I love my smith&wesson's for their smoothness ,accuracy and reliability ,my question is can they handle not only hot but heavy bullet weight for the caliber ammo without tearing them up ? IE- 300 gr in 44 mag or 180-200 gr in 357 mag,I've emailed them but no response as of yet and all fairness it's only been a couple of days,looking for the heavy bullet weight when carrying in bear country ,a insurance policy so to speak

They won't likely detonate your guns, but will almost certainly reduce their lifespans by X number of rounds. In which case, carrying the heavy stuff in bear country, while not making a regular practice of firing said rounds, will do no harm that I can see.

PS You will want to at least fire a cylinder full of whatever you plan to carry to carefully check for inertia pulling (and, while you're at it, POI), which can jam up a revolver. After firing each round, check the remaining rounds for any signs of inertia pulling, i.e., increases in OAL. If you see any, the revolver is too lightweight for the round.

Tim Sundles posts here every now and then. I used to shoot 357 "heavies" in my king cobra. I'm no expert but they were noticeably hot and spit an incredible flame that actually ignited the towel I was using as a rest over my sand bag. No idea what it did to the life of the revolver - doubt I will ever shoot anything thru one enough to know

Smith frames, especially after a certain time frame when they had the "endurance" package upgrades done, are usually okay with limited use of these loads. Sometimes, certain loads by the companies will statee on the package, only for use in Ruger class guns, if I recall correctly.

I carry warm loads in my S&W 629 and 625 Mountain Guns when I'm in critter country....I just don't shoot them often is all. I've found that a 240-260 gr hardcast lead bullet at or around 1,000 to 1,100 fps will kill whatever I need killin........YMMV

Good Luck!

Keith

Recoil and inertia of parts in the S&W's are what does damage, not pressures.
Shooting 300 gr and up has had 6 shots peen the locking pin in the cylinder so a stick was needed to open the cylinder with a small hammer.
In enhanced models, the pin was hardened, crane hardened and a stronger cylinder stop spring installed.
The S&W is a very poor design for extended heavy recoil and what do you do if it fails when you need it?
The guns can shoot 240 and 250gr max loads forever but I would top out at 265 gr.
Don't look for heavy boolit light loads, they don't shoot that way.

Get a 4" or 5.5" Redhawk for those "heavy" loads and keep those beautiful Smiths for regular and lighter loads. As Frogman said, "a 240 to 260 gr. cast bullet at 1000 to 1100 fps will kill most of what needs killing".

I may take that advice ,I just love my smiths

I had a 1973 vintage 29-2 that had a steady diet of hardcast 225 grain Lyman/Thompson gaschecked bullet at 1250 fps....that is about the only load that ever went through the gun.

At the 10K round mark a great gunsmith tightened everything back up to better than new and a few months later I sold the gun...that was 1980.

When you get over .40 caliber you don't need screaming loads to kill things...

Bob

I just sold my 629-2 MR, but when I took it shooting, I wouldn't use anything over 260 gr. I had two reasons for this: First of all it was a "pre-Endurance" model, although it had a number of the factory upgrades already, like the extended bolt notches, and hardened pin. This itself is enough reason to be respectful, but the second reason was that even with magnaporting, the recoil was about as much fun as I could handle. When moneys good again, I'll replace it with a Redhawk. Seriously, it's not worth beating the hell out of a perfectly good gun, just to make bystanders say "ooh, ahh".

As far as K frames go, I've never been a fan of that frame size for magnums. They were the first gun that S&W introduced that was inadequate for the task from the start. If people have something that says "magnum" on the side, they're not going to be looking for weak-assed 38 Spl loads. It's just not manly. I blame the 357 K frame for the first round of reduced factory pressures in the .357. I blame the .357 J frame for the last round. For cryin' out loud, the 38 Super in a 1911 can handle higher pressures than a .357 L or N frame? That's what SAAMI says.

Pre-xactly!!!

I dropped a 1,600lb pissed off bull with a standard pressure .45 Colt at 900fps. Dropped like a stone. Penetration was just shy of 2 feet after going through a skull. Made it damn near to the shoulder! Now maybe I just caught him right...or maybe large heavy bullets are just efficient killers out of a revolver.

They can handle them in limited doses. The L frame should take heavy .357's all day long. The post-Endurance Package N frames will take more, but I still wouldn't dedicate a S&W to 300gr or heavier bullets at higher velocities.

If you want to shoot nothing but the really heavy bullets, it's time for a single action revolver.

I have put some heavy loads through my model 19 in the past, now I reserve them for my Model 28 and my Blackhawk.

There's no .357 Magnum load the Model 28 can't handle.

It can't handle my heavy 357 load.

The friggin' cylinders too short.

And why in the world hasn't S&W fixed that one?

^^^This^^^

Good advice here. It won't hurt your S&W's with limited use. I use them in my Model 29 & Model 57 Mountain Guns. Also in my S&W Performance Center 8-Shooter, which is an N Frame 8-shot 357 Magnum.

The only handguns that I don't Worry about shooting heavy loads, like the Buffalo Bore stuff are in my Ruger Redhawks & Ruger Blackhawks. I've never seen or even heard of anyone shooting a Ruger RedHawk loose. I seriously doubt that you could wear one out, either.

I shoot Buffalo Bore equivalent loads in my M-19 and M-29-2 in limited amounts. The problem arise when they are used I. High volume shooting

For the S&W 625; dash what (625-?) and what year were the endurance packages started?

Thanks,

Jerry

I don't believe they ever made an "endurance package" engineering change for either the 25 or the 625. I believe those were exclusive to Magnums.

The Model 29 had the "endurance package" engineering changes in 1987. I assume the Model 57 had it then as well.

This is correct.

Just FYI, though, if you do shoot a S&W revolver with enough heavy loads to damage it, you can send it back to the factory and they'll rebuild and retime it for you. My Model 66 (which I bought used, it was a police trade-in gun that had been shot a LOT, and then I shot it even more) went out of time after a few years and S&W did their magic for a pittance. IIRC, it cost me about $35, including shipping, and they had it back to me in less than 2 weeks.

But as Kevin says, if you really want to shoot a lot of the heavy stuff, L-frame or N-frame revolvers are a better choice than a K-frame.

I have one of the early 629 "Classics" with full lug barrel. Don't recall if it is a 629-2 or 629-3, but S&W confirmed for me it has the endurance package.

If we're talking heavy non-expanding bullets, WFN, LFN, or whatever, 1200 to 1300 fps may give your best penetration anyway, and super-hot loads don't buy much.

I would not shoot any hot loads in a .45 ACP, or .45 Colt N frame. The .41 mag, or .357 Mag in the N frame, that's a different story. Or shooting expanding bullets, then I want the things to expand as much as feasible, while still having sufficient penetration.

"I would not shoot any hot loads in a .45 ACP, or .45 Colt N frame."

I know where you are coming from, but on the other hand Clark reams the 625's for the .460 Rowland! If this was inadvisable or had caused problems I would think he would have ceased doing it (total assumption on my part as I know him not at all... thinking down the lines of liability avoidance... as there is a long list of things my local gunsmith will not do). But try sending one of these back to S&W for warranty repair and I would bet it would not be covered.

Jerry