S&W 696 44 special - good or bad?

[MrPhil]

I'm looking at a Smith 696 44 special, 3 inch barrel. It looks to be in good shape. This gun interests me because I like the 44 special round and I already own a 686. The idea of an L frame 44 really appeals to me. I know a these were made for a few years in the late 90's but little else. What's the word on durability and anything else you can tell me.
Thanks,
Phil

 

[MikeJ]

Unfortunately I don't own one but from everything I have read and heard in the past they are considered to be excellent guns. Hopefully some owners of these guns will jump in here and give you some first hand experience.

 

[Majic]

Took me awhile to find me one, but I have to agree with what others have said about it. It's an accurate revolver. well fitted and finished. I like mine alot, as good as my M24 3 incher, but with one less shot. I think you would like it if you like the .44sp cartridge. That's the only reason it was dropped, due to the lack of popularity of the cartridge. The revolver is a fine one.

 

[George Hill]

What's not to like about it?
Perfect barrel length for carry. Strong gun able to handle the hottest .44 Special loadings, even the thumpers from Buffalo Bore. Has enough beef to shoot comfortably, but still able to carry comfortably thanks the the grip and 3 inch tube. Yet even with a 3 inch tube, the ballistics are more than respectable.
It's an idea CCW.

Mine? Love it.
Sell it? No freaking way.

Mine is dubbed "Saint Wesson" and it has shown me the light.

 

[9mmepiphany]

mine is very accurate and is a very handy size. since yor already have a 686, you won't need new leather. it uses the same speed loaders as the taurus .44. i keep mine loaded with blazer 200gr gold dots

 

[Stainz]

I bought the last new one I could find a year ago. It was made in 2001, the year they met the axe. Fantastic buy... I also have the higher original price 296, not so fond of it. My 696 has a permenant home here... it launches wimpy .44 Russians - decent .44 Specials. I like the Blazer 200gr GDjHP's - they hit 840fps from it's 3" barrel and are a great buy locally at $12.99/50. I did put the squared U.Mikes Combat grips, like those that came on my new 66-6, on mine, relegating it's OEM grips to the 296 - a great improvement there. Both fit the OWL #33473 pancake OWB holster quite well. Fun with 240gr LRNFP over 4.7-5.1 gr W231 - more potent & less sooty with Tite Group. Fun plinking with 4.4gr W231 in the .44 Russian cases, but clean the cylinders carefully before going back to Specials.

Stainz

PS Odd that S&W, as they approach it's centennial, cannot sell their own cartridge - the great .44 S&W Special - in a chambering... only the so-chambered 396 still exists - if you can find one!

 

[jc2]

I like it, but here are some potential negatives:

It is big for a five shot revolver--in the same size package (L-frame, 2.5 inch barrel), you can get a seven shot .357 Magnum. I'm pretty sure seven 145-grain Silvertips trump just about five of anything in .44 Special. Which brings us to the second point--finding ammunition (particularly good defence ammo) can be difficult (and expensive) for the .44 Special.

Again, I like it, but these are points to consider.

 

[VictorLouis]

Strong gun able to handle the hottest .44 Special loadings, even the thumpers from Buffalo Bore.

I vehemently disagree. The gun is not designed for that stuff. Stick with standard pressure loadings, and maybe a smattering of Cor-Bon from time to time would be OK.

finding ammunition (particularly good defence ammo) can be difficult

see

Blazer 200gr GDjHP's - they hit 840fps from it's 3" barrel

I avoided one for quite awhile based primarily on C.R. Sam's horror-storry with his example(s?). However, it's now my A#1 daily favorite, and I wouldn't hesitate to buy a second example. Like Stainz, I have a 296 enroute to me, and I hope I like it well enough to keep it.

 

[PigPen]

Help me out here.

I am trying to understand why anyone would choose a pistol which is limited to .44 special caliber ammo, when they could get a 29 (or 629) and shoot both .44 special and .44 magnum.

Even if you do not want to shoot .44 magnum, you might later (who knows!!). I like shooting .44 special but I am glad to have the option of also shooting .44 mag. out of my 629.

PigPen

 

[VictorLouis]

Primarily for CCW, for me anyway.

It carries smaller and lighter than an N-frame. Having shot enough Magnums out of 4" N-frames, I know I'd never purposefully use one for defense against two-legged predators.

Also, there are several folks I've read who use it for field-carry, as they believe warm Specials are up to the task.

 

[Majic]

I am trying to understand why anyone would choose a pistol which is limited to .44 special caliber ammo, when they could get a 29 (or 629) and shoot both .44 special and .44 magnum.

For the same reason people still buy and shoot .38 specials. Magnums are not needed or wanted for everything.

It is big for a five shot revolver--in the same size package (L-frame, 2.5 inch barrel), you can get a seven shot .357 Magnum. I'm pretty sure seven 145-grain Silvertips trump just about five of anything in .44 Special.

That maybe true, but some people prefer to shoot big bores. The handgun world doesn't start and stop at the .357 mag.

 

[Dave T]

...it uses the same speed loaders as the taurus .44.

I've got to take some exception to this. The only five shot 44 caliber speedloader available is the one from HKS intended for the Charter Arms Bulldog. That is a smaller gun (and cylinder) than either the Taurus or the Smith - particularly the Smith. Although the CA-44 speedloaders will work after a fashion they are hardly a good fit and if you try to insert them all the way, as you would with a proper one, they will hang up and releasing the rounds will be difficult.

I will never understand why S&W refuses to keep any 44 Special in production. I also do not understand how a company like Charter Arms can make a 5 shot 44 Special the size of the D-Frame Colt (Detective Special) and Smith & Wesson has to go to the L-frame. They insist it can't be done (build 5 shot 44) on the K-Frame. Every time I look at a CA Bulldog I ask myself, why???????

 

[MrPhil]

Thanks for the info!

Several things . . .
I do own a 629 and do shoot specials and magnums. Very nice BIG gun. I prefer the size of my 686. Particularly when shooting one hand. My suspicion is that a warm .44 special from a 696 will be easier on my paws than a .357 out of the 686.
Also, I load my own. I could not afford to shoot .44 anything if I didn't. I have not bought factory centerfire ammo for a long time. I can buy once-fired (really, only once) PMC 44 spc brass for $30/1000. And Gold Dots (bullets, box of 100) go on sale at my local BiMart every few months.
Overall, it sounds like this is a good defensive weapon. We'll see how it goes.
Thanks,
Phil

 

[Pappy John]

I am trying to understand why anyone would choose a pistol which is limited to .44 special caliber ammo, when they could get a 29 (or 629) and shoot both .44 special and .44 magnum.

"Both" is a good concept. I like my 29 MG for the woods, but something smaller for around town isn't a bad thing.
You're right about the recoil, Phil. The 696 gives you a good thump instead of the sharp smack of a .357 in the 686.

 

[BluesBear]

It is big for a five shot revolver--in the same size package (L-frame, 2.5 inch barrel), you can get a seven shot .357 Magnum. I'm pretty sure seven 145-grain Silvertips trump just about five of anything in .44 Special.

If you're talking about self-defense usese, I, and several others around here, would disagree with you on that.

They insist it can't be done (build 5 shot 44) on the K-Frame. Every time I look at a CA Bulldog I ask myself, why???????

Obviously you haven't owned one. Having owned FOUR of the CA I feel I am qualified to reply to this.
I have owned 2 Charter Arms .44 Bulldogs (3"-fixed sights), one in blue and one in stainless, and 2 Charter Arms .44 Police Bulldogs (4"-adjustable sights) both blued.
They're great carry weapons. They shoot nice as well. But they just don't hold up. Even with 246gr LRN factory loads they shoot loose in record time.
I liked the larger wood grips on the 4", it was pleasant to shoot and it was accurate enough. The little 3" with Pachmayr Grips was a great backup weapon. But they just don't hold up.

I have heard mixed reports about the Rossi .44 Special, I should fare a little better with heavier loads but I believe it would still shoot loose in time.

Making a D-frame size .44 special wasn't a big deal back in the 1970s. The only load was the 246gr LRN from Remington and Winchester. Mild stuff but it would still beat up a Charter. Then came Federal with a SWC.

Then in the late 1980s the heavier .44 special loads started appearing.
These loads will simply eat up a Bulldog. Even if they made the Bulldog 100% steel I doubt if it would be physically big enough to take the pounding.

With all of the heavier loads on the market now, any manufacturer will be thinking twice (perhaps thrice even) before trying to make anything similar to the CA Bullog.


I handled a couple of the all steel S&W L-frames and now I wish I had bought one.

I recall some custom 5-shot .44 specials that were built on S&W K-frames.
The L -frame isn't really that much bigger in size but the safety margin is.

 

[Hutch]

I can buy once-fired (really, only once) PMC 44 spc brass for $30/1000.

Phil, would you be willing to share the name of your supplier? At that rate, a few friends and I would looooooooove to snap up a few thousand.

 

[Stainz]

Dave T., please try your HKS CA-44 speedloader again! Mine fit fine in both the 696 & 296 - all the way up to bottoming out on the ejector's shaft, just as the #29 does in my 629MG. I tried my favorite defensive round, 200gr GDjHP .44 Special Blazers, in both.

BTW, I tried duplicating those Blazers... I found the Speer #4427 .44 200gr Gold Dots ~$16/100 locally. I got a reliable 834fps from 5.7gr TiteGroup, a mid-point according to the Speer data sheet, with WLP or Federal LP primers. That Speer data sheet indicates that the bullet is indeed a lower speed .44 Special round, designed to fully open at 800fps - as Mike Cumpston has demonstrated. The cost to reload is thus $10/50 in your brass - those Blazers are $13/50 at the 'Academy Sports/Outdoors' chains around town (Birmingham) - not a great arguement for handloading there. In fact, just try to find good .44 Special lead, 240/246gr LRNFP, to reload... it's a conspiracy, I tell you! Of course, then there is .44 Russian....

I feel that the .44 Special, whether that 200gr GDjHP or 240/246 gr LRNFP at 800-850 fps, is the perfect BG stopper - as it was designed to be. It is close to having a .45 ACP in a revolver - without moonclips or hard to find thick rims. I'll leave the .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum to their intended purposes - shooting through car doors or taking bear. I have my 696 and 629MG stoked with those Speer GDjHP's for BG's - that 629MG is the choice in the woods, however, as it will take big loads. Odd, it looks bigger - but only weighs ~5oz more than the 696.

V-L; You will find that those rounded U.M.'s grips, a la the 696's, cover that 296's backstrap - a 'good thing', as you will find out with those Blazers. My 296 has launched ~1,200 rounds thus far... about 200 homebrew & PMC 180gr, the rest were those Blazers. I have noted a wear point - the cylinder stop! Be 'gentle' when ejecting (Those Blazers pretty much fall out.). I know, those OEM boot grips make it a better CCW, but those UM combats are better feeling - and yield greater accuracy (Mine hits POA at 12yd with Blazers.). Good firearm for what it was designed for - CCW. That 696 is much more fun!

Stainz

 

[VictorLouis]

Stainz, I must agree with DaveT

The CA44s do work, after a fashion. However, they are obviously aligned for the slighlty smaller cylinders of the CA BullDog. Mine also bottom-out, as you described, but the shells do NOT drop free when the knob is released. Some drop farther than the others, but the loader must be pulled up and away from the cylinder, and sometimes wiggled a bit, for them to drop in. I even went so far as to test it without any grips on the gun. It's definitely not the grips interfering with the function.

I hear you about the UM's, but then the trigger reach is less than ideal for me. I forsee using it with SilverTip, probably exclusively, for less battering of both the gun and ME.

 

[Gewehr98]

You're missing something, PigPen.

I am trying to understand why anyone would choose a pistol which is limited to .44 special caliber ammo, when they could get a 29 (or 629) and shoot both .44 special and .44 magnum.

S&W Model 29 or 629 = N-Frame
S&W Model 696 or 296 = L-Frame

Big difference in the size of the guns. There are big N-Frame .44 Specials, true. But there are NO small factory L-Frame .44 Magnums. And I wouldn't recommend boring out a 696 or 296 cylinder to accomodate the latter, either. Remember, this is a carry gun. Sure, it ain't something Danny Vermin would want to pack, but his .88 Magnum shoots through schools, too. A heavy-bullet .44 Special does the job quite nicely without succumbing to Magnumitis.

My own 696 was somebody else's red-headed stepchild, as it were. I bought it on a whim, and the 2-Benjamin price was right. Even though I wasn't a big fan of stainless wheelguns, I was certain if I didn't like it I could sell it and at least recoup my investment. Then I took it to the range, with a box of 200gr SWC's. Wow! When this 3' L-Frame is that accurate, no wonder they put target sights on it! This one's staying with me.

Now it's MY turn to take exception. I have two of the HKS CA-44 speedloaders. They hold the .44 Special rounds so loosely, that the bullet noses have no trouble getting guided into the chambers. The speedloader does bottom out on the star extractor showing about 1/4" of the rounds, but that's plenty deep enough for the reload to finish smoothly.

Defensive .44 Special ammo hard to find? Mine carries the Federal 200gr SWCHP rounds, but there's also the popular Blazer 200gr GDJHP, then the PMC 240gr LFP and 180gr JHP, Hornady XTP 180gr JHP, Master Cartridge 200gr JHP, Remington 246gr LRN, Wincester 246gr LRN and 240gr LFN, Black Hills 210gr FPL, and Buffalo Bore 180gr JHP (255gr SWC's, but dunno if I'd want to hold on to those moving closer to 1000fps from a 696). Should be something in there that would cause terminal lead poisoning in your average bad guy. And it will do so without the pomp and circumstance of the magnum rounds.

I had to buy a bunch of locally-made cowboy loads, and shoot them up, because they were in new Star-Line brass. Now that I spent the money to get the brass, I'm curious if Phil would like to share his supplier's name with the rest of the 696 owners here, too?

I did change one thing. I put the 696's original Uncle Mike's grips in the box that my Altamont replacement grips came in. The walnut Altamonts feel great, the recoil isn't too sharp, and it adds a touch of class.

The L-Frame .44 did indeed shift my opinion of stainless wheelguns. I'm in the habit of going through my gun safes and carry/nightstand/closet guns, with a bottle of Rustprufe about once a month, call it a bit of preventive maintenance. The stainless 696 seems to have no problem with the beach-side salt air of the Florida Spacecoast. That's just another bonus, in my book!

 

[MrPhil]

Brass

I've been buying brass from the local indoor range. There aren't many (any?) others around here who reload .44 spc. The only .44 spc ammo the range sells is PMC. The last thousand cases I bought had 12 non-PMC's and 8 PMC 44 mags. The rest were very shiny PMC's with that white powder residue of theirs. I'll check what kind of stock they've got before I get back to you.

 

[zeke]

696=favorite medium weight revolver. Standard 45 acp power from L frame revolver. More bullets with crimp grooves available than 45 acp, two favorites are the 200 gn GD and Hdy 180 xtp's. Easy to handload 200 lrnfp's to same POI as the Speer's 200 GD.

Lower bore axis, full lugged 3 in barrel and shorter trigger pull length make it more controllable (personnal preference, someone's else opinion may differ) than shooting same load from 4 in tapered barrel N frame 44 mag. Less case capacity than 44 mag case make it easier to find accurate jhp loads in the 900 -1000 fps range. Unique and VV-N350 work extremely well for jhp's, hp-38 works very well for 200 gn lead.

The tighter chamber mouths and groove diam than the older 24's and 624's offer a significant increase in accuracy potential using lighter jacketed and lead bullets in standard diameters (another opinion).

Houge's bantam rubbers also work very well for this pistol, allowing for 3 finger purchase.

Personally don't like PMC handgun brass, lack of elasticity (yet another opinion)

Like the 696 enough, have 3 of them.

 

[Dave T]

please try your HKS CA-44 speedloader again

Stainz,

I have, over and over again. My experience is exactly the same as VictorLouis'. When fully insterted the rounds are splayed outword, because the diameter of the L-Frame cylinder is noticably greater than the diameter of the CA Bulldog. This prevents the rounds from dropping freely when released. Yes, with some wiggling you can get it to work but it kind of takes away from the whole concept of a "speed-loader".

Obviously you haven't owned one.

Actually BluesBear, I've owned three of them. I know they don't hold up well to continued use, that's why I don't own the Bulldogs anymore. I would think a 5 shot 44 Special build by S&W on a K-Frame might be of just a bit more quality (and durability) than the Charter Arms 44 Special built on a smaller frame in a weaker design. Smith insists it can't be done, which is what I question.

My guess is that since 44 Specials don't seem to sell as well as S&W likes, they aren't willing to put much effort into developing a K-Frame version. The L-Frame was easier to do, and since they didn't sell that well proved the wisdom of not investing in coming up with a workable K-Frame.

By the way, Taurus makes their Model 445 in 44 Special and it is another D-frame size gun. Funny how these other companies can manage to build small five shot 44 Specials but the Revolver Giant of the industry can't quite manage it.

 

[Gewehr98]

Dave T, mayber HKS changed their design?

I'm looking at my 696 right now, with a CA-44 speedloader inserting 5 rounds, and I see little or no evidence of the rounds being splayed outwards. They drop quickly and smoothly into the chambers once I rotate the knob slightly clockwise and pull up on the speedloader. The rounds, when held captive in the speedloader, do flop around quite a bit, so maybe HKS added some extra "slop" to accomodate the different Charter Arms, Taurus, and S&W .44 Specials? I purchased my CA-44's about 8 months ago, so maybe this batch is indeed different.

Now, as far as a K-Frame .44 Special - maybe a 4-shot version. Some numbers retrieved just now from Gewehr98's vernier micrometer say 5 shots would be too many for the smaller frame:

S&W Model 696 .44 Special L-Frame

Cylinder diameter: 1.560"
Chamber to outside of cylinder: 0.050" <Yup, it's THAT thin!>
Chamber-to-chamber: 0.130"

S&W Model 10 .38 Special K-Frame

Cylinder diameter: 1.440"
Chamber to outside of cylinder: 0.074"
Chamber-to-chamber: 0.100"

See the problem? You've got a 5-shot L-Frame .44 Special, with pretty darned thin cylinder wall dimensions already. (Which explains why S&W never made a 5-shot L-Frame .45 Long Colt) For a K-Frame, you need to reduce the outer cylinder dimension from the L-Frame's 1.560" down to the K-Frame's 1.440". How are 5 rounds of .44 Special going to fit in that smaller cylinder? Sure, they'd fit closer together, chamber-to-chamber, but it's still gotta give up some meat in the chamber-to-outside dimensions, which is probably how those custom K-Frame .44's got away with it. I wouldn't want to shoot one, even if the .44 Special is considered a low-pressure cartridge.

Save for redesigning the K-Frame for a larger cylinder window, so it could accept the L-Frame's cylinder, that's about the only way it would happen. That would be a major headache for S&W, so I doubt we'll see that kind of hybrid in production any time soon. Sure, they *could* build something as lightweight as the earlier .44 Bulldog, but when it shot loose and kept coming back into the shop for adjustment, the benefits just aren't there.

[edited to fix misplaced decimal point on K-Frame cylinder dimension]

 

[gunfan]

One must remember...

The CA is a "carry a lot, shoot a little" design. The S&W 696 is a stronger revolver. The "L" frame can take the "spicy" .44 specials rather well.

JMHO,

Scott

 

[tomthel]

K frame .44's

Seems to me a long time ago a couple of gunsmiths offered the .44 conversion on the K frame. The major problem is the barrel shank and very thin forcing cone as the K frame was designed for the .38/.357 size rounds. I would think there is some room to increase cylinder diameter inside the existing window. Wonder what the cylinder diameter was on the Charter Arms and Rossi 720 and Taurus 431 and 441?