Considering a 28-2

[Buford57]

Here are two great reasons to get a 28-2:

1) The way they shoot; a solid N frame is a reassuring piece of steel to hold, and it helps tame felt recoil nicely with the right grips.

2) The way they look; nothing looks as 'right' to my eyes as a 4-inch N frame. While I know this is highly subjective, I challenge you to find a gun person who will call it ugly.

Amen. I carried my wife's M67 on the job for a week or so while getting the sights repaired on my M28. The one time I had to draw it I felt like I was holding a cap gun. Purely psychological, but there's a lot of confidence in that big hunk of iron.

 

[trigger643]

My 28 no dash is a 6". My 28-2 is the 4". I shoot both pretty frequently. They both came with the magna service grips, the 28-2 with it's original box and paperwork, as well. I prefer the target grips. I think the prices are creeping up across the board on the older N frames, at least in this area. Until I rediscovered the fun of mod 57s, the Highway patrolmans were my favorite wheel guns.

 

[Rick_A]

A big six shot N frame 357 is a gun you can shoot comfortably with magnums all day...and carry somewhat comfortably for most of the day.

The 4" is the most practical barrel length of the bunch.

I'd bring cash and tell him to knock off another fifty.

A proper pancake style holster makes carry comfortable.

 

[rgm36]

The "bonus" in carrying around the extra weight of an N frame is that it shoots more comfortably than a K frame.
When you're holding an N frame, you're holding a real gun.
I don't have a single K frame anymore.
Once you go N frame - you never go back

 

[sodacan]

Not trying to ruffle feathers here but it just kinda seems to me that if you're going to have a gun as big & heavy as an N-frame it ought to be a big bore, or hold 7 or 8 rounds of 357 or something. Shouldn't there be some kind of "bonus" to make it worth packing around all that extra weight?

I've always kinda had the same questions about the K-frames chambered for 6 shots of 22LR. Just seems like a lot of gun to carry for the amount of firepower they offer. Again, if they held 8 or 9 rounds they'd make a lot more sense to me...

You obviously have no appreciation for a true classic S&W revolver. How many gunfights have you been in that required more firepower?

 

[Jack Flash]

Not trying to ruffle feathers here but it just kinda seems to me that if you're going to have a gun as big & heavy as an N-frame it ought to be a big bore, or hold 7 or 8 rounds of 357 or something. Shouldn't there be some kind of "bonus" to make it worth packing around all that extra weight?

If you want to ruffle some feathers, start talking like that about the Outdoorsman & Heavy Duty. These are N-Frames chambered for the .38 Special (only). I have never really warmed up to them, but they have a devoted following.

When S&W first introduced the .357 Magnum cartridge, it was in an N-Frame revolver. Thus it was for many years, until the law enforcement community clamored for a lighter platform.

Personally, I love the M27 & M28. I wish I could find a Registered Magnum I can afford! There is something very reassuring about all that metal around each chamber.

 

[wbraswell]

The price for the condition seems a little high for me. There is a condition called "N frame lust" and I am afflicted with it, and it can be financially taxing at times. I would like to say that I have 2 N frame .357s, a 28-2 from the 70s, and a mid 50s vintage .357. The trigger pull of these two guns are identical, both in single and double action. They even sound identical when the hammer falls. You might think the older premium line gun would be slicker than the newer HP, not the case. Gosh, I am just old, I can't warm up to the idea of a S&W revolver with more than 6 shots.

 

[MAJPATT]

The responses in this thread simply reinforce my belief that a person is either an N Frame guy or not. I'm a N Frame guy. I like my Js and Ks, but life would go on if I didn't own them. I don't own an L, or an X.

I would hate to be without a full stable of Ns at my disposal. I like them all. Have .38 Specials, .357 Magnums, 10MM, .44 Special, .44 Mag, and .45 ACP.

If you don't like N Frames, GREAT more for the rest of us with taste.

 

[DocB]

Got to agree with Shawn. When I was coming up in the 1970's and early 1980's I had new examples of all of them. . .even the 41 magnum and 45 LC. They all had these loooong barrels. I just couldn't get into them. Sold/traded them all off. Then I came upon this 4 inch barrel one. I don't own a gun I like as much. Something about it is just perfect.

 

[BC38]

You obviously have no appreciation for a true classic S&W revolver. How many gunfights have you been in that required more firepower? ��

Not true. I have a great appreciation for all of MY classic S&W revolvers. I just don't happen to own or have shot an N-frame 357. That kinda' makes it hard to have a real appreciation for them. The N-frame 38's make even less sense to me since (to me) shooting 38spl, even in a steel J-frame is about as punishing as shooting a polymer 22. I don't know, maybe all the extra weight makes the 357 feel like shooting a polymer 22 too. Maybe that's the attraction.

And the desire to have another round or two (like the 586 or 686+) isn't about a gun fight. Like I said, I get the same number of rounds in a K frame - and I can comfortably shoot full-house 357s all day with it - so what I'm asking is where is the benefit of all the extra weight without even an extra round to make it worth packing it around.

If a person has arthritis or something and CAN'T comfortably shoot full-house magnums in a K-frame then I can see where they would benefit from the heavier N-frame. Otherwise it just seems like a lot of extra weight without a lot of advantage. Personally I'm not that adverse to recoil, so maybe the N-frame 357s aren't for me.

I sure like the N-frames for shooting 44 magnums though!