Model 69 Snubbie

[nipperdog]

A couple of days before Christmas Ruger Announced that It was releasing a .44 Special GP-100 3" Revolver. Being a .44cal Nut I ordered one on GB the first of the this Month. I have been using my S&W M69 as a dedicated .44 Special Revolver up until now, and Love it Dearly. So yesterday I finally made it to the range to compare the M69 to the GP-100 44. I was using Handloads consisting of 6.8 grains of Unique under a 250gn Keith LSWC in new Starline Cases. To make it short, the 69 shot groups half the size of the Ruger at 10yds. NOW I want a Short barrel M69 like maybe 2.75". I guess that I could have one Custom Built, but would really like to see S&W come out with their own version.

[Jingles]

My understanding is they are making one with 2.75" barrel for 2017.

Model 69 Combat Magnum(R) | Smith & Wesson

[nipperdog]

Originally Posted by Jingles

My understanding is they are making one with 2.75" barrel for 2017.

Model 69 Combat Magnum(R) | Smith & Wesson

Wow: That IS good news. I will be owning one of those. Thanks for the Heads UP

[BE Mike]

I would wonder about complete powder burn with a 3" barrel. If I understand you correctly, the longer barrel S&W model 69 shoots twice as accurately as the shorter barrel Ruger. If I'm right, why would you want a less accurate model 69?

[shocker]

The 2 piece barrel with ECM rifling is an inherently accurate system. Also, slug the throats on your GP-100 - Ruger in the past seems to bore their throats a little bigger than SW.

[nipperdog]

Originally Posted by BE Mike

I would wonder about complete powder burn with a 3" barrel. If I understand you correctly, the longer barrel S&W model 69 shoots twice as accurately as the shorter barrel Ruger. If I'm right, why would you want a less accurate model 69?

Well I wouldn"t expect the 2.75 M69 to shoot as tight as a 4.2" gun. The sight radius alone would make a difference. In regard to the 3" Ruger VS the 4.2" M69 and an incomplete Powder Burn I get groups just slightly larger to the M69 with the same loads in my 3" 629 so I suspect the Ruger may not be as accurate with my particular load. More experimentation is called for.

[Topsarge]

Check the S&W sight. The 69 2.75" barrel is on there along with a 66 snub.

[Sugar River]

Originally Posted by Topsarge

Check the S&W sight. The 69 2.75" barrel is on there along with a 66 snub.

Yeah, and they're calling the 69 snub a "Combat Magnum" and have verbage about it being a K frame!

Doesn't anybody who actually knows something about the product proof read this stuff?

[one eye joe]

Originally Posted by Sugar River

Yeah, and they're calling the 69 snub a "Combat Magnum" and have verbage about it being a K frame!

Doesn't anybody who actually knows something about the product proof read this stuff?

THE OBVIOUS ANSWER WOULD BE A RESOUNDING "NO ! ! !", Sugar River......

[one eye joe]

CONFUSED A BIT (NOT A SURPRISE, SINCE I AM A 75 YO GEEZER. IN MY FAVOR IS THE FACT THAT I HAVE BEEN SHOOTING HANDGUNS SINCE AGE 15.)

IS THE RUGER A 5 SHOT, OR A 6 SHOT ? ? ? I THINK THAT THE POPULAR BULLDOGS IN .44 SPECIAL ARE 5 SHOOTERS. AM I CORRECT ? ? ? I WOULD THINK THAT A K FRAME S&W WOULD HAVE TO BE A 5 SHOT ALSO.

IMHO, ANY COMPARISON IN ACCURACY IS NOT VALID, UNLESS IT IS MADE WITH THE SAME AMMO, OUT OF 2 GUNS WITH THE SAME LENGTH BARREL. THE TEST BETWEEN THE SNUBBY RUGER AND THE LONGER S&W IS INCONCLUSIVE.....

FOR MANY YEARS, I CARRIED A 3" M629, OUT OF WHICH I SHOT .44SPL LOADS, 95% OF THE TIME. I THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE LITTLE ADVANTAGE GAINED, GIVING UP ONE SHOT, TO GAIN A SLIGHT REDUCTION IN SIZE AND WEIGHT, BY GOING TO A K FRAME, 5 SHOOTER.......

BELOW ARE MY 3" M629, AND MY K FRAME M686+.....

[nipperdog]

Originally Posted by one eye joe

CONFUSED A BIT (NOT A SURPRISE, SINCE I AM A 75 YO GEEZER. IN MY FAVOR IS THE FACT THAT I HAVE BEEN SHOOTING HANDGUNS SINCE AGE 15.)

IS THE RUGER A 5 SHOT, OR A 6 SHOT ? ? ? I THINK THAT THE POPULAR BULLDOGS IN .44 SPECIAL ARE 5 SHOOTERS. AM I CORRECT ? ? ? I WOULD THINK THAT A K FRAME S&W WOULD HAVE TO BE A 5 SHOT ALSO.

IMHO, ANY COMPARISON IN ACCURACY IS NOT VALID, UNLESS IT IS MADE WITH THE SAME AMMO, OUT OF 2 GUNS WITH THE SAME LENGTH BARREL. THE TEST BETWEEN THE SNUBBY RUGER AND THE LONGER S&W IS INCONCLUSIVE.....

FOR MANY YEARS, I CARRIED A 3" M629, OUT OF WHICH I SHOT .44SPL LOADS, 95% OF THE TIME. I THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE LITTLE ADVANTAGE GAINED, GIVING UP ONE SHOT, TO GAIN A SLIGHT REDUCTION IN SIZE AND WEIGHT, BY GOING TO A K FRAME, 5 SHOOTER.......

BELOW ARE MY 3" M629, AND MY K FRAME M686+.....

The Ruger GP-100 holds 5rds just like the M69 L Frame but it is only rated for .44 Special.

[BE Mike]

Originally Posted by nipperdog

Well I wouldn"t expect the 2.75 M69 to shoot as tight as a 4.2" gun. The sight radius alone would make a difference. In regard to the 3" Ruger VS the 4.2" M69 and an incomplete Powder Burn I get groups just slightly larger to the M69 with the same loads in my 3" 629 so I suspect the Ruger may not be as accurate with my particular load. More experimentation is called for.

One thing that you mention and I forgot is that you are using .44 SPL loads. My frame of reference is that I'm shooting .44 Mag. loads in a 629 with 5" bbl. I'm using 2400. You are probably using a powder a little quicker burning.

[wadcutter1]

Originally Posted by BE Mike

I would wonder about complete powder burn with a 3" barrel.

A very interesting website in case you haven't seen it:

BBTI - Ballistics by the Inch :: .44 Mag Results

It looks like it takes about a 14" barrel to get complete powder burn. I'm guessing in a 3" barrel the in-barrel powder burn is about 50% (based on the fact that the longer barrel has 50% higher velocity and the assumption that it requires 4x powder to achieve 2x velocity).

Originally Posted by BE Mike

If I'm right, why would you want a less accurate model 69?

The same reason we carry snub nose versions of other revolvers: they are easier to carry and conceal. A 240 grain bullet going over 1000 fps is still quite a punch.

[nipperdog]

Originally Posted by BE Mike

One thing that you mention and I forgot is that you are using .44 SPL loads. My frame of reference is that I'm shooting .44 Mag. loads in a 629 with 5" bbl. I'm using 2400. You are probably using a powder a little quicker burning.

Hi Mike: I'm using Unique in the .44 Specials, but may load some with Bullseye, or Tightgroup and see if that helps close up the Group

[WPWarhawk]

Barrel marking on the 69