The new S&W M69 44mag

[b23]

Anyone have or shot the new S&W M69 44mag and if so what are your thoughts of it?

I looked at one in a shop couple days ago.  I only fondled it for a few moments so it's hard to truly know but I liked the feel of it and I really liked how slim it seemed.  It felt very similar to my 686-5.  If anyone has shot one I'd like to know what you thought of it, likes an dislikes.

[Bofire]

same frame as your 686, no wonder it feels the same. I think it looks good.
Carl

[superdown]

I am looking forward to when i can afford one maybe after hunting season. I had the 629 4in and was just a little bigger than i liked to pack on my hip and made me miss my model 19 so i am hoping this is a good mix of both.

[Fl0und3rz]

Useless without pictures.



http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/chris-dumm/new-smith-wesson-model-69-l-frame-44-magnum/

It's pretty, like man jewelry.  It probably go nicely with a man purse. Although, I would not suggest anyone not buy another gun, for any reason.

But for the money, I'd think the proven Ruger Redhawk was a better buy, unless you have to have the S&W. 

[superdown]

Useless without pictures.



http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/chris-dumm/new-smith-wesson-model-69-l-frame-44-magnum/

It's pretty, like man jewelry.  It probably go nicely with a man purse. Although, I would not suggest anyone not buy another gun, for any reason.

But for the money, I'd think the proven Ruger Redhawk was a better buy, unless you have to have the S&W. 

It's more about the size/weight with the 44mag round in a smaller package without having to sacrifice double action. I am both a S&W and a Ruger fan. If you wanted your side arm to double as sledge hammer and boat anchor the Ruger would be perfect just joking That being said the ruger is a great gun for people looking for something that size they are not intended for the same customer.

[b23]

"But for the money, I'd think the proven Ruger Redhawk was a better buy, unless you have to have the S&W."

Funny you say that because I used to have a Ruger Redhawk 44 w/7.5 barrel.  I probably put more rounds thru that revolver than any other revolver I've ever owned.  It was a great gun, extremely accurate, and IMO, one of the best looking revolvers Ruger ever made.  It was, IMO, much better looking than the Super Redhawk.

I don't necessarily think the S&W is any better than the Ruger but I do like the size of this new M69 better and I'm a sucker for revolvers with a 4in barrel.  Before anyone corrects me, yes, I do know the M69 is 4.25 not 4.

[Fl0und3rz]

It's more about the size/weight with the 44mag round in a smaller package without having to sacrifice double action. I am both a S&W and a Ruger fan. If you wanted your side arm to double as sledge hammer and boat anchor the Ruger would be perfect just joking That being said the ruger is a great gun for people looking for something that size they are not intended for the same customer.

I'll give you the weight point (10 ounces less than similar Redhawk), although carrying the S&W, you'd also have to carry the boat anchor and the sledge.   

And you are right, the S&W is more intended for the effete, overrefined crowd with the man purses.   

All joking aside, it looks like a great lightweight option, and I would keep one in my man purse.

[rover758]

Just an opinion here ... I've shot the Redhawk and S&W M29 side by side and for me the biggest difference was the hammer position in shooting in the single action mode.  Shooting one-handed I'd have to rotate the Redhawk in my hand to reach the hammer.  I was able to handle the 29 better than the red.  So ... a matter of comfort and personal preference.  I settled on the 629 Classic but it certainly isn't a hide-ie gun.  How did Willy put it in his song.... ?  "He wore his gun outside my pants for all the honest world to feel"     Sorry ... I can't go with the man purse but that also is a personal opinion.

[Bofire]

I own both, S&W and Ruger 44's. Like em both. I have a favorite 44 load that is a 240 grain lead hollow point at about 1000fps. Very accurate and no I have not shot and animal with it but I bet on person size targets it would be deadly. a bit more than the 44 special but less than full mags. I think this gun would be PERFECT with that load!!!!! Bowen used to build a 44 special on the old security six rugers, it was way cool also.
L frame is a very nice size.
Carl

[PerryM]

The Model 329 would be a good choice if weight were a concern.

[luteai]

Seems to me like a copy of the Taurus Tracker in .44.  Smith jumped on the judge band wagon with the governor, now the 5 shot .44 mag.  It appears to be a 696 with a longer cylinder and square frame.  When loaded with Keith style 44 spcl loads it has enough power for lower 48 critters.  Being .a 44special, it never caught on. You need to roll your own to utilize the 44 special round well.  With that said, I'd love to have one.

[Hornseeker]

I am really tempted to buy one... for plinking and playing, lighter handloads would be the ticket!

Does anyone have any doubt this gun can handle the heavies though? I like to pack 320 hards when Im in the mountains in griz country...

E

[Hornseeker]

By the way... the Taurus can be had for about 150 less... what gives? They look like a nice pistol...

[Bill W]

I believe the Redhawk/Super Redhawk is a double action revolver.  The Blackhawk is the single action.

I own a Super Redhawk.