Smith & Wesson Model 64
- Thread starter FlorDe
- Start date
I have a 64-3. It’s a very well built revolver. I have no idea how many rounds are through it. It has a nice lock up, even more so for a 40+ year old revolver.
I’ve thought about opening it up to .357. But with today’s ammo, it’s probably a marginal gain in performance. I still practice with .38sp and carry +P in all of my .38/357 revolvers. No point in accelerating wear, no matter how tough a revolver it is.
I’ve thought about opening it up to .357. But with today’s ammo, it’s probably a marginal gain in performance. I still practice with .38sp and carry +P in all of my .38/357 revolvers. No point in accelerating wear, no matter how tough a revolver it is.
With the disclaimer that I am a S&W nut, particularly K-frames, and not a S&W engineer:
The 64-6 is the first with the newer type frame with the integral cylinder stop lug replacing the cylinder stop stud and other changes to eliminate potential weak points.
You’ll run out of money or years before you wear out almost any 64, especially a -6, -7, or -8.
The 64-6 is the first with the newer type frame with the integral cylinder stop lug replacing the cylinder stop stud and other changes to eliminate potential weak points.
You’ll run out of money or years before you wear out almost any 64, especially a -6, -7, or -8.
Sounds like your K-frames have really stood the test of time, which definitely gives me some reassurance about their durability. I’ve been thinking twice whether moving up to .357 would actually be worth it, but as you mentioned, with today’s ammo, the benefits seem pretty minimal when you consider the extra wear. I’ve mostly been practicing with standard .38 Special too but I’m really interested in how they hold up over the long haul with +P.
My 64-6 has taken a few boxes of hotter loads without any issues, but I haven’t shot enough to see how it’ll fare after thousands of rounds. Do you think sticking with .38 +P is the sweet spot for these older K-frames, or do you believe they can handle a regular diet of hotter loads without any problems?
I really had no idea the -6 was the first model with that newer frame design and the integral cylinder stop lug. It definitely puts my mind at ease about using +P loads occasionally without worrying that I’m cutting years off its lifespan. I’ve always appreciated how well the 64 balances in my hand, and knowing that the later dash numbers are even tougher than the earlier ones gives me confidence it’ll stand the test of time. It seems like the real limit is just how much ammo I can afford to feed it, rather than any issues with the revolver itself. Also, do you notice that the -6 and the newer K-frames are noticeably smoother in lock-up and timing compared to the earlier models, or is it more of a subtle improvement that you only really notice after years of use?
They have been making K frame size .357s for decades. They make .357s in the smaller J frame. I don’t think you have anything to worry about.
That being said, the hotter the load, the sooner it will show wear. Even if that is thousands of rounds.
Barry may be able to give you a better idea of how much the metallurgy has improved over time.
At one time, S&W heat treated K-frame cylinders only on the magnums. They later started doing all .38s and .357s. I can’t remember the year they started offhand (at 3:15 am too!) but it was well before the -6 started production.
ETA:
FWIW I almost always carry .38 +P in my .357 Mags. It’s not so much feeling the extra isn’t necessary, but more because the blast and recoil is a hindrance to follow up shots.
As opposed to those who say recoil doesn’t bother them, I readily admit it sure bothers me! However, in this case I don’t find .357 Mag so bad. But there is no denying I shoot 38+P better and faster, and I’ll take the better and faster hits.
I think the .357 125 JHP is as close as we have to a “Wonderload”. The ballistic effects are undeniable. The street record is nearly spotless. And in the receiving end, I actually believe the blast and flash has a positive effect. There is a theory out there that part of the 357/125’s effectiveness came from it acting as a sort of “directed flash-bang” giving a big psychological effect.
Maybe so, but that works both ways. Almost two weeks ago at a night shoot, I shot a cylinder of .357/125 through a 4” S&W 65 as a demo. This picture is one of those shots. My light was not on when this was taken.
ETA:
FWIW I almost always carry .38 +P in my .357 Mags. It’s not so much feeling the extra isn’t necessary, but more because the blast and recoil is a hindrance to follow up shots.
As opposed to those who say recoil doesn’t bother them, I readily admit it sure bothers me! However, in this case I don’t find .357 Mag so bad. But there is no denying I shoot 38+P better and faster, and I’ll take the better and faster hits.
I think the .357 125 JHP is as close as we have to a “Wonderload”. The ballistic effects are undeniable. The street record is nearly spotless. And in the receiving end, I actually believe the blast and flash has a positive effect. There is a theory out there that part of the 357/125’s effectiveness came from it acting as a sort of “directed flash-bang” giving a big psychological effect.
Maybe so, but that works both ways. Almost two weeks ago at a night shoot, I shot a cylinder of .357/125 through a 4” S&W 65 as a demo. This picture is one of those shots. My light was not on when this was taken.
Last edited:
