Model 69 Two Piece Barrel

[Voyager28]

I am seriously considering a Model 69 .44 mag for a field carry gun. If I go through with the buy it will be carried and shot a lot. being stainless, that doesn't bother me at all.

My quandary revolves around the two piece barrel. I just simply have a hard time thinking this is a good idea and will not, down the road, have problems associated with it. Admittedly, this may be a result of my ignorance about the manufacturing process but I just can't get my head around it.

So, what say the experts? good? Bad? Doesn't matter because it will last longer than me anyway?

Bob

 

[shawn mccarver]

I am not an expert, nor do I play one on TV, but in my opinion, the two-piece barrel in its current version, such as on the Model 66-8 and the Model 69, are well executed. Dan Wesson pioneered the use of the two-piece barrel, at least as far as I know, and although different in at least one respect (it was user removable and replaceable), it was used on heavy calibers such as 44 Magnum and larger without issue. In fact, those revolvers are highly sought after today.

The two-piece barrel has certain advantages. First, it virtually eliminates issues related to those very occasionally encountered with a one-piece barrel related to under or over "clocking," which means the front sight is not straight up and down when the barrel is torqued to the proper tightness. Secondly, barrel/cylinder gap is more easily controlled and consistency maintained with the two-piece design. There is no issue as to strength.

I doubt you will have issues, and if you do, the revolver has a lifetime warranty, doesn't it?

 

[markyboy57]

+1 to what Shawn said. I consider them an improvement over the one piece barrel. Being tensioned at both ends usually makes them very accurate as well. My first handgun was a Dan Wesson .44 magnum. It would shoot quarter sized groups at 25 yards.

 

[TDC]

Well.... I'm no expert either but I recently purchased both a new 66-8 and a 69. I trust the engineering at S&W and that was the basis for my decision to make the purchases. That combined with my excellent experience with S&W's life-time warranty sealed the deal.

Any change or deviation from what we all have become used to can cause some apprehension and such is the case with the two piece barrel.

I'm very impressed with the fit, finish and over-all quality of both guns. Time will tell if there are any unforeseen problems that emerge and if there are, I'm convinced S&W will address them and correct them...

I believe both guns will become hot sellers for S&W and that may bring about more barrel length options in the future...

 

[BruMatt]

I have had my 69 for several months. I am very impressed by the quality and performance of my gun. It highlights the improvements in metals and technology that have been made over the years.

 

[Jim Lawburgh]

I agree with the above posters.
My 327TRR8 is VERY accurate, don't have the test of time though.
Buy with confidence.
Jim

 

[skypilot1941]

sure be glad when I can ransom mine out of layaway! Can't wait, but good things come to those that do wait, right? BTW, how many of you who do have a 69 have changed the grips and if so, what did you put on it?

 

[yfdcap]

I am not an expert, nor do I play one on TV, but in my opinion, the two-piece barrel in its current version, such as on the Model 66-8 and the Model 69, are well executed. Dan Wesson pioneered the use of the two-piece barrel, at least as far as I know, and although different in at least one respect (it was user removable and replaceable), it was used on heavy calibers such as 44 Magnum and larger without issue. In fact, those revolvers are highly sought after today.

The two-piece barrel has certain advantages. First, it virtually eliminates issues related to those very occasionally encountered with a one-piece barrel related to under or over "clocking," which means the front sight is not straight up and down when the barrel is torqued to the proper tightness. Secondly, barrel/cylinder gap is more easily controlled and consistency maintained with the two-piece design. There is no issue as to strength.

I doubt you will have issues, and if you do, the revolver has a lifetime warranty, doesn't it?

I would think the B/C gap would be better also. Mine however is .009 without shooting it yet. I would think it should be a little tighter.

 

[TDC]

sure be glad when I can ransom mine out of layaway! Can't wait, but good things come to those that do wait, right? BTW, how many of you who do have a 69 have changed the grips and if so, what did you put on it?

Get that puppy out of lay-away and start shootin' it! You're going to love it!

The first thing I did was swap my original grips out for X frame grips. Mine will primarily be a "work horse" trail gun so the larger recoil absorbing grips will be ideal for the L frame. I have a set for my 66-8, too.

When we begin to see pictures of highly figured wood grips on these new guns I think people will be amazed with how much transformation in appearance they'll have.

I like to keep my handguns all original as far as the aftermarket products I add. I expect mine will have a set of highly figured S&W combats before long...

 

[Paul105]

Don't know about the two piece barrel. I think I read that it was devloped for the X Frame guns (don't hold me to this -- memory ain't what it used to be).

I have two of these guns (bought one in late Jan and one in early Mar). The 2nd gun has 1,677 rounds thru it w/500 of those 265gr SWCGCs at a chronoed 1,140 fps. Have shot 834 rounds thru the first gun - 262 of those were the 240 Jhps at 1,300 fps thru 325gr WLNGCs at 1,180 fps. The guns are still as tight as they were when I got them.

I have the X Frame 500 Hogues on mine. I would outfit them with some custom wood but the bone at the base of my thumb won't allow it.

Bbl/Cyl gap -- Using an old set of feeler gauges, both guns will accept the .004 but not the .006.

FWIW

Paul

 

[skypilot1941]

Thanks guys. TDC, going to go ahead and get the x frame grips so I'll be ready when I bring it home. I would like to try some nice wood on it also. Bet it will be beautiful.

 

[scooter123]

I've had a model 620 since 2008 and it was purchased specifically for the tensioned barrel it featured. At the time the Dan Wesson revolvers weren't being made and I've wanted a Dan Wesson since my college days back in the 70's. That 2 piece barrel on my 620 was as close as you could get at the time and a secondary benefit is that if featured a semi lug profile which I find much better looking.

After 6 weeks of practicing twice a week and using a 1.75 power handgun scope I managed to somewhat approach it's capabilities in the accuracy department with a 7/8 inch group at 50 yards. With a more powerful handgun scope and perhaps a full year of steady practice I might manage to get the 620 to 1/2 inch at 50 yards but that is a lot of work and ammo for a gain that really only matters on paper. To sum it up, tensioned barrels are more accurate than the one piece barrels. In addition I feel that they are less sensitive to ammunition variables than a one piece design so they are accurate with anything you throw at them.

As for longevity, the newer designs have addressed the one area of weakness that the design of my 620 that created some problems. That is the great big cap that S&W used on the early 2 piece design, on one lot of model 66's they had problems with the cap fracturing from the barrel body. IMO that was a result of S&W not using a large enough radius in the transition area. Because the 620 is an L frame with a larger outer diameter for the barrel than the K frames it was nearly free of this issue and I've only ever seen 2 reports of the barrel on a 620 failing.

Finally, read up on the History of the Dan Wesson revolvers which dates back to the late 60's and they never had any reports of barrels failing, even when filled with squibs from muzzle to forcing cone. Yeah, some idiot put at least 8 rounds into the barrel of a 6 inch DW 15-2 and the barrel didn't split. Somewhere on the net you can still find pics of that poor barrel. There were times when Dan Wesson had serious quality issues but in all the time they were made the only way to have a barrel issue was by wearing it out or filling it with squibs.

PS; about a month ago I was finally able to get a Dan Wesson. It was a consolation prize when I got to a Cabela's that had a 686-5 Mountain Gun listed and had been sold when I finally got to the store. Had it out today and in Single Action it's a laser, in Double Action it's a real challenge because the coil spring mainspring stacks up to a 13.5 lbs. break. If you ever see anyone claiming the trigger on a Dan Wesson is light they are either referring to the single action trigger or they never actually used a trigger gage on their Dan Wesson.

 

[yfdcap]

Don't know about the two piece barrel. I think I read that it was devloped for the X Frame guns (don't hold me to this -- memory ain't what it used to be).

I have two of these guns (bought one in late Jan and one in early Mar). The 2nd gun has 1,677 rounds thru it w/500 of those 265gr SWCGCs at a chronoed 1,140 fps. Have shot 834 rounds thru the first gun - 262 of those were the 240 Jhps at 1,300 fps thru 325gr WLNGCs at 1,180 fps. The guns are still as tight as they were when I got them.

I have the X Frame 500 Hogues on mine. I would outfit them with some custom wood but the bone at the base of my thumb won't allow it.

Bbl/Cyl gap -- Using an old set of feeler gauges, both guns will accept the .004 but not the .006.

FWIW

Paul

Looks like you got some good ones. Mine shoots well just a little dissapointed with b/c gap. Now after shooting a .010 is a easy fit.

 

[Mike_Fontenot]

I don't have any feeler gauges, but the gap on my M69 looks REALLY small, to me. I've wondered if it will be enough to handle temperature variations, etc. I have shot it very little so far, but no problems yet.

I have recently noticed a groove in the top of the frame (just behind the hammer spur, on the left side), not perpendicular, that I hadn't noticed before. More than a "scratch" ... seems like it would have taken quite a blow from a hard steel object to produce it. I guess I'll watch it, to be sure it doesn't start to crack and enlarge. If it's purely cosmetic, I can live with it, but I wish I'd noticed it before I bought it.

 

[riverrat38]

"I don't have any feeler gauges, but the gap on my M69 looks REALLY small, to me. I've wondered if it will be enough to handle temperature variations, etc. I have shot it very little so far, but no problems yet."


If you can get a thin strip of ordinary computer paper to move freely in the gap, you will not have any problems with too narrow a gap. The paper is in the .003 to .004 inch range. Just right, but S&W usually is in the .006 to .008 inch range these days. I prefer less, even if I have to shoot slower and clean more. But, I have never had a problem with a gap being to little on a S&W revolver. I think the two piece barrel lets S&W control the gap better.

Best,
Rick
,

 

[scooter123]

I don't have any feeler gauges, but the gap on my M69 looks REALLY small, to me. I've wondered if it will be enough to handle temperature variations, etc. I have shot it very little so far, but no problems yet.

I have recently noticed a groove in the top of the frame (just behind the hammer spur, on the left side), not perpendicular, that I hadn't noticed before. More than a "scratch" ... seems like it would have taken quite a blow from a hard steel object to produce it. I guess I'll watch it, to be sure it doesn't start to crack and enlarge. If it's purely cosmetic, I can live with it, but I wish I'd noticed it before I bought it.

Mike, you can pick up feeler gages for between 10 and 15 dollars at almost any auto parts store. Just make sure you ask for a set intended to use with setting the valve clearance on a solid lifter engine. Because many feeler gages intended to set the spark plug gap won't go below about 0.02 inch and valve gages go all the way down to 0.0015 inch.

As for the actual gap, I currently have the B/C gap on my Dan Wesson set so that a 0.003 inch shim will go and a 0.004 inch shim won't, so the gap is in the range of 0.0035 inch. Pretty darned tight. Today I ran 100 38 specials through the Dan and followed that up with 50 Federal 357 Magnums (158 gn SJSP). By the end of my range session with the Dan Wesson the barrel and cylinder were both hot enough to make clearing the cylinder a bit of a hot potatoe dance. At a guess the barrel and cylinder were in the 135 to 150 degree range and I have a fair bit of experience at estimating temps in this range. At no time did I ever have any issues with the cylinder dragging on the barrel and looking at the face of the cylinder shows the soot from today's outing is undisturbed. Quite simply a B/C gap distinctly on thin side is not typically a problem.

 

[TDC]

Excellent description and background info on the two piece barrels, scooter123....

 

[Donald Paul]

sure be glad when I can ransom mine out of layaway! Can't wait, but good things come to those that do wait, right? BTW, how many of you who do have a 69 have changed the grips and if so, what did you put on it?

...from {X}bay.
{Rosewood with S&W medallions, $64.99 incl shipping}.

 

[TX2010]

As mentioned above, one of the advantages of the two piece barrel is that the shroud/site can be held vertical while the barrel is tightened, eliminating canting of the front site. Unfortunately, whoever put my 69 together didn't get that memo. My front site is canted to the left, which also results in the ball not sitting in the detent correctly. This doesn't seem to affect lockup, but it obviously isn't right.

So I sent the gun back with a note asking for the barrel cant to be fixed and also for the burrs on the crown to be taken care of. When I got it back I could see they made a half-hearted attempt at fixing the burrs and did absolutely nothing about the canted barrel.

So that brings up a different question about the two piece barrels. Is there any special knowledge/materials/tools required to work on a gun with a two piece barrel? I suspect the 69 requires a special wrench that engages the rifling to get the barrel off, but don't know for sure. If so, that would make it much harder to find a gunsmith to work on these guns, as they would likely need a separate wrench for each caliber.

Has anyone else had a 69 with a canted front site, and if so, how did you get it fixed?

 

[jaymoore]

As mentioned above, one of the advantages of the two piece barrel is that the shroud/site can be held vertical while the barrel is tightened, eliminating canting of the front site. Unfortunately, whoever put my 69 together didn't get that memo. My front site is canted to the left, which also results in the ball not sitting in the detent correctly. This doesn't seem to affect lockup, but it obviously isn't right.

So I sent the gun back with a note asking for the barrel cant to be fixed and also for the burrs on the crown to be taken care of. When I got it back I could see they made a half-hearted attempt at fixing the burrs and did absolutely nothing about the canted barrel.

So that brings up a different question about the two piece barrels. Is there any special knowledge/materials/tools required to work on a gun with a two piece barrel? I suspect the 69 requires a special wrench that engages the rifling to get the barrel off, but don't know for sure. If so, that would make it much harder to find a gunsmith to work on these guns, as they would likely need a separate wrench for each caliber.

Has anyone else had a 69 with a canted front site, and if so, how did you get it fixed?

I suspect that it'll be difficult to correct without a new frame or shroud. The very nature of it's construction means that there is no adjustment as designed:

The owner's manual mentions barrel removal. The tool involved does engage the rifling. Not hugely difficult to fabricate if you have Cerrosafe or similar.