Hardiness question

[Kywoodwrkr]

Have two contender frames.
Both have serial numbers under 50000.
I have never heard about earlier frames being any less hardy than the later ones.
Are these early frames as good for intense calibers as the later frames?
May be an obvious answer but just wonder if the heat treating of earlier frames will hold up to some of the later larger rounds.
Thanks.
DaveP     kywoodwrkr

[Keith L]

Although there has been some speculation that the G2 frame is beefier than the originals I have never seen any real proof of that.  Loadings and chamberings are the same for each with the exception of a G2 muzzle loading barrel, and I don't know that is unique because of any more load on the frame.

I would recommend you not heat treat your frames, but just work within the limitations listed in loading manuals etc.  You should be safe then.  If not done quite professionally heat treating could cause your frames to warp and no longer work correctly, or be to hard and crack.

Thats my 2 cents worth.  Lets hear from some others.

[Kywoodwrkr]

Keith,
Thanks for your reply.
You have basically reaffirmed what I thought, that there was not much, if any, difference in the way the frames were manufactured from beginning to end.
I did not mean to convey the message I was considering reheat treating.
I enjoy painful experiences some times, but retreating good actions is not included! 
After I posted, I also realized I use to have a 30-30 barrel I used with the oldest of my actions.
So if I'd paused and thought about it I'd have realized the early frames had some recoil producing barrels.
Actually the 25-35 barrel I currently have is mean from the recoil end as well.
It's just been a couple of years since I've had the time to work with them.
I'm considering buying some carbine barrels so was wondering if the older frames would hold up to the beatings they might be exposed to.
Your thoughts and my recollections have put my mind at ease.
Thanks again, and have a merry Christmas.
DAveP    kywoodwrkr

[Lone Star]

Be careful making assumptions based on no information.  From personal experience I can tell you that early Contender frames were not as tough as later frames.  I don't remember the serial number when T/C changed the design of the frame "rails", but my 1975-vintage frame stretched right where the standing breech met the top of the rails.  On the old frames there was a interior relief cut on both rails at this location, and a number of guys in my silhouette club stretched their old frames at the same place - guys with newer frames didn't.  The cause was too high pressure in large diameter cases, but when I sent mine in to T/C they replaced it with a brand new frame...for free even though it was really my fault.  The new frame did not have the relief cuts, and the three frames I have of this vintage - all mid-80s - have not stretched.

It is not a case af inadequate heat treatment, but one of a design flaw.  I'm sure when the Contender frame was first designed it was never envisioned that this handgun would ever be chambered for cartridges like the .35 Remington or .375 Winchester, or that silhouetters would hot rod it.  T/C identified the problem and fixed it.

BTW, my 10" octagonal .25-35 was one of my most used barrels.  When I was actively shooting silhouette in the 80s and 90s I had a lot of fun with it....even shot my first 40x40 with that barrel and 120-grain Speer SBTs at a chrono'd 1800 fps.  Pachmayer rubber tamed the recoil.

.