[10 Ringer']

Looking through a commercial "all gun" catalog, I still can't figure out the differences between one S&W frame style and another. The only two Smith's I've come in contact with were an older Model 64 at a range and a new 686 at a show. The 64 with a small wood grip fit my otherwise longer but average size hands poorly, though I did outshoot both autos I shot on the same day by a fair margin-and who can't like THAT?!. The 686 felt a lot better, had a fuller rubber grip but was balanced not as good as the 64 with the same 4" barrel.

Just looking to clear the confusing air on how the various S&W frames differ and what modern (w/in last 20 years) models are associated with specific frames. Thanks.

[C.R.Sam]

See this ongoing thread... http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41271

and this ongoing thread... http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41362

And, if available where you are, grab a free S&W yearly catalog.

That way you can see the catalog descriptions and compare them to the pictured guns in the above threads.

Sam

[SDC]

It's mainly a matter of size; the "J" frame size is the smaller series of "snubbies" (Model 36, 30, etc.), the "K" frame size is the medium frame size (Model 15, 15, etc.), the "L" frame size is basically a beefed-up "K" frame for magnum loads (586, 686, etc.), and the "N" frame size is the heavy frame for the .44s and .45s (29, 629, 625, etc.) They've now added the "X" frame size for the new .500 revolver, and way back when, they used to make an "M" frame size, for a tiny .22 revolver; legend has it, S&W stopped making these revolvers when they found out they were the preferred carry pieces for ladies of the evening.

[Mike Irwin]

Size.

[Jim K]

The L frame is larger in the frame and cylinder, but the grip is the same as that of the K frame. In its new line, S&W has dropped the old "square butt" that characterized S&W revolvers for decades and has gone to a round butt configuration. The new "square butt" guns are that way because of grip shape, not frame shape. Another cost cutting measure, since only one frame needs to be made for each size.

FWIW, there was also the I frame, which was used for the .32 and .38 S&W (Regulation police and Terrier) revolvers; it was that frame that was lengthened and beefed up to produce the J frame.

Jim

[Daniel Watters]

Come to think of it, wouldn't a modern I or M-frame be interesting? The improved M-frame could be stretched for use as a 5-shot .32 H&R Mag, a 7-shot .22 LR, and perhaps even a 6-shot .22 Win Mag. In contrast, the improved I-frame would be no longer than necessary for cartridges such as the .22 LR or even the 9x19mm.

[Mike Irwin]

"FWIW, there was also the I frame, which was used for the .32 and .38 S&W..."

More specifically, the I-frame was the frame that introduced the .32 S&W LONG.

The .32 S&W round, an older, shorter case, was never regularly chambered in any Hand Ejector revolver.

It's reported that a FEW hand ejectors were factory chambered for the .32 S&W round. One with proper provenance would be EXTREMELY valuable.

There was also a slightly enlarged I-frame, called the I-frame Improved, which introduced the coil spring to the S&W line up.

It's more correct to say that it was the I-frame Improved that was the direct descendant of the J frame.