696 worries... real or no problem?

[Hendel]

PCL, I know the picture of what you speak.

I did not know that this model had a thin forcing cone. That would certainly explain the particular issue we're familar with.

 

[tdan]

<Now as to Charter's 44's I wouldn't have one if they were free.>

That's what I traded in toward the purchase price of my 696. I liked the concept of the light weight frame of the "Bulldog", but mine shot slightly off point of aim with ho-hum accuracy. My 696 will shoot tighter groups at 25yds. than that Bulldog would shoot at 25ft. I would not hesitate to take a head shot in a hostage situation at 25yds. with my 696. Mine is spot on with my handloads.

 

[alaskavett]

Perhaps we need to look at this another way. Has anyone here ever owned a 696 that they have had this issue with? Has anyone ever seen a 696 that had a cracked forcing cone? Where is the proof of a problem? Kyle

 

[Hendel]

I've never owned one, but know a gentleman who's 696 forcing cone has spread out like a bell.

My guess is from fairly hot reloads and perhaps improper heat treat. That's just a guess. Irregardless, the gun is going to S&W to see what they say.

 

[alaskavett]

Any chance of posting photos of this animal before its return to S&W? I know I would like to see them as well as others and the response from it's mother. Kyle

 

[VAdoublegunner]

Yes, I'd like to see photos of that one too!

Everytime a 696 thread comes up you hear about how thin the forcing cone is and what a bad engineering design it was and how S&W dropped it because they knew it was weak and how they will all peel open like a tangerine, etc. etc. Yet you don't seem to hear that from any 696 owners who use and enjoy shooting them, even with "hot" loads in the 250gr @ 1000fps range (not hot for the gun, btw -- easily achievable at 22kpsi, but definately a 44SP +P level). And we don't seem to have an internet full of pics, testimonials, and horror stories of them disintegrating. Not that most owners shoot them that hot all the time anyway, but they have the capability if they so desire. Now, true, it's not a 44 Mag and no one should try to make it one. But that's a handloader/user issue, not a gun issue.

However a lot of those same concerns about the 696 are easily applied to K-frame 357 Mags, with a known history of damaged forcing cones and shooting loose when being used with the specific cartridge they were designed to fire. Not just anecdotal, or even "this guy I know who knew this guy who said.." type of stories but well documented occurrences. So much so that S&W developed the L-frames to address the issue. And a lot of those same folks will go gaagaa over Model 19s and 66s, etc. But may rarely shoot them with full power loads for the cartridge they were intended to handle, and few subject them to a long steady diet of them for fear of damage. But that's a gun issue, not a handloader/user issue. Strange that there isn't the same kind of apopolexy about the beloved K-frame 357 mags. I unfortunately don't own any, just L- and N-frames, so may not have an exactly accurate opinion of them. I hear they come apart easily with full power loads and S&W could discontinue them... (sarcasm meant all in good fun; with just a dash of truth)

 

[Jimmymac46]

Dead Horse

I have always been a strong believer that there is no such thing as a bad dog......just bad owners. Rotties, Pits and the like are born into this world to be just as wonderful as any other. Owners abuse, poorly train, miss handle them and consequently 'create' mean and agressive dogs.

The same can be said of some gun owners. Smith and other companys design weapons for a specific purpose and when they are used as designed, they function exceptionally well. However, there is a tendancy of some to 'magnumize' a non-magnum. We see it in rifles as well....get that extra couple hundred feet per second and it will shoot flatter, reach out longer, and knock down better. In rifles, the cost of such is fried barrels, poor accuracy, and blown actions. In handguns, it equates to lose actions, end shake, and....split forcing cones.

The solution.....if you want more performance in your rifle than designed, sell your 308 and get a 458. In handguns, specifically the 44 Special, if you want more performance, get a 44 Magnum. Simple concept.

And, I have never ever heard, read, seen, or even dreamed that Smith ceased the manufacture of the 696 because of a 'thin' forcing cone. As with most company decisions, sales and profit dictate.

 

[RidgwayCO]

Jimmymac46, I agree with you about trying to make a round something it's not. If a certain caliber doesn't have enough power for you, then get a bigger caliber.

IMHO however, the .44 Special has been hobbled since its inception with artificially weak factory rounds. Heck, the .44 Special was originally loaded to the same specs at the .44 Russian, even though the .44 Special has a longer case. That the "standard" factory round in .44 Special is a 246gr LRN bullet at an advertised 750 fps (which often won't chronograph close to that number), is bordering on criminal. The thought is that these rounds are kept weak due to the numerous old guns out there with questionable steel and/or heat treatments.

But for a modern gun, with modern heat-treated steels, there's no reason to accept such pitiful performance. Elmer Keith and others ("The .44 Associates") showed the promise of the .44 Special, and Skeeter Skelton, John Taffin, and Brian Pearce have kept the flame alive. I've loaded thousands of .44 Special rounds in the 250gr/950fps class, and my revolvers haven't been damaged in the least. For the record, they range from an 18oz S&W M396 Mountain Gun to a 45oz Ruger Bisley Flattop.

Keith asked S&W and Remington for a .44 caliber round that would power his 250gr bullets to 1200 fps (within SAAMI specs), performance he could obtain from his 4" .44 Special revolver. The .44 Magnum produces even more performance than this, but at the cost of heavy revolvers with substantial recoil. I've touched off some "full magnum loads" in a 25oz M329, and that's just more "fun" than I care to endure. There's a reason that most of the rounds fired in .44 Magnums have performance levels much closer to the .44 Special...

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

On the "other" S&W forum there are pics and a lengthly thread showing one with a humongous belled forcing cone but no real explaination as to how it got that way.
Like I said both my 696 and my Rossi 720 will probably outlast me.

 

[Centenniel]

The 696 is a great gun. Seems if there was a forcing cone issue you'd see more of these models up for sale.

Used as intended you won't have any problems.

Yup, that has been my experience with the 696 I bought new in December 1996. She ain't for sale.

 

[Hendel]

The reason I posted that particular gun on the other forum was that I was trying to find out why this would have happened and if it had happened to others.

I wasn't looking to start a thread that got sidetracked into safe loading habits and whatnot. I simply wanted to see if this has happened to others before.

I looked at the actual gun last week and the owner said it was alright for me to post a thread about it.

The rounds in question were reloads. He drops his own 250 Keith's and puts 'em in front of 16.5gr of 2400. Yeah, they're hot and he knows they're hot. Apparently hot enough to bell the forcing cone.

In any case he's sending the gun to S&W and will see what they say.

 

[amazingflapjack]

Hi all-I'm very fond of the .44 Spl round, and I buy into the idea that it has "inherant accuracy" at least for me. I also echo the question as to what the gentleman would consider a hottie in a .44 spl (?) I have 2 revolvers that are chambered specifically for this round and neither is a S&W. I have been looking at S&W's in this caliber for some time, but haven't landed on anything yet. There is the 624 cylinder recall thing that keeps me away from them, but I have been watching some 696's lately. I have been carrying a Charter Arms Bull Dog 44 for about 20 yrs. It is a 2 1/2 brl and is accurate, dependable and light-21 oz un-loaded. I also have a Taurus 441 4 inch that has one of the nicest out of the box double actions I have ever experienced, and it is very accurate. I put some custom grips on it-which most all Taurus's need badly-and it made a fine revolver into a gem. Both of these are 5 shots. I bought them both from a dealer I had known a long time-same range- for very little. I think he sold the Taurus just because that's what it is, and never fired it, or I wouldn't have been able to buy it! I load my own range stuff-240gr SWC's over 6 1/2 - 7 gr's of Unique. I find it to be a good all around load. I shoot some of this out of some of my N frames-nice accuracy and pleasant. When you compare a .45ACP's numbers to those of a standard load .44 SPL I'd have to ask why push it any more than about 850-950 fps? Flapjack

 

[VAdoublegunner]

Hendel,
I checked the other forum photos and that is truly a weird looking thing! I would concur with a lot of posters that it was either a case of improper heat treating (likely) or someone who didn't know what he was doing bubbasmithed the cone with a reamer to "improve" it. It likely would have cracked rather than belled in that case if it had been properly heat treated. Which could be why someone tried to bubbasmith the cone ... it exhibited poor accuracy very early in life if too soft.

The loads, while hotter than a standard 44SP, are not that particularly hot for the gun. Should only be around 22.5kpsi or so.

Going to be interesting to hear what S&W has to say!

 

[zeke]

In years past there was a forum member that bought a 696, and specifically asked about shooting heavy lead loads. He was warned, but tried it anyway. If memory serves, he indicated his forcing cone was damaged. Can't remember if it split or what. The gentleman from Alaska was found of heavy recoiling revolvers, and very familiar with custom pistols and reloading.

By the way, there is a difference between being able to handle "pressure" and being able to handle "force". A cylinder may be able to handle a higher pressure, but the forcing conce handling the "force" from an larger diameter lead bullet with a greater bearing surface, may be an entirely different matter.

Have 3 696's, and if desiring to shoot heavy loads i use a N-frame. The 696 seems very well suited to 200 jhps at about 900 fps, or 180 jhp's at 1000 fps.

 

[notsofast]

Ok, you damage a forcing cone on a mod 696 or a mod 19, can it be fixed? and what does the repair entail? Does forcing cone damage ever render a gun “unfixable” ?

 

[BLUEDOT37]

The rounds in question were reloads. He drops his own 250 Keith's and puts 'em in front of 16.5gr of 2400. Yeah, they're hot and he knows they're hot.

The loads, while hotter than a standard 44SP, are not that particularly hot for the gun. Should only be around 22.5kpsi or so.

23.4K psi actually. Handloader #221 had Speer's ballistic lab test this exact load in 2002; 250gr LSWC, CCI-300 primers, & 16.5gr/2400 = 23,413 psi. It was fired in a SAAMI piezo-electric P/V (pressure/velocity) barrel.

.

As with the M19's, lead accumalation in the forcing cone has been stated as a prime reason for damage to there thin forcing cone/barrel breach.

.

notsofast: If the barrel breach gets split that normally requires a new barrel, as long as it didn't damage the frame. If that barrel is no longer available then it's unfixable.

.

Compare these two .44 L-frame forcing cones.

.

M396NG forcing cone/barrel breach
.

.
.

M69 forcing cone/barrel breach

.

 

[murphydog]

Good photos, but did you mean the red arrow in the photo of the 396NG to point at the "breech" (opening) or at a "breach" (an opening defect)? I can't see a crack there.

Also, before we get carried away, the OP hasn't been here for 6 1/2 years...

 

[HamHands]

I have never seen a broken one, a photo of a broken one, or a first-hand account of someone who has broken one.

I would guess, absent information from someone authoritative at S&W, that they were discontinued because of slow sales, not fragility.

Truth on all accounts! I've seen a pic of TWO 696's that the FC was either bulged or cracked. And we never did get the facts as to what "really happened" with said examples.

In fact, I've seen way more "K" frames cracked beneath/around the forcing cone and stretched top straps from shooting the dreaded 125grain warmed up .357's; and even then... it's not all that common to see a ruined "K". We run the snot out of my brothers vintage K frame with juiced up 158's and 180's. I'd own one but .357 is just a caliber that I simply don't shoot well.

OP, the .44Special is a relatively low pressure round. I would have zero problems running factory Underwood, 255grain "Keith" loads rated @ 1,000fps and it's equal reloaded on my bench to the same spec, no more, no less. That said, that particular load is as hot as I would go because anything more and you essentially are trying to "Magnum-ize" the caliber/gun. Truthfully, you don't need anything harder hitting than that load in a .44Special in my experience; I've used it for my go-to "Woods Load" for years in my 3" barreled M29 and M629. The Gold Dot 200grain load @ 900fps is a near perfect street/suburb load.

I've been on the hunt for a 696 for over a year. Nobody is turning them lose for any reasonable price because they are so awesome! .44Special is a "Come back Kid Caliber" that has a resurgence like no other I've seen in my lifetime over the last 2 years.

Should I ever be blessed enough to purchase a 696 that isn't as costly as a 3" Lew Horton Special.. then I'll certainly pic one up and fire/enjoy the snot out of it with the aforementioned loads and have absolutely zero concerns about it!

ETA: I just realize that this thread is from 2010..... Ugh.... Still interesting though!

 

[RoyM52]

Looking at the Hornady 9 th edition {I don't have the 10th} The top load for a 240 SWC {lead} is only reached with one powder {Blue Dot} and it only makes 900 FPS. Top loads with most powders are at 800 FPS. Appears as thought you have already been loading a thin forcing cone too hot. I don't think I would be posting this combination for new loaders to follow with their 696 . This is a good combination....but for a Model 69.

 

[RoyM52]

Looking at the Hornady 9 th edition {I don't have the 10th} The top load for a 240 SWC {lead} is only reached with one powder {Blue Dot} and it only makes 900 FPS. Top loads with most powders are at 800 FPS. Appears as thought you have already been loading a thin forcing cone too hot. I don't think I would be posting this combination for new loaders to follow with their 696 . This is a good combination....but for a Model 69.

My mistake...your loading for a 629 {has a thicker forcing cone} and it's a Magnum so your load is not over book for that, but for a 44 special it does appear to be over book.