I haven't paid that much attention to the Model 69, but swapping the 696 cylinder and hand into 686s, and even 681s, was done a number of times during the height of the 696's popularity, and lack of availability. Is there any reason the same couldn't be done with a Model 69 cylinder? I wouldn't recommend shooting .44 Magnum in it, since it would still have the thin forcing cone of the standard, rebored barrel, rather than the thicker one of the Model 69, but I would think it could be viable for .44 Special now that the spare 696 cylinders have mostly dried up. What do you think? I didn't find any references to this conversion in a search, so thought I would ask. I still have a couple of spare 696 cylinders, hands, and ejectors I picked up for doing a 686 conversion that may or may not materialize, but thought the 69 might be a viable option to cannibalize, too.
69 Cylinder in other L-Frames
- Thread starter rhm0351
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Cyl length on my M69 is 1.670".
Cyl length on my 396 is 1.635".
Sold my 696, so I don't know if cyl length is different than the 396.
Frame opening from firing pin bushing to just below bbl shank on front of frame is 1.815" for both 396 and M69.
It could probably be made to work, but most likely wouldn't be a "drop in" fit
FWIW,
Paul
Cyl length on my 396 is 1.635".
Sold my 696, so I don't know if cyl length is different than the 396.
Frame opening from firing pin bushing to just below bbl shank on front of frame is 1.815" for both 396 and M69.
It could probably be made to work, but most likely wouldn't be a "drop in" fit
FWIW,
Paul
Last edited:
Thanks! The 696 and 296 have the same length cylinders, so I would assume the 396 is the same. .035" should be easy to take off the forcing cone after a rebore, otherwise, shortening the front of the cylinder wouldn't be difficult, either. Seems like it would be an easy enough modification for someone so motivated.
Thought about this a bit more. Not sure it would be quite that easy as the cyl/crane were redesigned to handle the larger barrel shank on the M69. So, the face of the cylinder may have to be modified or parts made/modified or the M69 crane assy may have to be used. I don't have a clue if these makes a difference or not.
Here's a couple of picts of the the reengineered crane/cyl interface. Picture is of 66-8, but is the same as the m69 for purpose of illustration.
FWIW,
Paul
Here's a couple of picts of the the reengineered crane/cyl interface. Picture is of 66-8, but is the same as the m69 for purpose of illustration.
FWIW,
Paul
Attachments
Last edited:
Thanks, they are clearly different. I don't know if they are too different to do the conversion, but was curious as to the feasibility. I don't know if I'll ever bother to do my 686 to 696 conversion, but will probably hold on to at least one cylinder, just in case I get the urge later. Thanks, again.
