Certainly not for CCW - 8 3/8" revolvers

[Lone_Wolfe]

I wish I also had a pic of my model 17 long barrell...

 

[Ron H.]

Sir, the only 8-3/8" gun I've owned was a 629-1. The long tube really tamed down full-power .44 mags, but I found it unwieldy and rebarreled the gun to 3." Dumb move, in retrospect--it was still unwieldy, just in a different way.

I ended up selling the gun at a loss.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

 

[MakeMyNight]

Originally posted by toroflow1:
There's a couple of long barrels in there, although I am moving into shorter N frames...

Wheel of Fortune!

 

[VonFatman]

O.K....I'll throw in a few...don't have a bunch but enjoy the ones I own. I have a M-57 incoming but not yet at hand for a photo.

29-3

657-4 (just 7/8" off the 8 3/8" mark)

25-5 (it's got the large throats so I get to load "special" ammo for it to munch on)

 

[WoodSmith]

29-2 that's a handfull to shoot!

48-4 varmints beware out to 50-75 yards.

...and I'll sneak a Python Target (38 spl) in.

 

[pace40]

Wow...this turned out better than I thought. Thanks for all the contributions.

Don...absoulutley beautiful photo.
P.S. Don't stain the deck, once you do, you always have to keep doing it.

Bob...48's are a soft spot of mine. I've never come across a long tube one or I surely would have bought it. Thanks for showing yours.

RK...after seeing your RM, I fear a 2nd job approaching. That is magnificent. Thanks for the look. ( My wife has a different opinion

)

 

[papalondog]

Here is an older one.



Here's a newer one.

 

[danski]

I had heard---and it might not have been true--that a Chicago detective carried a Smith 8 3/8" .44 Mag. in the 1970s or early 1980s. What his ammo was or how long he bothered to carry it I don't know.

But I heard--again it might not have been true--he hit a young felon with it twice and the kid kept getting up. The detective yelled, "Stay down!" And the kid got back down on the stairs where he was trying to flee.

Urban legend? Might well be but I always liked the story.

Dan

 

[Neckball]

29-3.

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

 

[FOM]

Anyone know how the 8 3/8" length was determined ?.

I've wondered but not enough to investigate.

 

[gizamo]

17-1 Four Screw

Giz

 

[PALADIN85020]

Here's some of my Model 27-2s, including a couple of 8 3/8" jobs, one blued and one nickel. The stone ax is my backup weapon; still looking for a suitable handle, perhaps something in Goncalo Alves or Zebrawood?

 

[Bullet Bob]

Going from an always shaky memory, it was because NRA rules way back when mandated no more than a 10" distance between the front & rear sight. Turned out an 8 & 3/8" S&W did just that.

Of course, nobody really likes the long barrels, except those crazy people who actually shoot their guns for fun. Here's my three:

A 29

A 27

And, I guess I don't have a picture of my model 14. Someday, I'm going to find a model 48 in that length, and my life will be complete.

 

[pace40]

And what would a picture thread be without "Guns on Rocks" by Giz

 

[danski]

FOM,

This basically why 8 3/8" and I don't really recall the exact details:

In NRA bullseye, a limit was set on sight radius and Smith measured the max from the sight blade and it came to 8 3/8", meeting NRA criteria.

Hopefully, someone will be more detailed as I'm working from memory--what little is left.

Dan

 

[Gunhacker]

Originally posted by FOM:
Anyone know how the 8 3/8" length was determined ?.

I've wondered but not enough to investigate.

I think back in the days when people could order barrels in any length they wanted, the .357 magnum could be ordered in 1/4" increments from 3 1/2 to 8 3/4", I guess S&W got tired of doing that and standardized on 3 1/2", 5", 6", 6 1/2" and 8 3/8"?

I've added a few more S&W's to this family tree, but I still only have the M57 no dash and M29-2 (at the top) with the 8 3/8 tubes.

 

[gib]

I've got to take some newer pictures.

 

[EQGuy]

This is my only one at the moment. 29-2 Nickel.

 

[Magnum.35744]

Very nice everyone

! Keep em' Coming!!!

 

[Blackcloud2]

Posted 18 February 2008 10:15 AM Hide Post
Way too many folks think their perspective is the only one. Sometimes its a shocker to learn that others have an equally valid point of view. When I took my home state CCW course we had a real yokel in our group. To say he was stupid was an understatement. He barely passed the open book parts of the course, and had trouble understanding what "no live ammo in the building" was all about. The instructor was ready to throw him out when he refused to empty his pockets... that after bringing in a loaded Ruger.

Anyway...

The long barrel gun was the only handgun he owned, and it was going to be his CCW gun. That got a lot of snickers from the crowd that had been watching him. But the instructor came to his defense. He pointed out that everybody doesn't live in a city, nor do they have any intention of carrying under a coat or shirt.

Its just as legitimate to get your license to allow car or truck carry without any hassles. You've got your gun, its in your door pocket, under the seat, or in the console. That can be considered a concealed weapon requiring a license. If you've got the license, its a moot issue.

Some folks just can't take a joke!
This message has been edited. Last edited by: rburg, 18 February 2008 03:28 PM

Dick Burg

First thing is, these are beautiful weapons and I hope to have one myself someday, by reading Mr. Burg's note, I have had a similar experience. In my case, the guy with the huge .44 (and it probably wasn't more than a 6.5"), was at one of my CCW re-quals. He literally scored a round on my silouette target (actually in the scoring area of mine, several positions over!), which nearly had me disqualified. He never hit his own target and the instructor allowed him to go fetch another weapoin. He later admitted that it was new and he never intended to carry it concealed, but wanted to take advantage of the range. Well, my take was that either he needed to spend a heck of a lot more time at the range (alone) or sell the gun! Again, beautiful pictures guys!