I have been waiting for the Model 69 2.75" in 44 magnum to come out for a while now, however I have been doing some thinking and am not sure if i should just get the 4.2" barrel model instead. I want a 44 magnum really just because. I will use it for home defense with 44 special, some range time and walking leisurely through the woods for exercise, no strenuous hiking anymore, with some midrange 44 magnum. I'm not a hunter either. I currently have a charter arms 44 special with a 2" barrel and a Ruger Vaquero Sheriff Model 45 Colt, out of which I have shot some 330gr. ammo, so I'm not recoil adverse. I am just not familiar with 44 magnum and thought i would reach out for some thoughts on the respective barrel lengths. Thanks.
Model 69 44 Magnum 4.2" or 2.75" barrel?
- Thread starter HeyJoe
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
RIDE-RED 350r
Member
I wasn't aware that the m69 was coming out with a 2.75" bbl.
Given your intended use, the shorter barrel might get the nod from me.
Given your intended use, the shorter barrel might get the nod from me.
4.2 for shooting, 2.75 for looks.
I have a 4.2, and personally I don't want to shoot magnum anything in less than a 4" barrel. Unless you were handloading 45 Colt to way above SAAMI specs you haven't come close to experiencing 44 mag blast and recoil.
I have a 4.2, and personally I don't want to shoot magnum anything in less than a 4" barrel. Unless you were handloading 45 Colt to way above SAAMI specs you haven't come close to experiencing 44 mag blast and recoil.
Geblynch
Member
I feel the 69 is one of the best revolvers S&W has come up with since the Model 19. I 'm nuts over mine. I shoot plated 200 grain X-Treme @ 850fps but can stoke it up if I want. It's just about the same weight as the Mod 19
And it's accurate. I added older Goncalo Alves Grips. A 44 mag in an L frame is as good as it gets.
And it's accurate. I added older Goncalo Alves Grips. A 44 mag in an L frame is as good as it gets.
stykshooter
Member
"I feel the 69 is one of the best revolvers S&W has come up with since the Model 19."
I absolutely agree. I love mine. The perfect sized package for carrying and accurate as can be.
I plan on buying a 2.75" to compliment my current 4 incher but for for proposed purposes, you would probably be best served with the 4 inch barrel.
I absolutely agree. I love mine. The perfect sized package for carrying and accurate as can be.
I plan on buying a 2.75" to compliment my current 4 incher but for for proposed purposes, you would probably be best served with the 4 inch barrel.
The M69 4 ¼” is one of my favorite (if not my favorite) center fire handguns.
Bought a 4 ¼” shortly after they were introduced (Early 2014). Liked it so much that I bought a backup a month or so later. Both are equipped Hogue 500 X Frame grips which help moderate recoil for me (bone at the base of my thumb gets hammered with open back grips). Have shot them a bunch over the last three years and am continually impressed with their handling and shooting capabilities.
I will add the 2.75” when they become available.
FWIW, if I could only have one barrel length, it would be the 4 ¼”.
Paul
Bought a 4 ¼” shortly after they were introduced (Early 2014). Liked it so much that I bought a backup a month or so later. Both are equipped Hogue 500 X Frame grips which help moderate recoil for me (bone at the base of my thumb gets hammered with open back grips). Have shot them a bunch over the last three years and am continually impressed with their handling and shooting capabilities.
I will add the 2.75” when they become available.
FWIW, if I could only have one barrel length, it would be the 4 ¼”.
Paul
I think anything shorter than 4" is to short for a 44 mag. Now 44 special is a different story. Just robs too much from a magnums and makes it difficult to get any effective use of the power
Autonomous
Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2017
- Messages
- 1,042
- Reaction score
- 1,571
I vote for the 4" version. Due to the size of the frame the extra 1.25" of barrel won't really make the gun bulkier. I think the plusses outweigh any perceived advantage of the short barrel.
That's what I was thinking when I read this thread earlier. The shorter barrel version looks good, but I'm glad I have my 4.25" version.
Colonel
Member
IMHO: Magnums get their "power" with longer barrels, so I would vote for the 4.25" barrel.
Just like the .357 magnum; powerful and fantastic with a 4" to 8" barrel, but shorten that barrel down to 2.5" and it loses its power quickly.
Finally, comparing a 2.75" to 4.25" is only 1.5" that is not much difference while carrying, but a hefty difference in ballistic performance.
Just like the .357 magnum; powerful and fantastic with a 4" to 8" barrel, but shorten that barrel down to 2.5" and it loses its power quickly.
Finally, comparing a 2.75" to 4.25" is only 1.5" that is not much difference while carrying, but a hefty difference in ballistic performance.
To me, a .44 Magnum revolver is just about useless if it has a barrel much shorter than 4-inches, and a 6.5-inch gun makes a lot more sense than a 4. JMHO based on my own uses and abilities.
That said, if you really want the shorter barrel, you should buy it.
That said, if you really want the shorter barrel, you should buy it.
bluetopper
Member
The only thing better would be a 6" or an 8 3/8" barrel model 69.
Good decision, I doubt you'll be disappointed. I found the factory grips a bit uncomfortable with mid to upper level .44 mag loads. If you find this to be the case, you might want to consider the Hogue X Frame 500 grips.
Paul
Autonomous
Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2017
- Messages
- 1,042
- Reaction score
- 1,571
The first grips I put on my 4" 629 were Pachmayr's, didn't like 'em. Next was a Hogue Monogrip. Good grip, you just have to get used to the tacky feel. Now it wears a Crimson Trace grip which is fills the hand pretty well. Only thing is I worry about of the battering hot loads such as a heavy Cor®Bon will dish out to the laser.
petemacmahon
Member
agh, I'm too late to the conversation. For your all around walking gun, I would have said sell the Charter Arms and pick up a good used 696. Mine, although it was tuned DAO by a maestro, is the most accurate 3 inch S&W I have ever shot. You don't really need that 44 mag since your not hunting and my 696 has put venison in the freezer with simple 240 LSWC over 2400.
Enjoy your 69.
DennisE
Member
I've had the 4" but I'm looking forward to a 2.75" as soon as I can after I get the 2.75" Model 66.
hastings
Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2008
- Messages
- 471
- Reaction score
- 58
A short-barreled N-frame doesn't make much sense to me, but the 69 is a different story. Even without the full advantage a longer barrel affords you, an L-frame stoked with 44special would be just fine. Having the option of going with full-blown 44mag just adds appeal to a revolver that sounds ideal for concealed carry with really stout 44special loads. Not a hunting gun, but definitely a great concealed carry revolver.
I would get a longer barreled version if they offered it with a full under-lug like the 686. That configuration with a 4" barrel would be ideal. Going longer than 4" on the barrel would push me towards an N-frame again. If it's going to be a 69, I'd opt for the shorter barreled version - which I am impatiently waiting for S&W to release.
I would get a longer barreled version if they offered it with a full under-lug like the 686. That configuration with a 4" barrel would be ideal. Going longer than 4" on the barrel would push me towards an N-frame again. If it's going to be a 69, I'd opt for the shorter barreled version - which I am impatiently waiting for S&W to release.
Last edited:
Similar threads
