Square butt versus round butt

[tdennis]

Please forgive me for being such a novice on early S&W's but I have been looking at the S&W Standard Catalog trying to identify the different versions of the Model #3. I am not sure I understand the difference between the Square butt and the Round butt models.

Looking at a photo of a First Model SA American which is described as having a square butt, to me the grips appear to be wider and slab sided plus the bottom of the grips/and butt frame are flat in appearance.

When I look at one of the Russian Models which are described as being "round butt" the grips appear not be be as wide (looking at the side) and the wood being more rounded but also flat on the bottom.

When looking at online photos of a #3 Second Model SA which the catalog "ID Key" says has "square butt" the photo to me looks the same shape as on a Russian model which are said to have "round butt". I am missing something here!

My question is does the size/shape of the wood grips have any thing to do with the butt being square or round? Or is it rounded beveled corner's (front/rear) of the steel butt frame? (which my round butt #3 Frontier SA has.

I hope I am making sense. The catalog has examples in the index but it shows modern S&W pistols not early ones.
Thanks
tdennis

[BB57]

In the simplest terms, regardless of frame size, the back strap on the square butt stays straight, while the back strap on a round butt curves inward.

This refers to the grip frame itself - not the shape of the stocks, which can extend significantly in front of the grip frame and can also extend behind the grip frame, creating a square butt shape on round butt frame.

The picture below contains a 6" square butt Model 66, and a 2 1/2" round butt Model 66. The primary different is the sharply inward curving back strap on the round butt, which comes to a point where the angle is greater than 90 degrees. In comparison, the square butt comes to a point where the angle between back strap and bottom is less than 90 degrees.

There is also less curve to the front strap on the round butt to keep it from flaring are far forward, but that's not the definitive trait across all frames.

The critical dimensions and internals shape however are identical on these K-frame revolvers, and if some one wants to do so, they can remove metal from the square butt grip frame to create a round butt grip frame.



IMHO, the square butt revolvers are a dying breed. Ruger for example no longer uses a grip frame at all but rather uses a grip stub. This allows much more latitude in grip sizes for smaller or larger hands and provides for a better fit for customers, particularly on large frame revolvers.

Other companies, including S&W are leaning heavily toward round butt models in their current production as you can add a grip that provides the square butt shape, but not the reverse.

[Mark IV]

IMSHO (In My Seldom Humble Opinion ), the round butts are better on smaller pistols (like snubbies), being a bit more petite, which makes them a little more concealable and more comfortable to haul around. But they tend to make the pistol a bit more a handful to fire.
Square butts work better on larger pistols (K and up), as they provide a larger,firmer base that tends to make them more ergonomic and controllable. And, they look cooler.

[BB57]

I'd agree with the above performance based comments, if the stocks are limited to the shape of the grip frame, and if the stock material is limited to wood.

But that's not the case. If the shooter prefers, he or she can put a larger grip on a round butt, but you can't put a smaller grip on a square butt. And, a well designed rubber grip can make a round butt K-frame .357 very manageable, and it can make a J-frame .357 tolerable. Try a Hogue monoblock grip on a Model 60 with .357 loads, then try it with a wood boot grip. You'll notice a huge difference.

That's actually one area where Ruger has left S&W sitting in the dust. The peg style grips that Ruger uses on their SP (J-ish frame size), GP (L-ish frame size), and Super Redhawk series pistols provides the potential for a much greater range of grip sizes, and can allow a much shorter trigger reach for shooters with smaller hands.



It's a much more significant advantage on large frame revolvers than on small ones. For example, N frames don't fit me at all as the trigger reach I just too long for effective DA trigger control, but I have no problem with a Super Redhawk as the peg grip frame will accommodate a suitably small grip.

----

Now if we are just talking about looks, rather than utility, then absolutely, I like the square butt S&Ws, particularly compared to the Ruger peg gripped revolvers.

[mmaher94087]

I guess I missed the Memo; the OP was inquiring about the Antique Smiths and the replies have shown Modern frames. Helpful but only if one can translate the information to Antiques. OP; I'll venture that the "on line" description is incorrect. Go with the SCSW nomenclature. If the stock/frame is flat across the bottom with sharp corners on the stock/grip corners then it's a square butt. If the grip/stock frame is rounded and the stock/grip is not squared off at the rear corner, then it is a Round butt. Examples: 1st Models: square butt. Double Actions: round butt. Does it translate OK?

[tdennis]

Mike,
Thanks, yes that answers my question and makes more sense than the shape of the actual grip itself. I appreciate all the information given. Thanks
Dennis

Originally Posted by mmaher94087

I guess I missed the Memo; the OP was inquiring about the Antique Smiths and the replies have shown Modern frames. Helpful but only if one can translate the information to Antiques. OP; I'll venture that the "on line" description is incorrect. Go with the SCSW nomenclature. If the stock/frame is flat across the bottom with sharp corners on the stock/grip corners then it's a square butt. If the grip/stock frame is rounded and the stock/grip is not squared off at the rear corner, then it is a Round butt. Examples: 1st Models: square butt. Double Actions: round butt. Does it translate OK?