L frame in 44 MAG

[osteodoc08]

That's right ladies and gentleman. Smith is introducing a 5 shot 44mag on the L frame. Now if I could only get them to do a limited production of 41 Mag!!!!

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

[376Steyr]

A short video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwD2oOAc1Z8
It cost me about $1500 to build something similar in .44 Special, so this is a deal at $850.

[Piedmont]

The weak point of the L frame .44 spl. was the small barrel shank and consequent very thin forcing cone. S&W eventually ran out of barrels from folks sending in their revolvers for repair of split forcing cones. There will be less barrel sticking back in the frame on this one since it is chambered for .44 Mag (longer cylinder) but it makes me wonder. If they made the barrel shank larger in diameter, they made the frame thinner there to accommodate it. K frames and J frames often crack on the frame where it is thinnest at the barrel threads.

I won't be in line to buy one of these.

[bhn22]

The 696 & 396 both had durability problems, so now they're going to build a 44 mag version? I suppose the 44 mag will get further "dumbed down" to help the guns last longer. It seemed to help the 357 mag K frames live a little longer. Factory 357 ammo has consistently dropped in power ever since.

Rant aside... I too would like to see a five shot 41 mag on this frame, and perhaps a six shot 10mm with moon clips.

[John Allen]

I will stick with my 629's It might be great but I do not mind the extra size of the 629.

[Clay M]

I will stick with my 629's It might be great but I do not mind the extra size of the 629.

+1...I am pleased with the 629 classic

[osteodoc08]

I'm curious how they did meet those design challenges. I'm sure they did SOMETHING to enhance reliability. They don't want to lose money.

[rking22]

As a 696 fan, I am interested. I have had a 696 no dash since they first came out and put 1000s of rounds thru it over the years. But it's a 44 special and I held the loads to that level. A 250 with 7.5 of unique is the top load and only rarely used. The nice thing about the 69 for me is the fact TN requires 4 inch barrel to hunt with. So it would be fed 250 grains at 1000 fps , and I have no fear of a failure at that level. That said , less than impressed with the lock ! I have seen lots of internet comments about the thin barrel extension on the 696 and agree it is way thin , but is there any documented cases of failure with 44 special level loads ?
Another thought , maybe this will motivate Ruger to give me a 44 special 4" in GP100 (what I really want) before I find a used M69 ; )

[Dan Cash]

Oh, the fascination with the new and improved. In holsters of their own are my 29 6 1/2" and 24 3". Only ones I need.

[oger]

Why do you need a smaller lighter 44mag? I bet it will be loaded to 44 special specs to make it shootable.

[rking22]

I find the N frames too big for my personal preference. Have owned a few and shot several others, just like the smaller L and K frames. As to loading level , no doubt I will load it as a 44 special level. I suspect the little thing could be plain brutal with full steam loads. Just like knowing that it's proofed as a 44 mag level makes choices of 44 special loads much less of an issue. Nothing I am subject to run into in Tn. needs that much more power than a good 44 special.

[Catshooter]

A two and a half inch with a round butt would be very interesting. Nice carry piece.


Cat

[Comrade Mike]

I'll stick to the N frame for the 44 magnum

[Forrest r]

Hope the rubber grips work, had a 29-2 with a 4"bbl and factory wood grips. If I shot a couple of boxes of full house loads in it in 1 sitting it would rip the callouses off my hands. The checkering on those old grips acted like a diamond toothed file.

forrest r

[bhn22]

Word, Forrest. I had a 629-2 Mountain Gun. Full power loads would rip open the top of my trigger finger. I'll pay the penalty, and go with a heavier gun from now on. The guy I sold it to has a 329, and doesn't think my old 629 kicks that bad at all. More power to him, I'm glad he likes it.

[Clay M]

I have an old 629 ,but I shoot Special loads in it. I want to have a ball bearing installed in the crane to lock the cylinder better. My other 629 are 5's so they are strong guns. The L frame would be fine for special loads but I don't believe it would hold up to a steady diet of magnums.

[Dframe]

A two and a half inch with a round butt would be very interesting. Nice carry piece.


Cat



I agree but would prefer a 3 inch barrel

[PWS]

I'm with you osteodoc08, a .41Mag sure would be sweet at this size!

[TheGrimReaper]

I'm with you osteodoc08, a .41Mag sure would be sweet at this size! Yes, Sir!!! Put me in the same boat with you fellers! We need more guns in .41 Remington magnum!!!

[theperfessor]

I'm on board for a 5 shot GP100 in .41 mag and/or .44 special.

[TheGrimReaper]

I'm on board for a 5 shot GP100 in .41 mag and/or .44 special. Yes, please in both flavors.

[Aunegl]

Kinda looks like a Taurus model 441.

[MtGun44]

"Load to .44 Spl specs to make it shootable" Hah! It weighs 37 oz, and my 329 weighs 25 ounces, and it
is "shootable". The 329 is not a gun for plinking at full magnum power, but a very useful tool for backpacking and
hunting in bear country. The L-frame would be a step between the 329 and the Mountain Gun (lt contour 4"
bbl on 629) for weight. I'm sure it will appeal to many. Much heavier than the 396 also, but that one is also
a .44 Spl.

Perfesser - how does the GP100 cyl diam compare to the L-frame cyl diam? That would likely be the controlling
issue.

Bill

[Budda]

Sooooo. S&W is copying Taurus and Rossi?

That's Irony for you.

But they did with the Governor as well.

Lol.

[dubber123]

Sooooo. S&W is copying Taurus and Rossi?

That's Irony for you.

But they did with the Governor as well.

Lol.

With the exception that the Smiths stand a better chance of working.. :)

[Budda]

Do S&W come with a lifetime warranty?

That would be great!

I own Ruger, Rossi, Taurus, Colt, and S&W......

My favorite to shoot it my M85 Taurus. The copy of the S&W.

Now if I bought this new S&W it would be a copy of Taurus!

That would be sooo cool!!

[dubber123]

Do S&W come with a lifetime warranty?

That would be great!

I own Ruger, Rossi, Taurus, Colt, and S&W......

My favorite to shoot it my M85 Taurus. The copy of the S&W.

Now if I bought this new S&W it would be a copy of Taurus!

That would be sooo cool!!


I don't want to travel down the path of where nearly every Taurus thread has gone. I have dealt with the "lifetime warranty". I wish the paper it was printed on was softer, it was kinda scratchy when I used it for what it was good for.. :)

[Lloyd Smale]

ill give that one an amen!!
I don't want to travel down the path of where nearly every Taurus thread has gone. I have dealt with the "lifetime warranty". I wish the paper it was printed on was softer, it was kinda scratchy when I used it for what it was good for.. :)

[Lloyd Smale]

if it shoots as well as my 696 its going to be a great piece. I havent had a bit of durablity problems with mine and its ate hundreds or rounds of 250 cast ahead of 18 grians of 2400 and a couple thousand rounds of 8 grains of power pistol and a 250. My 396 did give me some problems and was a terror to shoot with that 18 grain of 2400 load. I dont miss that one a bit. Ive given thought to a 329 as there a bit heavier then the 396 but to come up with a grand to buy one or even this newest L frame is probably not in the cards. My little 696 shoots like a house afire is nice an compact and light enough to not even know its on you. Personaly what id like to see is an L frame 6 shot all steal 10mm. Now to me that would make an ideal compromise between power, compactness and light weigth. Have to agree with some of the others here in that no matter which it was chambered for id want it in a 3 inch gun. A 3in L frame just looks right.

[km101]

The model 69 L frame 44 mag is supposed to have the new 2 piece barrel like the X frame .500 S&W. This is supposed to improve the forcing cone problem and make the barrels last longer.

Below is part of an article on the development of the .500mag X-frame on the two piece barrel.

From: http://www.shootingtimes.com/2011/03...onster-magnum/

Quote:
At the frame’s opposite end, the Model 500 also employs a new method of barrel attachment. On all other steel-frame/steel-barrel S&W revolvers, the barrel is threaded directly into the frame with a “crush-fit” interface that is forcefully tightened into proper index and requires substantial minimum barrel diameter and frame enclosure material. By contrast, the X-Frame design uses a two-part barrel assembly consisting of in internal rifled barrel tube, and a separate enclosing barrel shroud. In assembly, the shroud is first placed over the index tabs on the front of the frame, and then the barrel tube is inserted and threaded into the frame with an enlarged ring around its muzzle bringing the shroud tightly against the frame as it torques down.
The system is superficially similar to the well-known interchangeable-barrel Dan Wesson system, but unlike a Dan Wesson barrel it is a permanent installation with a hard-fitted, nonadjustable barrel-cylinder gap. Like the Dan Wesson system, however, the result is that the actual barrel with the rifled bore is supported at both ends, not just at the rear, which enhances accuracy. And, most important of all, the barrel portion that is threaded through the frame at the critical location of the forcing cone, which must absorb all the punishing impact of the bullet as it leaps from the face of the cylinder, is a nonstressed interface. This is a real benefit to the gun’s longevity, considering the intensely high impact energy of the .500 Smith & Wesson Magnum cartridge.

[19112TAP]

I was able to do some trading this last weekend for the new Model 69, have shoot it a few times so I really don't have much experience with it but so far it shoots great with my load in 44 spl RCBS 44-250-kt with 8.0 gr of Power Pistol. I have always wanted a 696 but have never been able to find one when I had the money. My LGS got this one in and was able to get it, I really like the frame size, barrel length and grips. My plan was to have a 44 spl woods gun that I could CCW with and I think I have found it. I will probably never shoot 44 mags out of it but if I need to I can.

[Old School Big Bore]

I've owned multiple .44 Spl (Bulldogs) and .44 Mag (M29, SBH, three different rifles) for decades, and the 3" and 4" Bulldogs are sufficient CHL guns; in fact before I could afford the M29 on 1980s Deputy pay I cobbled up a holster and quad speedloader pouch and carried the 4" on duty, and to this day the 3" is my winter coat-pocket backup if I'm carrying my M29. Due to the Bulldogs' weight and relative fragility, the need for better ballistic performance can't really be met by much of an increase in velocity, so I have to look to bullet construction factors. The 'magnum' type conventional HPs are out, and core exposure, core softness, jacket design and depth/shape of cavity are all important, so I settled on the Speer 225 gr 3/4 jacket SWCHP with the butter-soft, 100% exposed frontal area and moderate weight being the deciding factors (I worked with the Lee 215 gr SWCHP but could not find a hardness that would balance leading and expansion, and I couldn't afford the Lyman HBWC mold to try reversing it). I gradually stepped on the accelerator with these till I reached the balance point of controllability and performance at 8.5 of Unique. I considered sending the 3" to Mag-Na-Port but didn't want any more flash in front of my eyes (this was before low-flash powders). The same J-word gets 10.0 of Unique in mag cases for my M29. Now, I'm working on a short-barrel load for the Speer 200, 210 and 240 gr GDHPs but the J-word unavailability is hindering me. I have a basic load of the 225s (loaded M29 & four speedloaders) and 50 ready-to-load left in the boolit cabinet, and now it appears that Speer has DISCONTINUED the design due to the alleged supremacy of the GDHPs. Since this j-word is also the favorite .44 projectile of Jerry Miculek, maybe a screeching campaign to Speer would keep it around? Anyway, I did lust after the initial S&W 5-shot .44 Spl (aha, at last someone makes a bulldog-type the way it SHOULD be), but my closest shooting buddy snapped one up and immediately warned me off it, selling it off shortly afterward, and I have not jumped at any subsequent version. So, when I broke the rear sight on my match/duty/defense M1911 last October, the M29, B92 and 3" Bulldog came out of the safe and 'went to work', the 4" Bulldog is SWMBO's nightstand gun, the SBH languishes awaiting cutting to 4 & 5/8" and the flattop type grip frame, and the M4 and shorty backup M1911 are on vacation, and the Deerstalker and Handi wish for a deer/hog/javelina hunt at suitable range. I eagerly await the arrival of my M-P .44 HBWC mold. And I wrote all that to write this - when Jordan et al were pushing for the .41 mag, they should have also gotten us the .41 spl - then, it'd be easier to talk manufacturers into medium-frame .41s...

[Hardcast416taylor]

I'm on board for a 5 shot GP100 in .41 mag and/or .44 special.


OKAY! Now we`re talking about cartridges that swim in my end of the usage pond!Robert

[enfieldphile]

+ 2! Mine is a 29 Classic 5". Yes, they were made in blue for a short time (IIRC '90 & '91).

Funny thing, I take it up the range, and guys keep asking, "Is that fer sale?"

Me, "Noooo, taint fer sale. It's on my 'never sell or trade' list.

I guess I don't "get" this chopped & channeled .44 craze. It's a .44! Irrigardless (I know it's not a word per se. I like it. Deal w/ it) if it's a special or a mag, there will be major velocity loss in an abreivated barrel. I suppose the bad guy could be set on fire from the muzzle blast.

4-5" barrels seem best to me in any .44

I do have a 7.5" RSB Bisley. But I bought that one because it has a fluted cylinder (one of 2000 made in '86). The dealer didn't know what he had and let it go for $259.00! A 98% gun no less. :)


+1...I am pleased with the 629 classic

[tek4260]

I'll have to try one of the new M69's eventually. With the offset bolt notches it should have no trouble with my loads.

[jameslovesjammie]

How does the GP100 cyl diam compare to the L-frame cyl diam? That would likely be the controlling
issue.

They are roughly the same size.

[Groo]

Groo here
I would sell some to get a 5 shot 41mag 3in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!

[Changeling]

I'm on board for a 5 shot GP100 in .41 mag and/or .44 special.

Now that sir would get my attention very quickly! However I do believe Ruger has been bombarded with that same wish a heck of a lot of times for quite a few years! Now they have the question/Problem of a "Lock"! No body wants it because it is totally "STUPID"!

I have said this before: If the lock is mandatory, then have the obominations in controll (currently) have them placed on all Military weapons!
Let's see how well that will go over!!!

Scenario: Don't shoot, not fair, we don't have our locks off yet!

The other side of the coin doesn't look so well does it now!!

[Leadmelter]

I asked a S&W rep last week when they would be released and I do not think he knew what I was talking about. Great!
My change is up to date and I just landed a FT job with bennies after three years of crazy.
I would like one because I love my S&W 586.
Leadmelter
MI

[John Allen]

A two and a half inch with a round butt would be very interesting. Nice carry piece.


Cat

Cat, I have a three barrel one with a round butt and it shoots great. It is very controllable it is quickly turning into my favorite 629.

[Silver Jack Hammer]

I called Smith and Wesson and told the guy I didn't think their fine L frame would hold up at the forcing cone if they drilled it out to .44 caliber, it'd crack at the forcing cone. The tech told me they fired 10,000 rounds through them and they didn't crack. I might have to buy one just to test it.

Old School Big Bore, you might enjoy this story. I was an Explorer Scout with a Sheriff's Office in the mid 70's and this old gray haired Deputy pulled his gun out and handed it to me and told me to tell him what it was. I said it's a Smith and Wesson .357 magnum. He said: No, That's a Smith and Wesson .357 Magnum. It was one of the old original registered Magnums and his name was on the rolls at Smith and Wesson for ordering and receiving it. It had nuclear sights for night shooting and a sticker that it was registered with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

I was in the Courthouse when I heard this old Deputy radio that he had encountered someone who needed to be shot. His Smith went "click" x 6 and probably some more. It turned out he and others were doing the common practice of spraying their guns down with WD40 and the penetrating properties of WD40 and deadened the primers. That bad guy lead a chase almost 30 minutes and he fled to the lawn of the Courthouse where I saw him get out of his car and lay down on the Courthouse lawn to be taken into custody.

[Old School Big Bore]

SJH - wonderful story. I was once undercover working a 'case of army hand grenades' wild goose chase. I was standing in a pawn shop schmoozing my contact when a street ape walked up, drew a hilariously abused el cheapo .22 revolver out of his nylon running shorts, laid it on the counter and asked my contact if he had any .22 shorts, cheap. My contact brought out a partial box of badly oxidized .22 shorts and dumped them out on a counter pad. I remarked, 'Wow, those are really ate up with the white crud - got any WD40? He grinned like a shark saying grace and handed me a red rag and a full can. Needless to say after a good soak, a heavy-handed rolling around in the rag to flex the bullet/case joint, and another good soak, followed by wrapping the shorts up in the sodden red rag and stuffing it in a baggie with instructions to the thug to leave them soaking for a while, he left happy and none the wiser, and the counterman and I had a good laugh. I hope he got all eight 'clicks' if he ever tried to use it, especially on one of my brethren. I saw him later around one booking desk or another, and he was eyeing me pretty hard, but I don't know whether he put it together. PS, this is the same counterman who gave me an enormously good deal on my B92.

[BruceB]

Some years ago, I performed a test on how quickly primers reacted to various solvents and lubricants (including WD40).

Part of the test involved spraying a heavy application of WD40 on the upturned case heads of a box of 50 .45 ACP cast-bullet rounds. There were POOLS of WD40 on the case heads. The pools were not removed from the cases.

For the next ten months, I took five rounds from that box each month, and tried to fire them.

Every last round fired and functioned normally. The few I chronographed during that period gave normal readings compared to uncontaminated "control" rounds from the same production run.

The cases were well-used ones from my regular supply of plinking brass.... the ammo wasn't loaded specifically for this test.

The other liquids used in the test were Hoppes #9 and Birchwood-Casey gun oil. The primers were all CCI Large Pistol, and they were SUBMERGED in baths of the various liquids. It took over a week of submergence before the last of the primers became inert. They are NOT FRAGILE.

[kweidner]

I personally like full size .44s and .41's. that being said, I do own a model 357 airweight in .41. Full house loads are not fun to shoot and not even remotley accurate. At old police load velocities, it is rather pleasant, accurate, and doesn't loosen screws etc. I do have it for backup while hunting. The small powerful platform, having shot them enough, is just not for me. The mags belong in the N frame IMHO. I will stick to my N frame 44's and Dan Wessons. The airlight will never be for sale as It now fits the role I want it to albeit loaded down a bit. I will have to pass on this one as well.

[Lloyd Smale]

I too dont have much need for one. I have a 696 and with 250 keiths at 1100fps it will take care of about anything i hunt. I will argue though about the 696. I hear all the time about the longevity of these guns and its mostly from internet experts that have never shot one let alone owned one. My gun has MANY thousands of rounds through it and alot with elmers load of 17.5 2400 and a 250 keith and the forcing cone still looks great and the guns as tight as it was new and shoots just as well. Id bet if you could prove it the guys that did have trouble were guys trying to shoot 180 jacketed bullets fast with ball powders. thats a recipe for forcing cone wear. I guess that keith load in an L frame is all i want out of a light gun like that and full power 44 mags would probably put it in a league with my old 396 shooting that 44special keith load and thats a league i dont want to join again. that gun was brutal. Id rather shoot 10 500 linebaughs out of one of my 4 inch 500s then shoot one shot through that gun with that load.

[Silver Jack Hammer]

BruceB, I too tried soaking some of my reloads in various penetrating solvents including WD40 and never had a misfire, didn't soak them for 10 months tho, much less. I've never used any of the primer pocket sealers either.

[M-Tecs]

BruceB

I have experienced the same. About 5 years ago I was asked to demill a bunch of ammo for a museum. I carefully drilled some of the cases and removed the powder. I tried to chemically inert the primers by filling the inside of the cases with various chemicals including WD-40. As long as the primer was wet it would generally not fire, however, as soon as it dried it would fire. I gave up on trying to chemically inert them.

I pulled all the bullets and punched all the primers out.

[OuchHot!]

I have one of the RB 3" 657 and I would really wish the frame was smaller. It is near spherical as it is and a 6rd speedloader is a bit more bulk than I like in a pocket. I would sure go for a RB L frame 3". I guess the 4" will do and I will have to try to find one. Is this edition RB or square?

[jameslovesjammie]

Here's the dimensional differences between a 69, 629, and GP100 cylinders.

http://rugerforum.net/gunsmithing/99853-measurements-s-w-629-69-gp100.html

[MtGun44]

Short version is: GP100 cyl diam = 1.555, S&W Model 69 is 1.56. The sticky
wicket is the length of the GP100 cyl, it is 0.025" shorter than the M69 cyl, but
possibly the barrel could be shortened at the rear by .025 and a longer cyl
used - assuming a factory job. For a conversion - you'll be making a new
cylinder from scratch anyway - so make it .025 longer and cut the rear of
the bbl that much. Sounds like the GP100 .44 Mag is a viable concept -
using the correct alloy for the cyl would be crucial.

Bill

[clyde-the-pointer]

That's a tempting piece, though I usually like the guns to be heavier when shooting .44 mags.

[Silver Jack Hammer]

Brian Pierce wrote in Handgunner that he saw some test results on the strength of a 5 shot L frame cylinder and what with the cylinder stop notches being cut off the center of the chamber the cylinder was extremely strong. I just look at that forcing cone and think that is the weak spot.

Personally if I get one of these I'll be shooting it with heavy Specials, not the full magnum loads.

[OuchHot!]

Thanks for the dimensions...I guess 14.5 thousands difference in diameter is not enough to float my boat....I like revolvers just because but not sure now if this will truly be enough of a difference. I have to agree that the forcing cone diameter is concerning.

[MT Gianni]

Pictures show a two piece Dan Wesson type bbl inserted into the stainless. I think that is their answer to forcing cone erosion.

[Paul105]

.
M69 Barrel Shank/Forcing Cone area:
.
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n172/Paul105_photo/Hobby/BarrelShank69-1_zpsb72ac0a2.jpg
.
M696 Barrel Shank/Forcing Cone Area:
.
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n172/Paul105_photo/Hobby/BarrelShank696-1_zps022af189.jpg
.
629 Mtn Gun Barrel Shank/Forcing Cone area:
.
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n172/Paul105_photo/Hobby/M629MtGunBarrelShank_zps8e4a7fad.jpg
.
Family Portrait - 629 Mtn Gun, M696, New M69:
.
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n172/Paul105_photo/Hobby/62969669_zps609b0821.jpg
.

[Paul105]

.
629 Mtn Gun Barrel Shank OD: .630“
M69 L Frame - Barrel Shank OD: .620“

.

[Silver Jack Hammer]

I saw my first S&W M69 in the gunshop today and I did not buy it. The gun looked good, had a nice size for a loaded down .44 Mag or loaded up .44 Special and the price was good at $850.00. The sights were a nice height above the hand. It just felt foreign in my hand. Hard to believe I carried a DA revolver for 19 years as a law enforcement officer. I couldn't tell if it was a round butt or square but under the rubber grips. I've been searching the Herrett grips website. The trigger was smooth double action but it sure did bind up just before let off. Right now I'm leaning toward letting it go, just too comfortable with SA revolvers.

[jameslovesjammie]

I couldn't tell if it was a round butt or square but under the rubber grips.

I'm pretty sure Smith switched all revolver frames to round butt in 1996 or so. Guns made before that could be either-or.