I just bought my a model 69 44 magnum, my first new revolver since I bought my 610 20+ years ago. I have not had a chance to shoot it but but am very happy with the way it handles, the trigger, and it's weight and size. The single action trigger is somewhat heavier than my 610 but breaks so cleanly it is more than good enough. Double action is heavy but smooth and consistent. The grips feel small but based on threads I have read here I ordered the 500 grips from S&W and am going to try those when they come in.

About the only thing I did not like was the way the muzzle was crowned. Instead of a bevel machined into the bore it looks like the bore was rifled after the barrel was crowned. As a result there are some small burrs. When I look really closely I can see the burrs do not extend into the bore so this should be cosmetic and not effect accuracy. I realize things have changed since I bought the 610 but am wondering if all new S&W revolvers are like this or if mine somehow missed a manufacturing step where the burrs are removed.

I have attached 2 pictures of the muzzle of my 69 and one of the muzzle of my 610 to show what my other guns look like.

Attached Images

	SW69_bore.jpg (122.2 KB, 375 views)
	SW69_burr.jpg (75.1 KB, 398 views)
	SW610_bore.jpg (70.4 KB, 348 views)

As you know, the M69 has a two-piece barrel/shroud assembly, unlike the one-piece M610. I have (5) guns with two-piece barrels (four Night Guards & one PC) & have also noticed this on a few of them. I believe those burrs are caused when the barrel is screwed into place & tightened as the tool used for this inserts into the muzzle's bore & grabs the rifling to turn it. I suspect sometimes it slips a little causing the burrs. I may be wrong but that's what I visualize happening.

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

Since it is unique to the 2 piece barrels that would make sense. My theory was all barrels have the burrs but S&W machines them off on the solid barrels but did not feel that was necessary on the 2 piece barrels.

As long as it does not affect accuracy I going to try to quit looking at the muzzle with my bifocals on and worrying about it. If my gun shoots as well as others have been reporting this will probably be forgotten after the first trip to the range.

Morning Dave Lively

My new model 69 (late 14 build) is actually worse looking than yours on the muzzle crown.

It came with actual flashing sticking forward & bent slightly into the bullet path.

Kind of typical of S&W's latest quality control (or lack there of).

It might have been from the barrel insert used to screw in the barrel but it looks more to me like a dull tool bit that didn't get run all the way past the bore crown edge.

I used a large thin (sharp edged) washer to scrape away the flashing & burrs (now looks better but a bit shinier than the remaining crown).

Removing the flashing & burrs seemed to decrease group size at 25 yards. (I couldn't tell much difference at 10 yards)

When I eventually send the gun back to Smith for other issues I will have them address the pathetic muzzle crown quality issue.

On another note: how is your model 69 sighting? My 69 shoots REAL high even with the rear sight fully bottomed out. I went down one sight blade height & it still shoots about 2" high at 25 yards. My 69 really needs the shortest rear sight blade but the notch is so shallow in those that I don't like the short blade at all.

Is your hammer dragging on the L/H side of the frame as you pull the trigger in double action? Mine was rubbing pretty hard & made the first part of double action trigger pull gritty & rough until hammer cleared the frame cutout.

Mine has a perfect muzzle. Sights are fine. Bottom the rear sight and my poi is well under the poa at 25 yds.
I can't find a significant flaw in the gun. Must be lucky, or blind.

My Model-69 is about a year old and has about 250 rounds through it. It is also my constant woods companion. Until I read your thread I had never noticed the burrs around the crown. But, after having a look, they are there.

Doesn't bother me though. This thing is tough as nails and very accurate out to 25 yards even in my 68 y/o hands. so, I think I'll just leave well enough alone and keep totin' her in the woods.

Bob

You need a taller front sight, not shorter. That will lower the impact point of your bullets.

Morning Warren

I said nothing about changing the front sight height.

I needed a shorter rear sight blade

Hi wolverine,

I just picked this gun up last night and have not had a chance to shoot it yet. I can see where the hammer is rubbing on the left side but cannot feel it at all in double action. The drag marks could be from when I pull the trigger back in single action and press a little to the left with my thumb. I have other guns with exposed hammers that have similar drag marks so if I cannot feel anything in double action just seeing the mark does not bother me.

Do you see a lot of variation in how high your gun shoots with different bullet weights?

Morning Dave


Hopefully your hammer drag doesn't become worse as the hammer & hammer pin wear in a little.

My hammer drag wasn't real noticeable on the new stock gun but became real noticeable when the lube wore off the frame area, the hammer loosened up a little, & I lowered the double action pull weight to something usable.

Yes, I do notice a little difference in how high it shoots with different bullet weights. Lighter bullets are slightly lower but still well above POA.

Faster bullets also hit a little lower but still above the 10 ring at 25 yards.

I usually shoot 240gr LSWC at around 1100-1150 FPS. But even my full house 240gr jacketed hollow points running 1400+ FPS hit high at 25 yards, even with the lower .146" rear sight blade installed & bottomed out.

Here's a target I shot from a rest at 25yds with the factory rear sight BOTTOMED OUT. Two shots for each load (black circles to show indiv groups where diff loads overlapped). Only shot two to keep target clutter at a minimum and reduce chance that fatigue would effect groups.



Notice how the 240gr Jacket loads seem to shoot left -- I have verified this on several different occasions and holds true when shot offhand.

Everyone holds gun a bit differently and may or may not see sights the same. This will account for some variation on POI from different shooters. FOR ME, my two guns shot high with the factory rear bottomed out.

I equipped one gun with the lowest Bowen Rough country rear sight for use with heavier loads. The other gun remains factory stock and is used mostly with 240gr laser cast over 6.5gr of HP38 (about 880 fps).

Both guns are equipped with the S&W 500 grips.

FWIW,

Paul

My M69 crown has imperfections too. I also notice that the hammer doesn't reset if I am too quick and pull the trigger again as the cylinder rotates (dry firing). I can also get it to lock up by trying to fire too quickly. As a relative novice, I don't know whether this is due to my inexperience or if it's a problem I should address with Smith & Wesson customer service. I do know I don't have this issue with either my 686-6 or Governor...

I have no problems with the hammer dragging on either side.

That was useful, thanks. I wonder if the problem is S&W used a machine rest for testing and underestimated how much muzzle flip would be present when the gun was held normally.

I plan to mostly use this as a range gun with 44 specials and fairly light magnums. I also plan to carry it while hiking in certain areas after encountering a surprisingly aggressive feral pig. I am going to use some stout 240-255 cast SWC while hiking but only shoot those once a year or so. It looks like your gun can shoot the sort of ammo I will be using most to the correct point of aim and the 240 grain magnum loads are 2 or 3 inches high at 25 yards. I would much rather be able to adjust the sights to be right on but if I get similar results with my combination of shooter, gun and ammo that will be fine.

Over the last year, I've purchased 4 new S&W revolvers (2 M69 .44 Mags, 1 M66-8 .357 Mag, and 1 M617 .22 LR). FOR ME, every one of these revolvers shoot high at 25 yards with the standard (cartridge specific) load and the rear sight bottomed out. As mentioned above, others may have (or have had) different results.

You may be able to use both of you stated loads without any sight adjustment. Sight the gun in for your most used load (informal target/plinking) at the desired distance. Then test your up-close, aggressive animal defense load to see where it it hits at 10 yds. They should be pretty close. If not, adjust your personal defense load (not the sights) to get closer to your desired point of impact.

I carried a 329 PD for a long time and proved to myself that the POI of heavy loads (vs lighter loads) were close enough to be perfectly effective at aw s$%# ranges -- 10 yds or so.

You are going to have to shoot the gun with the subject loads to find out where they hit with you shooting and with the components you are using. Sometimes it works, others it doesn't.

I have two M69s because I often shoot heavier loads at longer ranges and don't want to fiddle with sights or hold offs.

These guns have been problem free and are as tight as when purchased with absolutely no end shake. One has 1,300 rnds, mostly 265gr SWCs at a chronoed 1,140 fps. The other has 4,650 rnds, about half were 240s/880 fps and the rest were mid/upper level .44 mag equiv.

Good luck.

Paul

Good luck.

Yep

Sometime after I made this post I ended buying some chamfering tools from Brownells to clean-up burrs on the muzzle & to re-chamfer the forcing cones.

One of them is a 45 degree cutter for the muzzle which is designed to be used with a caliber specific pilot to maintain centering.

.

M69, chamfered muzzle
.


.
.



.
.



.
.



.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

Those are the best tools available for doing muzzle crown, cylinder chamfer, forcing cone, and cylinder gap work. I use mine a lot on my own guns. A good forcing cone and muzzle crown are required for best accuracy.

Often a mediocre accuracy gun can be made into a match target gun simply by cutting a good forcing cone and muzzle crown. The rifling is almost always good, they just didn't do the ends right at the factory. It has been this way for at least 50 years. As always, some are better than others.

__________________
protocalldesign.com

My Model 69 shoots just fine the way it left S&W. I am a firm proponent of it it ain't broke don't fix it. Anyone else is free to do whatever to theirs as they see fit.

The target is always the final judge. If it's shooting good groups, no need to change it.

__________________
protocalldesign.com

Exactly.

It's definitely never detracted from a revolver's abilities & invariably they group a tad better afterwards, besides allowing smoother entry & exit of the bullet on it's way to bullseye land.

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

In the six years that have elapsed since I started this thread (Which was my first post on this forum) I sent my gun back to S&W because it was shooting high with the rear sight all the way down and they would not send me a new rear sight. Since it was going back anyways I mentioned this issue and they recrowned the muzzle so it now looks like the picture of the 610 I used to own. No difference I could detect in accuracy but I rarely shoot it off a bench and offhand the limiting factor for accuracy is me, not the gun. Even if it was just cosmetic I am glad I got it recrowned.

Rougher and not as nice looking as the crowns people achieved using the Brownells kit but good enough for me.

The gun shooting high was due to the rear sight blade being too tall in the early versions of the 69. I understand they started shipping with a shorter blade after people complained about the gun shooting high.

I am surprised the pictures are still here. I used to use PhotoBucket quite a bit for inline embedded pictures six years ago instead of attaching them so most of my posts from this time have broken links for pictures.

A buddy of mine bought a model 69. It locks up after several rounds have been fired. He has sent it back to S&W at least once and the issue remains. He almost exclusively shoots moderate .44 SPL ammo. He is a very experienced shooter and says that the 69 is no fun to shoot with magnums.

BE Mike, if your friend wants to shoot magnums in it I suggest X frame grips. They make the gun much more comfortable.

__________________
Front sight and squeeze

I had a similar burr on the crown of my 5926 which made the gun shooting low by over 12” on 7 yards when the barrel was room temperature. It took roughly 10 to 15 rounds through it every time I tested it to be more accurate. Used a brass polishing die from Brownell’s to get rid of it and it’s now perfect from the first round on.

Do you know what's "locking it up"?

When I first shot my NYPD issued Model 10 heavy barrel($40.00) back in 1966 as a new recruit I got great groups in the 8 ring at 6 o'clock.
When 2 pistol team range officers shot it they blew out the X ring.
Letting others shot your weapon with the same ammo is revealing.
I've learned a lot since then.

__________________
NEVER GIVE UP YOUR GUN

It reads as if he’s talking about the rear sight blade.

Here's my question about recrowning a two piece barrel: The muzzle of the barrel is a flange that holds the barrel shroud in place. The flange part is connected to the barrel at the spot where the new crown is cut. It seems to me that would remove some metal at the junction of the barrel and the flange. Will crowning a barrel in this manner weaken the ability of the barrel to hold the shroud in place?

Not if you keep it to a minimum. Cut just enough to make a small even chamfer.

__________________
protocalldesign.com

No, I suppose if he ever figures it out, he'll be able to rectify the problem. It does seem to have something to do with the gun heating up. He cannot fire 50 round of Special loads without the action seizing.

The M69 is a two-piece barrel. When you chamfer the muzzle you're only beveling the edge of the bore where it meets the muzzle.

I can't see how this in any way could weaken the barrel's flange which is on the outer edge of the muzzle.

You only need the cut the chamfer to the depth of the groove to get equal presentation of all the lands/groove at the muzzle.

.

The M66-8 is also a two-piece barrel. The M610-3 is not.



.
.



.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day