What do you guys think of the 2 new S&W 9 mm revolvers?
- Thread starter Trooperdan
- Start date
smithman 10
US Veteran
9mm revolver needs to be a J-frame
I've got zero interest in these two guns but a J-frame 9mm would be a big seller if they brought one back like the former 940 - never could figure out why they discontinued that model.
How about an air weight 9mm J-frame? That should be a hit with the concealed carry folks.
I like the fact these new revolvers don't require moon clips but wonder does anyone make speed loaders for them? But all said and done I doubt these two revolvers will sell in large numbers.
Bring back the 940 or a similar model, please, Smith and Wesson Then you'll sell some guns!
I've got zero interest in these two guns but a J-frame 9mm would be a big seller if they brought one back like the former 940 - never could figure out why they discontinued that model.
How about an air weight 9mm J-frame? That should be a hit with the concealed carry folks.
I like the fact these new revolvers don't require moon clips but wonder does anyone make speed loaders for them? But all said and done I doubt these two revolvers will sell in large numbers.
Bring back the 940 or a similar model, please, Smith and Wesson Then you'll sell some guns!
I'm not being argumentative, I am really interested.
Is that true for sure?
I shoot steel with .38 Specs in a 627, and have used moon clips and the Five Star Firearms speedloaders. I am not sure that I am not faster with the Five Stars because they hold the cartridges with a little less wobble.
Because, years back when they made the 627's in .38 super they used .357 barrels instead of .356 barrels on some batches. There were issues with cylinder throats as well.
S&WIowegan
US Veteran
RichardC,
You should not have to suffer from wobbly moonclips. You can Google up TK Custom. Tom can make you moonclips that will fit the brass you plan to use. This generally will require to pick a brand you have the most of. Tom knows what thickness to give you. Of course it will cost money but what the hey!
You should not have to suffer from wobbly moonclips. You can Google up TK Custom. Tom can make you moonclips that will fit the brass you plan to use. This generally will require to pick a brand you have the most of. Tom knows what thickness to give you. Of course it will cost money but what the hey!
Nicksterdemus
Member
If they manufacture a J-frame w/5" brl I'm all over it. They would need to close the cylinder window instead of extending the brl though.
I like the looks of a seven shot L frame though it's a mite pricey for me. I'd probably opt for the Mod 69. Five shots is plenty.
I like the looks of a seven shot L frame though it's a mite pricey for me. I'd probably opt for the Mod 69. Five shots is plenty.
Last edited:
I shoot revolvers almost exclusively in competition, about 15,000 rounds last year. Moonclips are much faster than speedloaders, there is less motion/effort required by the shooter. With moonclips you just need to get the bullets started toward the holes and the rounds go in clip and all. Depending on the speedloader there are other motions (ie time) required. The 5 star and HKS loaders require turning a know to release rounds, even the Safarilands (faster speedloader) require extra effort to push the loader against the cylinder to trigger the release of the rounds.
That said, when it comes to moonclips they are NOT all created equal! As others have mentioned clips made to specific brass is the way to go in all but the 625's. I use Heartco's in my 627's.
roundels
Member
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2011
- Messages
- 182
- Reaction score
- 250
I converted a 640 to a dual caliber gun with a 940 cylinder, and it is a tack driver in 9mm even with the original .357 diameter barrel. I spoke with a smith at S&W who told me that the 940 barrels were not .355 but .357 caliber and there were no problems. If there are accuracy problems with some of the .357 barrels out there something else might be going on...
625 Shooter
Member
What Chico said!
I too use Hearthco's. Great moon clips for the M627.
The M625? Not so picky about moon clips.
Are moon clips faster than speedloaders? No doubt about it!
forrestinmathews
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,063
- Reaction score
- 725
I believe that the groove in rimless is not always the same. I have a bear of a time getting .40s&w Win brass into ranch clips for my 646. Nickel or brass, the same struggle. Rem and Fed work great! I don't fully buy into the fact that the Saami spec is being adhered to so closely all around in the rimless.
Another positive vote for Hearthco moonclips. I buy the real deal from the man himself. I have had some custom batches done up by Dave for my 610 and some in .38 Supercomp for a toy I am still building. I specifically spec'd the web to be widest possible so as to make the clips as strong as possible to resist the evil stompers. So far it has worked. I expect the .38's to be invincible...well nearly.
Side note: I admire all of you that take it in stride when someone steps on your moonclips. I may never master this grace so please watch where you step after I have just finished a stage. My five 8$ moonclips are just as important to me as your 50-150$ magazines are to you. Cheers!
Another positive vote for Hearthco moonclips. I buy the real deal from the man himself. I have had some custom batches done up by Dave for my 610 and some in .38 Supercomp for a toy I am still building. I specifically spec'd the web to be widest possible so as to make the clips as strong as possible to resist the evil stompers. So far it has worked. I expect the .38's to be invincible...well nearly.
Side note: I admire all of you that take it in stride when someone steps on your moonclips. I may never master this grace so please watch where you step after I have just finished a stage. My five 8$ moonclips are just as important to me as your 50-150$ magazines are to you. Cheers!
chalawa
Member
I wonder would it be possible to shoot 9mm major with this new 929?
625 Shooter
Member
Am not an authority on shooting Major with the 9mm.
But I suspect you easily could.
But I suspect you easily could.
forrestinmathews
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,063
- Reaction score
- 725
Respectfully there is no point. Major is limited to six shots and time and time again we have seen folks get the open bump on the seventh shot. Mainly the 625 is so much easier to reload with the big .45 holes that it makes no competitive sense to do the slightly slower reload for the risk of an open bump and a sharper recoil impulse.
Personally I'm a weirdo and have settled on .40 major in a 610 classic. I still have a pair of 625's for really getting down to speed work. I am more accurate from 5 to 50 with the 610, but finding pointy jacketed bullets is a PITA.
On an odder note I'm working on a six shot major gun based on the .38 supercomp that should be a lot of fun to play with. Trying to sneak into major with heavy bullets and slow velocity. Tinkering is so much fun.
Stainz
Member
I remember the competitive crowd at the FOP Range in Pleasant Grove having a devil of a time making their expensive 'race guns' work with 9mm +P machine gun ammo just to make 'major' classification (PF>165). I recall letting one of their better shooters shoot my 696 one day with 240gr LRNFP making just under 700 fps (Major PF!) from the 3" barrel - a real 'poof' load - and from .44 Russian brass, too. Now - go to a 127gr 9mm pill - it would have to make >1,300 fps - pretty extreme chamber pressures. The Ti cylinder likely was chosen for normal 9mm pressures, thus the 7/8 holes... I'd certainly rethink the 'major' PF use - unless the PC Shop will state it's okay.
I understand the 646's need for Ti, but it would seem, considering how many 627 8-shot .357M's they've made that stand up fine, it would seem overkill in a consumer gun - perhaps not in a competitive revolver - and I think that is the niche for the 986 Pro & JM PC929. My needs are met with 627's - moonclips or not.
I am not saying I don't like bottom-feeder rounds in a revolver - that would be heresy! After all, I keep 240+ Ranch Products moonclips full of my homebrew .45 ACP ball ammo - mostly in two ammo cans - for my 625JM and Governor, my first line defense against Zombie attacks. Besides, S&W has made revolvers that would chamber that round since 1917. BTW, my Zombie deterrence works pretty well... I still haven't seen one.
I will await a .40 S&W version - a la the 646 - hopefully less the Ti cylinder, whose care is too involved and use too tenuous for me, based on my eleven years ownership of a 296. Still - it's good to see new revolvers from S&W - thanks for the thread!
Stainz
I understand the 646's need for Ti, but it would seem, considering how many 627 8-shot .357M's they've made that stand up fine, it would seem overkill in a consumer gun - perhaps not in a competitive revolver - and I think that is the niche for the 986 Pro & JM PC929. My needs are met with 627's - moonclips or not.
I am not saying I don't like bottom-feeder rounds in a revolver - that would be heresy! After all, I keep 240+ Ranch Products moonclips full of my homebrew .45 ACP ball ammo - mostly in two ammo cans - for my 625JM and Governor, my first line defense against Zombie attacks. Besides, S&W has made revolvers that would chamber that round since 1917. BTW, my Zombie deterrence works pretty well... I still haven't seen one.
I will await a .40 S&W version - a la the 646 - hopefully less the Ti cylinder, whose care is too involved and use too tenuous for me, based on my eleven years ownership of a 296. Still - it's good to see new revolvers from S&W - thanks for the thread!
Stainz
625 Shooter
Member
Nicksterdemus
Member
I hope they sell well and lead to cylinder/frame window specific J-frame models in 9mm/40 that aren't all snubbies. I bought one of the New Vaqueros, SS no less, in 45 Colt though some bemoaned the smaller frame w/XR3 stocks that couldn't withstand Ruger only loads.
Every outing isn't a bear hunt nor social discourse a crazed methhead combatant. I appreciate the Redhawk 44 mag weight/built like a tank when I touch off rounds one-handed. There's a spot for many niches. In me best/worst limey/Cockney/Telly down under ad accent I offer, "'ello Gov'ner" as support to claim.
Some prefer wheelguns to bottom feeders. I need to limit my carry to the more petite five holer. I'd prefer options that included a five/5.5 inch tapered brl. I'm excited/hopeful that the Mod 69, combined w/969 will encourage S&W to give due consideration to a J-frame 9mm and/or 40.
I feel the Charter Arms 3" 44spl was the ultimate in concealed carry incorporating a lot of firepower in a small package. I've no interest in various 2" offerings. Not everything in a five round package needs to carry in cargo shorts. For that I have an Airlite 22mag, loaded w/1 shotshell and six 45gn WRF flatnose, that carries well and beats throwing rocks.
I bought a Mod 60-15 w/magnum frame in 3" and I can see it in a 40 w/moonclips. A tad too healthy a build for the nine. In a 10mm it would be a fire breathin' dragon w/o being sized as a Dragoon.
That's right, shoot those cheap 40 value packs for practice/plinkin' and save the 10 for packin' a wallop. That should be in the same neighborhood as the 5 rnd L frame 44 mag Mod 69 recoil wise.
But, for the time being I'd gladly purchase a 9/40 in a 5 rnd pkg in something over 3". I like the 969 love the 5" brl I just don't need seven rnd/L frame.
I don't think the 969 will dip low enough in price, so I'll probably throw my ltd financial support to the Mod 69 as it is a 5 rnd has a ever so slightly longer than 4" brl and it adheres to a large rnd/smaller platform. Plus, it's merely a hop, skip & jump from there to 40 w/moonclips. Albeit the L frame is not the compact carry of my desire.
I might even settle for the brl extending into the frame window, yet if cylinder length/window specific I'd be prone to buy two. The five rnd J-frame moonclip 40 will become the new & improved bulldog if offered in various brl lengths including a 3-3.5" up to a 5-6".
I'll find a way to carry an extra 1 1/2" or so before I'll give up the muzzle energy. That's why I own no snubnose save semi-autos that measure 3 1/4-1/2" from the back of the cartridge. I overlook that as they're flat. If I'm going to deal w/wheel bulge then I want at least three beyond the cylinder.
Every outing isn't a bear hunt nor social discourse a crazed methhead combatant. I appreciate the Redhawk 44 mag weight/built like a tank when I touch off rounds one-handed. There's a spot for many niches. In me best/worst limey/Cockney/Telly down under ad accent I offer, "'ello Gov'ner" as support to claim.
Some prefer wheelguns to bottom feeders. I need to limit my carry to the more petite five holer. I'd prefer options that included a five/5.5 inch tapered brl. I'm excited/hopeful that the Mod 69, combined w/969 will encourage S&W to give due consideration to a J-frame 9mm and/or 40.
I feel the Charter Arms 3" 44spl was the ultimate in concealed carry incorporating a lot of firepower in a small package. I've no interest in various 2" offerings. Not everything in a five round package needs to carry in cargo shorts. For that I have an Airlite 22mag, loaded w/1 shotshell and six 45gn WRF flatnose, that carries well and beats throwing rocks.
I bought a Mod 60-15 w/magnum frame in 3" and I can see it in a 40 w/moonclips. A tad too healthy a build for the nine. In a 10mm it would be a fire breathin' dragon w/o being sized as a Dragoon.
That's right, shoot those cheap 40 value packs for practice/plinkin' and save the 10 for packin' a wallop. That should be in the same neighborhood as the 5 rnd L frame 44 mag Mod 69 recoil wise.
But, for the time being I'd gladly purchase a 9/40 in a 5 rnd pkg in something over 3". I like the 969 love the 5" brl I just don't need seven rnd/L frame.
I don't think the 969 will dip low enough in price, so I'll probably throw my ltd financial support to the Mod 69 as it is a 5 rnd has a ever so slightly longer than 4" brl and it adheres to a large rnd/smaller platform. Plus, it's merely a hop, skip & jump from there to 40 w/moonclips. Albeit the L frame is not the compact carry of my desire.
I might even settle for the brl extending into the frame window, yet if cylinder length/window specific I'd be prone to buy two. The five rnd J-frame moonclip 40 will become the new & improved bulldog if offered in various brl lengths including a 3-3.5" up to a 5-6".
I'll find a way to carry an extra 1 1/2" or so before I'll give up the muzzle energy. That's why I own no snubnose save semi-autos that measure 3 1/4-1/2" from the back of the cartridge. I overlook that as they're flat. If I'm going to deal w/wheel bulge then I want at least three beyond the cylinder.
Last edited:
forrestinmathews
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,063
- Reaction score
- 725
He ain't Roger Davis. So that probably won't happen. You know that guy classified pretty well in Open with his revo, a comp, and a dot?
@nicksterdemus:
Buy a 646 and get some Hearthco clips for it. You won't be sorry. That little magnum is going to bite. Big time. I'm resisting the urge to get one because of the need for the extra reloading supplies and adding a new caliber. Please don't try to talk me into it. I've got enough problems debating between a matched set of shorty birds head vaqueros and a USPSA setup and 929.
Excellent reference between the two vaqueros! Have you tried carrying an RX3 as opposed to an old model? It's very different indeed. About like the spread between L and N frame. Cowboy action shooting makes these models very familiar in either hand. Eagle gunfighter grips, very nice and worth the cost.
Getting back to S&W's, I don't know about the .40/10mm. I own each and I think Smith feels a little bitten by the lack of warm reception of the Nightguard. I think if they did a titanium cylinder and made an Lframe .40/10 it would be a hit. The short N-frames were just so clunky looking and the rear s-i-ght left something to be desired. Maybe a bowman rough country rear s-ight instead?
Last edited:
Nicksterdemus
Member
Seems the 646 wasn't exactly welcomed w/open arms. Been a while, so maybe they'll give a five rnd 5" brl a whirl. Even though I have a few larger wheel guns I prefer small-medium frames for the most part. I finally broke down and purchased a 25-5 45acp last year. Nice, but still one rnd too many for me.Looked at a 610, have ammo & 1006, but it was almost as huge as a Redhawk 45 Colt. Or so I recall.
The New Vaquero fits me as a glove. Short fat fingers on a medium hand. I bad wanted a Night Guard and was waiting for the price to drop a bit. Didn't realize they were going to can the project. The 396 was calling my name, but the length of the brl was not.
Sadly, it would appear that beyond the J-frame I'm looking at South America w/ or w/o an Italian flair for larger caliber 5 rnd wheelguns. I have an old Charter Arms Bulldog and a Rossi 720C. However, I would enjoy a S&W in a five rnd.
My main carry was a Kahr CW45. Reasonably light/flat and concealable w/6+1 45acp DAO striker fired. It's as if the world is awash in semis & snubbies.
The New Vaquero fits me as a glove. Short fat fingers on a medium hand. I bad wanted a Night Guard and was waiting for the price to drop a bit. Didn't realize they were going to can the project. The 396 was calling my name, but the length of the brl was not.
Sadly, it would appear that beyond the J-frame I'm looking at South America w/ or w/o an Italian flair for larger caliber 5 rnd wheelguns. I have an old Charter Arms Bulldog and a Rossi 720C. However, I would enjoy a S&W in a five rnd.
My main carry was a Kahr CW45. Reasonably light/flat and concealable w/6+1 45acp DAO striker fired. It's as if the world is awash in semis & snubbies.
adams484
Member
Now this is an idea I would really like to see. But being that a J frame is already short enough for me I would like the cartridge length difference appliied to the barrel to give the slug a precious millisecond or two behind the gasses for maybe a little bit more velocity from the already fast 9MM load. A 9mm J frame with moon clips just makes sense to me as well.
S&WIowegan
US Veteran
I have direct experience with the 646...bought one used from a guy who couldn't stand the pounding. Shooting major in that gun is painful. Carmoney and I experimented with 646 minor loads for IDPA and it worked very well. Then Bill Wilson changed the revolver rules and the 646s went away. I sold mine(which was the PC version) to a PC revolver collector for a significant profit.
Carmoney had two of the non-PC version....only difference being front sight.
Carmoney had two of the non-PC version....only difference being front sight.
J. R. WEEMS
Member
Just when I thought I didn't need any more revolvers. 
Interesting to say the least. Just read the new policy as above-- sure is about time.
Interesting to say the least. Just read the new policy as above-- sure is about time. Nicksterdemus
Member
Maybe I'll run across a 646 one of these days. However, the price will more than likely be a mite rich for my blood.
I have a CS40 and it's kinda snappy w/cartridge included 3 1/4" brl.
I have a CS40 and it's kinda snappy w/cartridge included 3 1/4" brl.
silentflyer
Member
Rather have a 8 shot 627, make mine .357
forrestinmathews
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,063
- Reaction score
- 725
Yeah, let's leave IDPA out of this. They sure can screw up a shooting match and alienate a moonclip gun that can be easily concealed.
Mine gets some use with major from time to time. It's an awesome steel gun and I got a sweet trigger pull with the titanium cylinder and toothpick hammer inspired by Mike.
Late reply, but having just read this, my suggestion is that it might be time for you to find a different gunsmith!
Not only did S&W make two different 9x19 models, the J-frame 940 and the K-frame 547, but accuracy was NOT the major drama with either! Quite the contrary.
Best shooting 3" barreled S&W I've ever had.
And the little 9mm 940 is carried regularly partly because it outshoots any small auto that I've tried. It's shot regularly at 25yards, and has dispatched a beaver at almost 50yards!
Last edited:
Nicksterdemus
Member
Nice.
Real nice.
Real nice.
shipwreck2
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2013
- Messages
- 262
- Reaction score
- 59
Late reply, but having just read this, my suggestion is that it might be time for you to find a different gunsmith!
Not only did S&W make two different 9x19 models, the J-frame 940 and the K-frame 547, but accuracy was NOT the major drama with either! Quite the contrary.
Best shooting 3" barreled S&W I've ever had.
And the little 9mm 940 is carried regularly partly because it outshoots any small auto that I've tried. It's shot regularly at 25yards, and has dispatched a beaver at almost 50yards!
Looks like a fun gun.
Maybe because it's PC
Maybe it's because it's PC but that seems like a lot for a 9mm revolver that roughly equivalent to a .38.
Maybe it's because it's PC but that seems like a lot for a 9mm revolver that roughly equivalent to a .38.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
