Has anybody shot the S&W model 69 yet?

[Layne]

Wondering how this light framed pistol is to shoot in .44 mag? I've got larger framed/longer barreled .44 magnums and I quite enjoyed them. I'm getting tired of waiting for a Ruger redhawk with a 4.2" barrel and I really like the size of this model 69.

Any input is appreciated! Cheers.

 

[gdawg]

From what I understand, awesome for wilderness carry if you have an ATC as you might expect, fun for plinking 44 spec level loads, very punishing with standard factory 44 mag load for all but the hardened recoil junkies.

 

[Layne]

From what I understand, awesome for wilderness carry if you have an ATC as you might expect, fun for plinking 44 spec level loads, very punishing with standard factory 44 mag load for all but the hardened recoil junkies.

Have you had a chance to shoot one yet? I didn't have a problem with the 629 at all but I've yet to meet anyone that owns a model 69.

Cheers

Layne

 

[gdawg]

No I haven't. I'm sure some other members with actual experience will chime in.

I have the 629 4.2 and was thinking about switching to the 69 but was told it hits noticeably harder. For me fun with the 629 ends after a few cylinders so I figured I was already at the limit of my enjoyment. I would have more seriously considered it if I did more reloading. I find the 4.2 629 is much more of a handful than the longer barreled 29/629s I've tried.



O

Have you had a chance to shoot one yet? I didn't have a problem with the 629 at all but I've yet to meet anyone that owns a model 69.

Cheers

Layne

 

[Cocked&Locked]

there's a huge difference between the recoil of a 629 and a 69. One is fun to shoot the other will hurt the bear only slightly more then you, but it will be much easier on your hip, which is the point.

 

[longbranch*]

Just got my brandy new 69 home yesterday. No range-reports yet, but love the feel and quality of fit & finish. Plan to work up some mild loads using 240gr. cast SWC's this weekend. I'll work up from there.

 

[gdawg]

Just got my brandy new 69 home yesterday. No range-reports yet, but love the feel and quality of fit & finish. Plan to work up some mild loads using 240gr. cast SWC's this weekend. I'll work up from there.

Congrats. Post a report

 

[mudgunner49]

I think one of the real problems with the whole concept is that people can't do one of two things (maybe both, IDK):

1. accept the fact the physics is non-negotiable, and for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, if you're going to push 300 grains at speed commensurate with a .44 Magnum case, it will hurt more as you decrease gun weight. It ain't a .38... and

2. accept the fact that there is very little that you can't shoot with a 250gr cast at 1100 FPS (which I happen to know is VERY manageable in a Model 69), there's little to no need to set things on fire just because we're shooting a .44 Magnum...

 

[Mark-II]

Looking at one myself and I have a 6" 629, half lug.

I'm only loading with 8.4 titegroup under a 250 cast. Just enough thump to let you know you have a big boy gun, but not so much that you can't shoot a box off without getting sore.

If I want thump I do 17gr 2400 with that bullet. I'm good for maybe 4 cylinders before I've had enough fun.

44 magnum isn't really meant to be a bullseye style gun

 

[gdawg]

I think one of the real problems with the whole concept is that people can't do one of two things (maybe both, IDK):

1. accept the fact the physics is non-negotiable, and for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, if you're going to push 300 grains at speed commensurate with a .44 Magnum case, it will hurt more as you decrease gun weight. It ain't a .38... and

2. accept the fact that there is very little that you can't shoot with a 250gr cast at 1100 FPS (which I happen to know is VERY manageable in a Model 69), there's little to no need to set things on fire just because we're shooting a .44 Magnum...

Don't know many who can't grasp point 1 as evidenced by previous posts in this thread. No doubt point 2 is accurate on certain levels (particularly for us paper punchers) but irrelevant for someone who doesn't reload and wants to shoot something other than 44 spec. To fully appreciate the 69, reloading is pretty key imo.

 

[Heddok]

I've been shooting 44 mag for 35 years and it has got to be one of the most versatile rounds out there. Contrary to many people's pre conceived ideas it is inherently and very accurate round. And yes it has been dialled down and shot in Bullseye competition. There's a NRA grandmaster shooter in the states who regular posts targets with 2 inch groups at 50 yards with his red dot equipped 629 and he shoots groups like this one-handed.

My current favourite is my Dan Wesson 744 VH I've owned since 1984. It'll hold the 10 ring with 20 grains of H2400 and a 240 gr LSWC. This is about max for this gun and in the big Dan very pleasant to shoot. Likewise it'll group just as well with light 44 spec loads using W231, TG, or even Trailboss.

The 69 is on my wish list for that range of 44 Special level loads and on up to sort of the 1000 fps range. Full power loads are going to be too punishing for regular range use. But I suspect they'll be easily manageable. Even novices to handgun shooting are surprised with how easy the 44 mag is to shoot if you teach them properly before the very first shot...

High grip, firm but don't lock elbows, Isosceles position, double hearing protection. Don't try to strong arm the gun in recoil. So if you teach them a few of these basics they won't hit a damn thing past 7 yards but the gun doesn't catch them by surprise. After a few cylinders they are having so much fun then you can get them working on trigger control and sight alignment. The big muscle bound macho guys struggle the most as they lock up absolutely rigid and transfer all the recoil energy to their body, their 100 lb wifes go with the flow and have no problem

 

[Mark-II]

I find 20gr 2400 with a 240 to be punishing in a 6" 629. I do take a high grip, right behind the frame knuckle, but it will beat up the web pretty good in short order.

And once the hand isn't having fun, the rest follows!

17g isn't bad, though.

Anyone bother with 44 special brass for light loads? I'd rather not, personally

 

[saskgunowner101]

High grip, firm but don't lock elbows,...... Isosceles position, ..... Don't try to strong arm the gun in recoil. . The big muscle bound macho guys struggle the most as they lock up absolutely rigid and transfer all the recoil energy to their body, their 100 lb wifes go with the flow and have no problem

There's nothing at all wrong with locking your elbows, and using a firm grip. The recoil is going to go somewhere, if the elbows are bent, the gun will push up too.

 

[johNTO]

Just got my brandy new 69 home yesterday.

Who sells these 69's? Anyone have thoughts on how the K-frame with hold up to a steady diet of 44mag.
I'm a fan of the N-frame but I can see the fun factor in a big-bore "small" framed revolver. The grip on the 69 look wimpy…however. S&W should have stayed with the Hogue as OEM IMO.

 

[CV32]

Who sells these 69's? Anyone have thoughts on how the K-frame with hold up to a steady diet of 44mag. I'm a fan of the N-frame but I can see the fun factor in a big-bore "small" framed revolver. The grip on the 69 look wimpy…however. S&W should have stayed with the Hogue as OEM IMO.

Shooter's Choice had a couple in stock.

 

[Mark-II]

Who sells these 69's? Anyone have thoughts on how the K-frame with hold up to a steady diet of 44mag.
I'm a fan of the N-frame but I can see the fun factor in a big-bore "small" framed revolver. The grip on the 69 look wimpy…however. S&W should have stayed with the Hogue as OEM IMO.

69 is on the L-frame btw. 66 is supposed to be a slightly more beefy K-frame, to eliminate the weak spot of the old M19.

I want them both lol

 

[longbranch*]

69 is on the L-frame btw. 66 is supposed to be a slightly more beefy K-frame, to eliminate the weak spot of the old M19.

I want them both lol

I was hoping to get mine to the range today, but the rain is just pounding down. At least I don't have to cut the grass today! Good excuse to spend some time at my loading bench.

 

[johNTO]

Shooter's Choice had a couple in stock.

Nice! I always liked dealing with Shooter's Choice….

69 is on the L-frame btw. 66 is supposed to be a slightly more beefy K-frame, to eliminate the weak spot of the old M19.

I want them both lol

Thanks for the correction. I think I have it sorted now….66 is a .357mag and the 69 is a .44mag…."L" frames

 

[mudgunner49]

Nice! I always liked dealing with Shooter's Choice….



Thanks for the correction. I think I have it sorted now….66 is a .357mag and the 69 is a .44mag…."L" frames

No - 66 and 19 are K-frames. Stainless and blued respectively, the 581/586 and 681/686 are L-frames, fixed and adjustable sighted, blued and stainless respectively. There was nothing wrong with the 19 that was "fixed" by the 66. They did, however suffer top strap flame cutting when subjected to quantities of Magnum 125gr ammo. I have a 4" 66 purchased new in 1982 and it has somewhere north of 130K rounds through it with nothing more that a new cylinder end shake washer at around 70K, probably around 50K of that was magnum loads, mostly 156gr GC SWC and 2400. Few people will shoot a wheelgun enough to wear out even a K-frame.

I think an L-frame. 44 Mag is overdue (though I'd have been happy with a .44 Spec) and has the potential to be a hoot. Especially if fed a diet commensurate with its weight and the tolerance of the shooter. I will have one eventually...

 

[johNTO]

69 is on the L-frame btw. 66 is supposed to be a slightly more beefy K-frame, to eliminate the weak spot of the old M19.

I want them both lol

No - 66 and 19 are K-frames. Stainless and blued respectively, the 581/586 and 681/686 are L-frames, fixed and adjustable sighted, blued and stainless respectively. There was nothing wrong with the 19 that was "fixed" by the 66. They did, however suffer top strap flame cutting when subjected to quantities of Magnum 125gr ammo. I have a 4" 66 purchased new in 1982 and it has somewhere north of 130K rounds through it with nothing more that a new cylinder end shake washer at around 70K, probably around 50K of that was magnum loads, mostly 156gr GC SWC and 2400. Few people will shoot a wheelgun enough to wear out even a K-frame.

I think an L-frame. 44 Mag is overdue (though I'd have been happy with a .44 Spec) and has the potential to be a hoot. Especially if fed a diet commensurate with its weight and the tolerance of the shooter. I will have one eventually...

I think I'll just stick with the N-frames….