shoebox1.1
Member
I’m a Kramer man all the way but this 624 might get a Barranti and matching 2x2x2!
Model 27 S&W
- Thread starter McBrewski
- Start date
lightman
Member
A 27 is pretty high on my want list. I favor the 3-1/2 inch model. I have a few 6 or 6-1/2 inch "N" frames that are admittedly easier to shoot than the shorter barrels.
When in this thread about Model 27 I spotted picture above, I said "Gee, finally, S&W had seen the light and made cylinder longer on M27". Than, in third sentence I saw "I have a model 25-15...". Too bad...
W.E.G.
Member
A 5-inch is right on the cusp of being the MAXIMUM size you can conceal-carry on a belt holster.
Once you go 6.5 inch - especially on an N-Frame, you have entered the realm of "big honking horse-pistol." Which is fine. So long as you accept the realities of how big honking horse-pistols have to be carried. Get one with good target sights. Because that's pretty much all you're gonna be using it for. Put it in a (large) pistol case, and drive to the range.
There are such BETTER choices for carrying with the notion that you might actually get into a gunfight, I don't know why anyone would carry an N-Frame these days. Not that an N-Frame with a "carry-able" barrel won't do just fine in most gunfights. But its much less than ideal. Nobody can dispute that.
Get the one you think LOOKS NICEST. That's what you're mainly gonna do with it. You'll look at it. And be proud.
Stick a quality mid-size autoloader and spare mags in your pants if you think you're gonna have a shootout with the cartels.
And a rifle in the back seat.
Meanwhile I will continue to regale everyone with (partially) fictional stories about my shenanigans with wheelguns, and chaps, and lever-guns. And the occasional AK-47.
Once you go 6.5 inch - especially on an N-Frame, you have entered the realm of "big honking horse-pistol." Which is fine. So long as you accept the realities of how big honking horse-pistols have to be carried. Get one with good target sights. Because that's pretty much all you're gonna be using it for. Put it in a (large) pistol case, and drive to the range.
There are such BETTER choices for carrying with the notion that you might actually get into a gunfight, I don't know why anyone would carry an N-Frame these days. Not that an N-Frame with a "carry-able" barrel won't do just fine in most gunfights. But its much less than ideal. Nobody can dispute that.
Get the one you think LOOKS NICEST. That's what you're mainly gonna do with it. You'll look at it. And be proud.
Stick a quality mid-size autoloader and spare mags in your pants if you think you're gonna have a shootout with the cartels.
And a rifle in the back seat.
Meanwhile I will continue to regale everyone with (partially) fictional stories about my shenanigans with wheelguns, and chaps, and lever-guns. And the occasional AK-47.
Last edited:
shoebox1.1
Member
Rifle in backseat is the key. If you can. Clint smith says the handgun is only there to get you to the long rifle
stonebuster
Member
I couldn't carry any of those beautiful Model 27s and not because of the weight/size. I'd be afraid if I had to use it and a cop arrived and told me to toss it on the pavement, I'd hesitate and get shot.
Joking, but I don't carry anything I'm not willing to loose. Yes I know that would be the least of my worries if the worst case happened.
Joking, but I don't carry anything I'm not willing to loose. Yes I know that would be the least of my worries if the worst case happened.westernrover
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,613
I carry an L-frame for now. I've often considered the 27-types. What I know about them is there were several iterations which can be classified as
* Registered Magnums - the first ones, fetch a high price because of their exclusivity and value to collectors. They had individually customized features. Although they're pricey, they won't lose value like the new ones. If I bought one, I'd never want to sell it, so it would require me that I tie up all that cash permanently. It's as good as gold, but gold would be easier to part with.
* Post-war 5-screw - most of them were produced under Carl Hellstrom in the 1950's. I believe these to have the most consistent quality after the Registered. There were several barrel length options including 3 1/2", 5", 6", 6 1/2" and variations a little over 8 inches. Some early ones may have had the non-Magna service panels, but most either have the Magna-style grips or Target grips. There are also models with Target hammers and Target triggers. I've not used those, but I'm skeptical of them. I doubtful that I would like them.
* Bangor-Punta era 27-2 - I'm skipping over a lot of minor variations here, but clearly things changed when the Wesson's sold out. I think there are some outstanding 27-2's to be had, but believe the quality became less consistent under the new owners.
* Post-P&R - Again, I'm not trying to detail all the dash- changes, but clearly once they stopped both pinning the barrels and recessing the cylinders, the product was different. There are some interesting models from this era including stainless-steel Model 27's. The ones I'm talking about here are all before the current Model 27 "Classic" or the stainless 627 (which had a version introduced in 1989 and then the current version).
* The current Model 27 Classic - Earlier, there were also some 2nd-generation "Registered Magnums" and 8-shot blued model 27's. These benefit from modern production processes that could give it consistency in quality that was lacking in some previous eras (where some guns were great, but others not). I'm cynical toward current production quality because of considerable bad experience with multiple current production S&W revolvers (but not 27's). The other thing about the new Classic models is they use the current style sights. All previously produced model 27's use sights that are no longer available and can be difficult to replace. The current style on the Classic models has full support of the S&W factory and lots of aftermarket support. I've handled the 4" version with the Magnas (made to look like the original 3 1/2" guns) and the 6 1/2" version which notably comes with (3T's) target grips, a target hammer and target trigger -- a super-wide, flat-pad, serrated trigger (not sure I'd like it). The 4" version comes with the regular hammer and trigger.
For me, I believe the best bet would be an early 5-screw with the barrel length, stocks, and triggers that I decide I would like. But I see them consistently going for $2000 or more nowadays. Later model 27-2's in comparable condition can be had for about 25% less.
* Registered Magnums - the first ones, fetch a high price because of their exclusivity and value to collectors. They had individually customized features. Although they're pricey, they won't lose value like the new ones. If I bought one, I'd never want to sell it, so it would require me that I tie up all that cash permanently. It's as good as gold, but gold would be easier to part with.
* Post-war 5-screw - most of them were produced under Carl Hellstrom in the 1950's. I believe these to have the most consistent quality after the Registered. There were several barrel length options including 3 1/2", 5", 6", 6 1/2" and variations a little over 8 inches. Some early ones may have had the non-Magna service panels, but most either have the Magna-style grips or Target grips. There are also models with Target hammers and Target triggers. I've not used those, but I'm skeptical of them. I doubtful that I would like them.
* Bangor-Punta era 27-2 - I'm skipping over a lot of minor variations here, but clearly things changed when the Wesson's sold out. I think there are some outstanding 27-2's to be had, but believe the quality became less consistent under the new owners.
* Post-P&R - Again, I'm not trying to detail all the dash- changes, but clearly once they stopped both pinning the barrels and recessing the cylinders, the product was different. There are some interesting models from this era including stainless-steel Model 27's. The ones I'm talking about here are all before the current Model 27 "Classic" or the stainless 627 (which had a version introduced in 1989 and then the current version).
* The current Model 27 Classic - Earlier, there were also some 2nd-generation "Registered Magnums" and 8-shot blued model 27's. These benefit from modern production processes that could give it consistency in quality that was lacking in some previous eras (where some guns were great, but others not). I'm cynical toward current production quality because of considerable bad experience with multiple current production S&W revolvers (but not 27's). The other thing about the new Classic models is they use the current style sights. All previously produced model 27's use sights that are no longer available and can be difficult to replace. The current style on the Classic models has full support of the S&W factory and lots of aftermarket support. I've handled the 4" version with the Magnas (made to look like the original 3 1/2" guns) and the 6 1/2" version which notably comes with (3T's) target grips, a target hammer and target trigger -- a super-wide, flat-pad, serrated trigger (not sure I'd like it). The 4" version comes with the regular hammer and trigger.
For me, I believe the best bet would be an early 5-screw with the barrel length, stocks, and triggers that I decide I would like. But I see them consistently going for $2000 or more nowadays. Later model 27-2's in comparable condition can be had for about 25% less.
Last edited:
W.E.G.
Member
Here's a comparison pic of a 5-inch N-frame compared to the familiar Glock 17.
Gives you an idea of the "horse-pistol" dimensions I mentioned.
I really would like to have a nice holster for it. But I'm not Clint Eastwood size. I don't make a Garand look like I'm holding a Mini-14. For everyone who watched the "Dirty Harry" movies, I think we sometimes forget what a large-stature fellow Mr. Eastwood is. By the time "most of us" don an N-frame in a holster, we look relatively dwarfish. Mr. Eastwood is a full half-foot taller than me.
Gives you an idea of the "horse-pistol" dimensions I mentioned.
I really would like to have a nice holster for it. But I'm not Clint Eastwood size. I don't make a Garand look like I'm holding a Mini-14. For everyone who watched the "Dirty Harry" movies, I think we sometimes forget what a large-stature fellow Mr. Eastwood is. By the time "most of us" don an N-frame in a holster, we look relatively dwarfish. Mr. Eastwood is a full half-foot taller than me.
Last edited:
westernrover
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,613
He was 6' 3.5". In his elderly state, he's probably a little less, but we remember him for his full stature which is bigger than me also. In his prime was also 50 pounds heavier than me. I still manage to conceal an L-frame, but I have limited options to do so. I'm constrained in terms of how I carry it and what I wear. I've carried it for years and it hasn't been totally impractical, but I know it's not the same as a j-frame (what I carried before) or one of those P365 that are so popular now.
I'm the same height and within just a couple pounds of what Frank Sinatra was. He refused the roll for Dirty Harry because he wouldn't carry the Model 29. I read from one source he wanted to do it with a smaller Colt revolver and in another source that he would have done it with a shotgun (https://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nuts/2011/08/frank-sinatras-dirty-harry-make-my-day-melon/). Some sources cite that he had broken his wrist during the filming of the Manchurian Candidate and couldn't use the heavier 29. I think it was understood that the gun would make him look dwarfish like you say.
This is one of the things that's given me pause to consider the 27 for carry. I've contemplated instead downsizing from my current L-frame to a new King Cobra or even older Detective Special. I don't want to go back to J-frames and I don't want a K-frame.
I'm the same height and within just a couple pounds of what Frank Sinatra was. He refused the roll for Dirty Harry because he wouldn't carry the Model 29. I read from one source he wanted to do it with a smaller Colt revolver and in another source that he would have done it with a shotgun (https://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nuts/2011/08/frank-sinatras-dirty-harry-make-my-day-melon/). Some sources cite that he had broken his wrist during the filming of the Manchurian Candidate and couldn't use the heavier 29. I think it was understood that the gun would make him look dwarfish like you say.
This is one of the things that's given me pause to consider the 27 for carry. I've contemplated instead downsizing from my current L-frame to a new King Cobra or even older Detective Special. I don't want to go back to J-frames and I don't want a K-frame.
shoebox1.1
Member
bangswitch
Member
If you want a M27 because it was the premier .357 Magnum revolver, then find one of the older ones and not the new production. It's worth the hunt and shooter-grade guns can be very nice and no more expensive than the new ones. If you want a6-1/2" or 5" you'll have to get one made earlier than 1979 because that was when those barrel lengths were discontinued. 4" barrels are probably the most rare length in the original production as they were special order (bracketed in length by catalogued 3-1/2 and 5" barrels and the 4" wasn't standard until after the 3-1/2 and 5" were discontinued. A 6" barrel looks pretty darn good and has a good balance. If you find one made between 1975 and 1980 it will be a 3T gun, it was standard configuration during those years although you can find them in other years as special orders. M27-2 were made for 20 years, and were the last series to have pinned barrels and recessed cylinder bores, which is a desirable feature.
You can call it what you want, but if it wasn't made in the 1930's it isn't a Registered Magnum.
Don't forget the Non Registered Magnum, which came between the Registered Magnum and Post War Transitional. The Non Registered guns are more rare than Registered models, and the Post-War Transitional are the most rare of all and also came before the Post-War (Pre M27") guns.
The M27-2 seems to be the easiest to find as the numbers made is enormous, and although getting more expensive every day are still a reasonably priced value. Mine is from 1977, shipped early in 1978.
lemaymiami
Member
Back in the mid to late eighties in my small department (100 sworn authorizes - but usually less than 95 on board) we were still only allowed to carry revolvers and no magnums at all on duty. After an incident or two when the 38 did not end the problem quickly at all.... we were finally allowed to carry large bore revolvers.... if the individual chose and could qualify with it at the range. Not many chose to do that (I always preferred a shotgun instead of any pistol if at all possible...) but the ones that did carried an N frame in either 44 special (a 44 mag but only loaded with the 44 special ammo) or a 45 long Colt. The 45 long colt with the heaviest lead rounds was considered to be the best medicine for the street - but as mentioned few carried them.
I would be proud to own any of those older, well used, sidearms today. They were first rate examples of the weapons that Smith and Wesson were producing in that time...
I would be proud to own any of those older, well used, sidearms today. They were first rate examples of the weapons that Smith and Wesson were producing in that time...
Dave Markowitz
Member
Well there goes some more of my money. The Skeeter caps were out of stock but I just ordered 2 of the Elmer Keith caps.
TheFrontRange
Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2003
- Messages
- 538
^^^ I hear you, @Dave Markowitz - the hats are hard to resist!
Yep...Too true. Comments on totin' a good gun vs. the high heels... I've got a 'tanker' rig that I've used for my 629 with a 5" bbl....never tried the M-27 5" in it however, keep the weight off my sore hips....good suggestion. Best regards, Rod
.38 Special
Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2006
- Messages
- 7,366
The fly in the ointment is dealing with the gun when you sit down. Folks with adequate padding don't seem to mind, but those of us whose butt muscles went MIA during middle age can find that the extra inch of barrel is just enough to wedge the rig up into your gut.
Chesty Puller rig and an extra strap to hold my pants up. Revolver in it and my belt holster . Plus the 16 inch R92 gives me 20 or so steel whacking loads. Now new knees to hold it all up
Not so common 5 inch GP 100 and 3 inch SP101. Let's go baby
Not so common 5 inch GP 100 and 3 inch SP101. Let's go baby
Targa
Member
My 27-2 the day I picked it up
shoebox1.1
Member
My brother in law is in LE and could carry whatever they wanted at that time before the 9’s came in all the way. He and his partner bought new matching 625 5 inch N frames 45acp moon clip guns. He loved it. I think his partner when onto a 1911 for whatever reason. I wish he still had that 625!
ECVMatt
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2004
- Messages
- 2,869
First of all, Welcome to THR!
As to a 5" vs a 6.5", I can not advocate for the 5" enough. I was fortunate enough to find one locally in great shape and immediately picked it up. I felt extremely lucky to have found a 5" and being a Skeeter fan, it made the gun even more special for me. After shooting it, I get what all the fuss is about. For me, it is just about the perfect revolver. It has enough barrel to be accurate and get good velocity, the weight is just right for me, and it shoots like a laser beam. Shortly after getting this gun, I was even luckier to find an essentially NIB 5" at another local store. I also bought this one on the spot. So now I have two and love them both. The fit and finish is extraordinary by today's standards and they are both phenomenal shooters. I consider myself very lucky to own both of these guns and will pass them down to my son when I get done with them.
Let us know what you choose and post some pictures!
As to a 5" vs a 6.5", I can not advocate for the 5" enough. I was fortunate enough to find one locally in great shape and immediately picked it up. I felt extremely lucky to have found a 5" and being a Skeeter fan, it made the gun even more special for me. After shooting it, I get what all the fuss is about. For me, it is just about the perfect revolver. It has enough barrel to be accurate and get good velocity, the weight is just right for me, and it shoots like a laser beam. Shortly after getting this gun, I was even luckier to find an essentially NIB 5" at another local store. I also bought this one on the spot. So now I have two and love them both. The fit and finish is extraordinary by today's standards and they are both phenomenal shooters. I consider myself very lucky to own both of these guns and will pass them down to my son when I get done with them.
Let us know what you choose and post some pictures!
BobWright
Member
In my opinion, the N-Frame S&W is too large for the .357 Magnum cartridge. My own preference is for the Model 586, an L-Framed gun. In my opinion, this is the ideal .357 Magnum double action revolver. Plus its longer cylinder is an asset as well. When I got the L-Frame, I never looked back, preferring them even over the vaunted Python.
Again, my opinion only.
Bob Wright
Again, my opinion only.
Bob Wright
Targa
Member
I agree that the N-Frame is much more suited for the big bores and is a bit of overkill for the .357. On the other hand, for a range plinker, full power .357’s are a joy out of the big 27.
UncleEd
Member
Definitely agree with an exception, that being the newer
generation of N-frames Plus for 8 shots. I can see reason
for that iteration.
With the slab sided skeletonized barrels, round butts the
package is quite handy, especially in the 4- and 2.5-inch
barrels.
Of course, S&W upped the game in the L-frame when
it went to the 7-shot Plus models.
Last edited:
