- Joined
- May 21, 2003
- Messages
- 11,977
- Reaction score
- 18,780
- City & State/Province
- DUNNELLON, FLORIDA USA
What are the pro and con of round butt "N" frames ?
RB N Frames
- Thread starter jimmyj
- Start date
My personal "con" is I don't like the RB. It just doesn't fit my hand. I replaced them with a RB to SB grip and modified it to fit my hand and needs. The original grips stay in the box for someday when it may be sold.
Mod 24 3" RB.
Mod 24 3" RB.
The N-RB grip may be helpful to some folks with smaller hands, and there are those who say it helps concealment. I don't fall into either of these categories. I simply feel the RB N-frame looks wrong. Very wrong. My 625JM and 22-4 are both R-Butted and I hide the frame with SB Pachmayr grips which are an aid to shooting these big frames, mild though these rounds are.
This being said, these 2 guns are to be adored, RB or not!
This being said, these 2 guns are to be adored, RB or not!
Tom Kent
US Veteran
My first, and only, experience with a RB N frame is a 3" 629-1 I found. The grips and the feel of this particular gun is perfect to me. However, I don't see this as a concealed carry gun at all. Grips not withstanding, the gun itself is too big to CCW in my opinion. As far as the 4" models go, I think they need a square butt grip. Since they all seem to be round butt now, that requires one of the "Round to square" grips.
Dave T
Member
I'm always surprised at how many people will insist one or the other is superior. This is one of those subjective things that is completely up to the individual. Which shape of grip frame and which stocks you prefer is personal and no answer is wrong.
I happen to like the RB N-frames, particularly with these factory "Combat" stocks:
Custom M25-2 "Mountain Gun".
Badly corroded M27-2; rescued, round butted, bead blasted & blued.
New to me 325 NG with my nicest set of factory combat stocks.
Dave
I happen to like the RB N-frames, particularly with these factory "Combat" stocks:
Custom M25-2 "Mountain Gun".
Badly corroded M27-2; rescued, round butted, bead blasted & blued.
New to me 325 NG with my nicest set of factory combat stocks.
Dave
AveragEd
Member
Big guns need big stocks and round-butt stocks aren't big. And using an N-frame regardless of barrel length as a concealed carry piece is questionable when there are better - lighter and more concealable with greater magazine capacity - alternatives to a big-bore carry piece. A 1911 in .45ACP or even 38 Super, for example. Additionally, if you use an N-frame for hunting, full-house loads are more of a handful with a round butt.
Fortunately, I have three 629s, a 6" -1, a 6-1/2" -4 Classic and a 5" -3 Classic DX. Unfortunately, only the 629-1 that is used with target loads only has a square butt while the two Classics that primarily are used for hunting and are loaded with hunting ammo have to wear conversion stocks.
I don't find it a really big deal since the round butt can be converted to the feel and look of a square butt. I guess if they were going to drop one butt style, they made the right choice since the square butt can't be easily converted to round.
Ed
Fortunately, I have three 629s, a 6" -1, a 6-1/2" -4 Classic and a 5" -3 Classic DX. Unfortunately, only the 629-1 that is used with target loads only has a square butt while the two Classics that primarily are used for hunting and are loaded with hunting ammo have to wear conversion stocks.
I don't find it a really big deal since the round butt can be converted to the feel and look of a square butt. I guess if they were going to drop one butt style, they made the right choice since the square butt can't be easily converted to round.
Ed
Another opinion disguised as a fact. I shoot the .41 fine with round butt stocks, and I CC all manner of handguns, from a small Glock Model 27 to a Full Size Glock 21. My 1911's and 3" N-frames fall in between. It depends on what I'm doing and where I am. Just because you don't care for it, or can't shoot it, doesn't make it a fact. What you think is "questionable" is merely your opinion. Many on here carry N-Frames daily as CCW and have been doing it for decades. Try not to pontificate so much.
Here is a CCW N-Frame (657) that works just fine, thank you. I put N-Frame VZ Grips on it to save the stock combats...they work wonderfully well and conceal better than a square butt.
Last edited:
Pilgrim
US Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2005
- Messages
- 1,067
- Reaction score
- 614
- City & State/Province
- Massachusetts - Live Free
practicality (if any) aside, the SB just looks better than a RB
carelesslove
Member
"Converting Round-to-Square"
I have to agree - for me, square looks better than round. With the help of Forum member KURAC, I now have his conversions on 3 round butt N Frames.
Unfortunately, I now have a perfect pair of Nill "Cokes" and two pairs of Eagle "Ropers" - all N Round-to-Square, as leftovers.
I think I need more N Frame round butts............
carelesslove
I have to agree - for me, square looks better than round. With the help of Forum member KURAC, I now have his conversions on 3 round butt N Frames.
Unfortunately, I now have a perfect pair of Nill "Cokes" and two pairs of Eagle "Ropers" - all N Round-to-Square, as leftovers.
I think I need more N Frame round butts............
carelesslove
AveragEd
Member
Hey there 505, I never said my feelings were facts. But among many, they are reality. If carrying a large-frame revolver as a concealed weapon was common practice, small-frame snub-nose revolvers and small autoloaders wouldn't be as popular as they are. I know a lot of police officers; none of them are named Harry Calahan so none carry large revolvers as off-duty guns. I doubt you're an LEO; more than likely, you're just a guy who likes to "carry." Sorry, but what people trained to "carry" do means more to me.
And I can "handle" my .44s just fine, thank you. They're pretty tame alongside my Contenders and XP-100s that are chambered for 7mm and larger rifle cartridges. I just find that a square butt makes my 629s more controllable and comfortable to shoot.
Ed
And I can "handle" my .44s just fine, thank you. They're pretty tame alongside my Contenders and XP-100s that are chambered for 7mm and larger rifle cartridges. I just find that a square butt makes my 629s more controllable and comfortable to shoot.
Ed
You doubt I'm a LEO!
Ah well, I guess you caught me. I better start returning all that gear and those paychecks, and that suburban with lights and siren in my driveway. And I better turn loose those folks I arrested. Darn it anyway.
Son, you've got a lot to learn.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,074
- Reaction score
- 7,262
I know they are not traditional, however, I have always found the round butt frames to be more versatile. If you need a square butt grip, you can use a conversion grip. Otherwise, you can use a smaller round butt grip for concealed carry. The square butt frame lacks that option.
"I know a lot of police officers; none of them are named Harry Calahan so none carry large revolvers as off-duty guns. I doubt you're an LEO; more than likely, you're just a guy who likes to "carry." Sorry, but what people trained to "carry" do means more to me."
It is definately up to the individual. I WAS an LEO, retired after 25 years in Alabama. I then did 5 years overseas and I still carry a badge and a gun in a Federal facility.
While working the street in the Deep South, my main off duty piece was ALWAYS a 1911 .45 or a .44 Special, .45 ACP, or .45 Colt revolver, all with at least a 4" barrel. Most of these wheelguns I had RBed myself, back before factory RB N frames were available. And, these same revolvers rode in a duty holster on a Sam Browne belt while I was on duty.
Most folks carry smaller, lighter guns because they are smaller and lighter.
I'm a pretty good sized man, but I have smallish hands and RB revolvers fit me better. A RB revolver, wearing proper grips, does print less when concealed.
Today, I'm pushing real hard towards 60. I live and work nowhere near where I served as an LEO, so my offduty piece is usually a Colt Cobra, a six shot lightweight .38 special revolver. But I DO carry at least one speedloader.
If a squarebutt fits you better and you shoot it better, that's the best choice. But it does no good if it is in the truck or in the safe at home.
It is definately up to the individual. I WAS an LEO, retired after 25 years in Alabama. I then did 5 years overseas and I still carry a badge and a gun in a Federal facility.
While working the street in the Deep South, my main off duty piece was ALWAYS a 1911 .45 or a .44 Special, .45 ACP, or .45 Colt revolver, all with at least a 4" barrel. Most of these wheelguns I had RBed myself, back before factory RB N frames were available. And, these same revolvers rode in a duty holster on a Sam Browne belt while I was on duty.
Most folks carry smaller, lighter guns because they are smaller and lighter.
I'm a pretty good sized man, but I have smallish hands and RB revolvers fit me better. A RB revolver, wearing proper grips, does print less when concealed.
Today, I'm pushing real hard towards 60. I live and work nowhere near where I served as an LEO, so my offduty piece is usually a Colt Cobra, a six shot lightweight .38 special revolver. But I DO carry at least one speedloader.
If a squarebutt fits you better and you shoot it better, that's the best choice. But it does no good if it is in the truck or in the safe at home.
You may place me firmly in the RB camp. I can always (and sometimes do) use RB to SB conversion grips, but the reverse is not possible. I have a pair of the 629-5s that are the 3" fixed sight guns, packing both is for BBQ, but just one makes quite an impression on most folks. I have a bunch of 3" N frames, and I like em RB, above that barrel length (including 3.5") I prefer SB, but almost all have aftermarket grips that fit my hand better than factory splinters. Same goes for my L frames, it is just a matter of opinion and to some appearance.
If I had to pick a favorite it would one in .45 ACP with the 325 right up there near the top.
BTW: I have also long considered this to be the "gentlemans forum", and to even slightly flame someone on what you may think or not think he may be or have been, is approaching the edge of decorum.
If I had to pick a favorite it would one in .45 ACP with the 325 right up there near the top.
BTW: I have also long considered this to be the "gentlemans forum", and to even slightly flame someone on what you may think or not think he may be or have been, is approaching the edge of decorum.
AveragEd
Member
Well, then it appears I owe you an apology. I live in an area of low crime and although I was a police officer for three years and have a concealed carry permit, I have it primarily for gun collecting purposes and if I should ever venture someplace where I might want to take advantage of having it. So far, that hasn't happened.
These days, young (usually) guys seem to not feel complete unless they are carrying a firearm but I see them at the gun clubs to which I belong blasting away at silhouette targets from seven yards with the apparent primary goal of seeing how quickly they can empty their gun's magazine; where the holes appear in the paper seems not to be of as much importance. Speaking honestly, I often characterize some Internet posters that way and when someone expresses an interest in concealing a big blaster, it plants that seed.
I enjoyed law enforcement, my father was a federal agent and two of our daughter-in-law's uncles are federal agents, so between all of that, I know a lot of people in that field. "Carrying light" is universally the way they do it when not on duty. Perhaps there are areas where that is not the trend but I again refer to the popularity of smaller handguns.
I sometimes think I miss "the job." Then I recall the financial compensation and don't miss it nearly as much. But that was during the mid-1970s and I know that law enforcement pay has escalated quite a bit from the $15K I earned back then.
By the way, as you no doubt already surmised, I'm probably too old for you to be calling me "son."
Again, sorry for stereotyping you.
Ed
These days, young (usually) guys seem to not feel complete unless they are carrying a firearm but I see them at the gun clubs to which I belong blasting away at silhouette targets from seven yards with the apparent primary goal of seeing how quickly they can empty their gun's magazine; where the holes appear in the paper seems not to be of as much importance. Speaking honestly, I often characterize some Internet posters that way and when someone expresses an interest in concealing a big blaster, it plants that seed.
I enjoyed law enforcement, my father was a federal agent and two of our daughter-in-law's uncles are federal agents, so between all of that, I know a lot of people in that field. "Carrying light" is universally the way they do it when not on duty. Perhaps there are areas where that is not the trend but I again refer to the popularity of smaller handguns.
I sometimes think I miss "the job." Then I recall the financial compensation and don't miss it nearly as much. But that was during the mid-1970s and I know that law enforcement pay has escalated quite a bit from the $15K I earned back then.
By the way, as you no doubt already surmised, I'm probably too old for you to be calling me "son."
Again, sorry for stereotyping you.
Ed
"But that was during the mid-1970s and I know that law enforcement pay has escalated quite a bit from the $15K I earned back then."
Man, I wish I had gotten 15K in the mid 1970s. I started in 1976 as a deputy in a small sheriff's office and received $275, every two weeks, BEFORE taxes.
Man, I wish I had gotten 15K in the mid 1970s. I started in 1976 as a deputy in a small sheriff's office and received $275, every two weeks, BEFORE taxes.
Dave T
Member
The confidence of the amateur is the envy of the professional.
Dave
Well, then it appears I owe you an apology. I live in an area of low crime and although I was a police officer for three years and have a concealed carry permit, I have it primarily for gun collecting purposes and if I should ever venture someplace where I might want to take advantage of having it. So far, that hasn't happened.
These days, young (usually) guys seem to not feel complete unless they are carrying a firearm but I see them at the gun clubs to which I belong blasting away at silhouette targets from seven yards with the apparent primary goal of seeing how quickly they can empty their gun's magazine; where the holes appear in the paper seems not to be of as much importance. Speaking honestly, I often characterize some Internet posters that way and when someone expresses an interest in concealing a big blaster, it plants that seed.
I enjoyed law enforcement, my father was a federal agent and two of our daughter-in-law's uncles are federal agents, so between all of that, I know a lot of people in that field. "Carrying light" is universally the way they do it when not on duty. Perhaps there are areas where that is not the trend but I again refer to the popularity of smaller handguns.
I sometimes think I miss "the job." Then I recall the financial compensation and don't miss it nearly as much. But that was during the mid-1970s and I know that law enforcement pay has escalated quite a bit from the $15K I earned back then.
By the way, as you no doubt already surmised, I'm probably too old for you to be calling me "son."
Again, sorry for stereotyping you.
Ed
Apology accepted, and no harm done. I went through my first LE academy in 1986, so I'm not as old as some on these boards. I still have a few years to go before retirement, but it is coming soon.
My first LE sidearm was a Model 27 with 4" barrel. I did actually carry that concealed on occasion. I soon switched to a 1911 for concealed. My current job issues a Glock 22, so I carry that, a Glock 21, or a Glock 27 most days. I live in bear country (had one climbing in through the kitchen window a few weeks back!), so when out and about near the house, I usually carry a 3" RB .41 magnum. As I said in my post above, I like RB for concealed, and SB for working/hunting chores. The RB N-Frames allow both options with a grip change. SB is SB no matter what.
I've been a LE firearms instructor for 13 years now. Most of the new guys have never even handled a revolver. They see them as akin to flintlocks.
Nite Ryder
Member
Well Jimmy, I guess you have an answer by now with all the responses. It seems to be a matter of personal opinion and what works best for any given individual. I personally like the round butt, but a few of my revolvers are square butt. When I worked as a State Trooper in my state, very few of my fellow officers were what you would call a gun nut. Very few carried a concealed weapon while off duty, and most of them were just average shooters. We were required to carry state issued firearms, mine was a S&W model 10 with a 6 inch barrel, which was later replace with a model 27 with a 4 inch barrel. Off duty I carried a model 19 with a 2.5 inch barrel and RB. I was the only person in our patrol office with experience gained from being on a military pistol team. I was the only person who wanted to carry a 1911, and could shoot it well. Today few if any LEO's still use revolvers as duty weapons. My personal CCW has been a Kimber Ultra Carry for many years, but a month ago I switched to a S&W 386PD because I feel a revolver is more reliable. I hate the speed loaders, however. I might add, we all have opinions and none of us know it all and have done it all, we need to keep that in mind when we read a post we don't agree with, I smile and try to keep my mouth shut...
Last edited:
Dave T
Member
Very admirable Ryder, but if we all did that there wouldn't be a forum, would there? (LOL)
Dave
sac-gunslinger
Member
Amen, Dave, you hit the nail squarely on the head.
Frank V
Member
I have carried & shot both quite a bit. I've found for heavy recoil & or fast DA shooting the Jordan Trooper stocks on a square butt N frame are hard to beat.
For concealment I have proven to my own satisfaction that the RB is easier to conceal. It won't print as readily as a square butt will, (this isn't limited to a N frame either) I've worn both extensively & for me, the RB does conceal more easily.
Hope this helps.
For concealment I have proven to my own satisfaction that the RB is easier to conceal. It won't print as readily as a square butt will, (this isn't limited to a N frame either) I've worn both extensively & for me, the RB does conceal more easily.
Hope this helps.
BCDWYO
Member
I've got quite a few N-frame round butts (610, all 4 calibers of Mtn Gun, 24, 627) and here is my OPINION: I agree with the posts that say the RB is more versatile in that you can always switch to a Round-to-Square conversion stock. I personally like the round butt on the shorter barrel guns like the 3" 24 and the 2 5/8" 627 (I think square butt would look goofy on a snubby), but I do shoot much better with a square butt and don't like the RB on a longer barrel such as the 5" 610 or even the Mountain Guns. I also agree that the factory RB combat grips are the best (coolest and most comfortable for me) if I stay with a RB grip....Good thread Jimmy!
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
