Hello. And Happy new year.

I have tried to get my self knowledge about the barrel and the grip-frame on S&W revolvers.

There seems to be a lot of discussions on what looks best, heavy barrel or tapered barred, or round butt or square butt. -- And not a word about which design issues is best for achieving a good shooting result.

It seems to be a predominance in favour of square butt and tapered barrel. -- I wonder is that just a conservative attitude because the old S&W M&P Victory revolvers was like that. -- Or has it something to do with shooting performance.

It would be very instructive/nice if some of you experienced long time users would take your time to comment a word or two on this issue.


Best regards,
khpe

My first CF handgun was a used Model 10 4" HB Sq butt I bought from a retired police officer. The heavy barrel was supposed to aid in recoil control but the .38 Spl is not an artillery round. The skinny barrel is a classic seen in old gangster movies. It boils down to personal preference as is the round butt frame. They are both great.

I shoot the heavy barrel square butt in a 4" configuration Very well.
But prefer the look of the pencil barrel and round butt.
Go figure.
Peter

__________________
Need 1/2 moon Chiefs special

What would you expect from collectors?

Just joking. Seriously, you have simply been looking at the wrong threads. There has been plenty of discussion of shooting performance. Keep in mind, however, that shooting performance is a quality of the shooter, not (in this case) the gun.

RB vs SB is a matter of fit to the individual shooter's hand. What is better for one person is worse for another.

The 4" HB is more stable than the 4" standard barrel, meaning it has more inertia. That's a simple physical fact. Whether that is good or bad is a whole nother thing. IMO, it is usually good for static target shooting, probably not good for a weapon which may need to acquire a new target quickly. However, agreement on the last is probably not universal, whereas agreement on the former is nearly so. That's one reason why a target gun like a 14 or 25 almost always has a heavy barrel and it's not even called heavy, whereas carry guns often offer a choice. [Another reason is that some people don't like carrying a heavy carry gun.]

I prefer a HB in a 3" to 4" barrel length. I do not fancy 2 or 2 1/2" barrels at all but I'd think the same would apply. In these popular carry lengths the weight is not too far forward but does help absorb recoil & barrel flip.
In a longer barrel, I prefer a straight taper like the M25-2... still beefy but not "heavy".
I do not find the extra weight of the handgun to be significant in a proper holster.

The thinner tapered barrels are elegant but I'm more of a shooter.

The round butts are more flexible in grip panels than square butt designs. Smith is no longer selling their wood grips but I am impressed with Ahrends "retro grips".
Ahrends Grips : Home
There are all manner of synthetic stocks. My personal favorite is the Hogue Monogrip.
Russ

It's a matter of personal preference, and the use of the firearm. The Heavy barrel and square butt seem to aid in the control of the revolver and aid in accuracy. The round butt and light barrel (and shorter) barrels are more in keeping with carry and concealed carry. The round butt does not snag on clothing and does not "print" as badly as the square butt does. The lighter weight barrel is less heavy and not as tiring for being carried over long periods.

There is a place for all the different configurations depending on the use. (An excuse to buy them all).

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

I am a shooter, not a collector. My preferences are based on performance.

I prefer a "weight forward" balance for both action shooting and slow fire.

When action shooting, the "weight forward" balance aids in recoil recovery whether in the mild .38 Special or full house "heavy loads" from a .357 or .44.

Slow fire shooting, weight forward takes advantage of the inertia of a heavy barrel or dbl lugged barrel and the barrel exhibits less motion. That is GOOD!

My favorite "shooting" revolver is my 625-6 dbl underlugged barrel (5" .45 ACP). It holds extremely well and exhibits very good recoil recovery for action shooting.

I have a Model 60 Chief's Target revolver (3" full underlugged barrel with adjustable sights) and you will not believe how well that little, lightweight, short 3" barrel holds due to the "weight forward" bias.

FWIW
Dale53

Most S&W revolvers will shoot better than most shooters can achieve.
It is generally accepted that a square butt (or square grip on a round butt) provide more control, while the round butt carries better concealed.
Added weight generally provides more control for rapid shooting.
At an IPSC match, the 625 and 610 rule, while the 686s dominate IDPA/SSR.

My new favorite type of S&W .38 is the 4" HB with RB, with the stock wood grips. It fits my hand like a glove, and unlike my square butt revolvers I have no desire to add a Tyler T-Grip. I would try a T-Grip on my "shooter" 4" RB HB Model 10-10, just to see how it feels, but I shoot very well with it as is. I feel Hogues and Pachmayrs ruin the feel, for me, of the round butt K frame. I am actively looking for a 4" Model 64 HB with round butt grip frame.

I don't care much for barrels shorter than 4", as a shooter. My 4" HB points as naturally as my finger, and I think they are handsome revolvers as well. They have an "all business" look and to me are the quintessential "80's cop gun".

Collector's who prefer the pencil barrel probably do so for the classic look of them, rather than the shootability. I have a 6" pencil barrel 10-5 that shoots great and balances perfect, but given a choice between 2 4" Model 10's I would go for the HB as a shooter. I also love my SQ HB Model 64-3, but the round butt still feels more at home in my hand combined with the 4" HB.

I think if S&W made a 6" HB, fixed sight, they would have had a winner. It seems their fixed sight 6 inchers went out with the pencil barrel.

Just a question, I just bought a Model 64-7, 4", haven't picked it up from my dealer yet. I had read S&W deleted the square butt at some point, and all new M10 and 64's were round butt, with Uncle Mike's "round to square" grips.....is this the case? If do I would buy a set of woods for my soon to be new 64-7!

I have a 4" HB/RB 10-10 it is one of the most natural pointing revolvers I have ever fired.

All of my S&W revolvers...5 of them, are round butts and heavy barrelled. I just like the look and feel of that combination. Accuracy has never been an issue, even though they are shorties.

"Heavy Barrel" and "Round Butt"---Sounds like someone has been peeking in my window..........LOL--Seriously, my .02 is it boils down to what fits your hand(functionality),or what you like in terms of looks-Some like a tapered barrel because they may have had relatives with them or seen them used by "hollywood" figures. Typically, the big boomers don't come in light barrel configurations. It's a matter or recoil and possibly some longevity. Short or long barrels are a great matter of preference as I have shot and seen others shoot very accurately with a short barrel. The long barrel has it's merits also with a longer sight radius and more barrel to "stabilize" the bullet before exiting the barrel. Also, longer barrel, more forward weight-less perceived recoil. Round butt and square butt seem to be a matter of preference as well. What fits in your hand best should help you shoot better. Square butt has a following for the "cokebottle" style and target grips used on the early guns like the M-29 for example. Round butt has advantages in smaller finger-groove grips and may be able to be concealed more easily. Put your hands on as many styles as you can and shoot them if possible. The fun can be in the hunt or in the acquisition or.....,Sprefix

__________________
Go big or stay home

I thought the 1860 Colt Army was the most balanced revolver ever, but now my RB-HB 4" 10-10 is!

Heavy Barrel, Round Butt:



Heavy Barrel Square Butt:



Both 547s

I was able to score consistent hits on a silhouette at 100 yards with my Dad's 2" Model 66, with light .357 rounds once I got the "range" as in where to hold the front sight. It can be valuable to "know" your gun, as in if I held the front sight base on the top of the rear sight picture, that's where I needed to be to hit at 100 yards.

It was my experiment to prove that even short barrels can reach out and touch beyond what "lay people" consider outside of handgun range and you don't need a 9" barrel .44 Mag to keep a bad guy's head down at 100+ yards.

Thanks a lot for your time and your answers.

Regards, khpe

I thought the heavy barrel was also supposed to reduce barrel flex in revolvers without a fully shrouded ejector rod (eg. M65. On guns with a full shroud (eg. M66), the steel of the shroud adds rigidity to the barrel, so the barrel walls do not need to be as thick to get the same stiffness. That's why models like Colt's target models and such also came with bull barrels, no?

And, wasn't the round butt stock considered better for concealed carry - seems a lot os police issue models favored them for that reason (thinking Ruger Service Six versus Speed Six sort of thing).

I have an old model 10 that started life as a pencil barreled squarebutt. I acquired it after it spent years in a closet rusting away. I was bored and decided to make it a project for my wife. She has severe arthritis in her hands. we went to the gun shows and she compared guns and decided the round butt felt better to her painful hands and a heavy barrel seemed to help with recoil. I rounded the butt on the old model 10 for her and bought a 4 inch heavy barrel fairly cheap from a member on here. She is very happy with her "new" round butt heavy barreled nightstand gun.

I don't think so. Maybe you can get an engineer friend to do the math, but I don't think that in practical terms it makes any significant difference to barrel flex at all. Barrel weight is about inertia and balance.
The round butt is certainly better for concealed carry, and you can see that in some of the answers, but it is also true that some people, myself included, find that the square butt doesn't fit the hand. The butt of the frame is too big. For us, the round butt is better regardless of whether the gun is to be concealed, and regardless of the theories of those with larger hands.

Model 13 has it all...k frame, round butt and heavy barrel....great gun-great shooter!

Attached Images

IMG_0193.jpg (35.9 KB, 242 views)

I have a clutch of K Frame .38/.357 of the M10/M64-5 variety. For most purposes I prefer the round butt, just fits my hand better (with Ahrends stocks), I like the heavy barrel for action shooting as it makes recovery easier, particularly with magnum rounds. But I also like the pencil barrel as it is lighter, and places more of the weight back in my hand, making the gun handle faster. I have couple of pencil barrels, a M64 bought in Italy in 71-before they were readily available in the U.S.! Also have a M10 no dash, 1960 vintage that came to me from the Metro D.C. PD. A little work and a "hard" dull black finish and it is my "go to" gun, shoots to POA at 25 yards with +P 158 gr ammo, and it has a round butt!
As a shooter/accumulator (I'm really not in the collector class), I find that the M10/64-5s are probably one of the great revolvers of all time, everything you need, and nothing you don't.

For many people, this is the whole story. There are other good answers, but for me, this is it.

I have both round and square butt revolvers. Seems to me the round butts are more flexible because you can convert a round butt into a square butt with the right grips, but you can not do the reverse.