What can you tell me about this bull barrel S&W model 19 (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 7/26/2026 8:03:20 AM EDT
|
Just picked this up at a gun show yesterday. It was just kinda too curious to pass up. It is a S&W model 19 in 357 mag. The frame is stamped 19-3, looking online that puts it to around the late 60's for production? It has a very heavy barrel on it. It is a full 1in in diameter and the sides have been flattened (I think the term is slab side?). It has a bomar full sight rib. There are no stamps on the barrel to state a maker. I do not think it is a factory gun and my guess is a gunsmith build for possibly some type of competition? I have looked up pictures of model 19's online and I have not seen any like this, even when searching heavy barrel. Also have not seen any without the hammer spur. I think the trigger has been worked over, as the DA trigger pull is very nice, one of the best DA pulls I have felt. Better than the factory DA pulls on my 686 and 629. However I kinda wish it still had the spur, as I can bring it to half cock with the trigger, then there is just enough room to grab the hammer and fully clock it. The SA trigger pull is then phenomenal. It needed a little TLC, as it was not perfect. There was some very light dusting of rust on a few surfaces, and I still need to clean up the trigger some as it has a little surface rust on it as well. The trigger does have a over travel stop screw. The seller was a gun store that set up a booth. He said he got it from someone he knew that was using it as a farm gun! (hence the light rust). He said he things it might be a old police competition gun from back in the day, but does not know for sure. It has a hogue grip on it that I do not really like. I am actually surprised at how poorly the grip fits, as I have a few other guns with hogue grips and they are all great and fit perfectly. This one does not line up well with the backstrap and actually sticks up above the backstrap, leaving lips. I will probably look for a nice set of wood grips. I got it for $550    
|
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
199
EE: 0% (0)
TN, USA
|
It should shoot well! The purist S&W collectors won’t care for it, which probably resulted in the good price for you !! I’m surprised that whoever did the trigger job and dehorned the hammer spur didn’t remove the SA notch while they were at it. I’ve seen a few S&W K frames modified like yours. I have a Model 58 .41 mag that is DA only with a dehorned hammer, the SA notch has been removed. It still has the original 4” barrel. I found it at the Tulsa Wanenmacher show in the 80’s. I don’t know any history on it. It has the smoothest DA trigger of the several N frames and a few K frames that I have. I also have a 100% original Model 58, so the DA only 58 gets shot the most. |
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
200
EE: 0% (0)
TN, USA
|
Originally Posted By wideglidejoe: It should shoot well! The purist S&W collectors won’t care for it, which probably resulted in the good price for you !! I’m surprised that whoever did the trigger job and dehorned the hammer spur didn’t remove the SA notch while they were at it. I’ve seen a few S&W K frames modified like yours. I have a Model 58 .41 mag that is DA only with a dehorned hammer, the SA notch has been removed. It still has the original 4” barrel. I found it at the Tulsa Wanenmacher show in the 80’s. I don’t know any history on it. It has the smoothest DA trigger of the several N frames and a few K frames that I have. I also have a 100% original Model 58, so the DA only 58 gets shot the most. After unfortunate accidents involving cocked revolvers, some departments required officers’ revolvers to be DA only. Existing revolvers might have been grandfathered. IIRC, NYPD and LAPD revolvers were DA only. Your Model 58 may have suffered that modification. Back on topic. I came on at the end of the PPC days. I had a chance to shoot some older friends’ PPC revolvers and really liked the triggers. But I was not a competitor, so I had little use for such a pistol. Unfortunately, even in the 1990s, the price of even a well used model was beyond my means. You got a real deal. |
|
Congrats. Probably a great shooter at a great price. A lot of these older competition guns are overlooked by those wanting an all-original gun. But for just going to the range and target shooting, who cares. And a lot of these guns have $100's to $1,000's worth of work into them to make them a smooth shooter. I've bought a few guns like that over the past few months at good prices. Not sure if it was mentioned, but be aware that due to the light action, you might have to use soft primered ammo like Federal that's properly seated for reliable ignition. |
|
Originally Posted By JWagnr: PPC, Practical Police Competition, revolver. Popular in the 1950s-1970s. A lot of Model 10s were modified. Good find. Will be a joy for you to shoot. Good luck. This. Factory as-issued six inch blued K-38's around here go for five, six bills these days. Getting harder to find. Last PPC pistol I found was 1200. Considering what that gun went for back when and how much it cost for a good gunsmith to make it into a PPC gun (not cheap) you got a deal! The DA/SA intact action was common with the hammer spur removed; it's way more trouble to remove the SA notch and it really doesn't benefit anything to ddo that so almost always they just whacked off the spur & called it good. It was also common for the top of the hammer to be checkered to make it easier to cock it to SA if one wanted. |
|
Originally Posted By dump1567: Not sure if it was mentioned, but be aware that due to the light action, you might have to use soft primered ammo like Federal that's properly seated for reliable ignition. Interesting, I did not think of that. I'll test it out with my regular 357 loads and see if I get any light strikes. I've been using federal small pistol magnum primers, as I got a good deal on them a long time ago. So I will see how they do. |
|
Originally Posted By Kobolowsky_Tires: The DA/SA intact action was common with the hammer spur removed; it's way more trouble to remove the SA notch and it really doesn't benefit anything to ddo that so almost always they just whacked off the spur & called it good. It was also common for the top of the hammer to be checkered to make it easier to cock it to SA if one wanted. This one, the rear sight leaf blocks access to the top of the hammer, so if you want to cock it, you have to grab the sides of the hammer and pull it back. Not a very safe way to do it. No way I would try that with it loaded. Part of me would like to put a standard hammer back on it so I could cock it for SA, but without knowing exactly what all has been done to it, I do not know if swapping in a standard hammer would work. And if it does, it might make for a crappier pull. So I will leave it as-is for now. |
|
Definitely an older PPC gun. Look over it for a makers mark. Under the grips or behind the crane are the most common places. Try it with a good wadcutter load. I have one on a Model 10 from Sage Custom (Herman Sage). From a good rest it will cloverleaf a six shot group at 50 yards. It really likes Hornady 148gr HBWC over 3.1gr of 231. |
"Montani Semper Liberi"
"Mountaineers Are Always Free"
West Virginia State Motto
"Mountaineers Are Always Free"
West Virginia State Motto
|
Originally Posted By Andyd: The S&W revolvers lock up to the rear through the ejector star and in front of the ejector rod. It appears that this gun has the front lock removed and it raises the question if the ball detent was properly installed. Based on my research, this was a common mod for these guns (no front lock). And the front lock-up wasn't needed for the light target loads these used. Nor did they add a ball detent. |
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
202
EE: 0% (0)
TN, USA
|
Originally Posted By Mountaineer_Shootist: … Try it with a good wadcutter load. I have one on a Model 10 from Sage Custom (Herman Sage). From a good rest it will cloverleaf a six shot group at 50 yards. It really likes Hornady 148gr HBWC over 3.1gr of 231. Agreed. That is my load for match shooting with a S&W Mod. 19 and 686. |
|
Originally Posted By Andyd: The S&W revolvers lock up to the rear through the ejector star and in front of the ejector rod. It appears that this gun has the front lock removed and it raises the question if the ball detent was properly installed. Originally Posted By Andyd: The S&W revolvers lock up to the rear through the ejector star and in front of the ejector rod. It appears that this gun has the front lock removed and it raises the question if the ball detent was properly installed. Originally Posted By dump1567: Based on my research, this was a common mod for these guns (no front lock). And the front lock-up wasn't needed for the light target loads these used. Nor did they add a ball detent. I'm guessing then that these two detents are not factory?  Here is a picture showing how poorly the grip fits. I am hoping I get a chance to shoot it this weekend and if I end up liking it, I will probably get a set of these for it. https://www.smith-wesson.com/product/classic-wood-square-butt-target-grips-for-k-l-frame-revolvers 
|
|
Originally Posted By Mountaineer_Shootist: Definitely an older PPC gun. Look over it for a makers mark. Under the grips or behind the crane are the most common places. Try it with a good wadcutter load. I have one on a Model 10 from Sage Custom (Herman Sage). From a good rest it will cloverleaf a six shot group at 50 yards. It really likes Hornady 148gr HBWC over 3.1gr of 231. Nothing under the grips for a makers mark. I am contemplating taking the top sight rib off and checking under it. I may give it a try, but if the screws do not come out easy I will leave it be. |
|
Originally Posted By Jeeps-And-Guns: I'm guessing then that these two detents are not factory? https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55424648569_5f7bb06c04_b.jpg Here is a picture showing how poorly the grip fits. I am hoping I get a chance to shoot it this weekend and if I end up liking it, I will probably get a set of these for it. https://www.smith-wesson.com/product/classic-wood-square-butt-target-grips-for-k-l-frame-revolvers https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55424472226_bd9074641d_b.jpg That is correct. Those were added to aid in lock up since the front pin isn't there. The newer K frames & limited other models used a ball detent for lock-up. Those grips may possibly be for an N frame? |
|
^ nice Davis Grade 3. Your revolver has a Bomar rib. These were pretty common for PPC revolvers in the early days. Later on, Mascot, Power and then Aristocrat ribs were used. It looks like a nice build. I've never seen one with two ball detents. The Hogue grip can be shimmed to fit better if that bothers you. I'd always use a little duct tape that I'd roll up and place inside the grip until it fit flush. If I were you, I wouldn't try to take the rib off. There won't be any markings there and you could mess up the alignment and strip the screws, etc. Oh, and I wouldn't shoot any .357 Magnums through it. It could cause problems. It was built to shoot 148 grain wad cutter target loads. It doesn't look like it got a lot of use. |
NRA Benefactor Life
|
Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached File Attached File Some of my Police Pistol Combat revolvers from back in the old days. |
NRA Benefactor Life
|
Originally Posted By Jack_Rackham: ^ nice Davis Grade 3. Your revolver has a Bomar rib. These were pretty common for PPC revolvers in the early days. Later on, Mascot, Power and then Aristocrat ribs were used. It looks like a nice build. I've never seen one with two ball detents. The Hogue grip can be shimmed to fit better if that bothers you. I'd always use a little duct tape that I'd roll up and place inside the grip until it fit flush. If I were you, I wouldn't try to take the rib off. There won't be any markings there and you could mess up the alignment and strip the screws, etc. Oh, and I wouldn't shoot any .357 Magnums through it. It could cause problems. It was built to shoot 148 grain wad cutter target loads. It doesn't look like it got a lot of use. What type of problems? The base gun was built at S&W as a 357 magnum. While they may have shot 38spl out of it for competition, I am not really seeing why normal 357 loads could be harmful? Is there something I am missing or do not know? |
|
I do not foresee dramatic problems with .357 Magnum loads but the forcing cone for these PPC barrel was usually custom cut at an angle for 148 WC and jacketed ammo might not be anywhere close to the potential that this gun has. Is the forcing cone cut like the S&W19 at the 6 o'clock position? That led to problems with the 125gr jacketed .357 loads. The two detent balls are unusual and remind me of suspenders and a belt to keep the pants up but are a nice touch, making me guess, that the work was overall executed very well. FWIW, the detent ball wasn't for reinforcement but if you want to hit the 10 ring at 50 yards, the cylinder chambers better be perfectly aligned!!! |
|
Originally Posted By Jeeps-And-Guns: What type of problems? The base gun was built at S&W as a 357 magnum. While they may have shot 38spl out of it for competition, I am not really seeing why normal 357 loads could be harmful? Is there something I am missing or do not know? Most PPC revolvers were built on a k-frame .38, usually a model 10 or 64. It made no sense to build one on a .357 or a more expensive revolver. One other consideration was that the .357 cylinder sat the cartridge back an additional tenth of an inch. Having the bullet nose closer to the forcing cone was so advantageous that one PPC gunsmith, Fred Schmidt, built a short cylinder revolver like this one. Attached File No offense intended. |
NRA Benefactor Life
|
Originally Posted By JWagnr: PPC, Practical Police Competition, revolver. Popular in the 1950s-1970s. A lot of Model 10s were modified. Good find. Will be a joy for you to shoot. Good luck. This is the answer. Usually .38 special guns (Model 10, 15, etc) were the donors as 148 grain wadcutters were the ammo of choice. Make sure that the cylinder is not chambered for .38 special despite the donor gun being a .357 Model 19-3. |
"Freedom through Victory"
"Those who can ... do
Those who can't ... become site staff"
"Those who can ... do
Those who can't ... become site staff"
|
Originally Posted By Bushman_269: This is the answer. Usually .38 special guns (Model 10, 15, etc) were the donors as 148 grain wadcutters were the ammo of choice. Make sure that the cylinder is not chambered for .38 special despite the donor gun being a .357 Model 19-3. 357 chambers perfectly fine. |
|
Originally Posted By Jack_Rackham: The barrel that has been installed is for wadcutter ammunition. The forcing cone should be cut to an eleven degree angle (if I recall). I remember a lot of the PPC gunsmiths would warn you not to shoot magnums. Yes, the chamber will chamber and fire a .357 magnum but firing one could damage the barrel. Most PPC revolvers were built on a k-frame .38, usually a model 10 or 64. It made no sense to build one on a .357 or a more expensive revolver. One other consideration was that the .357 cylinder sat the cartridge back an additional tenth of an inch. Having the bullet nose closer to the forcing cone was so advantageous that one PPC gunsmith, Fred Schmidt, built a short cylinder revolver like this one. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/90884/IMG_6735_jpeg-3802384.JPG No offense intended. Not trying to be argumentative, just wanting to learn. I am just having a very hard time understanding how in the world a standard profile bullet could cause damage to the barrel. It would seem to me, that since the wadcutter bullets are just cylinders with a straight face, that they would need a longer gradual leade and not a shorter one, so they would not shave themselves. Then firing a normal round or pointed bullet through the same leade I just do not see how that can be a issue. I compared this one and my 686 side by side with a flashlight and the forcing cones (from what I can see), appear to be almost identical. I say almost, as I do not know for sure without using some type of special measuring tools I do not have. But they sure look identical to my eyes. |
|
Originally Posted By Jeeps-And-Guns: Not trying to be argumentative, just wanting to learn. I am just having a very hard time understanding how in the world a standard profile bullet could cause damage to the barrel. It would seem to me, that since the wadcutter bullets are just cylinders with a straight face, that they would need a longer gradual leade and not a shorter one, so they would not shave themselves. Then firing a normal round or pointed bullet through the same leade I just do not see how that can be a issue. I compared this one and my 686 side by side with a flashlight and the forcing cones (from what I can see), appear to be almost identical. I say almost, as I do not know for sure without using some type of special measuring tools I do not have. But they sure look identical to my eyes. You're wanting to learn yet don't like what the teacher is telling you. It's your gun do as you wish. |
"I miss the days of being able to shoot all commies" G.B.
|
Originally Posted By akethan: You're wanting to learn yet don't like what the teacher is telling you. It's your gun do as you wish. Well, in order to truly learn, we have to understand the reasoning behind something and that is all that the OP is trying to figure out. His question is intelligently asked. From my memory 5° is Ruger factory forcing cone angle 9° is common with most manufacturers and is a "one angle to do all" 11° is the cone angle that is gentler on WC than the 9° I am not aware of catastrophic dangers shooting .357 Magnum jacketed projectiles through the longer 11° forcing cone, other than a longer forcing cone with heavier bullets could potentially decrease accuracy. |
|
Originally Posted By JWagnr: PPC, Practical Police Competition, revolver. Popular in the 1950s-1970s. A lot of Model 10s were modified. Good find. Will be a joy for you to shoot. Good luck. My Colt 1911 MK III .38 spl was used for the same thing, I found some newspaper articles where the previous owner had done pretty well with it locally winning matches. |
Liberals are a curious mix of communism and fascism, they want to destroy you but want to use your own money to do it.
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
|
Originally Posted By Jeeps-And-Guns: I'm guessing then that these two detents are not factory? https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55424648569_5f7bb06c04_b.jpg Here is a picture showing how poorly the grip fits. I am hoping I get a chance to shoot it this weekend and if I end up liking it, I will probably get a set of these for it. https://www.smith-wesson.com/product/classic-wood-square-butt-target-grips-for-k-l-frame-revolvers https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55424472226_bd9074641d_b.jpg Originally Posted By Jeeps-And-Guns: Originally Posted By Andyd: The S&W revolvers lock up to the rear through the ejector star and in front of the ejector rod. It appears that this gun has the front lock removed and it raises the question if the ball detent was properly installed. Originally Posted By dump1567: Based on my research, this was a common mod for these guns (no front lock). And the front lock-up wasn't needed for the light target loads these used. Nor did they add a ball detent. I'm guessing then that these two detents are not factory? https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55424648569_5f7bb06c04_b.jpg Here is a picture showing how poorly the grip fits. I am hoping I get a chance to shoot it this weekend and if I end up liking it, I will probably get a set of these for it. https://www.smith-wesson.com/product/classic-wood-square-butt-target-grips-for-k-l-frame-revolvers https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/55424472226_bd9074641d_b.jpg That isn't the grip that was used way back then, it was probably a custom fitted wood grip. |
Liberals are a curious mix of communism and fascism, they want to destroy you but want to use your own money to do it.
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
|
ETA: Never mind. Jack_Rackham explained it much better in post # 27. I'm just wondering why they used a Model 19 for the foundation of that gun. Sure seems like a .38 special revolver would be a better choice. The extra chamber length of the .357 magnum Model 19 would seem to just invite cleaning issues with the accumulation of powder. A Model 15 or even a Model 10 would make more sense and probably cost less as a donor gun. |
| I used to volunteer as a range official at the Bianchi Cup back in the 1990s. I saw a boatload of revolvers similar to this. I'd say the majority of competitors shot autos but there were still a bunch of wheel gun shooters. They nearly all used K-frame Smith and Wessons with big honking barrels and massive ribs. |
|
Originally Posted By Jeeps-And-Guns: So he was right about it being a old police competition gun. I have never heard of PPC competition. Would have been cool if the builder had put their name on it and a date. I would love to know when it was built. There may be some information under the grip when you get it off! |
|
Originally Posted By Andyd: Well, in order to truly learn, we have to understand the reasoning behind something and that is all that the OP is trying to figure out. His question is intelligently asked. From my memory 5° is Ruger factory forcing cone angle 9° is common with most manufacturers and is a "one angle to do all" 11° is the cone angle that is gentler on WC than the 9° I am not aware of catastrophic dangers shooting .357 Magnum jacketed projectiles through the longer 11° forcing cone, other than a longer forcing cone with heavier bullets could potentially decrease accuracy. And that is all I am trying to do, is learn. I am just having a hard time understanding how a standard 357 could possibly hurt the barrel. I mean no disrespect and not trying to be rude, but just saying do not do it without giving a good reason why, makes it harder to understand. |
|
Originally Posted By Jeeps-And-Guns: And that is all I am trying to do, is learn. I am just having a hard time understanding how a standard 357 could possibly hurt the barrel. I mean no disrespect and not trying to be rude, but just saying do not do it without giving a good reason why, makes it harder to understand. Originally Posted By Jeeps-And-Guns: Originally Posted By Andyd: Well, in order to truly learn, we have to understand the reasoning behind something and that is all that the OP is trying to figure out. His question is intelligently asked. From my memory 5° is Ruger factory forcing cone angle 9° is common with most manufacturers and is a "one angle to do all" 11° is the cone angle that is gentler on WC than the 9° I am not aware of catastrophic dangers shooting .357 Magnum jacketed projectiles through the longer 11° forcing cone, other than a longer forcing cone with heavier bullets could potentially decrease accuracy. And that is all I am trying to do, is learn. I am just having a hard time understanding how a standard 357 could possibly hurt the barrel. I mean no disrespect and not trying to be rude, but just saying do not do it without giving a good reason why, makes it harder to understand. Probably a lot of it revolves around possibly cracking the forcing cone which is the end of the barrel. A longer forcing cone cut at 11 degrees cracks easier then one that is at a steeper angle as more material is removed and 19's were not the strongest revolver S&W ever made in that area anyways. |
Liberals are a curious mix of communism and fascism, they want to destroy you but want to use your own money to do it.
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
I'm getting down to the last box, the others have all been destroyed...
|
The problem that the old S&W 19 had with cracked forcing cones when fast 125 gr JHP were sent through them, comes from the cut at the bottom of the forcing cone, weakening that spot. I cannot see that weak spot in the photo of the OP, it looks as if the end of the barrel is completly round and not squared off and appears to be well supported by the frame. 
|
Joined:
Dec 2024
Posts:
213
EE: 0% (0)
TN, USA
|
Originally Posted By Bladeswitcher: ETA: Never mind. Jack_Rackham explained it much better in post # 27. I'm just wondering why they used a Model 19 for the foundation of that gun. Sure seems like a .38 special revolver would be a better choice. The extra chamber length of the .357 magnum Model 19 would seem to just invite cleaning issues with the accumulation of powder. A Model 15 or even a Model 10 would make more sense and probably cost less as a donor gun. Any “cleaning issues” would be resolved with a few swipes with a brass brush. The pistol was built for .38 Spl. loads and likely never had any magnum rounds. |
|
Originally Posted By JWagnr: PPC, Practical Police Competition, revolver. Popular in the 1950s-1970s. A lot of Model 10s were modified. Good find. Will be a joy for you to shoot. Good luck. I worked at a shop that used to do these builds - usually someone would start with a stock Model 10 but sometimes a 19. My boss would get them as smooth as glass. They were an absolute pleasure to shoot with 148 grain HB wadcutters. I would certainly buy one if I could find one. |
|
Originally Posted By Andyd: The problem that the old S&W 19 had with cracked forcing cones when fast 125 gr JHP were sent through them, comes from the cut at the bottom of the forcing cone, weakening that spot. I cannot see that weak spot in the photo of the OP, it looks as if the end of the barrel is completly round and not squared off and appears to be well supported by the frame. https://i.postimg.cc/MpZ4P0Fd/55424648569-5f7bb06c04-b.jpg First good explanation I have heard of what damage can actually happen from 357 mag loads. It just did not show up in the picture, but this one does have that very small cut at the bottom of the barrel. I did think it was a little odd, as I was not sure why it was there, till I noticed it was for clearance on the front of the cylinder. I never shoot 125gr in 357. I pretty much stick to 158gr (sometimes 180gr). So if the risk is cracking the forcing cone when shooting hot 125gr bullets, is there as much of a worry when shooting normal 158gr (magnum) loads? I keep my loads at normal pressures and do not push the envelope on speed or pressure. |
|
Nice find. As stated, that’s a PPC gun. It was built around a 148 HBWC at about 650 FPS. If you reload, 2.7 grains of Bullseye, and a 148, seated flush, is “the” load. I wouldn’t be surprised to get 2” groups at 50 yards with one. There used to be several prominent builders. These days, not so much. “Strahan” build those medium profile barrels, with slab sides. You can find Bomar sights, or Arosticrats. You do you, I’m sure it won’t matter. But, I would never shoot .357 out of mine. Heck, I don’t even shoot 158 SWC out of mine. If the forcing cone cracks, who’s gonna fix it?That’s just not what it’s made for. Bob Jones Attached File 50 Yards Attached File Trinkets Attached File |
Distinguished
Member
Joined:
Jun 2022
Posts:
14231
EE: 100% (30)
TX, USA
Member
Joined:
Jun 2022
Posts:
14232
EE: 100% (30)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By wideglidejoe: It should shoot well! The purist S&W collectors won’t care for it, which probably resulted in the good price for you !! I’m surprised that whoever did the trigger job and dehorned the hammer spur didn’t remove the SA notch while they were at it. I’ve seen a few S&W K frames modified like yours. I have a Model 58 .41 mag that is DA only with a dehorned hammer, the SA notch has been removed. It still has the original 4” barrel. I found it at the Tulsa Wanenmacher show in the 80’s. I don’t know any history on it. It has the smoothest DA trigger of the several N frames and a few K frames that I have. I also have a 100% original Model 58, so the DA only 58 gets shot the most. You should post pics of those for us .41 mag fans. 
|
“That’s not how it works. You buy more tools and power than you need and as you fuck everything up you gain the knowledge to become a better carpenter.”
Tveddy
Tveddy