Did S&W ever make a steel 3" 44 Special on a medium frame (K or L)?

[pignock]

I tried doing a seach here but kept getting error messages?!! The search engine kept kicking back "44 special" as below the search minimum of three letters.

Okay, back to my question - I have a 3" model 60-10 stainless 357 that I like a lot. I'd like to find a slightly larger 44 special version of the same gun but I don't have a model number to refer to.

This is what I'm looking for:

Smith & Wesson manufacture (no Charter Arms or Rossis)
3" barrel
44 S&W Special caliber
K or L frame
5 shot cylinder
adjustable sights
stainless steel construction

This is what I'd be willing to settle for:

Smith & Wesson manufacture (no Charter Arms or Rossis)
3" barrel
44 S&W Special caliber
K or L frame
fixed sights
carbon steel construction

I'd even be willing to accept an aluminum alloy framed version but that would add a lot to the cost because I would have to get the whole thing refinished so that the cylinder and frame were the same color - call me anal

Thanks for any info in advance

Keith

 

[jmcc11]

S&W 696
http://www.gunsamerica.com/guns/976452850.htm

 

[popbang]

Sounds like you are looking for a S&W 696. 44 Special with 3 inch barrel, adjustable sights, five shot, L-frame, and stainless. They quit making them a couple of years ago, but they are around. Great gun in my opinion.

 

[Gewehr98]

Yup, the stainless steel model is the L-frame 696.

They look like this:

 

[marley]

The 396 is in the 2004 catalog. .44 special, k frame,31/8 barrel,18 oz,alloy frame,matte finish,adjustable and the hiviz sights, 812.00 msrpHope it helps. Patrick

 

[Gewehr98]

Your size is a smidgen off, Marley.

The 396 is in the 2004 catalog. .44 special, k frame,31/8 barrel,18 oz,alloy frame,matte finish,adjustable and the hiviz sights, 812.00 msrpHope it helps. Patrick

The 396 is an L-Frame. There are no factory K-Frames in .44 Special.

 

[Pappy John]

$650 for that one on Gunsamerica??!! Whew! Little high.

 

[marley]

The 396 is listed with the k frames. I admit I dont know. If it is a l frame I would have listed it with the other l frames not the k frames. Patrick

 

[pignock]

696 -that'd be what I'm looking for


Gewehr98 - very nice! it looks like those stocks cover the back strap - do they?


Thanks y'all


Keith

 

[slicers63]

S&W 3" .44 special

I have a S&W Model 24 .44 special, blue with a 3" barrel. It is on a N frame. Lew Horton had a special run of them.

 

[Gewehr98]

No, I replaced the originals

Gewehr98 - very nice! it looks like those stocks cover the back strap - do they?

The Uncle Mike's rubber grips that come standard with the 696 do cover the backstrap, and go a long ways in soaking up recoil in the little L-Frame.

I just have a preference for nice wood carry grips, and bought those Altamonts. They don't cover the backstrap, but pack nicely when carrying IWB-style, without printing or hanging up on clothing like they did with the rubber grips. Recoil is a bit more sharp, but it's manageable, and nowhere near as bad as the same grips on a lightweight 296 or 396.

 

[Stainz]

The 696 was axed in '02 and disappeared quickly - the airweight 296 was axed the year before. Oddly, the 296's are still 'around' and available new (CDNN Investments in Texas has them ~$370 new vs their original MSRP of $789.). I have both... in fact, I shot up a box of 200gr Gold Dot JHP Blazers, available locally for $13/50 and an execellent PD round, I had in my 296 yesterday. While a thumper to be sure, it is controllable - and accurate - after a grip change. I bought the squared version of the UM's grips, a la the current 66's, for m 696 from S&W Accessories (~$26), putting it's rounded UM's on my 296. Covering the 296's backstrap really helped.

I mention the 296 simply because it is still available new - and those 696's have almost a cult following now. I do like the 696 better - mainly because it has a simple palate - it'll take anything in a .44 Special case. The 296 is ammo restrictive - 200gr clad-only, or less (Those Blazers are ideal... I chrono-ed them at 805 fps from mine vs 840 fps from my 696.). The 296 is an L-frame 5-shot .44 Special - from there, it deviates from your requirements. It is seriously hump-backed, as it has a totally enclosed hammer - and a 2.5" barrel with fixed sights. It's frame is Al alloy, it's cylinder is titanium, leaving it's barrel liner as SS - mine weighs 21 oz loaded with those Blazers. An HKS CA-44 Speedloader works for boith the 296 & 696. The 396 'Mountain Lite', currently available as the sole .44 Special offered by S&W and ~$600 locally, is a bit longer with adjustable sights, including a HiViz front, and a regular hammer - also ammo-restrictive.

Stainz

 

[JERRY]

the 296.....ahhhhh, that is one to drool for.

 

[BluesBear]

If you want to search THR for .44 special just enter 44*special in the search field.

 

[paul105]

"The 396 'Mountain Lite', currently available as the sole .44 Special offered by S&W and ~$600 locally, is a bit longer with adjustable sights, including a HiViz front, and a regular hammer - also ammo-restrictive."

Stainz

I don't think the 396 Mtn Lite is "ammo-restrictive" (I could easily be wrong). I emailed S&W and asked if it was ok to shoot 250gr SWCs at 1,000 fps in it. They said it was ok. Also sent mine back to S&W to have sights replaced to get Point of Impact adjusted for the 250/1,000 -- which they did.

Buffalo Bore (http://www.buffalobore.com/ammunition/default.htm) also makes a 255 SWCGC at 1,000 fps. They say it's ok in the 396 Mtn Lite by reference on their website -- I also emailed Tim at BB and he said they were ok for 396 Mtn Lite.

Two things about these loads:

1. If handloading, a serious crimp is need to avoid bullet pull and resulting cylinder tie ups. Due deligence is required to assure that you have a safe load -- I would definitely avoid the old Keith loads in the 396 -- Speer's current manual lists some 250 CSWC loads -- there are other sources on the web. You're probably better served buying a box of Buf Bore's -- I suspect it will be a while before you use them up .

2. Recoil is severe -- most people won't be shooting very many of these.
S&W 629 Mtn Pistol .44 Mag is fun compared to these, especially with orig Hoque Batams.

I replaced the Bantams with these Hoque grips :
"Model 500 Impact Absorbing Hogue Square Butt Conversion Grips" only available directly from Smith & Wesson
http://store.smith-wesson.com/store/index.php3?cat=293449&item=831269&sw_activeTab=9

The M500 Hoques won't conceal well, but will be noticibly more comfortable with heavy loads. The Bantams are great for concealed carry with lighter .44 Special loads.

I carry mine alot, mostly when walking the dog, and during archery season (where my main concern is 4 legged critters). It is light enough that I'll carry it no matter what I'm doing outdoors. It is powerful enough to handle anything I'm likely to encounter at point blank range. I'd shoot it a lot more but the sights are regulated for the "heavy load" and the lighter loads shoot to a whole different POI. I'm trying to develop a practice load that shoots reasonable close to "heavy load" POI. So far I keep getting distracted by something else.

Really got to rambling here -- sorry.