The S&W X-Frames

[AJMD429]

.
They seem pretty awkward kind of reminding me of the Desert Eagle, but it was interesting to see them come out with one in 350 legend. However, that got me thinking it would be a lot nicer if they made one in 375 Winchester.

[44shooter]

I don’t think the frame is long enough for 375

[GunnyMack]

I remember back when the desert beagle came out, an article said something to the effect 'its the only crew served handgun in the world', yeah its big & bulky but they are accurate and reliable.
I read the article about the X350, now with the 360 Buckhammer will they chamber it to that?

[RIDERED350r]

I think being a rimmed cartridge the Buckhammer is the more natural choice for the X-Frame than the 350L. And the Buckhammer should fit in the cylinder as well

I have a Smith 460V (5" barrel). It's fun

[marlinman93]

As a S&W fan I had to chuckle at the first time I saw and handled one of the X frames. It's just way too big and heavy to be something fun to shoot.

[RIHMFIRE]

As a S&W fan I had to chuckle at the first time I saw and handled one of the X frames. It's just way too big and heavy to be something fun to shoot.

with shoot'n sticks maybe! and in 460 so you can "plink" with 45LC, and 454 casul

[RIDERED350r]

The full size 8-3/8" barreled models are pretty heavy. My 5" is nothing to sneeze at, but it's definitely easier to handle. Still, considerably heavier than an N-Frame

[765x53]

It accommodates a moon clip so, I wonder if it can chamber and fire the .357 Maximum?

[vancelw]

It accommodates a moon clip so, I wonder if it can chamber and fire the .357 Maximum?

The articles I've read say no, since those are .358 instead of .355 diameter.
Maybe with lead bullets and reduced loads?

[765x53]

It accommodates a moon clip so, I wonder if it can chamber and fire the .357 Maximum?

The articles I've read say no, since those are .358 instead of .355 diameter.
Maybe with lead bullets and reduced loads?

350 Legend: case length= 1.71", base= 3.90, neck= .378
.357 Maximum: case length= 1.605, base= .379, neck= .379

Both are .357's. Eleven thousandths might be too much to stretch the base if rim thickness, head space and firing pin reach would permit firing.

[vancelw]

It accommodates a moon clip so, I wonder if it can chamber and fire the .357 Maximum?

The articles I've read say no, since those are .358 instead of .355 diameter.
Maybe with lead bullets and reduced loads?

350 Legend: case length= 1.71", base= 3.90, neck= .378
.357 Maximum: case length= 1.605, base= .379, neck= .379

Both are .357's. Eleven thousandths might be too much to stretch the base if rim thickness, head space and firing pin reach would permit firing.

SAAMI Specs say 0.357 - .0030

350 Legend SAAMI.jpg

Hornady lists a .357 diameter in their data

350 Legend Hornady 250gr.jpg

Yet, of their 3 factory loads, 2 use .355 and one uses .357 diameter bullets

350 Legend Hornady ammo.jpg

Load data lists a 0.355 diameter

350 Legend Loaddatadotcom.jpg

Winchester also lists a .357 bullet in their description of all 4 of their current factory load, but those Winchester bullets listed on MidwayUSA are .355 in diameter.
On the Hodgdon Reloading data page, all loads list a .355 diameter bullet.

As I said, I have read 4 or 5 articles on the .350 Legend. In those articles, the bullets in factory ammunition that the writer used had .355 bullets. Those writer's are not going to recommend that you use ..38 Special or .357 Magnum or .357 Maximum ammunition in a .350 Legend firearm in today's litigious society.

I was shocked last month when I read an article where the author mentioned that you could use .32 ACP ammo in a .327 Federal. We all know you can, but to see them put it in print surprised me.

Will it work? Loan me your .350 Legend revolver and I will get back with you. I had no desire to own an .350 Legend X-frame until this possibility was brought up. I don't really care for the 7-shot capability, but I guess it would be a shame to waste all that extra space by using only 6 in the cylinder.

[buckeyeshooter]

As a S&W fan I had to chuckle at the first time I saw and handled one of the X frames. It's just way too big and heavy to be something fun to shoot.

I bought a 6.5 inch 500 and I was actually very pleased that it felt very much like the 6.5 inch 29 that I had been carting around every time I left the house from 1979 on. The recoil is actually less and easier to handle with 275 grain Barnes at 1900fps than my 3 inch 29 shooting 300 grain xtp's at 1100 fps. I love it almost as much as my very old and well used 29.

[765x53]

Ruger dropped their .357 Maximum revolver due to severe forcing cone erosion and gas cutting of the top strap.
Will the S&W have the same problems?

[vancelw]

Ruger dropped their .357 Maximum revolver due to severe forcing cone erosion and gas cutting of the top strap.
Will the S&W have the same problems?

That same question comes up on several forums with no clear answer.
There is that large group of shooters that claim the flame-cutting was more hype than fact.
I know the lightweight alloy Smiths have small "blast shields" above the cylinder gap, but these X-frames are stainless. Weren't most (if not all) of the Blackhawks in .357 Max blued?
My only .357 Max is an old Contender. Never had a revolvers

Anyway, here is a good 350 Legend video
https://youtu.be/Fo70pNRXydY

[marlinman93]

The X frames might have the same grip as the Model 29, but weighing in at 4.5 lbs. sure didn't feel anything like my Model 29's do. Regardless of felt recoil, that's a huge increase in weight to hold up when aiming at a target very long. Not something I care to own, or shoot. I also don't care for factory loads in my 29 or 629, so everything I load for them is down at .44 Special levels.

[RIDERED350r]

Ruger dropped their .357 Maximum revolver due to severe forcing cone erosion and gas cutting of the top strap.
Will the S&W have the same problems?

I doubt they will have the slightest issue with it. This is a revolver designed to shoot the 460 and 500S&W that operate at or a bit north of 60k psi. I'd say the 350L is a creampuff compared to those two even if it operates at similar pressures. It's a very robust wheelgun

[765x53]

Ruger dropped their .357 Maximum revolver due to severe forcing cone erosion and gas cutting of the top strap.
Will the S&W have the same problems?

I doubt they will have the slightest issue with it. This is a revolver designed to shoot the 460 and 500S&W that operate at or a bit north of 60k psi. I'd say the 350L is a creampuff compared to those two even if it operates at similar pressures. It's a very robust wheelgun

As a "cream puff" likely, more rounds will be put through it than anyone could handle with the .460 and .500, thus more erosion and gas cutting.

[CowboyTutt]

I reviewed my 460 X-Frame snubbie years ago on Gunblast and I noted they had polished the forcing cone to reduce gas cutting. That being said, I do have some minor cutting on my gun which is to be expected with so much H110 or Lil'gun powder in the 460 Magnum cartridge. Mine has almost never been fed anything other than 460 loads. -Tutt

[Walt]

Vall, what kind of reduced 29 and 629 loads do best for you?

[Sixgun]

As for flame cutting in the Maximum, it’s part myth…….what guys were doing was using large amounts of slow burning powders with 110-125 grain bullets to get crazy velocities. If used as intended, there’s no issues. I’ve owned this and it has digested close to 2000 rods., mostly 180 Hornadys. The flame cutting comes up within the first couple of hundred rounds, then stops.

Ruger didn’t want the aggravation with the hi-vel guys so they pulled ‘em. This one shoots like a rifle, easily knocking down the 300 meter pigs during play. In competition the longest we go is 200 meters and it knocks down the 80 pound rams with ease, where the standard 357 does not. My ammo with 180’s run a bit over 14.

Also had a 7.5 inch but sold it unfired….-006

[AJMD429]

The X frames might have the same grip as the Model 29, but weighing in at 4.5 lbs. sure didn't feel anything like my Model 29's do. Regardless of felt recoil, that's a huge increase in weight to hold up when aiming at a target very long. Not something I care to own, or shoot. I also don't care for factory loads in my 29 or 629, so everything I load for them is down at .44 Special levels.

Yeah, for me a fairly hot 44 magnum load in a full-size Redhawk or Super Blackhawk as about as much as I want to tolerate from a handgun. So when it comes to 460 Smith and Wesson or 500 Smith and Wesson, I would have essentially no desire to have a handgun in either cartridge (other than perhaps an Encore pistol which is really sort of a short rifle without a stock).

Now out of a rifle or carbine, either one of those cartridges is sweet. I happen to have a BHA 89 in 500 Smith & Wesson, and it is an awesome cartridge out of a carbine levergun about the same size and heft as a Marlin Guide Gun.

[CowboyTutt]

Generally speaking, I don't like "muzzle heavy" handguns or rifles. But I do have to say that, the heavy handguns sometimes have their own advantages. One, they help dampen recoil (duh) but 2) I have discovered that since my hands are starting to shake some, the heavy guns resist the shake much more than a lighter gun. This would also apply to having a heavy heart beat or being tired. They just stabilize really well where a really light handgun can get kicked around more easily by external forces.

My 460 snubbie with a 2 3/4 barrel weighs 3 1/2 half pounds IIRC correctly. Loaded, or particularly when loaded with 5 rounds in that long cylinder, it is probably the most balanced and stable handgun in my little collection of handguns. Granted the larger ones are probably getting up there in weight and a tri pod might be a good idea to shoot it off of

But I think many would find that the short barrel ones, especially with a compensator to reduce muzzle flip (my snubbie has no such animal) balance and shoot well.

Just a different perspective on pros and cons.

-Tutt

[buckeyeshooter]

The X frames might have the same grip as the Model 29, but weighing in at 4.5 lbs. sure didn't feel anything like my Model 29's do. Regardless of felt recoil, that's a huge increase in weight to hold up when aiming at a target very long. Not something I care to own, or shoot. I also don't care for factory loads in my 29 or 629, so everything I load for them is down at .44 Special levels.

I understand MM93, personally, I a big guy myself and have been weightlifting 52 years and doing competitions 40. I don't really notice the difference in weight between the revolvers handling them and just a bit of difference on the hip. I think it is a personal preference thing and what you are used to. The X frame and the 5 round slide are much lighter than my dual vaquero rig with 20 filled ammo loops (44 Magnum or 44-40 depending which cylinders are in) and the 14 inch Bowie Knife also on the belt for Cowboy Action Shooting. You might even say the X frame rig is light.

[marlinman93]

Generally speaking, I don't like "muzzle heavy" handguns or rifles. But I do have to say that, the heavy handguns sometimes have their own advantages. One, they help dampen recoil (duh) but 2) I have discovered that since my hands are starting to shake some, the heavy guns resist the shake much more than a lighter gun. This would also apply to having a heavy heart beat or being tired. They just stabilize really well where a really light handgun can get kicked around more easily by external forces.



-Tutt

I don't care for muzzle heavy handguns either, but there are exceptions such as handguns for silhouette shooting that are usually better if muzzle heavy. I love rifles that are muzzle heavy, unless it's a hunting rifle that I'm packing all day. They just hold better for me, and less chance of moving around when shouldered. I've got a number of single shot rifles that have barrels that are heavier than my whole hunting rifles. And I really like shooting them.

[RIDERED350r]

IMG_20230201_161302579.jpg

Generally speaking, I don't like "muzzle heavy" handguns or rifles. But I do have to say that, the heavy handguns sometimes have their own advantages. One, they help dampen recoil (duh) but 2) I have discovered that since my hands are starting to shake some, the heavy guns resist the shake much more than a lighter gun. This would also apply to having a heavy heart beat or being tired. They just stabilize really well where a really light handgun can get kicked around more easily by external forces.

My 460 snubbie with a 2 3/4 barrel weighs 3 1/2 half pounds IIRC correctly. Loaded, or particularly when loaded with 5 rounds in that long cylinder, it is probably the most balanced and stable handgun in my little collection of handguns. Granted the larger ones are probably getting up there in weight and a tri pod might be a good idea to shoot it off of

But I think many would find that the short barrel ones, especially with a compensator to reduce muzzle flip (my snubbie has no such animal) balance and shoot well.

Just a different perspective on pros and cons.

-Tutt

My 5" 460V is comped. I find it's recoil only slightly more punchy than shooting my 6.5" 629 Classic with full house 240gr loads. I mostly run the 240gr XTP Mag in my 460. Biggest thing you notice is the concussion that sort of slaps you in the face.

[Rockrat]

The 357max. in a rifle is quite an eye opener and the 460 S&W in my Ruger #1 is no slouch either.

Many of the stories I have heard about the Ruger Maximums mirror what Sixgun has stated. The erosion was self limiting when using the gun as it was designed. Not for pushing lightweight bullets as fast as you can as some writers were doing and then complaining about erosion.

Think of taking a 6mm Creedmoor and pushing a 58gr bullet as fast as you can, vs using a 107gr match bullet at a more leisurely velocity below max load. Bet the 58 gr load will burn out the throat and toast the barrel long before the 107gr load does

[RIDERED350r]

Similar concept with the old S&W K-Frame 357s. Light for caliber bullets being pushed hard have been reported to crack the forcing cone. The flat on the bottom of the cone is the weak spot.

[Sixgun]

Yea Rockrat.....nothing beats "reading" as much as actual "experience".

For 99.9% of revolver shooters, anything more powerful than the 44 Magnum makes no sense.....but, that's only my opinion. Back in my day gun writers did everything they could to promote rifle cartridges into chopped down bolt action "handguns". It all failed miserably just like the current wave of huge cartridges into revolvers will also commercially fail. There's always the "niche" shooters so it's a good thing for those guys as it satisfies them and helps with the financial wellbeing of the gun manufacturers.

A somewhat acquaintance of mine lived by this 45-70 revolver.....he had several of them and he was a big, well fit and filthy rich guy who would sell me his once fired brass for what 9mm brass goes for today.......one day I was talking to him and he was telling me about an operation he had......seems like all of the ligaments and nerve endings with uncountable hairline fractures in his bones needed to be fixed on his right arm.........doc told him no more recoil than a .22 anymore. Nothing they could do for the bones but the ligaments and nerves were to the point he couldn't even hold a gun that weighed more than a pound steady.

Not much different with constant use of heavy recoiling rifles.....people start going blind along with organ failure.

But that's their business....----006

[Rockrat]

Sixgun--I hear about the rifle cartridges in the bolt guns. That said, I am one of them. I do have a 308 xp100 and a 358 barrel for it somewhere too. Muzzle brakes on both barrels. I still enjoy shooting the 308 even though I will be 70 this year. Did make a 44/284 for IHMSA. That was a handfull, loading 65gr H335 over a 240gr 44 slug. Quite a fireball too. Yep, guilty here. I did have a 357 max. in a DW that I regret trading off long ago, but I do still have my Maximum and a 353 Casull.

[CowboyTutt]

Biggest thing you notice is the concussion that sort of slaps you in the face.

Bingo!!! Only sort of??? -Tutt

[CowboyTutt]

I don't care for muzzle heavy handguns either, but there are exceptions such as handguns for silhouette shooting that are usually better if muzzle heavy. I love rifles that are muzzle heavy, unless it's a hunting rifle that I'm packing all day. They just hold better for me, and less chance of moving around when shouldered. I've got a number of single shot rifles that have barrels that are heavier than my whole hunting rifles. And I really like shooting them.

MM93, I could see how a muzzle heavy handgun or rifle would be useful when shooting from bags or cross sticks or tri-pods. I don't find that sort of rifle useful for off-hand or off-shoulder shooting however. Sadly, as I'm getting older I might find myself shooting more off of a bench. Hopefully not however, and not giving up.

I still find a balanced handgun or rifle the best overall option but I do see your points and the wisdom of it.

Regards,

-Tutt

[marlinman93]

Vall, what kind of reduced 29 and 629 loads do best for you?

Walt, I use .44 Special data, and my loads were around 900-100 fps, with a 240 gr. bullet. Very comfortable in a N frame S&W.