Interesting new revolver...

[Jim Puke]

Not a Ruger, but interesting...

L-frame 5 shot .44mag from Smith and Wesson is one of the more interesting new guns that I have seen offered. I would sure like to handle one, but I doubt that you would be able to find one at a dealer anytime in the foreseeable future. Seems like a neat package for the .44special.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_827559_-1_757751_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

 

[mike7mm08]

Don't see this as being all too popular of a configuration. Not much smaller or lighter than a n frame. Too big for concealed carry. Now cut the barrel back to 2"s I would buy one. I have wanted a pocket 44 for awhile. Thought about the charter arms bulldog. But Every time I look at one I find some deal breaking quality control issue. Smith has made a n frame snubnose 44 but prices were unreasonable in my opinion and the n frame is a bit thick for a pocket gun. Wish ruger would upsize the LCR and do a five shot 44 special.

 

[Tellico]

+1 on the LCR .44 spl. S&W, make that a 5 shot .45 Colt and I might need one.

Fred

 

[Bob Wright]

Two piece barrel. Lock. Stainless steel. Rubber grips.

Ugh!

Bob Wright

 

[contender]

I was speaking to Boge & Jeff Quinn at SHOT & BOTH said that up to that point, the S&W 44 was the best thing they had found so far. It made me go to the booth to study it.
It is a good feeling handgun, and I believe it will find a fair following.

 

[CraigC]

If it were not for a few particular things I don't like about how S&W is building their new revolvers, I'd be all over it. I like the barrel length and configuration. It's 3oz lighter than a Mountain Gun and 4.5oz lighter than a standard 4" 629. Although I'd like to know how they were able to make the L-frame sustain a lifetime of .44Mag loads. The forcing cone on the 696 is awfully thin!

 

[5of7]

If it were not for a few particular things I don't like about how S&W is building their new revolvers, I'd be all over it. I like the barrel length and configuration. It's 3oz lighter than a Mountain Gun and 4.5oz lighter than a standard 4" 629. Although I'd like to know how they were able to make the L-frame sustain a lifetime of .44Mag loads. The forcing cone on the 696 is awfully thin!

I have a 696 and the forcing cone is indeed very thin.

Had I designed the 69, I would have made the cylinder long enough that the exposed forcing cone was very short, perhaps .020" or so. This would make cracking the forcing cone less likely.

In short, a 696 with a somewhat longer cylinder, a 3" bbl and chambered for the big one. 8)

 

[CraigC]

That would help. I wonder if they did not increase the diameter of the barrel shank.

 

[God&huntingdogs]

How hard would it be to cut it down to 2"?

 

[RonS]

The two piece barrels require a lot of work; tear down shorten and rethread the tube, re machine the shroud to fit. Not sure on how to retorque the whole assembly, if the end of the tube is deformed during assembly or not. Over on the S&W forum one member got a gunsmith to quote shortening a two piece barrel and the quote was $400.

If I know S&W, in a year they will be selling a scandium frame version with a 1 7/8" barrel and a cool sounding name.

See page 25.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson2/upload/other/S&W_Revolver_Manual_08-15-2013.pdf

 

[Jim Puke]

Two piece barrel.

Ugh!

Bob Wright

Those old "two piece barrel" Dan Wesson's have a pretty good reputation for accuracy.

 

[gramps]

I have my second Charter Arms Bulldog. Sold the first one used for what I paid new. I would have bought a double action .44 spcl from Ruger, but they don't make one. This last weekend I handled an LCR. Sorry I can't get excited about it in any caliber! Now a .44 on a sp type frame I could warm up to real quick.
gramps

 

[chutch]

I have a Model 620 7 shot 357 L frame with a two piece barrel. One of the most, if not the most accurate handgun I own!

 

[Hondo44]

Not sure on how to retorque the whole assembly, if the end of the tube is deformed during assembly or not.
See page 25.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson2/upload/other/S&W_Revolver_Manual_08-15-2013.pdf

With the wrench shown on Pg 25 that fits the rifling and accurate torque wrench it says.

 

[k22fan]

Two piece barrel.

Ugh!

Bob Wright

Those old "two piece barrel" Dan Wesson's have a pretty good reputation for accuracy.

There are a small number of reloaders claiming S&W's two piece barrel revolvers are the tightest grouping revolvers S&W ever built because their barrels are under tension like Dan Wesson's. I don't shoot well enough to verify or refute that. Even in one piece barrels I prefer to buy S&W's older broach cut barrels rather than their barrels rifled by eroding out the grooves with electricity.

I can reload my 696 to recoil as hard as I enjoy so I'm not enthusiastic about a 36 ounce .44 mag. My lightest .44 mag. weighs approximately 48 ounces. Given a long heavy full lug barrel to absorb recoil this new 69 might make a better big game revolver than an N frame for hunters with short fingers. Those folks can already get shorter trigger reach with a SRH wearing original grips. Of course a SRH is to bulky for the concealed pistol market S&W is likely going to market their new 69 to.

Edit to change my comments on forcing cone thickness. Pictures have been posted on another forum showing the new 69s have nice thick forcing cones.

 

[k22fan]

Not sure on how to retorque the whole assembly, if the end of the tube is deformed during assembly or not.
See page 25.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson2/upload/other/S&W_Revolver_Manual_08-15-2013.pdf

With the wrench shown on Pg 25 that fits the rifling and accurate torque wrench it says.

All S&W two piece barrels are counter bored about 5/16" to 3/8". I suspect S&W reams out the front of the rifling to get rid of distortion that occurs during assembly.

Bulged and ringed barrels occur often enough to make difficult or factory only barrel replacement a significant consideration.