New S&W models for 2014

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder how they got enough forcing cone thickness to put .44 Magnum in the L frame.

I was thinking the same. Didn't the K-frames have trouble with the .357 for that exact reason, hence the creation of the L-frame?

I'd like to be interested the new offerings, but I keep having problems with the only newer Smith that I own. My 686-6 has just started light striking on double action. This after maybe 3000 rounds through it, about half of them .38 Specials. This will be the second trip back to the factory for me. Smith's customer service rep said I would have a shipping label via e-mail a few days after calling...and it's been about two weeks. It's not the end of the world, but for what Smith is charging for new revolvers, well, I'm not terribly impressed.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how they got enough forcing cone thickness to put .44 Magnum in the L frame.

Might be why they went with a 2-piece barrel.

Purists decry the 2-piece barrel simply as a cost-cutting measure, but AFAIK, it was developed for their .500mag: Since the 2-piece design doesn't have the stress at the barrel/frame junction the traditional 1-piece barrel has, it's actually more durable in this area. As a bonus, guns with 2-piece barrels have reputations for exceptionally good accuracy.
 
I don't think that's gonna keep a paper thin forcing cone from cracking.

I decry two-piece barrels not because I am a purist but because it is a cost-cutting measure that does not result in a better product. You still have to have tension at the shoulder to keep the barrel from unscrewing.
 
just joining the conversation and do not know as much about it as you guys but was the 2 piece barrel designed for the 500 true? And if so would it not be a strong enough design for the puny in comparison 44?
 
was the 2 piece barrel designed for the 500 true? And if so would it not be a strong enough design for the puny in comparison 44?

Below's a snippet from an article on the development of the .500mag X-frame.

From: http://www.shootingtimes.com/2011/03/19/smith-wessons-monster-magnum/
At the frame’s opposite end, the Model 500 also employs a new method of barrel attachment. On all other steel-frame/steel-barrel S&W revolvers, the barrel is threaded directly into the frame with a “crush-fit” interface that is forcefully tightened into proper index and requires substantial minimum barrel diameter and frame enclosure material. By contrast, the X-Frame design uses a two-part barrel assembly consisting of in internal rifled barrel tube, and a separate enclosing barrel shroud. In assembly, the shroud is first placed over the index tabs on the front of the frame, and then the barrel tube is inserted and threaded into the frame with an enlarged ring around its muzzle bringing the shroud tightly against the frame as it torques down.
The system is superficially similar to the well-known interchangeable-barrel Dan Wesson system, but unlike a Dan Wesson barrel it is a permanent installation with a hard-fitted, nonadjustable barrel-cylinder gap. Like the Dan Wesson system, however, the result is that the actual barrel with the rifled bore is supported at both ends, not just at the rear, which enhances accuracy. And, most important of all, the barrel portion that is threaded through the frame at the critical location of the forcing cone, which must absorb all the punishing impact of the bullet as it leaps from the face of the cylinder, is a nonstressed interface. This is a real benefit to the gun’s longevity, considering the intensely high impact energy of the .500 Smith & Wesson Magnum cartridge.
 
I wonder if the 66 will make it to Massachusetts. Heck, I'd love the 586 to be allowed into the state.....

Laura
 
I haven't kept up with other State's restrictions by why in the world would the 586 not be allowed in Mass? :what:

I just put my name down for a model 69 at my LGS for whenever they start trickling in. Hope to see them sooner than later.
 
Has anyone seen a drawing or cut-away picture of the two piece barrel? I am a visual kinda' guy, and I don't understand how this works!

I shot a couple of the first prototype guns to come out of the factory when the .500 was being introduced, but the 2 piece barrel was never mentioned at the time of the demo.
 
Sounds like some creative marketing to make a cost cutting measure look like an enhancement. S&W is good at that. Which basically means that their barrels cannot be removed and reinstalled by anyone but S&W. We're on our way from fully rebuildable to fully disposable revolvers.
 
All this blah-blah-blah about the Hillary hole in the side of the frame. IMHO, just so much BS. I have a couple of Hillary hole S&Ws and about a dozen without the Hillary hole. All function WITHOUT PROBLEM.

(And, I have bet my life a few times on Hillary hole S&Ws............and, I'm still here!!)
 
S&W is supposed to also this year have out a Jerry Miculek 9mm N frame 6" barrel revolver.
I so wish they would make it on the K frame however.
 
Km101 (And others): “2. "Two piece barrel" ??? Not sure what this means but it doesn't sound good to me!”

A rifled tube inside of an outer shroud that looks like an actual barrel. I’ve got one on a 637 J frame. Didn’t know what it was until I got it home. Good? – Bad? Time will tell.

But, I was under the impression that they only used it on “Airweight” models.
 
RE: two-piece barrel/better strength/accuracy - FWIW, Rugers run things like .454 Casull, .480 Ruger, and .44 magnums with HOT loads quite often. Also, those who own them aren't exactly kind with the reloads, and I RARELY hear of barrel issues. Likewise, many will say that the SP101 is one of the most accurate revolvers they've ever shot - and it certainly doesn't have a 2 piece barrel either.

Frankly I'm in the "it's marketing" camp. Also easier for the service department to change barrels - unscrew the dead barrel, screw in the new one, done. Shroud/nose and sights and everything stay in place, and accuracy/POI would likely be adjusted by the shroud/frame fitment.

That said, I also came across a NIB M60 2.5" at the LGS recently that had a shroud/frame gap that you could get a fingernail into. I'm sorry, but with a "name" like S&W, and a $759 pistol, I'd better not see anything even remotely close to that kind of slop.
 
S&W is supposed to also this year have out a Jerry Miculek 9mm N frame 6" barrel revolver.
I so wish they would make it on the K frame however.
Here's the 6.5" N frame 8 shot 9mm model 929:

170341_01_lg.jpg




And here is the 5" L frame 7 shot 9mm model 986:


178055_01_lg.jpg
 
If that model 69 ever comes out with a 3"bbl, heaven help the person who stands between me and the gun shop!

Same here.

I wonder how they got enough forcing cone thickness to put .44 Magnum in the L frame.
The 696 L .44 Special was often said to be marginal.

I wonder the same.
 
The 2 piece barrel came out well before the 500 Magnum. S&W used them on the M619 and M620 and they were very accurate. I don't mind a 2 piece barrel because it doesn't look bad and doesn't affect the accuracy other than possible make it better.
 
I do and I have perfectly legitimate reasons why I won't be buying one.

Out of curiosity, what are the drawbacks of the internal lock, besides the fact that it's not really needed?

The Model 69 looks very interesting to me, right now my only revolver is a 629 that I reload for and shoot a good bit. It would be nice to get a pistol in the exact same chambering, but in a smaller frame for carrying around the property when I'm not really actively hunting, but still want to be able to take a pig or something should I walk up on it. Also, I usually shoot mid range loads out of my 629 anyway, and I don't think this new revolver would be too bad with what basically amounts to hot special loads. I think the Model 69 would allow me to add a smaller revolver to my collection without having to tool up to load a totally new caliber I'm not particularly interested in.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top