Impulse buy: S&W 69 Combat Magnum

Status
Not open for further replies.
I saw one at my LGS a few days ago, and in spite of the fact that I don't really care for stainless steel guns, liked it a lot. I'm trying to get over the "puppy love" stage before I think seriously about getting one.

I'd probably shoot 44 Special most of the time IF I was to get it, but it would be nice to have the option to step them up if I want to.
 
Nice looking revolver. I have not bought a new handgun in many years and have not really followed the new developments at S&W. No lock on the ejector rod, but a lock at the crane? Would you be kind enough to post a photo? Picture vs 1000 words kind of thing.

Also, the two piece barrel, similar to what Dan Wesson used or just a barrel screwed into the frame and a shroud setscrewed over the barrel? I am sure it was done to cut costs but I can not wrap my head around that one.

Glad mine are older. (I sold my newest S&Ws, both L frames, both no dash numbers.) What intrigues me about this one is what also grabbed the attention of the OP, a five shot revolver.
 
As someone who struggles to shoot an N-sized frame well, this is VERY appealing. Love to hear the range report-


Larry
 
There actually are real, tangible benefits to the two-piece barrel design. The jury appears to be out on whether or not it really cuts any costs, but it should help longevity around the forcing cone, which can be a problem in the smaller frame sizes.
 
I have been shooting for almost 50 years and this is the first time I have seen grease on the back of the cylinder. I understand that when the gun is fired the cylinder is driven back into the recoil shield, but surely the shell casing will take most if not all of the force. I have revolvers that have thousands of rounds thru them without issue with the exception of a model 66 which went south in quick order (350 rounds) of Remington 125 jhp. All are s & w.


BTY that is an interesting revolver
 
I'm glad I swore off 1911s, that'll ease up some spending money for one of these but it'll have to wait till 2015. This year I'm getting a Remington R51, a Ruger GP100 4", and a Glock 21 Gen 2 (yes I know it's a Glock but my Glock 20 has been awesome to me and I want that same reliability in .45 ACP).

I already own a couple of .44 magnum Redhawks. I just wish .44 magnum wasn't so dang expensive, that's the real barrier.
 
If the shell casing took the impact force it wouldn't be long before the rims swelled enough that it wouldn't fit into a shell holder any more. The ratchet face does take the impact force. There has to be some clearance for proper headspacing. The case head does move back a small amount and strikes the recoil shield face, but only carrying the mass of the empty case, not the whole cylinder. The grease will flow out and need to be reapplied occasionally. Having a little bit of grease on the ratchet pads is a good thing as well.
 
I'm pretty sure on this particular gun the ratchet face is gonna take the brunt of it because there is no play whatsoever front to back. I do have a Ruger SA where the case rims keep the ratchet slightly off, but I don't think that'll be the case here unless it loosens up. The way I see it though is at the very worst, greasing the ratchet is unnecessary and at the very best it helps prevent wear. I have done it for a long time and never had anything bad come of it. 5-shooters do have a little more mechanical disadvantage working against them too in the hand-to-ratchet department.
 
Since it has gotten a little attention, here is where Linebaugh recommends lubing the cylinder ends (second paragraph of the .475 section).
http://www.customsixguns.com/pricing.htm

He calls for oil but grease just makes more sense to me. It's usually still there when I go to clean it and doesn't run from where I put it.
 
Nice looking revolver. I have not bought a new handgun in many years and have not really followed the new developments at S&W. No lock on the ejector rod, but a lock at the crane? Would you be kind enough to post a photo? Picture vs 1000 words kind of thing.
Click to expand...

StrawHat, see the attached photo. It just has the detent on the front face of the crane. There is no detent on the ejector rod itself.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20140211_173325_553.jpg
    IMG_20140211_173325_553.jpg
    50.8 KB · Views: 84
The 625-10, and snubbie 629PC and 657PC and 627PC all have the ball detent on the crane. Perhaps this means they are indeed intending on releasing it with a short barrel. ;)
 
Not a fan of the black cylinder release.
Click to expand...
'Cmon! Makes it easier to see in the dark!




Er...something.

But anyway, sure looks like for about $5 you could drop a stainless one onto it.
 
Is S&W actually giving this gun the moniker of "combat magnum" or is that just something you're calling it?

Combat Magnum, to me, means a model 19.
 
...and "Distinguished Combat Magnum" is the official S&W bestowed moniker of the 5/686.

Good question, did S&W actually go past model number and give a "name"?

Something like- "Enormous Combat Magnum", "Elephantine Combat Magnum", "Truly Serious Combat Magnum" or maybe just "Wrist Breaker Combat Magnum"? I doubt the latter, they are probably saving that for the 500 S&W 4 shot L frame.
 
I really don't think lubing the front of a cylinder would help much to prevent stress from the back and forth motion the cylinder makes from recoil. I also don't think "globing grease" on the ratchet is a good idea. I've seen enough over lubricated revolvers and other guns bind once things get dirty from shooting.
 
460Kodiak said:
3" PC model please.
Click to expand...

Please don't say that.

A three inch 69 would be my dream revolver, but after that comment I'm going to have nightmares that the 3" will be introduced only as a PC gun with one of those goofy duck billed compensators they love so much. :(
 
But anyway, sure looks like for about $5 you could drop a stainless one onto it.
Click to expand...

Absolutely Sam. That would be on order five minutes after buying the gun. I'd also slap some Nill grips on it.

A three inch 69 would be my dream revolver, but after that comment I'm going to have nightmares that the 3" will be introduced only as a PC gun with one of those goofy duck billed compensators they love so much.
Click to expand...

Oh you mean like the V-comps? Good god no! I hate those things. I'd just want the tuned action and trigger. I wouldn't mind an unflutted cylinder too. No nasty comps
 
eldon519 said:
Well, I came across one of the new S&W 69s on Saturday, and I held the thing, and it stuck in my head all weekend. I originally walked away because all my big bores are .45 Colt, and I already have the reloading setup for it, but for whatever reason, I love 5-shot revolvers. So this is both my first .44 magnum as well as my first S&W revolver surprisingly. I can't wait to shoot it. I read through the manual and couldn't find any ammunition restrictions, but I am figuring I'll probably just feed it 240s for its lifetime. I have a feeling it will be a handful. I know some people had been curious about the thickness of the forcing cone so I added a shot of it.
Click to expand...
Next time I would not impulse buy without thinking it over first. A five shot full size COMBAT revolver is about as useful as <deleted>.
Don't get me wrong five shot Freedom Arms 83 is about finest hunting handgun one can buy but this thing is abomination. The seven shot 9x19 target revolver would have been a smarter purchase.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

If1HitU
  • Locked
S&W 69 .44 Magnum 4.2" question.
Replies
9
Views
854
If1HitU
If1HitU
If1HitU
  • Locked
My new S&W 69 .44 Magnum
Replies
9
Views
622
mnrivrat
mnrivrat
Styx
Trade 69 for 629?
Replies
20
Views
969
OrangePwrx9
O
Styx
S&W 44 Mags
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Derek Zeanah
Derek Zeanah
C
  • Locked
Where are the S&W .327 Magnums?
Replies
7
Views
900
Carbonator
C
Back
Top