Why Not a S&W Scandium or Titanium K-Frame??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
61
Why has S&W not revived the airweight K-Frame with the new metals now available? It seems to me that the perfect carry revolver would be a Scandium .38/.357 with a round butt, fixed sights, and a 2.5 or 3 inch barrel.

Thoughts?
 
Oh give them time I'm sure they'll get around to it.

Right now S&W is so busy producing lighter than air .44 magnums for the masochists, er um I mean masses who must have for a .44 magnum than weighs less than a .22. :rolleyes:
 
Becasue they are already doing something very close to that: the 386PD is a 7-shot L-frame scandium snubbie. 2.5" barrel. round butt. something like 18 ozs.
 
Simmilar, but not the same. Just as a J-Frame carries significantly easier than a K-Frame, a K-frame carries much easier than a L-Frame.

Nothing shoots better from the average man's hand than a round butt K-Frame. The steel version gets a little heavy at the end of the day though!
 
I know! I'd be happy with a plain alluminum alloy frame in .38 Special if they would reintroduce it. I don't see it happening though.:(
 
Hank,

Have you handled a 386 yet? Like any L-frame, the grip is the same as the K-frame. Yes the cylinder part of the frame is bigger (big enough to hold a seventh round), but neither K or L is what I would call a pocket gun. The comparison of J to K and K to L is not spot on in my opinion. The L frame is marginally larger than the K in some dimensions.

Plus the 386 only weighs somthing like 18 oz. Most people would probably complain that the gun is too light, not too heavy. Check one out if you can, I am considering buying one myself.
 
I am waiting for a Model 15 in Scandium (M 315?). Sufficient power, good ergonomics, great accuracy, lightweight.

Thus far I am underwhelmed by the coyote-ugly bigbores S&W is promoting. I refuse to own premium priced UGLY guns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top