Forcing cone cracks

[The Hat]

Hi. First time poster with guestions. I have a S&W 696 with a cracked forcing cone. Smith says they can't do anything with it because they have no barrels but will replace it with something.(what something is I do not know yet)

The boys over on the Smith&Wesson forum say "keep it and try to find a barrel or have one made. Don't let it get away."

I'm not new to guns, but I am new to major repair issues so I'm not sure what's my best course.
Take S&W offer on something different.
Look for a barrel.(what are the odds)
Have one made. (this part sounds like $$$$$)

Opinions please.
The Hat

 

[texagun]

I would take S&W up on their offer to replace it with a comparable gun. Isn't the 696 (L-Frame .44 Special) still a current gun? How did you crack the forcing cone? Reloads, factory ammo???

Can you post a photo of the crack?

 

[peyton]

I would say to keep it and look for new barrel. It also depends on what your price theshold is. How long have you had it? Did you fire it very much before realizing it had problems.

 

[Walkalong]

I would be hesitant to part with it myself. I suppose you could find a barrel sooner or later. Trick is can you keep it and still buy a replacement. If so, that would be my inclination, but I am partial to .44 Special, and the 696 is one of the finest examples out there. Sorry to hear about yours.

What would S&W charge to make a barrel? Worth asking anyway.

 

[kmrcstintn]

hard to say...to restore it to 'stock' condition might not be worth the money if you are made to buy a replacement barrel, associated labor costs, inusrance costs, shipping costs, etc; you could use the frame and action as a platform for a custom target or race revolver to be made (if you're looking to do that)

 

[dfariswheel]

The odds of finding a usable barrel are astronomical.

First, everybody and his brother Billy are looking for these shorter barrels to build a custom gun. S&W made very few extra barrels, so the supply was minuscule to start with.

Second, used barrels are very often for sale because there's something wrong them. Often the barrel you get will have a crack, a damaged bore, an eroded forcing cone, or some other less noticeable problems that often doesn't turn up until you try to install it on a frame.

Making a barrel is very possible.
The first question the custom gunsmith (if you can find one who'll do it) is going to be "How much money ya got there bud"?

One other possible option is to have the barrel converted to a shroud.
In this, the barrel is removed and bored out similar to when installing a sleeve.
However, what's actually done is that a thin barrel is made up and properly installed on the frame. Then the bored out outer barrel is bonded OVER the actual barrel.
This too will cost some bucks but since the original barrel is still over the inner barrel, it still looks original.

Its your option, but finding a good barrel is unlikely, and having one made isn't going to be cheap.
This is a real shame, because the 696 was a great gun.

 

[Nicodemus38]

cant they just use a barrel from a more recent production model of 44 cal?

 

[ArchAngelCD]

My thoughts exactly, why can't they use a barrel from a current .44 they produce, there are many. I'm betting your revolver is not equipped with the ILS.

 

[Stainz]

I bought a new 296 & 696 1/03 - both new, but on closeout. The X96 family just didn't sell. Heck, S&W never was able to 'sell' .44 Specials in decent numbers. The 24/624, before the X96 by a bit, also didn't sell - and was dropped. The .44 Special revolvers were always 'enthusiasts' revolvers.

Of course, the X96 series has a built-in fault - the thin walled forcing cone. This is a design problem brought on by the thin frame front of the L-frame, designed just to allow a bit more meat in a .357 Magnum's forcing cone to prevent fc erosion/cracking when shooting lower weight/hyper velocity rounds. It was never meant to handle .44 Special, especially shooting Keith level, loads. My examples are fine - probably due to their long life enhancing wimpy loads. Another reason the barrels ran out early in the 696 is they were often slightly bulged from over-tightening.

If you really want to keep the 696, the 396NG barrel shroud/liner might be fitted - but that would look odd and likely be costly. I would opt for what I suggest is the best .44 Special revolver S&W makes - any X29 model - like a 629MG or 4" 629! Even a 4" 629, which weighs a whopping six ounces more than the 696, would be a great choice. I ridded myself of two 6.5" 24's, one a beautiful Heritage series, and replaced them with a 6" 629 some years back. I later replaced my 629MG with a 4" 629. The beauty of the 629 is that it is Keith level ready - it's a .44 Magnum! Also, the standard partial lug 4' 629 looks very traditional - and has a larger hammer & trigger, longer sight radius, and additional round capacity. Fitted with wood grips, it'll handle any .44 Russian or Special comfortably. Clean the chambers - and put on some .460/.500 Magnum Hogue monogrips, and it'll handle any standard Magnum load, too. Below you'll see my 696 and 4" 629 for comparison.



I would see if S&W would substitute a 4" 629 - even offer you one for a little difference. You'll be happier... believe me. I tried to wear out that 696 the first few years - then I replaced my MG with a regular 4" 629 - that's better - for me - YMMV.

Stainz

 

[Virginian]

I would get Smith to fix it. A gun with a cracked forcing cone doesn't seem like much use to me, but I know a lot of the Smith faithful are different.

 

[johnchamp]

has the 686-4 ever have that problem?

 

[Stainz]

Keep in mind some folks have had the 696's for ten plus years - and no warning came in my manual re lite weight high speed rounds. It would be understandable that a revolver that never sold well, meaning low production numbers, and that has been out of production for nearly seven years would not have factory fresh replacements available.

As to the L-frame .357 Magnums, recall that it's development was to offer more forcing cone than the K-frame's had so they could withstand continued lite weight high velocity .357 Magnums. If memory serves me, it adds .012" to the rim thickness of the forcing cone. Now, compare that to what happens when you substitute a .430" bore for the .357" - the rim thickness drops by .036+", leaving a sharp edged and short forcing cone. Easy to see how hot loads would damage that, isn't it? Mine, with it's diet of thousands of 240gr LRNFP/LSWC from 692-780 fps, is still perfect.

Of course, the 'cure' for a cracked fc is simple - a new barrel. If the 696's barrel is no longer avaiable, I would think the 5-hole cylinder could be sold to a 296/396 Ti cylinder owner for it's replacement (The 396NG has a steel cylinder.). Then, both a 2.5"-3" 686+ barrel and seven hole 686+/620 cylinder might be fitted, making a user from that frame. Folks have 'made' a 696 from a 686-series - why not the reverse? Like I said earlier, consider a 4" 629 (3"-ers are too dear!) for a replacement .44 Special - I've seen new 4" 629's for less than some used 696's. Keep us apprised of your decision.

Stainz

 

[The Hat]

Hi folks, just now able to get back to this thread. Thanks for your thoughts on the subject. Let me answer some questions in general.

First let me say that I had already sent the 696 to S&W before I posted.(my mistake) I do not think that S&W will send back out, one of their guns with a cracked barrel that they can't fix. So that cuts out some of your suggestions.

Texagun: No photos now, but you could not see the cracks on the outside of the forcing cone. They were more visible on the inside. About an eight of a inch in m o l. There were three, 12-5 and 9 o'clock. The cracks ran up to where the LAN meets the grove and followed along that line up I don't know how far.
If I had not given it such a good cleaning (chore boy) I would never have seen them.

ArchAngleCD: No ILS.

Stainz: I'm liking the 629 idea more all the time. 4 in.or 5?

I should be hearing from S&W about wed. I wonder what they will come up with.

 

[mec]

series has a built-in fault - the thin walled forcing cone.

I'd take them up on their offer of a new/different revolver then either use it as a range gun or trade it for a ruger sp101 or gp100

 

[Stainz]

The choice between a full lugged 5", SKU 163636 44.3 oz, and the partially lugged 4", SKU 163603 41.5 oz, is highly subjective. I like the 'traditional' look of the partial lug. I feel it points easier - and more naturally. The full lugged probably will keep the muzzle down a tad better than the`partial lug, as it has a bit more weight out 'front'. My 4" is mainly employed, as is it's 6" sibling as well, as a .44 Special & Russian launcher - with mild Magnums, too. I would ask them to include - and offer to pay for it - a Hogue .460/.500 Magnum monogrip - great .44 Magnum recoil aid. If you might want to hunt with your 629, consider the 6" 629. Here it is with the previously shown 4" 629 - as a '.44 Special' (Note the grips!).



You can put a scope rail and handgun scope on it easily (Just like your 696!)remove the forward iron sight screw and slide the sight off. A Weigand silver rail looks/works decently - if you remember to use blue Loctite on the screws! That's a 2x28mm Weaver H2 - a great sighting aid for older (prebsbyopic) eyes. Set for 50yd, most 180-240gr .44 Magnum loads will be 'close' at 25 & 100 yd. I ping a plate at 110yd with it like that. The X-frame Hogues, shown, really help - especially by padding that backstrap.



Let us know what they offer in trade!

Stainz

 

[18DAI]

They don't currently make anything as nice as the 696. Good luck.

 

[The Hat]

Stainz, You are a very good salesman. I do want a dedicated 44 spl. and the 4 in. 629 looks like it will fill the bill. I have a M29 8 3/8 that i got some 25years ago. I no longer shoot it (haven't for years) for fear of the dreaded ding
The gun is just to darn beautiful.

I'll post the offer when it happens.

 

[The Hat]

Thanks. Thaddeus Jones, I really liked that gun.

 

[Rexster]

Well, it is a darn shame S&W has the gun already. A good custom 'smith could have rebarreled it. A .357 L-frame barrel could have been re-bored, which would have been the simplest fix, but a really good 'smith could have cut, contoured, and threaded a totally custom barrel. S&W may well see replacing the gun as making it right, but the loss of such a rare sixgun is a shame. (Well, OK, fivegun.)

This is just my $0.02. I would love to have a 696, and would be willing to baby it with light loads.

 

[gearchecker]

Finding a barrel may be a little bit frustrating but you will be able to find one if you are patient and willing to pay around $100 or more for a used one.
If S&W offered you a trade you will probably be better off to work with them on it.
The Model 629 is an excellent .44 with a very good reputation on it's reliability.
I own one and I'm not getting rid of it. My daughter will probably get it in my will when I'm called out of this world.

 

[RedAlert]

I'm curious. By what legal means can S&W retain the pistol against your wishes? Personally, unless there is some sentimental attachment to this particular pistol, I'd accept the offer of S&W for a exchange. I'm pretty sure that the value of the pistol is diminished due to the cracks you mentioned.

 

[barnetmill]

It is interesting how many gun major makers will sell defective products and not back them up. So far I have run into ruger with the series 180 mini14, remington with the 742, and now S&W with the S&W 696. I have some S&W products: Model 15, model 41 and 629 mountain gun. After reading this I probably will not buy another S&W without very good reason. I am sold on glocks and Kimber 1911's. The .44 special anyway is not my ideal as a self defense gun. It is a good outdoors and general purpose gun that can be adapted for SD. Light .44 revolvers kick a lot with heavy loads and for me are unpleasant to fire.
Good luck with S&W.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

The Hat,
Please ask S&W why they won't put a barrel from a current .44 Magnum on your .44 Special... I'm betting it's because your revolver doesn't have the ILS. I wouldn't let them take that away from you. Be firm because they do have barrels that will fit so that's a lie!!! Ask for someone higher up and tell them it's unacceptable that they don't repair that revolver. If the frame were cracked I could understand them not having a replacement frame but it's only a damn barrel for goodness sakes!!!

 

[Stainz]

Here is the reason They can't just sub a 629 .44 Magnum barrel - it's fc OD is .621+", while the 696's is .520". The frame at the barrel is .840" on the 696 - .901" on the 629. The frame would be weakened even if you could bore and ream it coaxial to it's original bore, a problem for all but the best gunsmiths. Lineboring a full diameter 686 barrel -- and rifling it and recutting it's fc - might be the answer - at least it has the .520" OD for the fc. I guess it would depend on the trade-in they offer on a 4" 629. If you really wanted it, one would think they could return your 696. I'd opt for a 'deal'.

Stainz

PS UPDATE Minutes ago I concluded a call to S&W in which I was told they have additional barrels for my 696-1 #CDNXYZ, part #21728 $116.97 + $8.50s/h. What run is yours, no dash, -1, or -2?

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Stainz,
Thanks for the information, I didn't know that. No matter how good a truck mechanic I am it doesn't make me a Gunsmith... (not that I ever thought I was) Also, it's nice of you to check on the parts for the OP.