Smith and Wesson Model 69

[CJJohn]

I've read a lot, and searched, and read more, but wanted to ask directly. I fondled a S&W Model 69 today and liked it a lot. I went into LGS wanting a Model 29 (classic series) but they didn't have one in .44. I compared the 29 (.357) and the 69 side by side though and liked the 69. Before I buy, who has one, and what are your thoughts? I hate the lock, but in researching it seems to be a non issue. I do not need a .44 magnum at all, that's why initially I was going for a 29, but this could be carried (some what) easily, and easily used for hunting, so logically it makes more sense. And it felt as if it just fit. Thanks for the feedback.

[Lost In The Pits]

Just letting you know the model 29 is only in .44 magnum. They may have shown you a model 27 classic that is a .357. I personally don't own one but I do like an L frame .44 mag my only knock on it is it's only a 5 shot.

[keith1911]

Just letting you know the model 29 is only in .44 magnum. They may have shown you a model 27 classic that is a .357. I personally don't own one but I do like an L frame .44 mag my only knock on it is it's only a 5 shot.

Like he mentioned I think you've got your models mixed up.

29 or 629 is a .44 magnum only N-Frame.
27 or 627 is a .357 magnum only N-Frame.
69 is a .44 magnum only L-Frame.
586 or 686 is .357 magnum only L-Frame.

The N- Frame was the original large frame S&W revolver (before the X-Frame). The L-Frame was crated to give LEOs a gun that can handle a steady diet of .357 more so that the K-Frame. The L-Frame is considered medium-large in size.

[sierra11b]

Those that own the 69 seem plenty happy with them, even those sternly against the lock. I remember reading the posts of a devout pinned-recessed forumite on smith and wesson forum who claimed to own 2 (or was it 3?).

Look, the lock isn't going away and has been around for many years now, so just ignore it and enjoy, or be patient and search diligently for a pre-lock that suits your tastes here locally, or at your LGS used/consignment case. They can be had. I bought a cherry '54 K22 and "cherrier" '77 Model 57 doing just that within three months of each other in '17. Just takes some dedication to comb the forum for the right deal and taking the opportunity to browse your local gun stores as time permits.

I was on the fence between the 69 and 66 (.357/.38 nearly identical twin) but leaning 66 because I don't need another .44 mag, whereas .357/.38 is lacking in my safe.

The fact that a) I'm lacking a .357/.38 in the collection, b) can get those rounds without having to reload for it (yet), and c) would have to reload .44 special for most target applications (.44mag in L-frame is a bear but doable -- I hate rubber grips *see below*) to make me and my hands happy, I'm thinking of making the model 66 my first gun of '18.

I'd certainly consider the 69 if you have the means of .44 special and loaded for it, don't shoot .44 mag frequently (50rd box at the range amongst other guns), or just want one of the best handle-anything-in-CA packing revolvers currently on the market.

You're in a good spot here... If you like it I say go for it. Most who routinely feed the 69 .44mag swear by S&W X Frame Hogue 500 rubber grips (lots on this subject) to tame the recoil. Or a custom set of hard smooth grips in micarta or wood to fit your hand specifically, which is expensive, but something Culina could provide you in spades with great looks to boot.

Now if only Smith and Wesson would offer a .41 mag L-Frame....

[sierra11b]

As others have said, the Model 69 is a .44 Mag on an "L" Frame. In contrast, the Model "29" is also a .44 Mag but on the larger and stronger "N" Frame.

Obviously, the larger "N" frame model 29 would be presumed to be stronger because it's heavier and larger.

I could be wrong, but here's what my instincts tell me: Loading the 69 with hot .44 magnums would be comparable to shooting .38+P ammo through the smaller J-Frame Smiths. It might be okay to a point. But, if I were tool up my progressive press for .44 Magnum, and crank out buckets full of hot .44 magnum ammo, the Model 69 wouldn't be my first choice. Good luck.

I'm not sure the 29 is stronger in this case but could be wrong? It would certainly absorb recoil better being the heavier of the two, but this is exactly why the 69 is so popular me thinks... Being that the 69 is 5 shot cylinder it places the bolt notches between the chambers, instead of directly over the chambers like with the 29, which effectively weakens the chamber wall.

I'm not sure I'd shoot non-SAAMI spec ammo through a pretty N-Frame 29, but think some are getting away with it in the 69 (disclaimer OP: do your research before taking my comment as factual).

The forcing cone of the 69 is the unknown fail point as of yet, mainly because it was the perceived fail-point of this revolver when it was released, but it's too young a gun...However, people claim to have shot thousands upon thousands of .44 mag through it so far without it failing.

[cantdance]

I had to send mine back for the front yoke lock. The ball didn't engage the detent on the barrel shroud. Check it before you buy. It took over a month to get it back.

[CJJohn]

You're right

Just letting you know the model 29 is only in .44 magnum. They may have shown you a model 27 classic that is a .357. I personally don't own one but I do like an L frame .44 mag my only knock on it is it's only a 5 shot.

you are correct. I do have the models mixed up.

[200Apples]

I own a 3"-barreled L frame in the form of a Model 696. These were chambered in .44 Special. An L-frame chambered in .44 is a delight to shoot with Specials, or with medium magnum loads (if you handload).

20170327_200733.jpg

I have on my list to acquire at some point in the next couple of years a 5" 629 Classic (with the full underlug). My present .44 Mag shooter is a 1964 Ruger 7-1/2" Super Blackhawk; a masterpiece of a production gun.

[CJJohn]

You too

Like he mentioned I think you've got your models mixed up.

29 or 629 is a .44 magnum only N-Frame.
27 or 627 is a .357 magnum only N-Frame.
69 is a .44 magnum only L-Frame.
586 or 686 is .357 magnum only L-Frame.

The N- Frame was the original large frame S&W revolver (before the X-Frame). The L-Frame was crated to give LEOs a gun that can handle a steady diet of .357 more so that the K-Frame. The L-Frame is considered medium-large in size.

You are right. I had my models mixed up. I'm not a huge revolver guy, but I'm either growing old, or refined, or I'm just giving up in the PRK. But they are growing on me

[CJJohn]

I own a 3"-barreled L frame in the form of a Model 696. These were chambered in .44 Special. An L-frame chambered in .44 is a delight to shoot with Specials, or with medium magnum loads (if you handload).

[ATTACH]668120[/ATTACH]

I have on my list to acquire at some point in the next couple of years a 5" 629 Classic (with the full underlug). My present .44 Mag shooter is a 1964 Ruger 7-1/2" Super Blackhawk; a masterpiece of a production gun.

That is a beautiful gun. Thank you for sharing, and the info. I feel that a 44 Magnum frame would be best as I can carry / use 44 Special OR Magnum.

[sierra11b]

I had to send mine back for the front yoke lock. The ball didn't engage the detent on the barrel shroud. Check it before you buy. It took over a month to get it back.

Curious.

Was the reason behind the return catastrophic, maybe you didn't want to risk potential catastrophe and it didn't look right, or was it primarily cosmetic?

As you well know this is a hot topic for the 69 so your take on the matter would be appreciated.

[cantdance]

Curious.

Was the reason behind the return catastrophic, maybe you didn't want to risk potential catastrophe and it didn't look right, or was it primarily cosmetic?

As you well know this is a hot topic for the 69 so your take on the matter would be appreciated.

This. Maybe ok for you, but I want mine right. They fixed it under warranty. It's the same photo I sent S&W and they stopped asking stupid questions and sent me a pp shipping label.

I had no idea that Model 69 problems were a hot topic.

[CJJohn]

This. Maybe ok for you, but I want mine right. They fixed it under warranty. It's the same photo I sent S&W and they stopped asking stupid questions and sent me a pp shipping label.

I had no idea that Model 69 problems were a hot topic.

I read the issues you had. Are you happy with the gun now? I will check this tomorrow BTW. I've had good luck with S&W service so far, but I also don't want to send a gun back for months.....

[Tank 57]

Have a 629 and a 69. Recoil is more noticeable in the 69 with more muzzle flip. Both are fun (to me) to shoot.

Either gun is extremely mild mannered with 44 specials. Had the 69 about a year and a half. No issues although round count is not very high.

[cantdance]

I read the issues you had. Are you happy with the gun now? I will check this tomorrow BTW. I've had good luck with S&W service so far, but I also don't want to send a gun back for months.....

I'm happy with it being fixed, but haven't fired it yet. Had it almost a year now, maybe I ought to get it out.:-)

Best thing to do if you purchase one, check it out good first and demand a different one if something is suspect. Let the dealer send it back.

My experience wasn't months, maybe a month and a week. It sat in return shipping for 2 weeks which is what really peed me off. I'll bet it didn't take more than an hour to fix once they eventually got to it.