Scandium frame with no blast shield (pics)

[Nockm]

I just purchased an unfired 327 PC from 2007 and just noticed that it does not have a blast shield above the forcing cone. I could not find any photos of earlier guns to compare to. Is it safe to shoot the revolver?

Also on another note there is a stamp of "100" on the swing out arm. It is not the serial of the gun nor the model number. What does that mean? Thank you!

 

[Maximumbob54]

A .357 without a blast shield does not sound correct to me at all. I looked at a Night Guard and it had one. Not sure what the difference would be. I would call S&W about it.

 

[Nockm]

Photos

some pics

 

[Nockm]

Update

I called SW and the rep was not able to verify this specific configuration based on serial number. Its going back to SW to get checked out. Could this be an early model, maybe prototype? The frame is certainly not user modified where the blast shield is supposed to be. It looks like it came from factory without a blast shield recess cut into the frame. Here's another photo of "NIB" 327 PC.

 

[redhawk444]

Blast shield? That is a new one on me...What is a blast shield?

 

[blackcloud45]

It's a little piece of metal placed above the forcing cone to eliminate flame cutting of the frame during firing.

 

[FTG-05]

Blast shield? That is a new one on me...What is a blast shield?

See the flame cutting in the second pic just before the barrel on the frame? It's a little clip that goes right there to prevent that.

To the OP, if it was indeed a prototype gun, I hope you didn't send a big $$$ gun back to S&W. I have no idea if a prototype gun would be worth $$$, maybe to S&W, maybe to collectors???

 

[jughed440]

Also on another note there is a stamp of "100" on the swing out arm. It is not the serial of the gun nor the model number. What does that mean? Thank you!

IIRC, it means that the crane and frame are a matched pair and original to one another. That same number should also be stamped on the frame under the grips...as on this 617...that needs cleaned

 

[WC145]

I looked at numerous pics of that model and they all had the shield.

Redhawk- Here's a pic of one with the shield. It's the little piece of metal above the barrel/cylinder gap.

 

[jessegpresley]

This gun looks so cool.

 

[Ashlander]

Jesse: You are not alone in thinking that gun looks cool. I am in the other camp who wonders whether that nub on the front of it is really a barrel? It looks deformed! But it's all a matter of personal preference, so all's well.

 

[Old Fashioned Six Shooter]

I absolutely love snub nosed revolvers, but IMO that barrel is too short. Whether it is effective or not (and arguably it loses quite a bit of the potential velocity by going that short) it looks weird with the barrel that short, and I don't see how it could be any more concealable than one with a 2 1/2" barrel. But to each their own I guess.

 

[1 old 0311]

I absolutely love snub nosed revolvers, but IMO that barrel is too short. Whether it is effective or not (and arguably it loses quite a bit of the potential velocity by going that short) it looks weird with the barrel that short, and I don't see how it could be any more concealable than one with a 2 1/2" barrel. But to each their own I guess.

+1. When you think about it the butt of the gun, to a degree, is the hardest part to conceal.

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

Blast shield? That is a new one on me...What is a blast shield?

It's what the Imperial Storm Troopers use to protect the Death Star. Duh........

 

[roundgunner]

I absolutely love snub nosed revolvers, but IMO that barrel is too short. Whether it is effective or not (and arguably it loses quite a bit of the potential velocity by going that short) it looks weird with the barrel that short, and I don't see how it could be any more concealable than one with a 2 1/2" barrel. But to each their own I guess.

I think looking different looks cool. 625-10

 

[Nockm]

Do you guys think I should send this in to SW or keep it as curiosity? I searched all over, even around the posts pre 2007 of supposedly this gun was built but could not find an example that looks like this. This is definitely not modified as it is lacking the recessed shield cut in the top strap

 

[roundgunner]

I would hang on to it untill someone with a lot more knowledge than I can let you know if you have a very rare prototype. someone might pay nicely for that some day.

Good luck

 

[ohnas]

No blast shield on my 327pc either but my barrel is shaped differently inside the frame. It is stepped.

 

[Packard]

My 340 PD does not have one; the 340 M & P does.

If the cylinder is not stainless steel then they will not put the shield in because the cylinder will get damaged by the light magnum bullets as well as the frame, so there is no purpose.

Is it stamped "120 gr or heavier only"?

The 110 grain magnum bullets leave the cylinder so fast that the powder is still burning and damages the frame and alloy cylinder. So you have to use the heavier bullets.

 

[David Sinko]

Blast shields, bullet weight restrictions, cast bullet restrictions... is it all worth it? Is this what passes for progress these days?

Regarding the 2" barrel on an N Frame, I too used to think they looked ridiculous. Then I went and had one installed on one of my 625s. The end result is awesome. The 2" barrel allows the gun to be carried in places where even my 3" barrel won't fit. If you find yourself staring down the barrel of somebody else's gun, that 2" barrel will come out of your holster much quicker, with far less margin for error. My stainless frame and cylinder mean I can shoot any bullet I want, at any velocity.

Your revolver is nice and I think it would make the most sense with heavy bullets, but I don't know if that's possible with or without the blast shield. If that were mine, I'd hold on to it and do a bit more research before I sent it back.

Dave Sinko