DDGator
Member
I have seen a few at gun shows. Does anyone on this forum actually own one or shot one?
S&W PC 625 -- 2 inch Scandium
- Thread starter DDGator
- Start date
- Status
TonyB
Member
Just got my Handgins magazine yesterday and it's on the cover...it does interest me..........hopefully someone's got a range report....
snubby
Member
Saw the Hanguns article, too. Chrono'd velocities were all less than 800 fps. The gun still weighs 25 ounces, since the cylinder is steel, not scandium. With it retailing over $1000, I'm not sure how much an improvement it is over a cheaper Taurus .45 titanium snub (is that sixth shot worth $600?).
SnWnMe
Member
Anything is an improvement over a Taurus
Tamara
Senior Member
So, 230gr loads run about the same as they do out of Officer's-size 1911's. Which is, of course, unsurprising considering the similar bbl length...
I think you mean "titanium", not "scandium".
I do own one and have shot it a few times. The gun comes with two sets of grips wood and Rubber. I have used the rubber exclusively.
It is a Scandium frame. Fit and finish is good but not great. As is common from the S&W custom shop where this comes from, there is a hand tooled look not a machined look.
Trigger pull D/A is very smooth and about 12 lbs.
Accuracy was acceptable. I fired a basic drill at 21ft,30ft and 50ft. Sights were slightly off but at 7 yards it mattered not. Groups never larger than 4" slow fire.
I tried Power"Ball, Govt Match Ammo, Winclean and a bunch of Win Ranger.
If I were to carry it I would use Power'Ball for sure otherwise velocity would dip below the threshold of expansion for all else.
Truly, I consider the 625-2 an oddity. More for collecting than shooting but it is a keeper in my collection.
Cordially,
Jim Hiller
It is a Scandium frame. Fit and finish is good but not great. As is common from the S&W custom shop where this comes from, there is a hand tooled look not a machined look.
Trigger pull D/A is very smooth and about 12 lbs.
Accuracy was acceptable. I fired a basic drill at 21ft,30ft and 50ft. Sights were slightly off but at 7 yards it mattered not. Groups never larger than 4" slow fire.
I tried Power"Ball, Govt Match Ammo, Winclean and a bunch of Win Ranger.
If I were to carry it I would use Power'Ball for sure otherwise velocity would dip below the threshold of expansion for all else.
Truly, I consider the 625-2 an oddity. More for collecting than shooting but it is a keeper in my collection.
Cordially,
Jim Hiller
Tamara
Senior Member
Indeed it is!
Since there was no 625 or 625-1, the 625-2 (produced only during 1989) is an oddity. I have one, and it's pretty cool.
Your 2" 625-(8?) is also an oddity.
Prodigalshooter
Member
Well, last night I shot the Performance Center 625 with the 2" barrel, friend of mine just bought it. He said it was a 625-10, but I didn't check inside the crane, just took his word for it.
I did shoot some downloaded 205 gr RNFP handloads and it was pretty comfortable shooting. These loads are probably 1/3 less umph than factory, give or take. Very controlable, sights are a bit like a j-frame. I was able to hit pretty well at 10 yards, kept 'em inside the "A" zone anyway.
This would be a great carry gun, IMHO, for a large frame revolver. The boot grip style grips actually surprised me, much more comfortable than I expected. I like they didn't make it a 5 shot gun. As a carry gun, some of the 185 gr. HPs out there would be plenty effective in this gun, in my opinion, but I wouldn't want to shoot factory 230 gr. FMJ loads, it's too light for them.
I liked it.
Besides, you get that spiffy case with it too.
Oh, the cylinder is stainless steel, not Ti.
I did shoot some downloaded 205 gr RNFP handloads and it was pretty comfortable shooting. These loads are probably 1/3 less umph than factory, give or take. Very controlable, sights are a bit like a j-frame. I was able to hit pretty well at 10 yards, kept 'em inside the "A" zone anyway.
This would be a great carry gun, IMHO, for a large frame revolver. The boot grip style grips actually surprised me, much more comfortable than I expected. I like they didn't make it a 5 shot gun. As a carry gun, some of the 185 gr. HPs out there would be plenty effective in this gun, in my opinion, but I wouldn't want to shoot factory 230 gr. FMJ loads, it's too light for them.
I liked it.
Besides, you get that spiffy case with it too.
Oh, the cylinder is stainless steel, not Ti.
Last edited:
10-Ring
Member
2" Scandium 45 wheelgun??? Interesting. I'd be interested to see how the perform as well & to find out shooters perspective re: this gun too.
Kentucky Rifle
Member In Memoriam
800 FPS Velocity?
I think that's pretty OK. I'm reminded of my "ER Doc" friend's comment. "Those big, slow, round nose sumbitches cause a LOT of damage". Ain't it the truth.
Will
I think that's pretty OK. I'm reminded of my "ER Doc" friend's comment. "Those big, slow, round nose sumbitches cause a LOT of damage". Ain't it the truth.
Will
Highland Ranger
Member
CMcDermott
Member
Maybe I'm just being too picky, but shouldn't this gun be a model "425" (from the 442) or maybe "225" (from the 296) since it has a Scandium frame with a steel cylinder? I just think that S&W should try to keep their model numbers a little more descriptive, with all "6xx" guns being all stainless steel.
P95Carry
Moderator Emeritus
Only just gotten round to reading up on this in latest Guns and Ammo ...... lot of money!!
Mind you - being an N frame freak ... this could well be one of the revo's that really converts me to rimless auto ammo wheel guns. Seems to fit a VERY desirable slot in the carry choices.
Mind you - being an N frame freak ... this could well be one of the revo's that really converts me to rimless auto ammo wheel guns. Seems to fit a VERY desirable slot in the carry choices.
The Mighty Beagle
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2002
- Messages
- 218
Anybody else notice in that Handguns article that they shot the gun at 12 yards? Kinda funny ... they used to shoot at 25 yd. targets back in the day, and I've seen it steadily decrease over the years because "this isn't a 'target gun'" and is "meant for close-up personal defense". Just interesting is all.
DrDremel
Member
I have to agree on the distance. Maybe in 20 years they will touch the target with the barrel and test for groups. Even if the gun is for up-close, the reason for testing at 25 yards is to see the accuracy of the firearm itself. If the gun had an extra inch of barrel, I'd buy it. If it had the extra inch of barrel and a shrouded hammer, ala 296 style, I'd buy two.
Tamara
Senior Member
Supposedly, a titanium-cylindered, 2.5" 325PD should be making its debut as a catalogued item this year.
DrDremel
Member
If it has a Ti cylinder, I'll pass. My S&W296 blew up. S&W replaced it with a 625. All the cylinders stretched using factory ammo.
It is Titanium. I think Scandium is limited to the frame.
Interesting revolver though. I find the grip size a little large for me but it is unusually accurate for a snubby. Maybe a tribute to close tolerences and a longer barrel than appears from external dimensions. Also appears to have lots more beef than the 296 did at least on the frame bridge.
Cheers,
Jim
Interesting revolver though. I find the grip size a little large for me but it is unusually accurate for a snubby. Maybe a tribute to close tolerences and a longer barrel than appears from external dimensions. Also appears to have lots more beef than the 296 did at least on the frame bridge.
Cheers,
Jim
kalibear45
Member
Whats wrong with titanium cylinders?
- Status
