24-6 has Magnum length Cylinder?

[Realzebub45]

I am a little confused about my 24-6 and was hoping someone here could clarify.

I think what I have is a Lew Horton 24-6. Production code on Box puts this at early Dec, 2006 production. I think it's one of those from the 250/per production runs in .44 spl, .44 Mag and .45 ACP, Blue and Nickel.

It's blue, Marked .44 spl, with the Square Butt, with a 2-7/8 Inch Tapered Barrel.

What I am curious about is the cylinder length. It is definitely longer than the cylinder in my 696. I no longer own the 4" 629 PC I used to 10 years ago, so can't compare. Also, the forcing cone does not come into the frame window like other N frames I've seen with the shortened .44 spl. cylinder.

Also, I have seen other pics of these guns (I think) on the net and they all seem to have the shorter cylinder, longer forcing cone configuration.

What gives?

 

[Doug M.]

There was a string about 6-8 months ago from a fairly active member about his .44 special being able to chamber .44 magnum rounds. I can't recall if it was a 24 or 624, or who it was.

 

[Waidmann]

Classic 21-4

This one a Classic 21-4, not Thunder Ranch, certainly would if crimped.

 

[rck281]

The Model 24 is an N frame revolver while the 696 is an L-frame. The cylinder window is larger on the N frames.

 

[Dave T]

The guns pictured above certainly have Magnum length cylinders. Guess this is another example of S&W cutting corners to save production cost. Why make two lengths of cylinders when you can just use the long ones for everything.

There doesn't seem to be any limit to what they will do to reduce cost. Kind of sad if you ask me.

Dave

 

[cornfed83]

Could be what you have is a bit of a Frankengun. Maybe a previous owner replaced the cylinder with a 29 cylinder and shortened the forcing cone. Does it actually chamber the longer magnum rounds?

 

[BUFF]

Yes, the newer S&W .44 Specials use a longer cylinder than did the old ones. Doubtless done to cut costs, I guess.

However, just because the cylinder is longer doesn't mean it ought to be able to chamber the .44 Magnum cartridge. It ought not to do so. The chambers of the .44 Special revolvers are not as deep as the .44 Magnum chambers.

If the Magnum cartridge has a very heavy roll crimp and the bullet's ogive is rounded, as most JSP and JHP designs are, the Magnum cartridge MAY chamber but ought not to be fired, as the shorter chamber probably won't have enough room for the crimped cartridge case mouth to expand normally and the pressures of such may be pretty high.

 

[Realzebub45]

Could be what you have is a bit of a Frankengun. Maybe a previous owner replaced the cylinder with a 29 cylinder and shortened the forcing cone. Does it actually chamber the longer magnum rounds?

No, this is a brand new purchase, NIB Old Stock from a LGS.

This is how it left the factory. As far as the Magnum rounds chambering, I sold my 629 V-Comp PC many years ago, then sold all my ammo to a fellow Gun Club member. So can't gauge it.

To the other poster, I am aware of the 696 being an L frame.

 

[coiler666]

I wouldna chance a magnum load in it...why risk an "even maybe" malfunction? Nice revolver though sir Mike

 

[Realzebub45]

Yes, the newer S&W .44 Specials use a longer cylinder than did the old ones. Doubtless done to cut costs, I guess.

However, just because the cylinder is longer doesn't mean it ought to be able to chamber the .44 Magnum cartridge. It ought not to do so. The chambers of the .44 Special revolvers are not as deep as the .44 Magnum chambers.

Looking down the chambers, it appears they are cut for .44 spl. length.

I am curious if this is in fact simply a cost cutting measure for this production run, so they only had to cut the cylinders in 2 length, for the .44 Mag length and the .45 ACP length.

I am not a reloader (but plan to be some day), but I certainly remember having some .44 Mag bullets that were much longer than others. Some of those 300+ grain Hard Cast could get up there in comparative length. Could this have been an intentional design element to allow for different length .44 spl. bullets? (or is this just a benefit?)

On thte other hand, you would think from the legal perspective, if a company puts the IL on all their new guns, why would they want the liability and potential issues of someone mistakenly loading a .44 Mag where it ought not to go.

Where the Lew Horton guns requested with .44 mag length cylinders, or did Lew not have the option? But, I am still confused because I am sure I've seen examples of these guns on line, same look, same grips, same trigger, same hammer, IL, just the shorter cylinder. Just can't find the links now. I know the older models like the "-3" had the shorter cylinders.