New S&W models for 2014


PDA






Thursday45
January 3, 2014, 04:35 PM
Not sure if anyone has seen this yet but S&W has announced their models for 2014. Among the ones I am most interested in is the return of the model 66: http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_827561_-1_757751_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

And the five shot L frame 44 mag model 69: http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_827559_-1_757767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

If you enjoyed reading about "New S&W models for 2014" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ArchAngelCD
January 3, 2014, 05:02 PM
Links don't seem to work and I'm very interested is seeing them. I'm looking on the S&W site and I don't see a link to their new products. I guess I'm missing it!

mesinge2
January 3, 2014, 05:05 PM
I will be buying the model 69!!!

Thursday45
January 3, 2014, 05:07 PM
Hmmm no sure why the links won't work. Here is some more on the 66

http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/2014/01/02/return-smith-wesson-model-66-combat-magnum/

If you go to S&w's website and go to handguns then revolvers and on the drop down go to "view more" the 66 and 69 are both on the 1st page down at the bottom.

Thaddeus Jones
January 3, 2014, 05:10 PM
The model 66 is my favorite revolver. I own examples from the 66 no dash through the 66-4.

That abomination being touted as a model 66 bears scant resemblance to a real 66.

Looks more like that discontinued 7-shot, IL, two piece barrel 520 that was discontinued after a short production life. I predict the same short production life for that 66 knock off.

Dframe
January 3, 2014, 05:18 PM
That model 69 has my attention! I've already got a nice 66 from the old days.

98Redline
January 3, 2014, 05:20 PM
Until they get rid of the Hillary Hole on the side of the frame, S&W will see none of my money.

Ruger was smart enough to end the production of the internal lock versions, time for S&W to follow suit.

km101
January 3, 2014, 05:36 PM
+1 on no keyhole guns! When will S&W get the message?

But the model 69 looks very interesting! But two things caught my eye:

1. "Ball detent lock" Are they changing the locking system? A ball system doesn't sound as strong as the current system.

2. "Two piece barrel" ??? Not sure what this means but it doesn't sound good to me!

Anyone have any ideas? I couldn't find anything on the S&W site.

19-3Ben
January 3, 2014, 05:53 PM
If that model 69 ever comes out with a 3"bbl, heaven help the person who stands between me and the gun shop!

Thursday45
January 3, 2014, 05:59 PM
I'm alright with the 4". I currently conceal a 686 4" and sometimes even my 629 4". I like the balance of a 4" but if we ever see a 3" it would mean that it was successful and may be around awhile which I'd be okay with since there are so many S&Ws I want but so few $$.

Dframe
January 3, 2014, 07:51 PM
19-3 ben you MAY have to try and run over me.
I'll be at the front of the line for a 3 inch gun!!!

bikemutt
January 3, 2014, 07:55 PM
I'll be all over the 66, I don't care about the lock so much for a range gun, albeit that it's unflattering to say the least.

mesinge2
January 3, 2014, 08:21 PM
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!

351 WINCHESTER
January 3, 2014, 08:36 PM
Ditch the lock and where did they get a 4.25" barrel for both models???

Black Knight
January 3, 2014, 08:48 PM
I heard that in Canada revolvers must have a barrel that is 4.1 inches or 4.25 inches. I imagine that it is so they can be sold in Canada as well.

mesinge2
January 3, 2014, 09:09 PM
Ditch the lock and where did they get a 4.25" barrel for both models???

Copying Ruger?

351 WINCHESTER
January 3, 2014, 10:23 PM
OK, makes sense. I wasn't aware about the Canadian regulation. Maybe I should go into the holster making business and concentrate on 4.25" ones. Actually I doubt that a quarter of an inch would make much difference in any of my holsters.

Jaymo
January 3, 2014, 11:11 PM
My guess is that the ball detent lockup refers either to the cylinder lockup at the rear of the cylinder/recoil shield, or a the barrel underlug/ejector rod.
Either that, or the crane/frame.

crazysccrmd
January 3, 2014, 11:27 PM
I might have to sell my 629 mountain gun to pick up that L frame 44.

Jim Watson
January 4, 2014, 12:00 AM
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.

cfullgraf
January 4, 2014, 12:02 AM
Lock or not, I am going to look for them.

I wish the Model 69 was 44 Special only but i'll accept it in 44 Magnum.

ECVMatt
January 4, 2014, 02:45 AM
I really like the 69!

plateshooter
January 4, 2014, 08:11 AM
That model 69 could be called the S&W Tracker. Looks like they have taken notice of the Taurus Tracker 44 mag with the lock up, frame size, and 5 shot cylinder.

I have a 5 shot Tracker in 44 mag and it is a great gun, the S&W 69 should be even better.

CraigC
January 4, 2014, 10:48 AM
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.
That's what I'm wondering as well. I wonder if they enlarged the barrel shank. Very interesting, to say the least.

BSA1
January 4, 2014, 12:19 PM
+1 on no keyhole guns! When will S&W get the message?

I think they have. Notice how the publicity pictures do not show the lock.

But the model 69 looks very interesting! But two things caught my eye:

1. "Ball detent lock" Are they changing the locking system? A ball system doesn't sound as strong as the current system.

The recoil on magnum loads in a L-Frame should be....well big attention getter. Maybe the ball detent prevents the cylinder from unlocking from the recoil?

2. "Two piece barrel" ??? Not sure what this means but it doesn't sound good to me!

Well it certainly isn't as high as quality of manufacturing as old S&W revolvers but the barrel doesn't contain the pressures of the round when it is fired.

Anyone have any ideas? I couldn't find anything on the S&W site.

It seems to be part of the trend to chamber the most powerful commercial round possible in as small and light as possible aka 357 J-Frame revolvers. This mostest in the lightest is really not practical for regular use. However it should be a excellent platform for handloaders to take advantage of the full potential of the 44 Special.

JudgeHolden10
January 4, 2014, 12:55 PM
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.

MrBorland
January 4, 2014, 01:37 PM
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.

CraigC
January 4, 2014, 01:57 PM
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.

lobo9er
January 4, 2014, 02:42 PM
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?

lobo9er
January 4, 2014, 02:44 PM
Total side note, but didn't S&W wesson some what copy taurus last year with the 410 revolver?

MrBorland
January 4, 2014, 03:01 PM
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.

Mastrogiacomo
January 4, 2014, 03:55 PM
I wonder if the 66 will make it to Massachusetts. Heck, I'd love the 586 to be allowed into the state.....

Laura

Thursday45
January 4, 2014, 04:42 PM
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.

mesinge2
January 5, 2014, 08:58 AM
Thank you for that link MrBorland!!

km101
January 5, 2014, 11:56 AM
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.

CraigC
January 5, 2014, 12:21 PM
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.

OldCavSoldier
January 5, 2014, 11:57 PM
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!!)

pittspilot
January 6, 2014, 12:11 AM
Want a 69! Sweet!

bluetopper
January 6, 2014, 01:23 AM
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.

Twiki357
January 6, 2014, 01:41 AM
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.

shadow9
January 6, 2014, 03:54 AM
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.

mesinge2
January 6, 2014, 09:05 AM
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:

http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson2/upload/images/firearms/zoom_lg/170341_01_lg.jpg



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


http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson2/upload/images/firearms/zoom_lg/178055_01_lg.jpg

460Kodiak
January 6, 2014, 10:13 AM
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.

osteodoc08
January 6, 2014, 02:04 PM
I'd be all over a model 69 and shoot medium loads out of it. Lots of em.

CraigC
January 6, 2014, 02:49 PM
IMHO, just so much BS.
It's not BS, it's personal preference. Some folks don't mind them, some do. I do and I have perfectly legitimate reasons why I won't be buying one.

ArchAngelCD
January 6, 2014, 07:13 PM
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.

Gtscotty
January 7, 2014, 06:34 AM
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.

dickydalton
January 7, 2014, 10:13 PM
Thumbs Up!

Queen_of_Thunder
January 7, 2014, 11:41 PM
The day I see those 9mm revolvers for sale will be the day I buy them.

Pointshoot
January 8, 2014, 09:51 PM
+1 on no keyhole guns! When will S&W get the message?

When people stop buying them

SleazyRider
January 8, 2014, 10:04 PM
Nope. I ain't buying one until it's featured in a Hollywood movie!

If you enjoyed reading about "New S&W models for 2014" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!