Lew Horton 624

I told myself I wasn't going to post this, but just when I thought I was out, you pulled me back in!

Here's mine. I bought it late last year for $800 and thought it a bit high but having tried to work a deal on a 624 4" and loosing out, I didn't want to let this one out of my sight. The prices are now catching up to what I paid and if they keep on this way, in another 6 months I'll look like a genius for buying for such a low price.

PC040005.jpg


Mine's a verified 1985 LH with a red circled C on the box.

Here's her glam shot.

PC040006.jpg


Very partial to the Skeeter load. Shoots like a laser.
 
ALU prefix... I will let the experts figure out the first of 100 question...

IMAG0302.jpg
 
Got It

Now the fun begins. I had no idea how much discussion this inquiry would generate, but what an incredible amount of useful information I've received.
Based on the initial feedback I went back to the local gun store this morning, looked at the LH 624 in more detail, negotiated a lower price and took in home with me (thanks to my CW permit). It had a holster with it but wasn't one of the S&W made; rather, it was a run-of-the-mill Bianchi. However, the 624 was in very nice shape, looking very similar to that shown in Nemo288's post.
I had not reviewed some of the later posts before I purchased the revolver and was not aware of the recall, so now I get to contact S&W to determine if my revolver is one of the "500"... it's got an "AHT" prefix. It has seen a fair number of rounds through it based on the staining on the front of the cylinder and hasn't failed yet, so I am hopeful.
If you will indulge me, I have two more questions:
o I've seen an opinion that the round-butt grip frame accepts "K" frame stocks, rather than "N" frame stocks; is that correct?
o If this revolver is one of the "500", should I send it back to S&W and risk having it destroyed and replaced with something I don't particularly want; i.e. something new?
I would appreciate your frank and honest opinions. Thanks for all the input!
 
o I've seen an opinion that the round-butt grip frame accepts "K" frame stocks, rather than "N" frame stocks; is that correct?
o If this revolver is one of the "500", should I send it back to S&W and risk having it destroyed and replaced with something I don't particularly want; i.e. something new?

I have put on a couple of N frame RB stocks. They fit. Never tried
K frame stocks. I would stick with N frame RB.

If they tell you your gun is one of the unlucky few I would keep it.
That's just me and I have to disclaim etc. etc. I would still
shoot it with 750 fps (or lower) loads. Did I mention my disclaimer?
The chances are small. 500 weapons out of the many 10,000's
that were made during that period is a small sample.
All 3 of my 624's and my 629-1 have the red circle C on the box.
I am sure there are those out there will disagree with me
about shooting a non-passing gun.

Want a dispassionate view? Take it to your nearest metalurgy
dept. on campus and have them magnaflux/assay it.
Some kid will get a paper out of it. S&W will have a certain
data point to meet pass/fail. Your senior in metalurgy will
produce precise data without such a limit. He may need
a chunk of your gun to melt ;)

73 AB7WH

---
Nemo
 
Your 624 was made before the new N frames were made with K frame size round butts. So no, K frame grips will not fit it properly at the point where the web of your hand meets the back strap. Otherwise they will work. I have one.

This is what I'd do:
I would not send it back until I call S&W to see if they now have SS 44 Spl N frame cylinders in inventory again due to new production models. If they say yes and guarantee you'll get one if you send your gun for testing and it fails, then I'd send it back. If they don't have a replacement cylinder, I would not send it back. If they have new cylinders but won't guarantee one for your gun, I would order one and have it on hand if you need it or just install it when you get it or have it installed locally.
 
Last edited:
I would not send it back until I call S&W to see if they now have SS 44 Spl N frame cylinders in inventory again due to new production models.

What production models? They are making .44 specials again?
I am in line.

I notice Taurus has dropped the .44 Special entirely.

---
Nemo
 
What production models? They are making .44 specials again?
I am in line.

I notice Taurus has dropped the .44 Special entirely.

---
Nemo

I don't know what they are making now or everything they have made except there just may be some possibilities. They make SS cylinders for some models with a black finish that can be polished off. They made a limited run of 44spl 3 inchers for LH. A SS 44 mag cylinder can be shortened. Where there's a will there's a way.
 
"There are Lew Horton 624's out there with Square Butts, but they were shortly after the original run of 5000. The reason was is there was to only be 5000 of the 3" Round Butts, thus some Square butts were produced. I'm not sure how many though."

I have never heard this before. My understanding is that when the Model 24-3 was announced, at it's introduction in 1983, S&W said they were only going to make 7,500 of them, and they did, 2,625 4 inch and 4,875 6-1/2 inch, with sqare butt frames and blued finish. These sold as fast as they were made and shipped to dealers and distributors. Lew Horton then ordered 5,000 blued M-24-3's with 3 inch barrels and round butts, and these sold out quickly as well. A couple of shooters on this site have letters from Lew Horton, who stated that there were 6,300 of the blued 3 inchers made.

The production runs weren't big enough for everyone who wanted one or more of the new .44 Specials to have one. People who missed out asked S&W to make more. People who had already bought theirs, sometimes paying more than retail, called foul. They expressed the thought that part of the reason the guns had been bought up for the sometimes premium prices asked was because S&W had announced that production was going to be limited to 12,500 guns (maybe 13,800 guns) of the three barrel lengths. They would be unhappy if S&W reneged on their statement to limit the blued guns to what had already been made, and manufactured more.

One example of just how fast these Model 24-3's were sold was given by Skeeter Skelton, the godfather of the .44 Special's rebirth. He wrote, by the time he found out about the 3 inch guns, they had all been sold and he couldn't buy one unless he found one in the secondary market.

S&W then decided they could keep both camps happy, the camp that said, "Hey, you just said you would keep them limited in numbers, so don't make more!" and the camp that said, "Hey, we still don't have OUR .44 Specials! Are you going to ignore us? Make more!"

Skelton wrote, "The company's solution is worthy of Soloman. Having ceased poduction on the Model 24-3, it is now announcing the Model 624, which is, quite simply, a stainless steel Model 24." He projected the M-624's would be available in early 1985.

Lew Horton then jumped into play again, and signed a contract with S&W to make 5,000 stainless M-624's in the same 3 inch barrel, round butt frame format as the blue M-24-3.

Thus everybody should be happy, with the quick strikers buying up 12,500 (or 13,800 or so) blue Model 24-3's, (the 7,500 4 and 6-1/2 inch guns with their sqare butt frames and the Lew Horton 3 inchers, made in quantity of either 5,000 or 6,300, plus an unknown quantity of the same guns in stainless steel, 4 inch and 6-1/2 inch guns with square butts plus the 5,000 to 6,xxx M-624's 3 inch, round butt made in stainless.

I never saw any word from S&W that they would put strict limits on the numbers of M-624's they would make. They didn't want to get caught short again as they had earlier, with the blue 24-3's being more popular than they had planned for. I never saw any restrictions on S&W's planned production of the stainless 624's. Lew Horton says they ordered 5,000 3 inch round butt guns, but the 4 and 6-1/2 inch square butt guns had no planned limit; here was a big, brawny .44 Special revolver that could be made in numbers needed. They made all the market would bear. I have never seen an authoratative statement from the company as to just how many stainless Model 624's of all three barrel lengths were made from 1985 to 1988.

Personally, I was extremely pleased that I was able to buy at least one of each of the six variations of the .44 Special Target Model of 1950 as they were made and shipped out. I got my 4 inch 24-3, ABZ02XX first, in October 1983. I found my 6-1/2 incher, ABZ40XX, January, 1984. Lew Horton's blue 3 inch gun, AEJ14XX, came home September 1984 Then the stainless steel Model 624's emerged. I got my 4 inch, AHB99XX, September 1986, my Lew Horton 3 inch gun, ALW52XX, February 1988, nd finally my 6-1/2 inc gun, AHB79XX, March 1988.

I have accumulated a few doubles of these great sixshooters over the years, some make great trading stock and are like money in the bank. I have one very smooth-actioned 6-1/2 inch 624 I bought used, which shoots really well, that I plan to send to Hamilton Bowen to be shortened to 5 inches. I have a 5 inch pre-24 made in 1952 that is too pretty to drag around the bushes in a holster, so it sits. A 5 inch 624 will make a delightful woods walking gun.

Everyone who has one or more of these fine guns can cound himself as fortunate.
 
Last edited:
The 3-inch .44's are some of the best carry guns S&W ever made. I bought mine, a blued model 29, new back in '85. Action work and mat-chrome finish were done by 300 Gunsmithing Service out of Denver. It looks as good today as when it came out of the shop despite many miles. It get's carried in one of the S&W model 624 pancake style holsters. This picture was taken last fall when the grips were updated.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0115.JPG
    IMG_0115.JPG
    48.1 KB · Views: 161
I have a Horton 624 purchased new circa 1985, still have the box, papers, tools, and unused holster in bag. To the OP, the original Combat grips command a premium and it seems as though over the years a lot of the 624s I've seen in gun-shows have aftermarket grips and the dealer will get a quizzical look on his face when asked if the originals come with it. In any case, after I bought mine I shot it some, worked up some loads, and then for the next 25 years it did easy but essential duty as my office desk gun. A couple years ago I brought it home, shot it a bit, and now it's a safe-queen although I may shoot it again sometime.

I believe the reason they sold them with holsters back in-the-day was that there were so few 3" N-frames around that finding a commercial holster for them was difficult.

Fun, interesting gun. Enjoy.

 
Product recall return...should I?

I emailed S&W re the 624 recall and discovered my revolver is one of those affected. My contact assured me that they have the necessary parts to handle the recall and, "to the best of my knowledge" they have never been unable to fix a revolver sent in for that recall. The S&W representative seems very sincere but I wonder what other's experience has been with current recalls/repairs of the 624's. Tentatively, I plan on sending my 624 in but would value opinions of those on this very useful forum. Thanks in advance for your responses!
 
May be a none-issue

Thanks to forum member "JT" whose post referred me to "The Gun FAQ's" that provides clarification on which 624's may have been tested. Upon closer review I spotted a post from 10-24-2008 by "prefer wheelguns" titled "re. the .44 recall of 85'-86'" that includes a photo of a cylinder that passed re-inspection. The marks left by the hardness tester are identical to those marks on my revolver's cylinder. So, unless someone has a differing opinion, I believe my gun has already "passed muster".
 
I have 4 guns from this era that all have the red C on the box.
They all have a noticeable annealing on the front of the cylinder.
Not sure if this helps but it is data.

---
Nemo
 
Thanks to forum member "JT" whose post referred me to "The Gun FAQ's" that provides clarification on which 624's may have been tested. Upon closer review I spotted a post from 10-24-2008 by "prefer wheelguns" titled "re. the .44 recall of 85'-86'" that includes a photo of a cylinder that passed re-inspection. The marks left by the hardness tester are identical to those marks on my revolver's cylinder. So, unless someone has a differing opinion, I believe my gun has already "passed muster".

I have been trying to use search and due to my lack of expertise
cannot find that post.

Can you please post the URL? Thanks. I have never heard of the testing marks.

Red_C_Guns.jpg


Notice that each one of these has darkening at the front of
the cylinder. Hard to make out on a couple.
And no, it's not due to shooting. This is annealing.
They are all "Red C" guns. They all shoot straight and true.

---
Nemo
 
I have 4 guns from this era that all have the red C on the box.
They all have a noticeable annealing on the front of the cylinder.
Not sure if this helps but it is data.

---
Nemo

Hi Nemo,

There was a 'V' stamped on the rear face of the cylinder.

I see what you meant by "noticeable annealing"; yes discoloration. Your pictures posted while I was writing.
Thanks,
 
Last edited:
Thanks to forum member "JT" whose post referred me to "The Gun FAQ's" that provides clarification on which 624's may have been tested. Upon closer review I spotted a post from 10-24-2008 by "prefer wheelguns" titled "re. the .44 recall of 85'-86'" that includes a photo of a cylinder that passed re-inspection. The marks left by the hardness tester are identical to those marks on my revolver's cylinder. So, unless someone has a differing opinion, I believe my gun has already "passed muster".

Yes, great ending! My gun was not in the range but has an 'F' stamped on rear face of cylinder. Probably routine inspector's mark.
 
Top pic is my 624 w/Left Handed 624 holster. I got the gun w/box (red "C") and papers several years ago for $560, knew even then it was a very good price.
Bottom pic is 624 along w/little brother 657. I traded a spare 6.5" 624 for little brother and was pleased. .44spl's & .41mag's ring my bell big time.
Although I've got the finger grip combats and they look really nice on them, they just don't fit my hand. Houges work better for me.
Kevin
38771206.jpg

8a711a1e.jpg
 
Not quite the end of the story

Thanks and a "Tip O' The Hat" to Hondo44 for the suggestion to call S&W to confirm my first email response from S&W customer service. My second contact (by phone) was very helpful and we exchanged several phone calls to develop the following information:

He checked my revolver's serial number and verified it was affected by the "product warning" (Not Recall!). However, he could not find information that indicated which revolvers had been returned and checked for the potential cylinder defects. He also spoke with another employee who had been involved with the 1980's 624/629 returns who said the "V" marks on the back of the cylinders had nothing to do with the metallurgy testing. He offered to send me a prepaid FedEx shipping label so I could return it for inspection. My first attempt to obtain a shipping label via their website was rebuffed because the serial number was "not recognized as valid in our computer system". At this point I asked if they had 624 cylinders in the event mine needed to be replaced. He asked if I might not return the revolver if they didn't; I suggested I might not. After doing some more checking, he discovered that S&W did not have replacement 624 cylinders, counter to the earlier email response from another Customer Service representative, but suggested they could install a blue Model 24 cylinder (which they had in stock). If I wanted the blue cylinder, should it be necessary, I would need to enclose a note to that effect with the revolver when I returned it.

So, there you have it. It doesn't sound like there were very many 624's with defective cylinders and mine probably is okay (it's been fired), but............. My second contact was very helpful and, I think, truthful, but who knows what would happen once it gets back to Springfield. Once again, your comments and advice are welcomed.
 
Back
Top