Colt Police Revolvers vs. K-frame S&W Revolvers in Strength?

[PBSmith]

According to literature of the day ( 1956) both the Colt Police Positive and Official Police revolvers in caliber .38 Special could handle "Hi-Speed" loads then in use by those who wanted more punch than what was produced by the standard police loadings of the 158 RN bullet.

I'm not exactly sure what numbers those "Hi-Speed" loads involved (weight of bullet, velocity?). One source says that Colt claimed the Official Police was strong enough to be used with the powerful .38-44 High Velocity load. That's kind of hard to believe. If I'm not mistaken those HV loads were well beyond +P. The .38-44 claim would imply the Colt revolvers were substantially stronger than S&W police revolvers of that time.

Was that true, or should sane shooters load the .38 Colts named above to nothing more powerful that what you'd sensibly shoot in a K-frame .38 like the Model 10?

Please note I'm NOT trying to make a .357 out of either one.

Look forward to your responses.

[ReloaderFred]

Out of the approximately 700 Model 19-4 revolvers my department owned, none were ever put out of commission from a steady diet of +P ammunition used for both duty, practice and quarterly qualifications in all the years they were in use. We bought them in 1974, and some of them were in use right up until the department issued Glock 22's starting in 1993. The one I bought from the department upon my retirement is still just as tight as when it was first issued.

Hope this helps.

Fred

[PBSmith]

Out of the approximately 700 Model 19-4 revolvers my department owned, none were ever put out of commission from a steady diet of +P ammunition used for both duty, practice and quarterly qualifications in all the years they were in use. We bought them in 1974, and some of them were in use right up until the department issued Glock 22's starting in 1993. The one I bought from the department upon my retirement is still just as tight as when it was first issued.

Hope this helps.

Fred

Thanks Fred. I was thinking K-frame .38 Specials as in M 10.

[Bigslug]

I cannot speak to the Colts, but the .38-44 concept was Elmer Keith and others experimenting (and blowing up some older, weaker guns in the process) with what could be accomplished. These loads were operating into .357 pressure levels.

The whole reason the .357 Magnum came into being (and the .44 Mag for the same reason) was to create a cartridge that generated those power levels that would not physically fit into the older, weaker specimens. Smith & Wesson rated the big N-frames for .38-44 HD loads, but the K-38's never were.

Even the K-frame .357's (the 19 and 66 family) did not do well with steady diets of .357, so if you have one that's still in tune, I'd refrain from testing its limits in either size cartridge case and save the hot stuff for an L-frame or a GP-100.

[Outpost75]

The E-frame Colt Official Police is fine with the original .38-44, 1970s Super Vel and modern +P for steady use. Not so with the pre-1930 Army Specials which were not heat treated. The I-frame OP revolvers with frame-mounted firing pin are robust and can handle a steady diet of +P+ LE without restriction.

I would not shoot a lot of +P in any pre-1970 Colt D-frame Detective Special or Police Positive if I wanted it to last. Occasional use of +P is not harmful if guns carried in retirement are tweaked by a factory-trained armorer during annual requals. Otherwise I would limit +P to 500 rounds spread gently over the life of the gun on a steel post WW2 D-frame and no more than 100 for an alloy frame Cobra or Agent.

[rintinglen]

I am something of an aficionado of the Colt E Frames. I do believe that the larger cylinder and hence thicker walls made for greater strength and capable of containing higher pressures. But the K-frame Smith's actions are much more durable. When I began to shoot PPC on the late 70's, I used a Colt Python initially.

I used it for about a year and a half, but two trips to the Gunsmith's at $50 a visit to get it re-timed put paid to that. I was able to purchase a Bill Davis S&W M-10 Bull Barrel used, and shot it at least 40,000 times over the next 5 years and never had to take it in. Granted my Python had fired several hundred, maybe as many as a thousand, hot .357 loads put through it, but it was spewing lead like a red-neck at a water melon spitting contest after less than 8,000 38 WC target loads. And while I did not keep track of the number of rounds, it was back in the shop less than 8 months later.

So, cut to the chase, the Colts may have been stronger, but the Smith's were more durable, at least so long as the loads were kept to standard velocity.

[GooseGestapo]

The Colt Police Positive frame, cylinder, and crane are stronger due to being “beefier “ than the Mod-10.
However, the lock work of the Colt is more delicate compared to the S&W and will get out of timing sooner than the Smiths.
The Smiths will develop excessive end shake quicker. I’ve seen a box of over loaded .38 whack either. The metal in the yoke of an S&W is surprisingly soft.

Many of the parts of a M19 are heat treated differently.

[Larry Gibson]

It's the better durability of the lock work of S&Ws vs Colts when fast DA firing is done, especially during competitions. The larger cylinder and frame of the Colts is what gives them the ability of sustained use of 38/44 ammunition, especially when fired using the SA mode.

I concur with Outpost75's assessment.

[KCSO]

The big difference imho is that the s and W has a front lock on the crane and in some a covered crane that is less likely to be subject to damage from mishap or misuse. In the real world guns get dropped or worse and i have yet to see a smith in for a bent or damaged crane other than bubba.

[smkummer]

I am a colt collector, I have over 100. The E-frame ( official police, original trooper and officers model) and plus P go together well. It’s what I use to shoot 100 yard steel as it’s flatter shooting. It was modification to the E frame which resulted in the I frame ( .357 model, python, trooper 357).

Colts last recommendation for the D frame was to have the revolver checked by an authorized service center after 3K rounds of plus P in the steel frames (diamondback, police positive special and detective special) and after 1K rounds of plus P in the alloy frame revolvers ( cobra, agent and viper).

I truly believe if a steel D frame needs attention from plus P, parts replacement such as a hand can bring it back to spec.. I carry a alloy frame parkerized agent made in the 80’s as it such a durable finish with plus P but only shoot maybe a cylinder full a year out of it. The last thing I will concern myself with in a gun fight is if I am adding wear to the gun. I do fire a bunch of wadcutters and semi wadcutters out of it loaded to stand pressure or less on 21 ft.targets.

[pworley1]

I think they both would stand a limited amount of hot loads but I chose not to in mine. I shoot standard 38's in both the Colt and the Smith. I shoot the hot loads in the 357.

[gwpercle]

I inherited my grandfathers Colt Police Positive Special from my Dad .
It is a smaller framed revolver than my 38 special model 64 S&W K frame .
After shooting it many times I will limit it's use to standard velocity / standard pressur 38 special ammo . No +P in this one ... it's old and small framed , I'm not going to push this old girl too hard .

My model 64 has +P stamped on the barrel ... no problems here , the frame is larger and the barrel is heavier .
Gary

[Bigslug]

I'd like to take a moment to call attention to the fact that there's shaping up to be a lot of gold in this thread.

I'm what you'd call a "modern" S&W revolver armorer, meaning that in my time, they've never been used as duty guns; I had to wrestle to both find and get into most of my classes/re-certs; and I'm mostly working sporadically on inspecting somebody's personally-owned backup J-frame or (occasionally) their grandpa's hand-me-down for a serviceability check. For the most part, I don't keep parts on hand and mainly determine what's wrong, correct minor issues if I can, and summon a shipping label back to The Mothership when I can't.

But I've had "brush passes" with a some of the prior generation's guys who worked on S&W's for real. In the case of Colts, those seem to have been mostly gone from duty holsters LONG before my time - at least regionally. Back in 2004, when I took Colt's 1911 armorer's class, the instructor pretty much spelled out that "almost anyone with the knowledge and skill to make a Python has been retired and/or dead for a while now.

So if you get an opportunity to sponge info off guys who worked on a mess of either (especially in an "industrial" setting) do yourself a favor - shut up and listen, because there aren't likely to be many more.

[Outpost75]

^^^Amen^^^^

Sandy Garrett at Northern VA Gun Works is the last Colt factory-trained gunsmith doing warranty service and listed by the American Pistolsmiths Guild. He maintains my dozen or so Colts and I am well pleased. He refurbed all six of my New Service Colts as well as several Official Police, Police Positive and Detective Specials.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

I carried them (various) as duty weapons back in the '60s and '70s, shot them a lot, worked on them some. Without going through each model of each make I'll just make the observation that Common Sense should rule in which ammo you use in which revolver, and vintage should be a big factor in that decision. A Colt Police Positive Special as made in the 1930s is not the same gun as one made in the 1970s. A S&W M&P is not the same as a Model 10 made in the '90s. Metallurgy improved with time and experience. Personally, if the revolver doesn't claim to be +P rated I don't shoot +P ammo in it. Simple.

DG

[HWooldridge]

Back in the 1970's, two of my shooting buddies and I all bought .357 revolvers and began going through fairly high volumes of full power .357 loads. I bought a 6" Colt Trooper, one friend bought a S&W Model 19 and the other guy bought a Ruger Security Six.

We had access to a progressive loader and probably fired at least 10,000 rounds each over a 5 year period - the Smith shot loose and was sent to a gunsmith at least once (maybe twice - I can't recall for sure). Both the Colt and the Ruger were unaffected - I eventually traded the Colt off for something else and the Ruger also found a new home.

We all shot each other's revolvers but I always thought the Trooper had the best action of the three. The Ruger was probably the worst but the thing was a tank - it also served as a duty pistol and endured some pretty rough handling. The Smith was a good piece but it always felt like a weak sister compared to the other two.

[missionary5155]

Here's another nugget of history
Dan Wesson was big in development at SW factory. He was well aware of the limitations of the Model 19. So they came up with a revolver that would run "forever" with any sane .357 load using 180 grain jacketed at healthy velocities. As the story goes the directors" were not interested.
But Dan Wesson was and finally gave up the issue at S&W and moved out.
Dan Wesson Revolvers soon became a reality. We still have the one we bought used (hardly shot) in 1978. It has always digested our loads of 180 - 200 cast GC grainers with enough 296 to always knock over those heavy steel rams at 200 meters with 1/3 up from the belly twaps. Still utterly accurate with the same 10 inch barrel we bought new in early 1980.

[smkummer]

When you say Colt Trooper, was it the original with a python action ( discontinued in 1969) or the later MKIII series? The later MKIII was initially advertised with “perma timing”. I suppose this was in reference to continued use would not effect timing as eventually the earlier positive lock Colt would need the timing corrected after much use.

[elmacgyver0]

When I want to shoot Hi-Powered loads I go to a Magnum revolver, guess I'm just kind of weird that way.

[HWooldridge]

When you say Colt Trooper, was it the original with a python action ( discontinued in 1969) or the later MKIII series? The later MKIII was initially advertised with “perma timing”. I suppose this was in reference to continued use would not effect timing as eventually the earlier positive lock Colt would need the timing corrected after much use.

It was a MkIII, and had coil springs instead of flat springs. I bought it new (either 1979 or 1980) and shot thousands of rounds out of it - if anything changed over that time, I was unable to tell any difference. We were primarily shooting Speer 160 gr JSP bullets with heavy charges of WW296.

[Dutchman]

All this great information and not a single photograph!

S-prefix MP .38 Special. I've owned several over the years. This particular one I've not even shot yet. I have a second MP that was made 1923 and was police gun. The barrel is loose on that one.

https://images12.fotki.com/v539/photos/4/28344/9895637/20180430_185915x-vi.jpg (https://public.fotki.com/dutchman/firearms/20180430-185915x.html)

Colt Official Police .38 Special. Mfg 1929. I was told it was an armored car guard gun. It has a nice smooth action but.... The cylinder lock-up is loose with side-to-side play. In looking at it, taking it apart, it appears to be the actual cylinder locking pin where it fits into the recess on the extractor star. I've thought how it could be repaired and seems it needs two procedures. One is to make a scrapping tool to clean out and freshen the extractor recess and then modify the locking pin with a larger pin. Seemed like a lot of work for a very small issue but there it is. The Colt came with the Pachmayr Presentation and they feel very good.

https://images42.fotki.com/v1640/photos/4/28344/9895637/20180430_191041x-vi.jpg (https://public.fotki.com/dutchman/firearms/20180430-191041x.html)

The 1939 Stoeger's catalog lists the ammo.

https://images12.fotki.com/v1677/photos/4/28344/9895637/27722543-vi.jpg (https://public.fotki.com/dutchman/firearms/27722543.html)

https://images34.fotki.com/v1675/photos/4/28344/9895637/img004b-vi.jpg (https://public.fotki.com/dutchman/firearms/img004b.html)

[Char-Gar]

Don't buy broken guns unless you are a competent pistolsmith with lots of the correct parts.

[Bigslug]

I'll just make the observation that Common Sense should rule in which ammo you use in which revolver, and vintage should be a big factor in that decision.

Reminds me of a documentary I saw 10-20 years ago about a group of Brits restoring an ME-109 that had crashed during the Battle of Britain. They sent the BMW (maybe Benz) engine to Rolls-Royce for a going-over and were told "Every part on this thing is smack in the middle of a set of pretty tight tolerances, AND FOR GOD'S SAKE, WHATEVER YOU DO, DON'T DAMAGE THE CRANKSHAFT, BECAUSE WE DON'T THINK WE COULD MAKE ANOTHER ONE!"

Maybe I'm wrong on this, but the impression I've had is that while the S&W's will have variation from one revision of a model to the next, you'll probably have an easier time finding spares for most of them than the Colts. In any event, much like the Messerschmidt, these guns have ceased to be a consumable weapon of war that you can throw around the sky with reckless abandon because (a.) your life depends on it, and (b.) a governmental entity is picking up your maintenance bill. Kicking in the turbo boost on a museum piece is probably not the best call, even if it was rated for it back in the day.

[Outpost75]

Reminds me of tale Dad told me of WW2 Mitsubishi aircraft engine they got for testing which had Fafnir bearings in it made in New Britain, CT which had his own USAAF inspection mark on it.

[smkummer]

All this great information and not a single photograph!

S-prefix MP .38 Special. I've owned several over the years. This particular one I've not even shot yet. I have a second MP that was made 1923 and was police gun. The barrel is loose on that one.

https://images12.fotki.com/v539/photos/4/28344/9895637/20180430_185915x-vi.jpg (https://public.fotki.com/dutchman/firearms/20180430-185915x.html)

Colt Official Police .38 Special. Mfg 1929. I was told it was an armored car guard gun. It has a nice smooth action but.... The cylinder lock-up is loose with side-to-side play. In looking at it, taking it apart, it appears to be the actual cylinder locking pin where it fits into the recess on the extractor star. I've thought how it could be repaired and seems it needs two procedures. One is to make a scrapping tool to clean out and freshen the extractor recess and then modify the locking pin with a larger pin. Seemed like a lot of work for a very small issue but there it is. The Colt came with the Pachmayr Presentation and they feel very good.

https://images42.fotki.com/v1640/photos/4/28344/9895637/20180430_191041x-vi.jpg (https://public.fotki.com/dutchman/firearms/20180430-191041x.html)

The 1939 Stoeger's catalog lists the ammo.

https://images12.fotki.com/v1677/photos/4/28344/9895637/27722543-vi.jpg (https://public.fotki.com/dutchman/firearms/27722543.html)

https://images34.fotki.com/v1675/photos/4/28344/9895637/img004b-vi.jpg (https://public.fotki.com/dutchman/firearms/img004b.html)
The colt probably only needs the cylinder bushing tapped ( bent) into alignment. This might have happened if it was dropped. If upon closing the cylinder one still observes a slight gap with the cylinder crane to frame or looseness, then open the cylinder and tap it downward at the rear of the cylinder. Go light with a wooden mallet or handle until when back inside the frame, no looseness in noted.

[Mk42gunner]

My personal opinion is that any of the older .38 Special revolvers make pretty good guns, but they don't need to be hot-rodded into .357 Magnum territory. +P may be okay, if you can be sure it won't get into something that it will damage.

I went to Armorer's school about thirty years ago, (all two weeks of it) and we did learn how to work on Colt, Ruger, and S&W revolvers.

I did maintain a bunch of K frames, and a few Security Sixes. I have no problem working on my own Rugers or S&W's. Colts on the other hand, I know enough to maintain (i.e. take apart, clean and lube) but I don't have the indepth hands on knowledge to alter them willy nilly.

Robert

[downzero]

Out of the approximately 700 Model 19-4 revolvers my department owned, none were ever put out of commission from a steady diet of +P ammunition used for both duty

I'd certainly hope not. .38 +P has half the pressure of .357 Magnum. It should last forever with 38 loads.

[Dutchman]

The colt probably only needs the cylinder bushing tapped ( bent) into alignment. This might have happened if it was dropped. If upon closing the cylinder one still observes a slight gap with the cylinder crane to frame or looseness, then open the cylinder and tap it downward at the rear of the cylinder. Go light with a wooden mallet or handle until when back inside the frame, no looseness in noted.

I'll peruse your suggestions, thank you.

Dutch

[Outpost75]

Something to consider on former cop or corrections Colts is that frames are frequently bent from being used as impact weapons. I have factory lettered NYPD and NYDC Attica Colt OP revolvers which required frame straightening as well as setting barrels back to fix a loose gap, correcting end shake and timing. Perhaps re bluing and targeting. Sometimes you need to decide if you want to spend $600-$1000 in gunsmithing to correct a $150-250 gun because you knew the guy back in the day and wanted his son to have Dad's gun. Have done this twice and family was appreciative. Never regretted doing so.

[PBSmith]

Thanks all for your comments. I learned a lot from them and appreciate your sharing of experience.

[Jtarm]

I am something of an aficionado of the Colt E Frames. I do believe that the larger cylinder and hence thicker walls made for greater strength and capable of containing higher pressures. But the K-frame Smith's actions are much more durable. When I began to shoot PPC on the late 70's, I used a Colt Python initially.

I used it for about a year and a half, but two trips to the Gunsmith's at $50 a visit to get it re-timed put paid to that. I was able to purchase a Bill Davis S&W M-10 Bull Barrel used, and shot it at least 40,000 times over the next 5 years and never had to take it in. Granted my Python had fired several hundred, maybe as many as a thousand, hot .357 loads put through it, but it was spewing lead like a red-neck at a water melon spitting contest after less than 8,000 38 WC target loads. And while I did not keep track of the number of rounds, it was back in the shop less than 8 months later.

So, cut to the chase, the Colts may have been stronger, but the Smith's were more durable, at least so long as the loads were kept to standard velocity.


I am something of an aficionado of the Colt E Frames. I do believe that the larger cylinder and hence thicker walls made for greater strength and capable of containing higher pressures. But the K-frame Smith's actions are much more durable. When I began to shoot PPC on the late 70's, I used a Colt Python initially.

I used it for about a year and a half, but two trips to the Gunsmith's at $50 a visit to get it re-timed put paid to that. I was able to purchase a Bill Davis S&W M-10 Bull Barrel used, and shot it at least 40,000 times over the next 5 years and never had to take it in. Granted my Python had fired several hundred, maybe as many as a thousand, hot .357 loads put through it, but it was spewing lead like a red-neck at a water melon spitting contest after less than 8,000 38 WC target loads. And while I did not keep track of the number of rounds, it was back in the shop less than 8 months later.

So, cut to the chase, the Colts may have been stronger, but the Smith's were more durable, at least so long as the loads were kept to standard velocity.


The distinction between strength and durability is important, and, from what I can tell, lost on most people. They assume a big, beefy revolver that can withstand higher pressures also means the mechanical aspects are tougher.

[rintinglen]

One other aspect of the firearm design that deserves mention is that the cylinder bolt on the Colt six-shooters is offset to the right, while that of the S&W is centered on the chamber wall.

While in modern guns, at least, this is seldom an issue, I owned a 44 hand ejector that had been damaged by some Elmer Keith wanna-be that had dimpled the walls of two chambers so that no loads greater than factory could be used without making ejection very difficult. Older M&P revolvers also could be vulnerable to this type of damage, though I have not personally encountered it.