|
|
08-19-2009, 09:59 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 0
Liked 27 Times in 24 Posts
|
|
Has anyone carried a S&W 296?
Not sure when it is discontinued (I'm too lazy to get up and check the book now). I think maybe 1999.
I handled one the other day for the first time and it intrigued me. I think it had an aluminum frame and a titanium cylinder and it was chambered in 44 special. It sort of looked like a 642 on steroids.
Anyone shot/carried this?
__________________
Aaron Terry
|
08-19-2009, 10:34 PM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 13,996
Likes: 5,005
Liked 7,702 Times in 2,624 Posts
|
|
Cool guns. I have one, but I don't carry. I have shot mine some, and the recoil is stout. Face it, a gun weighing a pound and a quarter shooting .44 special is going to feel a whole lot different from a gun weighing about twice that much -- like, say, a 696 or a short-barreled 24.
I put a steel cylinder in mine (same as the 696), which raises the weight by about three ounces. It is tolerable to shoot with cowboy loads now -- low speed 240 gr bullets. But be advised that in the titanium cylinder version, Smith doesn't want you to shoot loads whose bullets weigh more than 200 gr; there is the potential for unfired rounds in the cylinder to jump crimp and tie up the gun.
I would imagine that this would be an excellent carry gun if you had to haul something around all day in a pocket. It would sure catch a bad guy's attention if circumstances required you to produce it. And in a moment of need, I imagine the recoil is the last thing you would notice. But I sure noticed it in sessions at the range.
__________________
David Wilson
Last edited by DCWilson; 08-20-2009 at 08:19 AM.
Reason: Add photo
|
08-20-2009, 01:08 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: MI
Posts: 1,509
Likes: 29
Liked 1,013 Times in 231 Posts
|
|
The 296 is a fine revolver. Why S&W stopped making it, who knows?
It's a little on the large side for concealed carry, but manageable. And yes, it's a handful!
__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
|
08-20-2009, 07:48 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 0
Liked 27 Times in 24 Posts
|
|
It just looks like a handful
__________________
Aaron Terry
|
08-20-2009, 10:00 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 112
Likes: 1
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Oh yeah, i got one, its great. everybody needs one. S&W should bring it back.
There is a picture of mine in my photo album.
__________________
Member SWCA, SWHF, CCA, WACA
|
08-20-2009, 10:37 AM
|
|
Moderator
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Great Lakes State
Posts: 29,939
Likes: 12,830
Liked 34,111 Times in 8,017 Posts
|
|
A friend and I each bought one for $375 + tax when they were being discontinued around 2001. I didn’t find recoil that bad with 200gr factory ammo, but the fluting on the back of the trigger guard is sharp and jabs my middle finger. I don’t know how much weight it saved, but they should have left the back of the trigger guard smooth. Factory ammo is expensive.
The gun wasn’t terribly popular and holsters were hard to find, unless you liked nylon. The odd barrel length, 5 shot fluted cylinder and frame hump pretty much dictate a custom holster and not all makers have a mold for the gun. I ended up with a Kramer MSP paddle and carried it a few times, but it’s pretty bulky. It is extremely comfortable on a belt because it’s so light. They’ve become a little pricey.
__________________
"I also cook."
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|