This Revolver Confuses The Snot Out of Me....

geekWithA.45 · November 29, 2003, 01:08 AM

I handled one of these the other week at S&W display at a gun show.

I just don't get it. I'm not a revolver guy, so maybe there's something I missed.

The S&W Model 625:

The one I handled had full sized grips, unlike the one in the picture, making it a full sized .45acp wheelgun with a 2 inch barrel, and the only revolver I'd ever seen that was taller than it was long.

Can anyone tell me what they were after when they designed this thing? It's kinda big & bulky for CCW, so why put such a short snout on it? Considering the lazy twist rate .45acp calls for, can you even do meaningful rifling in so little space? (banging head, didn't think to look at the rifling at the time) I mean, it might be cheaper and about as effective to just cut straight grooves into the barrel and call it a day... Will .45acp even stabilize with so little barrel?

Still scratchin' my head.

Parker Dean · November 29, 2003, 01:29 AM

I've noticed a definite increase in interest about big-bore, low pressure, revolvers here recently. The Smith 25/625's are definite interest generators but the only company making a smaller one for concealed carry is Taurus with their Tracker 455. I expect what you're seeing is Smiths attempt at countering the 455 while not really spending any money on modifying another frame type for the .45ACP

CleverNickname · November 29, 2003, 02:18 AM

First thing I thought when I opened this thread was "who photoshopped the tiny barrel on that gun?". Too funny that it's real

Preacherman · November 29, 2003, 02:56 AM

Geek, sure it'll stabilize. Look at all the 3" and 3½" .45 pistols out there! That barrel length includes the chamber, so they've only got about 2" or 2½" of rifling in them - yet they seem to shoot just fine. On this revolver, you've got 2" of rifling, plus the length of the chamber - works out to a similar sort of effect.

That said, I wouldn't be happy shooting heavy bullets out of this, or out of short autos. They lose so much velocity that they fall under the threshold of expansion, as has been demonstrated many times "the hard way". I'd go with a 185gr. +P hollowpoint in this gun. It would make recoil a bit snappy (after all, the gun only weighs 24 oz. with its Scandium frame - see here for full specs), but should still be controllable, given that you've got a good-size grip to hang on to.

It may look wierd, but it'll work!

Jim March · November 29, 2003, 03:13 AM

Ya, when you run 3" auto barrels or 2" wheelgun barrels in 45ACP, the Cor-Bon 165grain Pow'R'Ball or a load involving the 185 Gold Dot make a lot of sense. The 230grain JHPs flat-out are NOT going to expand.

Jim March · November 29, 2003, 03:14 AM

PS: yes, that gun looks bizarre

. Hang a 3" tube on it for God's sake!

Shane · November 29, 2003, 03:42 AM

That barrel looks far less than 2". Maybe its just a picture distortion, but to me that barrel is so short it looks closer to 1 inch.

BluesBear · November 29, 2003, 04:09 AM

Shane that's because less than ½ of the barrel is out in front of the frame.
There is only about 1" out front. Look how short the cylinder is in the frame window.

I think it would look much better if they had just left the barrel ROUND.

caz223 · November 29, 2003, 04:13 AM

Fortunately, nobody loads .45 acp with slow burning magnum powders.
They are all fast burning powders, which don't really need the 8 inch barrels that the magnums use for full velocity with the large amounts of lead that the magnums throw around.
On the positive side, the .45 acp doesn't need the long 6+ inch magnum tube that the magnums need to get the point across.
That same gun with a 8" barrel wouldn't acheive any usable velocity increase over and above the snubby length because of the fast burning rate of the powders used. (At least, not enough to actually quantify using the longer barrel.)
I hope that this makes sense because I just had a long night at the bar, and my organization and typing skills both are on vacation.
Maybe I'll clarify later, if and when I understand what I'm trying to say.

JMag · November 29, 2003, 05:13 AM

Agreed, I'm confused too with the 2" .45ACP wheelie...

Jim March · November 29, 2003, 06:55 AM

caz223: within limits, I disagree.

Chronographed speed comparos between 3", 4" and 5" 1911-pattern guns show a clear speed boost. Good 230grain JHPs that expand well out of 5" barrels are iffy at 4" and doomed at 3".

Granted, out past 5" you're most probably correct, although there's been some successful 6" "longslide" autos made.

Glockorama · November 29, 2003, 12:03 PM

Good info all, but let us not forget one thing: that is one butt-ugly revo!

OH25shooter · November 29, 2003, 12:16 PM

I own and shoot S&W wheel guns. But, that is a freeky lookin' handgun. Are you sure the barrel is 2"? Maybe that's S&W's version of a derringer.

Standing Wolf · November 29, 2003, 11:01 PM

It looks to me as though Smith & Wesson messed up a batch of barrels and had to figure out a way to salvage them.

George Hill · November 29, 2003, 11:19 PM

You know...
It kinda grows on ya.

sgt127 · November 29, 2003, 11:29 PM

...So does Ringworm. Don't want that either!!

James Bondrock · November 30, 2003, 12:10 AM

Other than the lack of the cutaway trigger guard and bobbed hammer, this is a similar concept to the old "Fitz Special" revolvers of the 1920s and 1930s. This originated with a guy named FitzGerald who worked for Colt back then. His idea of the perfect self-defense gun was a Colt New Service (a gun similar in size to the Smith N-frame) revolver, in .45 Colt or .45 ACP, with its barrel shortened to two inches, the butt shortened and rounded, the front of the trigger guard cut away and the hammer spur removed. He would sometimes carry a brace of them in his front pants pockets! Colt produced some of these revolvers, as well as some Detective Specials similarly modified, and custom gunsmiths of the period also modified these and other revolvers in this fashion. If you have any older gun magazines, you will probably find some pictures of Fitz Specials. The cutaway trigger guard is frowned on today (for safety reasons as well as being easily bent), but the concept of a big-bore snubby revolver still has merit. The gun shown would look better with a round barrel, but I find myself rather fancying one!

Preacherman · November 30, 2003, 12:25 AM

For those who want one, I hope you've got a larger bank account than mine... Lew Hortons (the sole distributor for these guns) sets a retail price of $1109.95!

Carbonator · November 30, 2003, 12:29 AM

Oh, wait guys. That's the guns "bad side". Here's a better angle lol...

Great concept but poorly executed IMO. Bean counters probably destroyed any chance of success. I'd be very interested if it had a shorter frame to close that gap, titanium cylinder, Hogue grip, concealed hammer option...

James Bondrock · November 30, 2003, 12:37 AM

Quote:

For those who want one, I hope you've got a larger bank account than mine... Lew Hortons (the sole distributor for these guns) sets a retail price of $1109.95!

Looks like I'll have to wait a while, then. (Layaway?

) It would look much better with a half-inch longer and round barrel.

JohnKSa · November 30, 2003, 12:38 AM

Quote:

a shorter frame to close that gap, titanium cylinder, Hogue grip, concealed hammer option...

Exactly what I was thinking...

The gap makes it look like someone didn't take the time to do things right. And a concealed hammer would make a lot of sense.

BluesBear · November 30, 2003, 12:42 AM

Here lately it seems that S&W only show publicity photos of their newer revolvers from the right side. Thus ending a century old tradition of showing their revolvers from the left side.

Funny they still show older guns and their current automatics from the left side?

Preacherman · November 30, 2003, 12:49 AM

BB, that's because photographs of the other side would show the Black Hole Of Political Correctness above the cylinder catch...

George Hill · November 30, 2003, 02:52 AM

I'd rather have the cylinder a little longer to fill the gap and be able to handle things like .451 Detonics, .45 Win Mag.... and anything inbetween.

Sheldon · November 30, 2003, 03:26 AM

Looks like you'de better punch that short ejector rod hard and fast to get them shells out. I'de imagine it would be impossible to get a clean ejection of shells longer than the 45 ACP!!

November 29, 2003, 01:08 AM	#1
geekWithA.45 Moderator Emeritus Join Date: January 1, 2003 Location: SE PA Posts: 6,764	This Revolver Confuses The Snot Out of Me.... I handled one of these the other week at S&W display at a gun show. I just don't get it. I'm not a revolver guy, so maybe there's something I missed. The S&W Model 625: The one I handled had full sized grips, unlike the one in the picture, making it a full sized .45acp wheelgun with a 2 inch barrel, and the only revolver I'd ever seen that was taller than it was long. Can anyone tell me what they were after when they designed this thing? It's kinda big & bulky for CCW, so why put such a short snout on it? Considering the lazy twist rate .45acp calls for, can you even do meaningful rifling in so little space? (banging head, didn't think to look at the rifling at the time) I mean, it might be cheaper and about as effective to just cut straight grooves into the barrel and call it a day... Will .45acp even stabilize with so little barrel? Still scratchin' my head. __________________ The Second Amendment is an intrinsic, inextricable part of the system of checks and balances upon which our Republic is based. --- Didja ever notice that while psychos might try to kill everyone at the mall or the cafeteria, they never try that nonsense at NRA meetings? --- Fight smart. Not dumb. Smart. --- http://geekWithA45.blogspot.com

November 29, 2003, 02:56 AM	#4
Preacherman Moderator Emeritus Join Date: December 20, 2002 Location: Louisiana, USA Posts: 13,323	Geek, sure it'll stabilize. Look at all the 3" and 3½" .45 pistols out there! That barrel length includes the chamber, so they've only got about 2" or 2½" of rifling in them - yet they seem to shoot just fine. On this revolver, you've got 2" of rifling, plus the length of the chamber - works out to a similar sort of effect. That said, I wouldn't be happy shooting heavy bullets out of this, or out of short autos. They lose so much velocity that they fall under the threshold of expansion, as has been demonstrated many times "the hard way". I'd go with a 185gr. +P hollowpoint in this gun. It would make recoil a bit snappy (after all, the gun only weighs 24 oz. with its Scandium frame - see here for full specs), but should still be controllable, given that you've got a good-size grip to hang on to. It may look wierd, but it'll work! __________________ Proud THR plank-owner Let's put the fun back in dysfunctional! Please visit my blog: http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/

November 29, 2003, 03:13 AM	#5
Jim March Member Join Date: December 24, 2002 Location: SF Bay Area Posts: 8,758	Ya, when you run 3" auto barrels or 2" wheelgun barrels in 45ACP, the Cor-Bon 165grain Pow'R'Ball or a load involving the 185 Gold Dot make a lot of sense. The 230grain JHPs flat-out are NOT going to expand. __________________ Jim March TFL Alumnus Equal Rights for CCW Home Page http://www.equalccw.com Airplane Pictures

November 29, 2003, 03:14 AM	#6
Jim March Member Join Date: December 24, 2002 Location: SF Bay Area Posts: 8,758	PS: yes, that gun looks bizarre . Hang a 3" tube on it for God's sake! __________________ Jim March TFL Alumnus Equal Rights for CCW Home Page http://www.equalccw.com Airplane Pictures

November 29, 2003, 04:13 AM	#9
caz223 Member Join Date: December 27, 2002 Location: SW Michigan Posts: 1,697	Fortunately, nobody loads .45 acp with slow burning magnum powders. They are all fast burning powders, which don't really need the 8 inch barrels that the magnums use for full velocity with the large amounts of lead that the magnums throw around. On the positive side, the .45 acp doesn't need the long 6+ inch magnum tube that the magnums need to get the point across. That same gun with a 8" barrel wouldn't acheive any usable velocity increase over and above the snubby length because of the fast burning rate of the powders used. (At least, not enough to actually quantify using the longer barrel.) I hope that this makes sense because I just had a long night at the bar, and my organization and typing skills both are on vacation. Maybe I'll clarify later, if and when I understand what I'm trying to say. __________________ Sometimes you gotta create things you want to be a part of - Charlton Heston

November 29, 2003, 01:29 AM	#2
Parker Dean Member Join Date: June 30, 2003 Location: Corpus Christi, TX Posts: 469	I've noticed a definite increase in interest about big-bore, low pressure, revolvers here recently. The Smith 25/625's are definite interest generators but the only company making a smaller one for concealed carry is Taurus with their Tracker 455. I expect what you're seeing is Smiths attempt at countering the 455 while not really spending any money on modifying another frame type for the .45ACP

November 29, 2003, 02:18 AM	#3
CleverNickname Member Join Date: December 25, 2002 Location: TX Posts: 1,025	First thing I thought when I opened this thread was "who photoshopped the tiny barrel on that gun?". Too funny that it's real

November 29, 2003, 03:42 AM	#7
Shane Member Join Date: December 26, 2002 Posts: 342	That barrel looks far less than 2". Maybe its just a picture distortion, but to me that barrel is so short it looks closer to 1 inch.

November 29, 2003, 04:09 AM	#8
BluesBear member Join Date: July 25, 2003 Location: The Great Pacific NorthWet Posts: 7,673	Shane that's because less than ½ of the barrel is out in front of the frame. There is only about 1" out front. Look how short the cylinder is in the frame window. I think it would look much better if they had just left the barrel ROUND.

November 29, 2003, 05:13 AM	#10
JMag Member Join Date: April 23, 2003 Location: Southeastern USA Posts: 277	Agreed, I'm confused too with the 2" .45ACP wheelie... __________________ JMag Sola virtus nobilitat (Virtue alone ennobles) "The truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ? Winston Churchill

November 29, 2003, 06:55 AM	#11
Jim March Member Join Date: December 24, 2002 Location: SF Bay Area Posts: 8,758	caz223: within limits, I disagree. Chronographed speed comparos between 3", 4" and 5" 1911-pattern guns show a clear speed boost. Good 230grain JHPs that expand well out of 5" barrels are iffy at 4" and doomed at 3". Granted, out past 5" you're most probably correct, although there's been some successful 6" "longslide" autos made. __________________ Jim March TFL Alumnus Equal Rights for CCW Home Page http://www.equalccw.com Airplane Pictures

November 29, 2003, 12:03 PM	#12
Glockorama Member Join Date: December 25, 2002 Location: Washington Posts: 248	Good info all, but let us not forget one thing: that is one butt-ugly revo! __________________ 10mm-Fast, heavy, powerful--when only the best will do.

November 29, 2003, 12:16 PM	#13
OH25shooter Member Join Date: November 10, 2003 Location: OH Posts: 1,142	I own and shoot S&W wheel guns. But, that is a freeky lookin' handgun. Are you sure the barrel is 2"? Maybe that's S&W's version of a derringer.

November 29, 2003, 11:01 PM	#14
Standing Wolf Member Join Date: December 24, 2002 Location: Colorado Posts: 23,224	It looks to me as though Smith & Wesson messed up a batch of barrels and had to figure out a way to salvage them. __________________ No tyrant should ever be allowed to die a natural death.

November 29, 2003, 11:19 PM	#15
George Hill Member Join Date: December 22, 2002 Location: Uintah Basin, UT Posts: 6,844	You know... It kinda grows on ya. __________________ MAD OGRE "Courage is when you are afraid, but you saddle up anyway."

November 29, 2003, 11:29 PM	#16
sgt127 Member Join Date: April 29, 2003 Posts: 517	...So does Ringworm. Don't want that either!! __________________ "No one ever won a gunfight by being the first to make a loud noise."

November 30, 2003, 12:10 AM	#17
James Bondrock Member Join Date: October 15, 2003 Location: Henderson, NV Posts: 423	It's a modern-day Fitz Special! Other than the lack of the cutaway trigger guard and bobbed hammer, this is a similar concept to the old "Fitz Special" revolvers of the 1920s and 1930s. This originated with a guy named FitzGerald who worked for Colt back then. His idea of the perfect self-defense gun was a Colt New Service (a gun similar in size to the Smith N-frame) revolver, in .45 Colt or .45 ACP, with its barrel shortened to two inches, the butt shortened and rounded, the front of the trigger guard cut away and the hammer spur removed. He would sometimes carry a brace of them in his front pants pockets! Colt produced some of these revolvers, as well as some Detective Specials similarly modified, and custom gunsmiths of the period also modified these and other revolvers in this fashion. If you have any older gun magazines, you will probably find some pictures of Fitz Specials. The cutaway trigger guard is frowned on today (for safety reasons as well as being easily bent), but the concept of a big-bore snubby revolver still has merit. The gun shown would look better with a round barrel, but I find myself rather fancying one! __________________ "James Bondrock, you're wonderful!" "I know." Last edited by James Bondrock; November 30, 2003 at 12:56 PM.

November 30, 2003, 12:25 AM	#18
Preacherman Moderator Emeritus Join Date: December 20, 2002 Location: Louisiana, USA Posts: 13,323	For those who want one, I hope you've got a larger bank account than mine... Lew Hortons (the sole distributor for these guns) sets a retail price of $1109.95! __________________ Proud THR plank-owner Let's put the fun back in dysfunctional! Please visit my blog: http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/

November 30, 2003, 12:29 AM	#19
Carbonator Member Join Date: November 7, 2003 Location: NoVa, USA Posts: 152	Oh, wait guys. That's the guns "bad side". Here's a better angle lol... Great concept but poorly executed IMO. Bean counters probably destroyed any chance of success. I'd be very interested if it had a shorter frame to close that gap, titanium cylinder, Hogue grip, concealed hammer option...

November 30, 2003, 12:42 AM	#22
BluesBear member Join Date: July 25, 2003 Location: The Great Pacific NorthWet Posts: 7,673	Here lately it seems that S&W only show publicity photos of their newer revolvers from the right side. Thus ending a century old tradition of showing their revolvers from the left side. Funny they still show older guns and their current automatics from the left side?

November 30, 2003, 12:49 AM	#23
Preacherman Moderator Emeritus Join Date: December 20, 2002 Location: Louisiana, USA Posts: 13,323	BB, that's because photographs of the other side would show the Black Hole Of Political Correctness above the cylinder catch... __________________ Proud THR plank-owner Let's put the fun back in dysfunctional! Please visit my blog: http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/

November 30, 2003, 02:52 AM	#24
George Hill Member Join Date: December 22, 2002 Location: Uintah Basin, UT Posts: 6,844	I'd rather have the cylinder a little longer to fill the gap and be able to handle things like .451 Detonics, .45 Win Mag.... and anything inbetween. __________________ MAD OGRE "Courage is when you are afraid, but you saddle up anyway."

November 30, 2003, 03:26 AM	#25
Sheldon Member Join Date: October 4, 2003 Location: La Puente, CA Posts: 734	Looks like you'de better punch that short ejector rod hard and fast to get them shells out. I'de imagine it would be impossible to get a clean ejection of shells longer than the 45 ACP!!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode