Anybody Switch from N Frame to L Frame?

[kbm6893]

I really like the 28-2 I just got. Looks basically new. I owned a 686 a few years ago but haven’t handled one in a while. Of course, I own K frames so the grip size is same as L frame but certainly not the feel due to the added weight of the L Frame.

I handled a 4” 686 the other day. It did feel better in my hand than the N Frame does. Might have been the grips since the 686 was wearing rubber Hogue’s, but the overall balance and feel of the 686 was better for me. The 28 looks classy but it also looks and feels “more clunky” to me. Doesn’t feel bad to me, just more unwieldy.

Since the N Frame was built for the .44 magnum, is it overkill for a .357?

[OKFC05]

Everybody needs a 4" 686, IMHO.


The answer to your last question depends on whether you are shooting it or carrying it at the time.

[grinner]

Originally Posted by kbm6893

Since the N Frame was built for the .44 magnum, is it overkill for a .357?

If it is only 6-shots, like the the model 28: yes.

But for an 8-shot .357 Magnum: No. you won’t get that in a k-frame or L-frame.

[1sailor]

Are you sure you got that right about the N frame being designed for the .44 Magnum. Wasn't the N frame introduced with the .357 Magnum years before they ever dreamed of the .44? I'm pretty sure the N frame was chosen for the .44 because it was robust enough but was originally for the .357.

[dr. mordo]

I went the opposite way. My 686 PC lives in the safe, my 3" M629 gets carried every day. IMO the N frame is the ultimate S&W revolver platform.

An L frame only weighs something like 4 oz less than a N, so there's not much actual benefit, and for some reason L frames seem to have unnaturally heavy triggers no matter what springs you run in them.

Also, if you manage to find a square butt N frame (unlike my 629) and equip it with magnas and a grip adapter (I use BK grips), they have the most comfortable grip of any revolver that I have found.

[kbm6893]

Originally Posted by 1sailor

Are you sure you got that right about the N frame being designed for the .44 Magnum. Wasn't the N frame introduced with the .357 Magnum years before they ever dreamed of the .44? I'm pretty sure the N frame was chosen for the .44 because it was robust enough but was originally for the .357.

I thought the .44 came first.

[rct269]

Ah you youngsters-------all about the gun--nothing about the history---nothing on target anyway.

So, for any and all who care one way or the other, the N frame appeared in 1908---the .44 Hand Ejector First Model (also known as the Triple Lock----far and away the finest revolver ever made by S&W---or anybody else). And not surprisingly, it was preceded by other large frames; albeit of the "top break" variety.

Bottom Line: Large frames for large cartridges---more power calls for more strength---more strength comes from more iron.

Next Bottom Line: Should you ever be so fortunate as to get your grubby little paws on a Triple Lock, take it apart and sit and stare. It will be akin to a religious experience-----or maybe sex.

Ralph Tremaine

[Lou_the_welder]

I switch from an N from to an L frame all the time. The one thing that gets me is the reach.
It's easier for me to DA (double action) an L frame than the N frame. As I have to have the webbing of my hand higher up closer to the hammer on an N frame. On the L its usually in the middle of the grip(round part of coke bottle).
I have large (size) hands and have had a firearm instructor watch me shooting an L, telling his class of 4 the way I had gripped my L WAS IN THE INCORRECT MANNER. I'll admit, I do grip the L's incorrectly. But after a few shots, he also told his class, " yeah, but he's hitting the target good so he could leave it alone...."
So, I guess I shoot all my N's in the correct manner. With the webbing higher up towards the hammer; but my preference lately has been an L.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[kbm6893]

Originally Posted by rct269

Ah you youngsters-------all about the gun--nothing about the history---nothing on target anyway.

So, for any and all who care one way or the other, the N frame appeared in 1908---the .44 Hand Ejector First Model (also known as the Triple Lock----far and away the finest revolver ever made by S&W---or anybody else). And not surprisingly, it was preceded by other large frames; albeit of the "top break" variety.

Bottom Line: Large frames for large cartridges---more power calls for more strength---more strength comes from more iron.

Next Bottom Line: Should you ever be so fortunate as to get your grubby little paws on a Triple Lock, take it apart and sit and stare. It will be akin to a religious experience-----or maybe sex.

Ralph Tremaine

I thought so. I know that J Edgar Hoover requested S&W make a stronger round for his agents that were shooting mostly .38 with I guess some .45 ACP. He wanted something that could penetrate the solid car doors of depression era gangsters and supposedly would crack an engin block on their getaway cars. I seem to recall the very first registered magnum with serial number 00001 was presented to him. It has never been recovered. Wonder where that gem is? Would be worth a fortune.

[1sailor]

Huh, what year was the .44 Magnum introduced. The OP mentioned the N frame being designed for the .44 magnum (not .44 special or 44/40) which I thought came much later than the .357. Isn't that why the .357 is referred to as the "original" magnum? I thought the actual .44 Magnum didn't hit the market until the 50's.

[kbm6893]

Originally Posted by 1sailor

Huh, what year was the .44 Magnum introduced. The OP mentioned the N frame being designed for the .44 magnum (not .44 special or 44/40) which I thought came much later than the .357. Isn't that why the .357 is referred to as the "original" magnum? I thought the actual .44 Magnum didn't hit the market until the 50's.

Someone will chime in. But what’s the difference in 44 special and magnum? I’m not the expert on this but if a 44 magnum is the same size as a 44 special but just loaded hotter, the size of the original N frame wouldn’t need to be changed, and if it was beefy enough to handle to magnum then no changes would have needed to be made.

I’m sure some minor changes took place, though.

I just checked. You’re right that technically the 44 mag came after the .357. But the 44 special was way earlier than the .357 mag. Elmer Keith experimented with his own hand loads of a .44 special and created it.

Still, I don’t think the N frame changed much to accommodate the magnum. So I think the .357 mag used the existing .44 frame to accommodate the new hot round.

[rct269]

Originally Posted by kbm6893

I thought so. I know that J Edgar Hoover requested S&W make a stronger round for his agents that were shooting mostly .38 with I guess some .45 ACP. He wanted something that could penetrate the solid car doors of depression era gangsters and supposedly would crack an engin block on their getaway cars. I seem to recall the very first registered magnum with serial number 00001 was presented to him. It has never been recovered. Wonder where that gem is? Would be worth a fortune.

I haven't seen it with my own eyes, but I've been told by a source I trust as much as much as my own eyes that J. Edgar's Magnum is alive and well----and cherished. So what does that mean---cherished? It means the owners more or less recently declined an offer of $200,000 for the gun----and subsequently declined another offer from another source of $250,000. I guess that means it's NOT FOR SALE!!---at least not right now---nor anytime soon----so stop calling!!!

And as an aside, the REGISTRATION NUMBER (not the serial number) of the first Registered Magnum is 1----as in "REG 1". I don't know what the serial number is---I reckon it's in the book. I also reckon it's in the later 46000 neighborhood of the N frame series which it (the 357) shared with all its kinfolk.

Ralph Tremaine

And as an aside, the .38 S&W Specials that were proving to be ineffective against the bad guys' cars and vests was improved upon (by Elmer Keith and Remington), renamed the 38/44 S&W Special High Speed, given a nice new S&W N frame gun (commonly known as the 38/44 Heavy Duty)---and put paid to the problems. In accord with the time honored wisdom of "Some's good, more's better, and too much is just right.", S&W kept on keeping on----and VOILA!!---the .357 Magnum. For those of you in the numbers crowd, they go like this: Regular everyday .38 Special---870 fps, 288 ft. lbs., 38/44 Special High Speed---1,175 fps, 460 ft. lbs. Sounds just like Elmer, doesn't it??!!

[1sailor]

You may have mistyped your description of the .44 special. The .44 Special is the same diameter but is not loaded hotter than the Magnum. The .44 Magnum can be loaded considerable hotter than the older .44 Special.

[kbm6893]

Originally Posted by 1sailor

You may have mistyped your description of the .44 special. The .44 Special is the same diameter but is not loaded hotter than the Magnum. The .44 Magnum can be loaded considerable hotter than the older .44 Special.

Yeah. I saw I had it reversed. Didn’t feel like going back and editing it at the moment.

[kbm6893]

Originally Posted by rct269

I haven't seen it with my own eyes, but I've been told by a source I trust as much as much as my own eyes that J. Edgar's Magnum is alive and well----and cherished. So what does that mean---cherished? It means the owners more or less recently declined an offer of $200,000 for the gun----and subsequently declined another offer from another source of $250,000.

And as an aside, the REGISTRATION NUMBER (not the serial number) of the first Registered Magnum is 1----as in "REG 1". I don't know what the serial number is---I reckon it's in the book. I also reckon it's in the later 46000 neighborhood of the N frame series which it (the 357) shared with all its kinfolk.

Ralph Tremaine

You’re right. I looked it up. It’s like 46758 or something with an 8.25” barrel. And a quarter million is low for it. The again, anyone who can turn down a quarter million isn’t gonna sweat at such a low number (to them).

I’m a member of the CMP forum. Elvis Presley’s issued M1 Garand is out there somewhere, they say. That would fetch big bucks too.

The local cop who was involved of the shooting of Dillinger, and supposedly just fired after the FBI agents already took him down, his family sold the revolver he used for big bucks.

[Wee Hooker]

I'd be hard pressed to choose one over the other till the end of time. They each have their niche's. Fortunately there is plenty of room in the safe and range bags to accommodate both.

[rct269]

Originally Posted by kbm6893

You’re right. I looked it up. It’s like 46758 or something with an 8.25” barrel. And a quarter million is low for it. The again, anyone who can turn down a quarter million isn’t gonna sweat at such a low number (to them).

I’m a member of the CMP forum. Elvis Presley’s issued M1 Garand is out there somewhere, they say. That would fetch big bucks too.

The local cop who was involved of the shooting of Dillinger, and supposedly just fired after the FBI agents already took him down, his family sold the revolver he used for big bucks.

J. Edgar's Magnum carries an 8 3/4" barrel-----not just one quarter----unless it shrunk some.

Ralph Tremaine

[Warren Sear]

Originally Posted by rct269

...(blah, blah, blah)... Bottom Line: Should you ever be so fortunate as to get your grubby little paws on a Triple Lock, take it apart and sit and stare. It will be akin to a religious experience-----or maybe sex.

Ralph Tremaine

Hahahaahahaha!!! Not even close!

[ABPOS]

Originally Posted by dr. mordo

I went the opposite way. My 686 PC lives in the safe, my 3" M629 gets carried every day. IMO the N frame is the ultimate S&W revolver platform.

An L frame only weighs something like 4 oz less than a N, so there's not much actual benefit, and for some reason L frames seem to have unnaturally heavy triggers no matter what springs you run in them.

Also, if you manage to find a square butt N frame (unlike my 629) and equip it with magnas and a grip adapter (I use BK grips), they have the most comfortable grip of any revolver that I have found.

I think it's all relative. I personally think 4 ounces with your arms pointed towards a target 90 degrees from your body means it feels like 4 pounds difference. I feel that way about long guns too.

My 6" model 19 doesn't balance anywhere near as nice as a 4"er.

And as far as L frame trigger, that comment made be go waaaaah? Every 686 I've fondled new in the store had a pretty darned good trigger. WAY better than J frames. Which I probably have the most experience with. I do not have really any experience with N frames though. So you may actually be correct. But comparing a J frame to 586/686, it's no contest. L frame wins all the way.

And to all who say everyone needs a 686, shouldn't it be AFTER you have a model 10? LOL.

[HamHands]

I've never swapped my beloved "N" frame for an "L" nor do I think I ever would. I love ALL SMITHS and certainly love the "L" frame as well. But my vintage/Lew Horton Special 3" barreled M29... it's the tits! When I absolutely cannot risk printing I'll swap the "N" for a pair of "J" frames, front pocket and rear pocket and have on several occasions. That said, I do find myself on the hunt for an M69 if I ever come across one that isn't astronomical in price!

[Ribwizzard]

You got to get your mind right.
A 8 oz. Hammer doesn't feel right in the hand when looking to bust up a cinder block
A 20 oz hammer doesn't feel right in the hand when looking at driving a tack
Same with guns, it's how it feels when your shooting it, not sitting around playing with it.

[wnc wheelgun]

Found a nice sample 581 first and stumbled upon a 28-2 and a 24-3. The L frame 581 with fixed sights was perfect for a crimson trace grip and balanced just right for me and my older eyes. My N frames are a joy to shot at targets with, but will back up the L frame.

[ctxcummins]

As much as I love the L-frame, and I do love mine, I'm pretty much one and done with them and am focusing on K-frames.

I don't see my 686-4 going anywhere, but it will definitely be sharing safe shelf space with some of it's smaller, older brothers!

As far as N frames go...I'm a big fan of the .44 Magnum, and have a couple of those sitting around as well. I don't really have a need for a 357 N frame.

[STCM(SW)]

Only "L" frame I have now is a M 696 no lock.
I can shoot my "N" frame .44's better from the 1923 to the M 24-5.
I had a M 686 4" , just was not my cup of tea.....

[Czechvar]

Just paid off my 629PC Snubbie Layaway at Buds, and my next Layaway will be a 627PC Snubbie. I had a 686+PC on Layaway, but cancelled it for the upcoming 627. The meager weight differential favored the 8 shot 627. Just my choice though...I’d like an L Frame, but my options are limited.

[Mr.Harry]

My opinion is that the N frame is best suited for 44 cal. I prefer L frame for .357 mag. But, in a duty weapon, open carried on a heavy duty belt, with really no consideration as to weight or concealment or efficiency of profile, I DO understand .357 mag in an N frame because it makes it ridiculously easy to manage and shoot rapidly and get rounds on target accurately. Hence the Highway Patrolman.

[HamHands]

Originally Posted by STCM(SW)

Only "L" frame I have now is a M 696 no lock.
I can shoot my "N" frame .44's better from the 1923 to the M 24-5.
I had a M 686 4" , just was not my cup of tea.....

Same here. I like the .357 cartridge just fine... But the .357 Magnum and even the.357 Sig are the only common handgun caliber(s) that I absolutely cannot shoot well; and never have in my 25 years of shooting. So I have accepted it and have foregone the caliber.

Thankfully, I shoot everything from .22lr to .44Magnum's well, very well actually. So my "N" frames are a 3" barreled M29 & a 3" barreled M629 with the lock deleted. They balance so well in the hand and while shooting that I've relegated my beloved 1911 commander to nightstand duty. A 3" barreled N frame carries well too, even better than the 4" barreled 1911 ever did.

I need a 2-3" barreled "L" frame though to try/compare between the N and L though!

[Narragansett]

Originally Posted by kbm6893

I thought so. I know that J Edgar Hoover requested S&W make a stronger round for his agents that were shooting mostly .38 with I guess some .45 ACP. He wanted something that could penetrate the solid car doors of depression era gangsters and supposedly would crack an engin block on their getaway cars. I seem to recall the very first registered magnum with serial number 00001 was presented to him. It has never been recovered. Wonder where that gem is? Would be worth a fortune.

I have a signed letter from J Edgar to someone

[BAM-BAM]

IIRC...........................


N-frame early 20th century
.38/44 about 1932/33?
.357 magnum 1935
.44 magnum 1954/55 ?
L-frame 1980

IMHO the L-frame a 4" 686/681 is the best utility/duty .357 going..... grip frame and trigger reach of a k-frame and the strength of an N-frame

[Mrnurse]

I carry a 32 auto...I holster a N frame. Ive found the N frame is perfect for me... Not that the others are bad...I just shoot the 28 better then any handgun I own.

[Narragansett]

I was 18 when I got my first pistol. 1968 to be exact. It was a 28-2 6"bbl. Traded it for a Browning Hi Power. Still have that. Love N frames. Have 2-28's, a 29classic DX, a 629, and 2 -57's coming. That being said, I have a small hand and like N frames for slow or long distance shooting. I have several K frames, and IMO, my all around best gun ever was a model 65-1 with target grips. That felt like an extension of my hand. I own one J frame, M60, not sure why, but it is going to go on the WTS soon. 2" guns are fine, but in a K frame

[shocker]

Just bought my first 357, a new production K-frame. With the light bullet limitations gone I went for the compact six shooter that still has enough mass to tame the recoil of full house magnum loads.
I downsized my 44 magnum from N to L.

[Walkingwolf]

Originally Posted by 1sailor

Are you sure you got that right about the N frame being designed for the .44 Magnum. Wasn't the N frame introduced with the .357 Magnum years before they ever dreamed of the .44? I'm pretty sure the N frame was chosen for the .44 because it was robust enough but was originally for the .357.

The N frame was actually designed for .40+ standard pressure cartridges. The registered magnum came along after the the outdoorsman revolver in 38-44. The N frame was picked because it was stronger than military and police frame.

[muddocktor]

It's all a matter of what feels right for the individual person. For me, the N frame just feels better than a K or L frame gun. I have a good buddy that has a 686 no- and it is a fine weapon, but my model 27's just feel better in hand for me. I started off with a 5" 27-2 as my first pistol purchase back when I turned 18, so the N frame just "fits" me better. But now if a nice 686 came up at an absurdly low price I would snatch it up in a heartbeat.

[Chukar60]

Everybody has preferences. If we all liked the same thing we would not have all these wonderful Smiths to talk about.
For me an N frame is a great platform for any cartridge that starts with a 4.
I have a 696, but if I am not on a trail somewhere or at the ranch, I prefer my 629 for 44 spcl and 44 mag. But the 696 has its place and sees plenty of carry time in the field.
I have owned 4 N frame 357’s. A pre 27, 3 1/2”, a 27-2 5” that I never shot a 4” 27-2 and 1954 Highway Patrolman in 4”.
Mechanically, these were wonderful guns. I just found the bulk of the guns out of proportion the 357 cartridge.
My slippery slope with Smiths started with a 66-1 snub. Then a 19-4. These two guns defined what a 357 was for me before I ever shot an N frame 357.
Perhaps if I had started my 357 shooting with an N, my opinion would be different.

[Bakebfr480]

Nope.......N frame all the way!

[Tom_R]

N Frames are great.

But my 4" 586-1 just feel and shoots like perfection for me.

[johngalt]

I have an N, L, K, and J frame. I prefer the N frame grip the best. I know the L and K frame are supposed to have the same size grip frame, but the L feels a little bigger to me. They don't have the same grips, so that is probably the difference.

I don't consider the caliber to relevant - caliber shouldn't have any influence on ergonomics. I would get an N frame .22 if it existed.

[CajunBass]

I've never had to choose. I just buy another gun.

I don't care much for L or J frames though. The full length barrel underlug has more to do with that than anything. I just think that's ugly. I've got a Model 69, but that's the only L frame..

J's are just too small.

[Old Corp]

Glad we're all different in likes and dislikes, or it'd be a boring place.
For me, don't have and never intend to jump on the 'big snubbie' bandwagon. Have never seen a use for those that appealed to me.
Large (N) frames seem at their best in the 4" and above range.

If I desire a snub for carrying, it'll be a J or K frame something, not a grapefruit sized revolver with a short barrel.
To fill the niche of smallish .45, I will carry an Officer's Model LW M1911 3". Flat, compact, easy to carry.

So, my eschewing these big shorty's leaves all the more for you guys that love'em!

[HamHands]

Originally Posted by Old Corp

Glad we're all different in likes and dislikes, or it'd be a boring place.
For me, don't have and never intend to jump on the 'big snubbie' bandwagon. Have never seen a use for those that appealed to me.
Large (N) frames seem at their best in the 4" and above range.

If I desire a snub for carrying, it'll be a J or K frame something, not a grapefruit sized revolver with a short barrel.
To fill the niche of smallish .45, I will carry an Officer's Model LW M1911 3". Flat, compact, easy to carry.

So, my eschewing these big shorty's leaves all the more for you guys that love'em!

Thanks for leaving the big shorties to us OC, ahaha! I like a big 3" N frame because it's just damn easy to carry with a decent belt and holster; even better with a great belt and holster. And the difference in velocity between a 3" and a 4-5" barrel is at best about 25-40fps and never enough for me to worry about slinging .44 anything. And the 3" just pulls/presents so well is the other attraction over anything longer.

That said, I like pretty much all "N" frames!

[Mrnurse]

Since the N Frame was built for the .44 magnum, is it overkill for a .357?
Your joking right?.... The little extra weight of my 28 is perfect for balance, I have large hands but find the NON Target Stock grips perfect...simply...in my book ... there is NO better wheel gun. Boeing designed the 707 airliner in the late 1950's...they added extra structural support for their new jet aircraft...over built...the AF is still flying KC 135's that DOM 1962.... overbuilt is a good quality.

[HamHands]

Originally Posted by Mrnurse

Since the N Frame was built for the .44 magnum, is it overkill for a .357?
Your joking right?.... The little extra weight of my 28 is perfect for balance, I have large hands but find the NON Target Stock grips perfect...simply...in my book ... there is NO better wheel gun. Boeing designed the 707 airliner in the late 1950's...they added extra structural support for their new jet aircraft...over built...the AF is still flying KC 135's that DOM 1962.... overbuilt is a good quality.

Awesome! I like/love overbuilt too as long as it's NOT, over complicated; Example, I hate working on Jap cars. Taking 5 things off the motor to get to one is F-ing stupid! I made my wife sell her 4Runner for something American. She chose a 4 door 15' Jeep Rubicon on 35's. I can crawl around under the hood in that baby. Overbuilt? Absolutly! The Dana 44's front and back with air lockers a beefy 241 transfer case and chromolly drive shafts... it's hard to break! The same goes for the N frame in .357!

[steelslaver]

357 J frame, kinda harsh recoil, K frame is snappy, but OK, no L frame 357. N frame 357s are like a Lincoln Continental, big and comfortable. I got big hands and love N frames, but, with the right grips, except for J frames there isn't that much difference in operating the trigger.

[bananaman]

I have 2 L frame revolvers. Have 5 N frames. Depending on what you are doing with them , use & loads, N's are my thing. I primarily just use them at the range. Bob

[ladder13]

Originally Posted by 1sailor

You may have mistyped your description of the .44 special. The .44 Special is the same diameter but is not loaded hotter than the Magnum. The .44 Magnum can be loaded considerable hotter than the older .44 Special.

Same diameter, but the Magnum case is longer by 1/8 inch or so.

[elm_creek_smith]

Originally Posted by johngalt

I don't consider the caliber to relevant - caliber shouldn't have any influence on ergonomics. I would get an N frame .22 if it existed.

How many .22 LR chambers do you think S&W could bore in an N-frame cylinder?

[ABPOS]

Originally Posted by HamHands

Thanks for leaving the big shorties to us OC, ahaha! I like a big 3" N frame because it's just damn easy to carry with a decent belt and holster; even better with a great belt and holster. And the difference in velocity between a 3" and a 4-5" barrel is at best about 25-40fps and never enough for me to worry about slinging .44 anything. And the 3" just pulls/presents so well is the other attraction over anything longer.

That said, I like pretty much all "N" frames!

Besides being easier to carry on your person, drawing is the other endearing quality of a shorter barreled gun. Drawing a 6" gun is like.... well just a lot longer process than a 2".

I do agree that a short barreled N frame is not really a great carry gun for concealing though. But for the woods a 3" may still be a really good choice. It would be legal for small game in my state. Not Deer though.

[chiefbob81]

I switch back and forth every time I go to the range.

[RoyM52]

But for the woods a 3" may still be a really good choice. It would be legal for small game in my state. Not Deer though.[/QUOTE]

this could also be considered an advantage. I live in the north where lots of other animals must be considered as you unload any hunting gun because of legal hunting hours. You have yet to leave the woods completely. However a non hunting gun of a decent caliber that is sized to be considered as a self defense Conceal carry can still be loaded {food for thought on carrying a non legal hunting length} The same goes for bow hunting.