Questions about the S&W 60-4
- Thread starter dores585
- Start date
Dale53
Member
Years ago, a gentleman in the Gun Digest built up a similar (but blued) gun for the ideal trail gun. I lusted after one, but being chronically short on discretionary spending (raising three kids, etc) I didn't build one. Then, to my surprise, I was at the 500 gun show in Indianapolis, and saw a 3" blued Smith with target sights. I went home wishing I had bought it. The next 500 show I went back with money in my pocket. I learned that all of the blued guns were gone - However, the 60-4 was on display. I jumped all over it. I took it to my home gun club and shot it in front of a bunch of people. They couldn't believe the scores I was shooting with this "pocket gun". I had hoped for a 4" barrel but, frankly, the dbl underlug barrel holds better than my Kit gun (have both .22 and .32 Mag) and shoots VERY well, indeed!
I have taken a few grouse, and a number of cottontails and snowshoe rabbits. One of the best loads extant for this handgun, IMO, is the full charge wadcutter. They work extremely well in the field and are dandy self defense loads for that revolver.
Here's mine:
Dale53
I have taken a few grouse, and a number of cottontails and snowshoe rabbits. One of the best loads extant for this handgun, IMO, is the full charge wadcutter. They work extremely well in the field and are dandy self defense loads for that revolver.
Here's mine:
Dale53
Last edited:
Like Dale53, I was "asleep" and missed the 36-6 too, for much the same reasons, and others, and when the 60-4 was released I did not make that mistake again. They are just about ideal in every way, especially if you are not a handloader. A handloader might prefer a .32 caliber, which S&W followed up with in making the Model 631 Target.
Along with the .22LR (M34/M63) and .22 WMRF (M51/M651) versions, I think these four guns make up sort of a "gang of four" small outdoorsman's revolvers which will probably never be equaled or exceeded.
When the Model 60-10 was released, I had great expectations for it, but the concept turned out to be inherently flawed, in terms of field shooting here in the midwest - at least in my opinion. (A westerner might see this differently.) The gun is difficult to use with any degree of small-game accuracy with full-powered loads, which are not necessary anyway, so it gains nothing over the 60-4.
I still have my 60-10 based on the theory that it might be desirable for other purposes. It may be that the 60-10 is a better self-defense gun than any of the other J-frame .357s. I tend to think so, but do not seem to be joined in that theory to any extent by others.
Along with the .22LR (M34/M63) and .22 WMRF (M51/M651) versions, I think these four guns make up sort of a "gang of four" small outdoorsman's revolvers which will probably never be equaled or exceeded.
When the Model 60-10 was released, I had great expectations for it, but the concept turned out to be inherently flawed, in terms of field shooting here in the midwest - at least in my opinion. (A westerner might see this differently.) The gun is difficult to use with any degree of small-game accuracy with full-powered loads, which are not necessary anyway, so it gains nothing over the 60-4.
I still have my 60-10 based on the theory that it might be desirable for other purposes. It may be that the 60-10 is a better self-defense gun than any of the other J-frame .357s. I tend to think so, but do not seem to be joined in that theory to any extent by others.
I have those same grips on mine. makes it a classy little 5 gun.
