Quick review of a new Smith 69

[PWS]

I've got about 1k rounds through one of the new S&W L-frame .44Mags and thought I'd share a few observations.

First the complaints: I have not noticed a whole lot of difference in the carrying and handling characteristics from my 4" N-Frames. While the cylinder on the L-frame is thinner and flatter overall, Smith put a pretty heavy barrel on the 69 so it's definitely not a "compact" revolver. In fact, the cylinder might be a little smaller than optimal because it's a lot harder to clear five .44 cases from the 69 than six .44 cases from an N-frame. While it's a smaller revolver, if you already have a 4" N-frame, you won't loose much by going to an L. Naturally, the L kicks like a mule, even with the weight forward balance and I can't tolerate as powerful of loads in the 69 as I can in the N's.

The 69 also came with a rough and heavy trigger pull. The single action has a noticeable amount of creep. I have a recent 686-6 that came with a wonderful trigger so I know Smith can do better.

Also, the finish in the barrel is terrible and the crown looks like a beaver chewed it out. It is dimensionally correct with a 0.4290" bore and there was no thread choke but, gee-whiz, if this is an example of EDM machining, the steel must have had a lot of inclusions! I can only assume it was button rifled and that they didn't use enough or the proper lube as the grooves have what appears to be lumps of galling in them.

Lastly, the front of the cylinder does not have a male boss around the yoke pivot point so gunk and fouling tend to build up on the rotational surfaces and depending upon the load (especially with cast bullets), the cylinder starts to drag. This is also a common complaint with SP101s. It's not a major problem but nothing can be done about it other than keeping it clean and lubed.

Cylinder throats measured 0.4290"-0.4295" as far as I can tell (with turned brass plug gauges) and were exactly the same between chambers. I did not measure the chamber bodies but they're larger than my 1990's N-frames as spent brass from the 69 is tight in the N's while the reverse is an easy fit. Really nothing to complain about here.

Overall fit and finish is ok. The dark screws, trigger, hammer etc. don't bother me but they definitely don't add to the appearance and actually look a bit like they ran out of the right parts. The sights are standard Smith and have enough play to zero 240gr loads from 750-1250fps. I don't like the rubber grips provided but that's a personal matter. They are, however, very light and lend nicely to the ease of carrying.

The little gun is fast, probably due to the tight throats and barrel and, despite the rough bore, it has been no problem to find loads that will print into 2" or less at 25yards. It has been difficult to find a load that doesn't foul so I may try to lap the bore but will give it a long trial period first. I have not tried it with J-wonkies but would guess that it would do well with them. So far, it shoots about like I would expect a $700 revolver but it's definitely not yet proven to be a humdinger. Even though it has not won my heart away from my well used, slick and accurate 4" 629, everything is dimensionally correct on this little gun and it has a lot of potential.

[PWS]

106249

Picture of the 69 with Jordan trooper grips. They're very comfortable but being old plastic, they've cracked! The 629 is shown for comparison and has a set of very exclusive custom grips installed.

[MtGun44]

Can't see the pic, says it is invalid.

Thanks for the report.

Bill

[randyrat]

Correct me if I'm wrong.
The smith 69 has been out for 2-3 years?
The 69 has a barrel shroud?
The first bunch that came out had a cylinder gap a bit too large but not out of spec?

I was thinking about one of these and I possibly found a used one, but I don't want a handy mans special, I'm not a pistol smith.

[osteodoc08]

I sure do wish they'd make one in 41mag......

I may have to settle for a 44 and buy new molds, brass, dies, etc to see what all this 44 fuss has been about.

[rking22]

I thought it was new this year??? I finally got one in my hand a week ago. Feels good in the hand, barrel shoud like the X frames. Also saw a new 66 , it had the same type barrel???? This is the first (believe it or not) Smith I have handled with mim parts and a lock. I was underwhelmed with the action , not really smooth like I am used to. Also the black mim hammer ect, looked kinda wierd. BUT , I liked it over all, I have a 696no dash(my youngest S&W) and N frames just don't fit me well, so this looks real good from a shooters perspective. Can't really say why this instead of a 629 except I have had 2 N frames and they are just too big for my hands. I too am waiting for them to show up used, probably won't be long after some folks try them with factory 300gr loads :) , Will be a "skeeter load" 44 special level gun for me to hunt with. Tn just doesn't have much a 250 at 1000fps won't handle!

[PWS]

As far as I know, the 69 revolver is "New for 2014". The first ones I saw for sale was late January and I picked up this one off Gunbroker in mid Feb. There's been at least 20 on auction the last couple of months so Smith must be filling orders.

I was looking actually looking for a good 696 at a reasonable price and had daydreams of one with a 4" barrel. The 69 sidetracked that scheme (that and money it would have taken to convert a 696!) Had they made the 69 in .41Mag or .44Special, I would have gotten one of those before the .44Mag.

I sure hope Ruger is listening to the dull roar for a 40+cal GP100. Something with a 3-4" barrel around 36oz would be spot on.

[rking22]

"I sure hope Ruger is listening to the dull roar for a 40+cal GP100. Something with a 3-4" barrel around 36oz would be spot on."

And that would derail my plans for a 69! A 4 inch gp in 44 Special would be truly SPECIAL. I need the 4inch to be legal for hunting here in TN, else the 696 would be all I need. 696s bring way to much money for me to modify, and they shoot very well as a 3 inch. Glad to see that the 69 is accurate ,at least yours is, so there is hope.

[376Steyr]

I spent about $1500 building a 4" 44 Special, including the price of a used 686. It's nifty, but I probably wouldn't have done it if the 69 had been on the market.

I have an embarrassing amount of 40 S&W brass stockpiled. A 40 caliber GP100 would be sweet.

[rking22]

Thats an interesting idea. gp100 would maybe?? take 10mm in a 5 shot and cut for moon clips..... Interesting idea. I wind up with lots of 40 when picking up other stuff, I'm bent over so may as well pick it up :) 1500$ , was that recent? who,when,where, ???? I might could swing that!

[rking22]

It seems the GP100 will take 10mm in a 6 shot....
Does the 44 special 5 shot too.... Reasonable cost, especially the 10mm

http://www.clementscustomguns.com/rugerdarevolvers.html

Sorry fof the thread drift, but ran accross this while searching more reviews on the Smith 69, seems lots of interest in a smaller framed big bore!

Still haven't seen but the one M69 so far and none used yet.

[376Steyr]

Thats an interesting idea. gp100 would maybe?? take 10mm in a 5 shot and cut for moon clips..... Interesting idea. I wind up with lots of 40 when picking up other stuff, I'm bent over so may as well pick it up :) 1500$ , was that recent? who,when,where, ???? I might could swing that!

I bought a used 686, a new 4" .357 Mountain Gun barrel which I had rebored to .44 by Delta Gunshop (deltagunshop.com), a new 696 cylinder with extractor and hand, got on Jim Stroh's waiting list (alphaprecision.com), sent the gun and parts to him, and it was completed Summer of 2011. It took a few years for me to get all the parts and pieces together, plus wait time on the gunsmiths. Fortunately, I wasn't in a hurry. I think even if a fellow wanted to throw money at the project, it would still take close to a year to have a "name" smith put it together.

[three50seven]

I know this is an old thread, but I just traded into a model 69 this weekend. The date on the fired case envelope is late 2015, so it was probably made close to 2 years after the one the OP was reviewing. On mine the cylinder release latch is stainless instead of black, though the rest of the accents are still black. The original owner is a good friend and shooting buddy of mine, and I know the gun wasn't shot very much in the time he had it. the SA trigger on mine is excellent with almost no creep, and the DA trigger is fairly heavy but smooth. I haven't noticed any flaws in the finish, except for some unevenness in the stamping.

So far I have only shot some light .44 specials consisting of a 240gr. SWC over W231. After about 15-20 rounds there was a decent amount of leading in the bore, which was kind of annoying. When my friend had it I shot some factory 240gr JSP .44 mags through it and I can say that it was nothing close to comfortable. I will probably carry and shoot mostly "Skeeter Loads" through this one, as I really don't have a need for a .44 mag packin' pistol here in Indiana. So far I am overall pleased with it. It carries easy enough that I will probably be sending my Charter Arms Bulldog on down the road.

[bobthenailer]

I installed a pachmayer decelerator gripper rubber grip to my 69 after trying the factory and a Hogue rubber grip the gun was noticeably softer shooting !

Cast bullets account for about 99.9% of my shooting , my 69 is cast bullet friendly, and is just as accurate as all my other S&W revolvers that in have owned over the past 45 years.

I installed a Wilson Combat reduced spring pack as I do with all of my S&W revolvers.

[rintinglen]

My experience to date with mine is that it is not cast friendly at all. 50 rounds will lead the bore pretty badly, despite having the cylinder throats recut and fire-lapping the bore. The trigger on mine was rough at first, but a little work with a hard Arkansas stone did a good job of smoothing things out, though it is still not as nice as my older Smiths. When I get back to it, I am going to run a couple hundred rounds of jacketed bullets through the bore, and if that doesn't clear things up, it will be going down the road.

[rking22]

Gotta love it, this is a bit of time capsule to me. I scratch he'd my 69 itch with a Clements 41 special gp100, then Ruger did the 696 clone GP100! Still somewhat interested in a 69 if and when a used one shows up. Seems it will most likely need a barrel lapping, I ain't gonna shoot enough jackets to wear it in :)

[44MAG#1]

So far I love mine. 1-16 tin lead with 21 of 2400. Shoots well. No leading. Reasonable recoil.

[GooseGestapo]

Yeah, it's an old thread but I'll throw in my two cents.
I got one about a year ago when Academy Sports had some.

As most Smiths, it needed some tweaking. A lighter rebound spring and main spring helped along with some judicious stoning. It now has a decent trigger (single action was acceptable so I didn't mess with it). Cylinder gap is about.005", so acceptable.
I'd sold a 329PD,as recoil was too much, didn't need it, and got my money out of it, also, the N-frame just doesn't fit my hands. 30+yrs of shooting competition with a K- or L-frame has "ruined" me.
The 69 recoil is slightly less , but still substantial. Due to .44mags not completely ejecting, I decided to try some .44Spl. I LOVE the way this gun handles the Specials. Grafs had some ofb on sale so I bought 200. It shoots as good as some of my competition guns with a Lee 240gr TL-SWC over 5.5gr of HP-38. Plus, it readily ejects the fired cases. If only SOMEONE made a speed loader that actually fits. Ones for the Charter and Taurus are marginally under sized, takes a little jiggling to get the speed loaders to work.
It's a keeper...

Added; BTW, it's got an exceptional smooth barrel/bore. Leads little, and cleans very easy. If you have a barrel that is "rough" I'd suggest you contact Smith about replacement.

[PWS]

Funny this thread was revived!

I don't remember exactly when but I did end up selling this 69. The concept is great but it was a bit on the rough side and just didn't do it for me. It did, however, leave me with the itch for another so while on a trip through Anchorage (and a half a day of hitting the LGS's), Northern Security Supply had a new one for sale with a great trigger, what looked like a much better bore, and seemed to be a better fit and finished revolver. It went home with me.

This second one has proven to be a honey and I have no intentions of getting rid of it. The bore was also a bit on the rough side and leaded quite a bit initially but 300 rounds of full power XTPs over H110 helped quite a bit with that. With select loads, it's an easy 6moa revolver and every load in it give more velocity than my 5" 629-3 Classic.

I've also come to appreciate the thinner cylinder compared to the N-frame. This .44 L-frame is the largest pistol that will reasonably fit in a hip pocket of Carhartt's or other jeans (it's normally in a Uncle Mike's Cordura holster on a Bianchi belt).

So whereas I was a bit lukewarm about my first 69, I'm looking forward to a long future with this second one! It's already taken a few deer and gone on a lot of hikes.

[Silver Jack Hammer]

PWS, what a great write up. I've been reading gun reviews since Skeeter went by "Charles."
Before the 69 came out I'd been pontificating a custom 5 shot L frame. Then this L frame came out in the M69 at such an affordable price -it made me suspicious.

Your write up is really excellent. A guy at work has a pristine M28 and I've been thinking about buying it and having it cut right by Clements. Beats buying and selling factory editions looking for a good .44. A buddy has a M28 he had Clements custom re-bore and I've shot it. Expensive yes but probably the most accurate.44 I've ever shot.

I appreciated your take on the cylinder dimensions for carry and extracting. Can get information this detailed in any of the "gun funnies."