which has the 45 Colt models capable of about 1000 to 1100 fps depending upon your source. The first estimates in 1978 were more like 100 fps less. Take note that velocities and pressures are not completely interchangeable. Also, I have no idea about previous 45 Colt models, the 1955 Target and the like, which were to the best of my knowledge, few and far between. The production of the 25's in 45 Colt that are made now, were pretty much started a couple of years before the standard issues came out in '78 with MIM production starting somewhere later...and possibly being of significance.

Anybody playing with top velocities in this or any other gun should not take mine or anybody else's word for it on the internet as their final analysis but should instead, do their own research.

First N frame was the Triple Lock, New Century in .44 Spec. brought out in 1907.

First .357 Magnum was the Registered Magnum, later called the model 27, brought out in 1935.

First N frame .38 Spec. was the 38-44 Heavy Duty brought out in 1930. The ammo for this was called the 38 High Speed or the like, but differed only in velocity from the 38 Special, to the best of my knowledge.

The M-29 and M-25 are indeed the same frame , no difference in strength of the frames. The cylinder walls are thinner is the 45 Colt chambering and the case head thrust is greater due to the larger diameter case. The N-Frame is marginal in 44 mag chambering and even more so in 45 Colt

The M29 & 629 received a "Durability package" upgrade around 1990, to help them withstand a steady diet of heavy bullet loads, which were becoming more & more popular in those days. IIRC it was additional heat treatment of components.

Yes, the .45 Colt naturally does have thinner cylinder walls and barrel shank, which leaves less safety margin. I wouldn't try .44 mag loads in one.

The other point is, a DA revolver would be chosen over a single action for rate of fire, at extreme close range. Whether it is a two legged or 4 legged assailant, a 250-270gr load at 1000fps is going to have less recoil than a 300gr at 1300fps, and be easier to fire accurately, in a dire situation.

I like my 5" M629, and have carried it in bear and mt lion country. For big bears, my .480 Ruger would get the nod.

One of these days I need to get me a M25-7. Always have liked 5" S&W's

I'm not real interested in getting into a pizzin' match about which N-frame came first, nor whether the M29 has a stronger frame than the M25.

http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=12

I stumbled across John Linebaugh's articles on his research with 45 Colt guns a long time ago, and that answered any questions I might have had. Like Linebaugh, I've taken to carrying a 4" Model 25 or 625 for most of my big-bore revolver carry and I'm satisfied it can handle all the power I need it to handle.

No one has deliberately blown up more guns than Linebaugh. If he says the M25 can handle the loads specified in his articles, I believe him.

BTW, TnC, I agree completely with your statement regarding moderate pressure loads in a DA revolver. Whether you're carrying a 45 Colt or a 44 Mag, a guy should be GTG with such a rig.

Save for Dick Casull.......

Yes S&W did what is referred as an "endurance package" S&W claimed better heat treating. I can tell you with certainty that heat treating will only make metal "harder or softer" depending on which you are after but will not make the metal STRONGER. The S&W M-29 will shoot the same loads as a SBH as far as not blowing up is concerned but wear is a different story. Also the N frame has a side plate that also weakens the frame, where as a Redhawk has a solid frame same as a single action. A double action will wear quicker than a single action even if the strength is the same

IIRC didn't the endurance package have something to do with improving the lockup of the cylinder, which was unlocking and rotating backwards under the heavy load's being used by the IHMSA shooter's?
Ditto's on checking out Linebaugh's work.

I had an X-frame that would unlock and rotate backwards as well as a number of N-frames.

Yes they made the notches a bit larger I believe but it still happens with some if pushed hard for a period of time

The problems with the N-frame M-29's is one of the reasons that the SAAMI pressure has been lowered from where it started

A number of years back I took possession of both a NMBH and a 625 Mountain Gun ; both SS 45 Colts. Hadn't read Brian Peace's 2007 article yet. I developed identical 335 gr LBT loads running about 1100 fps in both. Both shot very well but it quickly become evident the Smith was not up to the task ;becoming difficult to open. Internal parts were getting beat, peened beyond specs. Had a local, yet respected'Smith clean it up so I could send it on it's way.

Safe? Likely! Suggested? No!

Alan

A couple of things here.
There has been no lowering of the pressure levels for .44 magnum ammo since the round was introduced back in 1956. Pressure is measured differently, that's all. Same ammo all along.
The original 29's used much tougher, heat treated steel than did any other smith revolvers until then. As far as strenth goes, they are every bit as strong as the classic Ruger Super BH. HP White labs proved that many years ago. Both let go at 80,000 psi. The BH in .45 Colt, BTW, let go at 60,000 psi.
What happened to S&W over the years is some of the new owners changed the specs of the 29's. Visible differences are noticed in the lack of pinned barrels and the doing away of the recessed chambers. Other internal differences are not so easily noticed. The so called endurance packages were efforts to redo these design changes.
One more thing. What's safe and at acceptable pressures in one gun may not be so in others. That's one reason why the SAAMI pressure levels are set where they are. If you stick with that, your gun will do fine and last many years.
But if one doesn't strickly follow the loading data put out by the bullet and powder companies, pressures can easily vary, and one has no way to tell just what he's getting in a revolver. E

E the pressure is lower today. The old Rem loads chrono higher than most loads today. Some don't clock more than 1180 with 240's and that's a fact

I have to agree. .44 Mag ammo nowadays is not nearly as hot as it was. Even loading manuals have dialed back loads for the .44 Mag if I can recall correctly. And I don't think that a Model 25 cannot withstand the loads a BH can eat for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

yep, the original loads often had 240's at 1470 fps, now most 240gr loads are under 1300 fps.

The .357 mag also got throttled back about the same time.

How much of it is actually "throttling back" the loads as opposed to just being more realistic about the velocities achieved?

Definitely throttled back. I chrono'ed some old factory loads a few years ago and 240's were over 1450 FPS and many of todays factory load are in the 1180 to 1250 FPS range. Buffalo Bore loads are in the 1400 FPS range

I agree completely, jwp. The .357 has also been emasculated over the years.

+2

I had access to some old (WW2 era) 357 Magnum loads and they chrono'd very, very fast... much faster than any other factory ammo I've ever tested except for Lee Jurras's SuperVel. I lucked into a full case of SuperVel about 14 years ago and still have most of it, and it's wonderful stuff. I handload my hunting ammo to basically duplicate that SuperVel.

I've not personally chrono'd old 44 Mag ammo, but one of my shooting buds back in WI has done so. He's now a retired cop, but back in the day he carried S&W revolvers on duty, and off-duty carried a Model 29. He has ammo from the earliest days, and he has confirmed that the early ammo was very, very hot; much hotter than anything put out by the factories nowadays. Gary has killed more deer with the 44 Mag in revolvers and lever rifles than most hunters have killed with all their calibers combined. He still handloads his 44's to the old specs.

Obviously a dude that doesn't own a Lyman manual...

The data you cite was taken from a 240 gr. SP Remington load fired from a 4 inch vented, pressure test barrel, not a 6.5 inch revolver barrel.
Some of the original factory swagged lead, 240 gr. ammo was loaded beyond the pressure standards of 40,000 CUP. Winchester, for instance ran a lot like that. It tested at 45,000 CUP.
But the standards have not changed. It's still either 36,000 psi or 40,000 CUP.
The loading companies have learned to publish better, more accurate loading data because their testing equipment is now more accurate. Capable of recording sudden spikes, not averages as before. In other words, some of the older data was too hot. Rifle data has shown the same trend. E

You haven't read every thing that I posted or you are just not comprehending but you are flat wrong on this

It's been reported a few times that cases have gotten thicker over time, with less capacity, and that change has reduced safe powder charges, too. EK's famous load for the .44 mag was 22 gr of 2400, under his Keith bullet. 20 years ago folks started suggesting 21gr was better, now I think even the less conservative guys are saying 20gr.

This is due to 2400 changing over the years.

Nonsense. There is no conversation rate fort CUP measurements to PSI.
The original .357 Magnum ammo was loaded to 45,000 CUP. So what ?
Again, some of the factory swagged lead ammo was loaded to more than the 40,000 CUP limit set for the .44 Magnum. But pressure limit was still 40,000 CUP.
BTW, there are no swagged lead, full power loads out there for the .44 Magnum any longer.
The bottom line is that the pressure limits for the .44 Magnum were not reduced to go easy of the Smith & Wesson revolvers. Same pressure levels just different method of measuring it.
The factories may be loading them on the light side these days. As opposed to loading them too hot in the past.
So what ? It has nothing to do with the strenth of the S&W revolvers made for the .44 Magnum. E

"E: where have you been. Denton (Denton Bramble) has a conversion has wriTten about it in articles and posted about the conversion of CUPS to PSI

You are behind the times

Both the 357 and 44 Magnums have had their SAAMI pressure limits reduced, be it CUP or psi.

Single shot/Contender data still adheres to the "old" limits.


As far as cases go, at least in 44 Magnum; I have cases from the late 60's early 70's of Winchester (Western) and R-P make that are far heavier and have nominally thicker walls than ones fro the 2000's, FWIW.

Brian Pearce has hashed out just about every topic we are bantering in print.....

A good while back a friend bought a 4" GP100 357 mag and I took him to the range to shoot a variety of ammo. One combination was the old high pressure Speer max charge of Blue Dot under a 125 JHP. The muzzle blast was loud and sharp enough to get the firing line tin roof to sing.

Even close to twenty years later the "roof ringer load" comes up in conversation.

JWP, I just read his response to your inquiry over on the gun writers forum. He's never done any work with handgun loads.
Second, he discovered a relationship, not a conversion formula, in rifle cartriages that changes as the pressure increases.
This is all a long way from what we were discussing. Which was the fact that .44 Magnum pressure standards were not changed because S&W revolvers couldn't handle the so called old pressure standards or for any other reason. That's not to say that some loading companies haven't reduced the pressures of their factory offerings. Some may have. Still not the point.
Are you aware that special ammunition is loaded to verify pressure testing equipment ? This standard ammo for the .44 Magnum was never changed. Just the way it's pressure is measured.
I do seem to recall that the pressure standards for the .357 Magnum were changed. I could be mistaken on this, but I seem to recall that the original ammo leaded badly and was very hard to control, both of which were problems for law enforcement. So, among other changes, it was loaded differently to meet their needs. E

They correlate well at the pressure range that we are discussing

"Later, the small arms technical people increased the velocity specs and also went to jacketed bullets, greatly increasing both pressures and velocities."
"Dr. Nippe sent a box of these loads to White's Labratory and they varied 11,600 psi in just ten rounds and some loads went to 50,000 psi.."

"In my humble opinion, 35,000 psi should be the limit for pressure of factory loads for the .44 Magnum and velocity should stay around 1,400 fps. Anything much over that is hard on the guns and will not deliver the same accuracy. Even 3,000 rounds with factory loads these fine guns lose accuracy and need tightening up"
"Factory American loads I have recently tested from Remington are back to a more normal pressure. I have not tried any late issue from Winchester-Western, but for a time both makes were far overloaded to my notion"
-Elmer Keith, 1973.

I also find it interesting that Elgin Gates, at the dawn of IHMSA that guns made by Ruger, Dan Wesson and Seville easily made the durabilty grade while Smiths emphatically did not; some literally falling apart on the line.

FWIW, Ross Seyfried also used Keith's recommended load in 3 4" 29's. His last one (in the 1990's) was on its last legs.

[/quote] WRONG The first N frames were the 38/44 ,which

were the first 357 loaded to near mag loads [/quote]

Actually, S&W's first N-frame was the New Century (Triple Lock) in .44 Special in 1907-1908. They didn't start heat-treating the frames and cylinders until the Second Model Hand Ejector.