Last two range trips I bought my 4" Model 69. I had forgotten what a nice gun it is. Trigger is good, gun is very accurate and easy to shoot (I did install bigger grips). The L frame makes for a very handy size and the guns very flexible in its loadings. In snake country? .44 shotshells. Plinking and just general shootin'? .44 specials. In bear country? .44 mag.

The lock? I pay it no attention. One downside only 5 shot capacity, but if they went to 6 the gun would be too bulky.

Attached Images

69 1.jpg (73.6 KB, 231 views)

__________________
Jim
Many K and N Frames

Yep, they did somethin' right there. Mine's been to Clark Custom for an action job, and the sights have been changed to a Dawson F/O on the front, and Bowen Back Country on the back. It has a Red Dot on it at the moment for load development, but even though it's easier to shoot accurately (for me?), I "strongly" prefer the open sights. It's just a cool little? gun!
So cool that I recently traded and unwanted Sig for it's little brother with the shorter barrel! Not sure I'll ever find a purpose for it, but it'd be a dandy carry gun in the right circumstances.
It still feels weird to me that the 69 is smaller than a 686! Just amazing considering our perspective of the 44 Magnum back in the 60/70's.

Smaller? Debatable

686
WIDTH 1.55 in
LENGTH 9.56 in
HEIGHT 6 in
WEIGHT 40.3 oz

69
WIDTH 1.55 in
LENGTH 9.6 in
HEIGHT 6 in
WEIGHT 37.4 oz

No doubt you’re correct.
I’m not in a position to weigh them at the moment but when I shove a fully loaded, 686+ in the holster, there’s no doubt which one I want to be wearing at the end of the day! Sometimes feeling doesn’t Translate into easily measurable values, not unlike recoil for many people. And, of course, we all have our subjective ideas about things.
I probably shouldn’t have made that comment.

Anytime I worry about 5 I remind myself that 6 isn’t much better.

__________________
Uvidíme se později, aligátore.

IMHO, without the full lug barrel the 69 feels smaller. Definitely smaller than an N-Frame. 69 is just a good flexible gun.

__________________
Jim
Many K and N Frames

I agree, the L-frame 44s are nice! I went with the 2-3/4" bbl.

Of course they couldn't go to (6) rounds in a L-frame because the cylinder diameter/width is set at 1.555".

The L-frame .357s & .44s have the same diameter cylinder.

.



.
.



.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

The comment is fine. If you're expecting the 44 mag to be bigger and heavier, it would make the 69 seem even smaller and lighter. Like you said, it's subjective.

The 69 is a great revolver. Had mine for a few years now. Typically shoot it with lite .44 Mag reloads (Special equiv). East to shoot, very accurate. Very good gun for the boonies.

Another Model 69 lover, shoot mine stock and it goes every where with me...Here is my rig from Gene at Indian Creek Leather.

Attached Images

image_67579393.jpg (102.5 KB, 96 views)

Well if ya think real hard about only 5 rounds remember this-the only safe way to carry the old 6 shot single actions was with one empty chamber. My thought process is if whatever is still coming at me with 5 full power Keith swc’s either stuck in or poked through it it’s time to run lol

Makes me appreciate my 696s all the more!

Attached Images

01C30899-578F-4864-A3EB-E1E11E0A92B5.jpg (87.2 KB, 96 views)

__________________
213th FBINA

I have often thought about getting a model 69. To this point i have stayed content with my 329 and 629 MG.

of course, that could change by this afternoon!

The Model 69s are a nice little package and surprisingly shootable.

It's amazing the power that can be harnessed in a relatively small gun nowadays.

Just a wondering: How would a 696 compare in these figures?

__________________
"Don't Give Up the Ship"

696

WIDTH: 1 1⁄2"
OVERALL LENGTH: 8"
HEIGHT: 5 3⁄4"
WEIGHT: 35 ozs.

I agree with all of the above. My plinking load is 9.5g of Win 244 behind a coated 240g
swc. Clean burning light moderate load at about 1120 fps. Very stable, I've recorded SD's as low as 5 fps.

I sold my model 14-4 so I could but the 4.25 inch and have never regretted it. Last year I finally broke down and got the 2.75 inch. Love them both.

I've had .44 on my mind a bit lately, and the 2.5" 69 has definitely shown up on my radar. It looks like a really nicely sized revolver. I can't bring myself to like being limited to five shots, but I can bring myself to accept the trade off. Having shot a few matches with a revolver, I'm not particularly keen to the panicked feel of hearing "Click" instead of "BOOM!" and having to reload. As much as I dislike it while shooting at paper and steel targets, I don't like to consider how much that would suck when shooting at malicious or angry things that mean me harm.

six shots is comforting. Five large heavy slugs provide a comfort of their own.

Lite .44 Mag loads are very shootable in a 69, and STILL pack a serious punch. Loaded heavy it’s a round that has taken everything on the continent, if not everything in the world. For a fairly compact, shootable piece what more can you ask?

Big fan here. Have a pair and a spare of each barrel length (the spare was in case S&W discontinued the m69). My favorite revolver platform. Have shot them a lot - over 15,000 combined rnds thru both bbl lengths.

Here's a target that might be of interest - shows POI of various loads using the same POA (Big center diamond). Shot rested at 25 yds with my origianl 4 1/4" - 2 shots with each load to prevent recoil fatigue and reduce target clutter.
.

.
The 2.75" is my current favorite.
.


Paul

I put night sights and Nill grips on my M69

Cool!

Which brand/model of night sights are they?

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

Paul, perfect person to ask this question to with your experience with m69s. Have you encountered any barrel issues with your high count pieces? Mainly asking about barrel torquing due to projectile rotational mass, or any other issues.
Thanks,
Chaz

No barrel issues.

It’s 20% better.

5 shots donesnt bother me at all. Nor does the lock. I’d simply plug it. When hand polished with new grips they can look great. It’s the 2 piece barrel that wrecks it for me. I’ve wanted a short barrel 44 for awhile now. I flirted with the idea of the 2 1/2” 69. But I’m going to hold out for a 29/629 I think.

I am going to be spending more time in bear country and would like a .44 Mag to back up bear spray. One review said that the felt recoil could be softened by larger and/or softer grips so I am very interested in which grips you installed.

Thanks.

Pachmayr Diamond Pro grips are cushie but not too big.

.



.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

Hogue monogrip. They’re ugly but they work

Hogue Tamers (S&W 500) OverMolded Rubber Grip for S&W K, L, N, X & Z-Frame - Round Butt (Tamer Conversion) - Black

These cover the revolver's backstrap with soft sobthane.

I have a saying; "A gunfight is more fight than gun."
I have been practicing reloading while moving to cover, whether with a revolver or a semi. I cannot do this at any indoor range, so I usually train at the creek. It takes a certain amount of time to move to the second position which I use to reload. Shoot Move. Shoot Move. Pretty hard at first but I got better. It is always fun. Pray God I never need it.

There is comfort in the quality of your equipment as you said. There is comfort in the confidence you have earned in your skills and plan. There is comfort in the One Who guides and guards us.

Kind Regards,
BrianD

__________________
696-6906-457-38-3913-CS40-411

All of my revolvers wear exactly these.

Pachmyr Compac is thick and nice.

+1 on the grips Hogue makes for the X frame revolvers. They fit all round butt K, L and N frame revolvers too and work very well. The only downside is that they are bulky but you can sand them down if you find them too large.

I like the way they feel in my hands so much I put them on my 686 and 617 too even though recoil is not as much as an issue with the 686 and no issue with the 617.

A lot of people object to them on aesthetic grounds. It's definitely a minority opinion on this forum but I think wood grips look out of place on a stainless steel revolver. Wood looks great on blued guns but I don't own any blued revolvers.

You are right in my wheelhouse. I use 9 grains for my “light magnum” load.

240gr Acme SWC
9gr Win244, 1.61” COAL, Win LP

20” Henry AW: 1285fps
4” 29-2: 1058fps
3” 629-6: 1028fps


I might have to break down and pick up a 2.75” 69…….

hey guy`s,
just adding my $.02. bought my 4in 69 about a yr ago. used the same load to compare with my 4in 629, yes much lighter but as far as accuracy...just about as good. i love it!

Thanks, Paul105 and all others who replied to my grip question. I bought a M69 4.25" today and the store/range only had Remington 44 mag JSP 180 GR 1610 FPS available so that's what I shot. The recoil was stout, to say the least, but the worst part was the damage the recoil did to the web between my thumb and index finger. I think the damage was the revolver rotating in my hand a bit but I can't be sure. I ordered the tamer conversion from Amazon and a couple of reviewers on Amazon reported great satisfaction with these grips on an M69.

My plinking and target shooting will mostly be with 44 Special but I spend enough time in bear country to make this purchase and its 44 Mag capability worth it.

Looking forward to receiving the replacement grips.

Thanks also to glenncal1 for the original post. It clearly sparked a lot of interest.