Did you buy it new and send it to Spokhandguns?It's a M-19, I bought it new in the 70's.
DM
That is interesting to me. All the 1917 Commercial Models, of which I am aware, have the small logo under the cylinder release. A large logo on the right side makes me curious.It may not be a commercial just one sent to England? The logo is on the right side and it has many British proof marks. It's a 45 Auto Rim.
Not here for sure. I may have mentioned it on the S&W Forum but no pictures. I bought it in 2020.That is interesting to me. All the 1917 Commercial Models, of which I am aware, have the small logo under the cylinder release. A large logo on the right side makes me curious.
Have you done a thread on this revolver?
Kevin
No, I shot thousands and thousands of rounds through it, and it was what I had at the time, so off it went.Did you buy it new and send it to Spokhandguns?
Kevin
I well remember those ads. By the time I got a Model 19, they had stopped converting them. So, I went to the ACP N frame. It might have been different if I had found a Model 19 sooner!No, I shot thousands and thousands of rounds through it, and it was what I had at the time, so off it went.
DM
You can do a .475 on the N-frame but for mild loads only. Jack Huntington built one a few years ago. Not sure if he'd do more.Well I have a Smith 29-2 4 inch that I had turned into a round butt. I like it a lot.
But, I would love to have a model 29 5 shot, 5 inch round butt in 50 Special. Looking to launch a .510 lead WFN bullet of 380 to 400 grains at 900 to 1000 fps.
If it couldn’t be done on an N frame I would go for a Ruger Red Hawk with the same criteria. The gun would have to be blued. No stainless.
Nice I have a 686+ 3" .
I have always been intrigued by the 480.Would really like to get a Super Redhawk in 480. Was able to shoot one at work I did some loads for. Cast some Lee 325gr using 18 gr of 2400. Very enjoyable.
Well while only a parallel I had a model 69 in 4” which I bought to possibly replace my 4” model 29. Well the comparison didn’t work out. The 69 was maybe 5 oz lighter, and beyond my limited experience to feel any different in physical size. All of that and 5 shots compared to 6.Mine is really simple. A L frame Smith and Wesson like the 69 with 4 1/4" and 2 3/4" barrel options in 41 mag.
HEY SMITH AND WESSON ARE YOU LISTENING???
I have a S&W 69 4". With full bore loads it is more than a handful. I agree a 45lc would be nice, as I enjoy shooting 44 special out of my 69. I really like the 41mag cartridge and have a Taurus 415 in 41mag. The 415 is between a K & L frame, so a L frame Smith would not be a lot different than what I already have.Well while only a parallel I had a model 69 in 4” which I bought to possibly replace my 4” model 29. Well the comparison didn’t work out. The 69 was maybe 5 oz lighter, and beyond my limited experience to feel any different in physical size. All of that and 5 shots compared to 6.
Keep in mind my model 29 was a round butt. It was a nice pistol but the other problem was it was stainless. I’m a blue steel guy. But the real reason it went down the road (I would have kept it) is I was offered a very nice Savage 23D with a Redfield receiver sight straight up trade so down the road it went.
But, a 41 mag while a great caliber, which I personally have absolutely no use for, is basically the same category as a 44 so my comparison might be helpful, but probably not.
If you’re a 41 fan then you’re mileage does vary.
The 69 in a 45 LC or 45 ACP 5 shooter would be trick.
Easily built, contact Andy Horvath!S&W M19, 6", blue, chambered for 32-20. Make it a low dash number so to have pinned barrel, counter bored rims, no lock hole.
The concept is be able to hand load the 32-20 to 357 mag pressures. Fed 327 would be OK, but the 32-20 case is longer.