S&W L-Frame .44 Mag

[Chemsoldier]

This could be interesting.

An L-Frame, 5 shot, .44 Magnum. The S&W 69

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_827559_-1_757769_757767_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

I would prefer a 3 inch barrel over the duty length barrel this has, but the idea of a smaller, lighter .44 Magnum revolver for back country carry is kind of intriguing. Taurus has done this before but I would prefer a S&W. I think this is the first time Smith has done this.

With this latest batch of revolvers though I completely give up on understanding how they number their revolvers. It used to sort of make sense.

[GJM]

This could be interesting.

An L-Frame, 5 shot, .44 Magnum. The S&W 69

Part of me likes this, part of me does not. It is a close call whether I would want a 5 shot S&W .500 or a 6 shot S&W N frame .44 magnum to stop a bear attack. Capacity doesn't matter until it does. Before I moved to Alaska, while visiting in 1992, I had a brown bear sow and two adult "cubs" come at me while packing moose. My buddy had a .338 with three rounds on board and I had a six shot S&W 629. Three bears and five cartridges ain't a great ratio.

If I wanted to carry a .44 in an appendix holster, this would be a real advantage over an N frame.

[LHS]

I'm curious as to how well it'll hold up to hot loads, or if it's really meant to be used primarily with Specials, kind of like an M66.

[Dagga Boy]

I'm curious as to how well it'll hold up to hot loads, or if it's really meant to be used primarily with Specials, kind of like an M66.

The "L" frames were not all that great with a diet of magnum ammunition. Would I trust a Ruger GP100 as a 5 shot .44 mag-yes. A S&W L frame.....not so much.

The Big Bore revolver part of me would love this in a 3", but having spent a lot of years shooting big bore revolvers, I am cautious. Luckily, I bought a .44 Mag 329 Night Guard when they were available, so I already have something to fill this role. The only problem is it scares me. I have carried the crap out of a 296 with Bowen sights and that better fills the role that I think the S&W 69 is supposed to.

[JHC]

Hmmmm . . . I'll listen. I find .44 mag loads punishing enough out of my 629. But since I've got components reload a few cases of whatever power level I wanted someday, a handier chassis might be nice. And I love the look of it. Never liked full lug revolvers from Colt, S&W, or Ruger. If I'm going to go wheelie I need some aesthetics.

[GJM]

Luckily, I bought a .44 Mag 329 Night Guard when they were available, so I already have something to fill this role. The only problem is it scares me.

and it should! Here is my .44 magnum Nightguard, that I managed to shoehorn on K/L frame Hogue compact grips, in an attempt to make a fanny pack .44 magnum. Close call whether being kicked by a moose or shooting this with the Garrett Defender ammo hurts more.

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg251/GJMandes/329_zpsc7989380.jpg (http://s250.photobucket.com/user/GJMandes/media/329_zpsc7989380.jpg.html)

[JHC]

GJM - ever shot one of those NGs in .41 magnum? I used to shoot .41 a lot and found it much less punishing than .44.

[GJM]

GJM - ever shot one of those NGs in .41 magnum? I used to shoot .41 a lot and found it much less punishing than .44.

I have a Scandium .41 magnum. A tad softer shooting than the .44 magnum, but if I figure I am carrying a revolver in the field, it will be a .44 magnum. Same reason I have, but don't carry a 10mm wheel gun up here -- if I have just six cartridges, they better be big ones.

[JHC]

Got any standards off the top of your head for delivering heavy hits at close-ish distance? Say 5 shots into a 4x6 card at 10 yards. Do you measure that sort of thing in the context of defensive shooting against big animals with big handguns?

[GJM]

Got any standards off the top of your head for delivering heavy hits at close-ish distance? Say 5 shots into a 4x6 card at 10 yards. Do you measure that sort of thing in the context of defensive shooting against big animals with big handguns?

Standards implies something you (can) practice. I can't shoot more than a few cartridges at a time out of my Scandium .44 magnum revolvers, with full power ammo, without hurting my hands and wrists. I seriously don't like to shoot more than two or three rounds, but figure with a bear I will have no trouble shooting all six. Now that my 329's (I have a number of them) are verified reliable and zeroed, I shoot six rounds a year through them, to make sure all is well.

I had Hamilton Bowen customize a Scandium 329 to be regulated with .44 special and used to shoot that and a 624 frequently with .44 special. Now, I just shoot my 317 with .22 ammo, and DA semi-autos to work my trigger press.

Gunsite has a fantastic course, designed for personal defense against bears, called "Backcountry." I have taken that twice, and they have an anatomically correct target, with a circle between the top of the mouth and eyes, where you need to shoot for an upper CNS shot. We also have a full size mounted brown bear, and his head makes for a nice dry fire practice target for visualizing the CNS from different angles. A 3x5 card, mounted vertically, would be a good representation of the upper CNS on a bear.


This, is what caused my wife and I to seat carrying .40 and 10mm handguns in the field. We were shooting tens of thousands of rounds through our semi-auto pistols, and a whopping 6-12 through our .44 magnum revolvers. Since the goal is to penetrate the CNS at 10 yards or less, we felt like we could do that more reliably, especially if it required follow-up shots, with our semi-auto handguns.

[SansSouci]

This is a topic that has interested me since I took up trout killing in bear habitat. I used to own a 4" 586. It was somewhat manageable with magnum loads. The poster that wrote about a 586 not doing wlll with magnum loads was right on the money. Many yeas ago during a training course, my 586 froze up on me with .38 Special loads. So much for a revolver being more reliable than a semiauto. Anyway, I've been on a quest to find the perfect back country handgun. I ain't so sure it exists.

I used to own a 6" Model 29. Long story short: I sold it. After trying to master it, it mastered me. There was no way I could accurately fire follow-up shots at a charging bear. So I bought an S&W 1911. It is a much easier gun to carry, it is a lot faster to battery, and 9 .45 ACP +P rounds is a whole lot better than maybe 1 accurately fired .44 Mag round. On top of that, it is a lot faster & easier to reload.

About 10 years ago I wrote to S&W asking for an "L" Frame .41 Mag. I guess I ain't ever gonna see one. Were I to see one, I ain't sure it would be worth the wait.

[JHC]

This is a topic that has interested me since I took up trout killing in bear habitat. I used to own a 4" 586. It was somewhat manageable with magnum loads. The poster that wrote about a 586 not doing wlll with magnum loads was right on the money. Many yeas ago during a training course, my 586 froze up on me with .38 Special loads. So much for a revolver being more reliable than a semiauto. Anyway, I've been on a quest to find the perfect back country handgun. I ain't so sure it exists.

I used to own a 6" Model 29. Long story short: I sold it. After trying to master it, it mastered me. There was no way I could accurately fire follow-up shots at a charging bear. So I bought an S&W 1911. It is a much easier gun to carry, it is a lot faster to battery, and 9 .45 ACP +P rounds is a whole lot better than maybe 1 accurately fired .44 Mag round. On top of that, it is a lot faster & easier to reload.

About 10 years ago I wrote to S&W asking for an "L" Frame .41 Mag. I guess I ain't ever gonna see one. Were I to see one, I ain't sure it would be worth the wait.

On his FB status about the new GP100 Champion Caleb (I assume it was he of Gun Nuts Media) told me a GP100 and $1000 sent to (I'd have to double check but I think it was Hamilton Bowen) could get me a 5 shot GP100 in .41 magnum.

[TR675]

I've seen some of his work and there isn't much Bowen can't do.

I really want one of his GP-44's.

[SansSouci]

JHC,

Thanks so much.

I think than an easy-to-carry 5-shot .41 Mag revolver would be an excellent choice in black bear country.

[tomr]

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/w...layErrorView_Y

2 piece barrel?

[Timbonez]

This is a topic that has interested me since I took up trout killing in bear habitat. I used to own a 4" 586. It was somewhat manageable with magnum loads. The poster that wrote about a 586 not doing wlll with magnum loads was right on the money. Many yeas ago during a training course, my 586 froze up on me with .38 Special loads. So much for a revolver being more reliable than a semiauto. Anyway, I've been on a quest to find the perfect back country handgun. I ain't so sure it exists.

I used to own a 6" Model 29. Long story short: I sold it. After trying to master it, it mastered me. There was no way I could accurately fire follow-up shots at a charging bear. So I bought an S&W 1911. It is a much easier gun to carry, it is a lot faster to battery, and 9 .45 ACP +P rounds is a whole lot better than maybe 1 accurately fired .44 Mag round. On top of that, it is a lot faster & easier to reload.

About 10 years ago I wrote to S&W asking for an "L" Frame .41 Mag. I guess I ain't ever gonna see one. Were I to see one, I ain't sure it would be worth the wait.


http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/w...layErrorView_Y

2 piece barrel?

The new Model 66 says 2-piece barrel too.

[Tamara]

The barrel itself is one piece; the outer sleeve with the sights is a separate piece. From a QC standpoint, this beats either the crush-fit or the pinned barrels, IMO.

Incidentally, some 696s back in the day came with overlong chambers. I know of people who have put reasonable amounts of 240gr magnum loads through them without noticeably harming the gun.

[Alaskapopo]

I am glad they are making this and wonder why they did not sooner. I have started carrying my Glock 20 in the woods instead of my 5 shot Ruger Redhawk/Hamilton Bowe revolver. Part of the reason was the weight and bulk which this revolver does not suffer from as much. The other reason is I shoot Glocks a lot more than I shoot my revolvers and familiarity with your weapon is a good thing under stress. This would make a nice woods gun however for those who prefer revolvers.
Pat

[JAD]

I'm very likely to buy one, probably sight unseen. My hands are too small to grip an N frame properly and I have serious .44 envy as a result. I have no use for the thing, I just want it.

[MikeFletcher]

I'd like one of these, possibly two.
I would probably use it more as a .44 Special.
I have a supply of Buffalo Bore Ammunition custom loads; .44 Special w/ 255 grain Keith style @ 1000 fps and .44 Magnum w/ 255 grain Keith style @ 1200 fps.
They hit close enough to the same POA / POI that I don't have to worry about it.
The .44 Speecial @ 1000 is a little more than standard factory loads, but not enough to wear you out practicing. And bear protection aside is probably suitable for anything I need to shoot. :)

[GJM]

Welcome, Mike! I have a 329 set-up just for the lighter of those two Keith loads. May have even got the ammo, or at least the idea for it, from you.

[MikeFletcher]

Hi George!
I think the ammo was a mutual idea and a joint participation order!
Mike