New L Frame 44 mag!

[Dstyles75]

nevermind...

 

[Mule88]

Ill get one not because I need it, but I just like different variations of smith .44's to collect. its one of my favorite calibers.

 

[steelslaver]

About frame size. Making the opening narrower top to bottom to for a 5 shooter will not cause problems as long as the top strap and lock work areas have the same thickness and width as a N frame. Matter of fact the shorter dimensions up and down help. Easier to bend a long piece than a short one. I agree on the forcing cone area being a concern. An N frame has a .670-36 thread and allows it to have a forcing cone OD of about .640. A L frame has a only a .562 -36 thread which only allows an OD of about .532. Take .429 from that leaves .103 and divide that by 2 and you only have .05015, and you need to bevel that fore the forcing cone. Not much left. I have a L frame sized Taurus 44 special and it is around .040 at the edge of the forcing cone. Hard to make the frame accept a larger thread because the forcing cone area of the barrel has to clear the top strap and you have to have some frame below the barrel threads, but still let the ejector rod have a big enough hole in the yoke and still have metal above it. All this is dictated by the OD of the cylinder and radius of the chambers in the cylinder. Move the chambers out and walls get thin and the center line of the barrel has to go up. Move the chambers in and they get closer together with thin walls between and then the center line of the barrel goes down and less room for the yoke ejector rod fit. Kinda stuck. But like said above might get a little with a slightly smaller ejector rod OD.

And then I want a L frame in 45ACP which would leave .040 before the forcing cone taper and about .03 with the taper. But, Taurus made some. I want a S&W.

 

[TAROMAN]

Agree, a .45 ACP version of this would be sweet.
I'd grab one in a flash.

 

[Lenny_D]

I own a no dash 696 so I know that the forcing cone is alittle wimpy. I've not put a lot of rounds through it nor is it a magnum so maybe someday it will cause a problem. The new "L" magnum could exacerbate the problem (?) with heavy loads I suppose. To be honest,I've never heard of anyone who has had a forcing cone issue with a 696. Does anyone know of one? I'm not trying to start a debate just want to know if the issue is real or not?
Len

 

[Paul105]

Just a short update. I took possession of a 69 today. OD of barrel shank is right at .620". The cylinder is 1.670 inches and isn't recessed for cartridge rims -- a 1.712" handload fits, but is right at the face of the cylinder. Lymans No 49 edition shows OAL w their 425421 Keith Bullet is 1.710".

Here are some pictures:
.
M69 Barrel Shank/Forcing Cone area:
.

.
M696 Barrel Shank/Forcing Cone Area:
.

.
629 Mtn Gun Barrel Shank/Forcing Cone area:
.

.
Family Portrait - 629 Mtn Gun, M696, New M69:
.

.
Sorry about the "so-so" pictures -- light wasn't the best and I'm not the best photographer.

Headed to the range with about 25 Lbs of .44 ammo (Mild to wild) and the chrono. Naturally, the range was closed, so I'll do it another day and open a new thread to post results.

What a neat little package.

FWIW,

Paul

 

[KLYDE]

Congrats on the purchase. While the forcing cone isn't as beefy as the N fram, it does make the 696 look a little weak. Keep us filled in on the range report.

 

[TAROMAN]

Thanks for the update.
How'd you score that?
Inside connection, I presume?

 

[colt_saa]

Thanks for the update.
How's you score that?
Inside connection, I presume?

The Model 66s and 69s were released into the distribution chain a few weeks ago. You should be able to find one at most any gun show this weekend. There have also been many of them on the various auction sites over the last week.

 

[nawilson]

Paul105, thanks for the comparison. I do think there will be a Model 69 in my future...

 

[STCM(SW)]

Paul, you beat me to it.... LOL!

 

[80sgyrene]

I'd be a buyer with a 3" barrel and fixed sights.

 

[jake m29]

I have a 696 and love it. I carry a 4inch 29 off duty pert near everyday. I plan on buying the first 69 I see as long as I have the money. I think it will be the perfect vehicle for my favorite factory carry load, the Federal 240 gr hydra-shok. Like the 696 I see myself carrying it much more than shooting it.

 

[LaVistaBill]

I was at SHOT 2014 Media Day and got to shoot the S&W Model 69 with Federal 240 gr. JSP .44 Magnum ammo. As expected, it packed a punch at both ends, but the well-designed grips helped. It's still a "carry much - shoot little" gun with Magnum loads...should make a great .44 Special. At 15 yards shooting SA, I had no trouble keeping all 5 rounds in a palm-sized group at 15 yards on a Shoot-N-C target. Boge and Jeff Quinn were right there with me, I may have ended up on a GunBlast.com video!

 

[radar1972]

I love Smiths, but I think I'll pass on the M69 and just keep my Ruger Redhawk .44 mag 4" stainless 6-shot.

 

[Kilibreaux]

Just a FYI for those interested...

I was looking at the video coverage of the 2014 SHOT Show over on gunblast.com, (day 3 video if you are going to go look) and they were showing the new, 5 shot L Frame model 69, 4.25" barrel in 44 Mag.

I like the concept - will need to see & hold one to really decide.

Anyone else interested?

Have a good weekend,
Bob S.

I thing it's an outstanding idea! A five shot .44 Magnum isn't any "less" than a five shot .44 special by Charter Arms!

 

[Timbo22]

I'll be buying the first model 69 that I see. It looks to be a twin to my 686-6 Mountain Gun (6 shot 357 with lock and same barrel profile made for Lipsey's in 2010). Remington made a mid-range 44 Magnum loading that I have used in the past in my 629-2 Mountain Revolver, and I think will match up well with this new revolver. And thanks Paul105 for the photo comparisons.
Tim

 

[fungunnin]

Care to put both the 629 mountain gun and the 69 on a scale for comparison?
Thanks!

Sent from my Motorola Flip phone.

 

[jtcarm]

What's the cylinder diameter and frame window height?

 

[Godandhuntingdogs]

Anyone stocking these yet.