Has there ever been, or will there ever be a Model 69 without the lock?

Got it in my head that I'd really like to try one of these. And I understand it is a simple thing to defeat the lock but I don't feel like dodging a designed in defect.

And there was a time when I liked shooting N frame Smiths. Never could warm up to carrying them.

I’ve removed the lock to preclude any issues. Absolutely love mine and carry it constantly here in northwest wyoming.

the greatest model number

Don't know if S&W will ever go back to "no lock" versions. I have both 4 1/4" and 2 3/4" versions. I like both, but the 2 3/4" is quickly becoming a favorite. I modified some S&W (Hogue Tamer) 500 X frame grips and it is comfortable to shoot with everything I've put thru it (up to and including 310gr over 20.0gr H110 at 1,100 fps)

Little gun on left with modified S&W 500 X Frames (removed finger groves and rounded butt with Dremel sanding drum or belt sander/knife sharpener.



Paul

OK guys, thanks...

Won't rule one out but I am surely prejudiced against the lock.

Paul,

Do you ever shot .44 special in the 2 3/4" 69? Do you know if there's a serious factory .44 special load suitable for larger critters?

Sorta an ugly cousin, but I think I might be able to like the Ruger GP100 in .44 special...

Bought mine so I wouldnt have to pack my super redhawk after whitetail. Seriously thought about the 44spl ruger gp100. But I can always load this lighter. So versatility won.

I think my phone loads those upside down because I'm a lefty, but I'm to computer illiterate to know for sure. Sorry.

Only complaint I've heard about the Ruger is a very thin barrel shank/forcing cone area. At least one internet post about cracking in this area.

Don't shoot 44 special from my 69s unless you consider 265gr SWCGC over 17.5gr of A2400 deep seated and crimped over the front drive band in .44 mag brass (44 special OAL) .44 specials -- for reference, recoil from these feel the same a 24.0gr H110 under 240gr JSPs.

Underwood Ammo, Buffalo Bore and Double Tap have some serious .44 special ammo for bigger critters.

https://www.underwoodammo.com/collections/handgun-ammo/cartridge_44-special

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=17

http://www.doubletapammo.net/index.php?route=product/category&path=303_347

Probably some others I'm not aware of.

Paul

which mount are you using under the fastfire?

Paul I like what you did with the xframe grips.

That mount is from Raptor-engineering. It's pretty clean looking. I put a .020 shim under the front of it today at work. That should give me ~10.25" of elevation adjustment. I'll be ready to try the light loads out again this weekend.

I love mine, don’t even think about the lock.... feels good and has a excellent trigger.

Paul105

Hard to tell with rubber grips on them but is your 2 3/4" 69 a round butt? How about the 4 1/4"?

Did you need to modify the x frame grips to fit the model 69? Or just to fit your hand?

Both M69s are round butts.. No modification of X Frame grip required to fit M69. My mods only to make a bit more concealable. First picture with 3 44 mags (M69, M329, M629) all wearing X Frame grips -- the M69 on left was modified by removing finger groves and rounding butt -- other two factory original.

OK thanks...

Couldn't tell you if I've ever seen an x frame or not. If I did it was likely in a display case.

I am a bit recoil sensitive in that after a few full velocity rounds even with a 6 1/2" N frame I have to concentrate harder to keep my shots where they belong.

I just watched the first 2/3 of a hickok45 video on the 2 3/4" 69. The guy is windy but his points about this gun's recoil are valid, I'd guess. Maybe more for me than others who relish the big bore magnum handguns.
That said, I suspect I'd get along well with the set-up you've got.

With reasonable velocity loads...

Hickock calls it a 44 special and belabors how much recoil it has with magnum loads. His video kind of put me off the gun a bit. He complains about recoil being stiff several times regards the 2.75 model 69.

I might very well feel the same way about the gun. Nothing wrong with the .44 special cartridge in my estimation.

But when I go there, I always wind up thinking that the gp100 has no lock on it.

And I know guys who hate on Bill Ruger's memory because of his stance on gov't regulations. Others who hate on Smith for caving.

That's a major sector of the handgun market supply to hate on.

I do know that Smith still makes and sells revolvers with no lock. Any chance some distributor will push the issue and get a model 69 made up minus the wart?

And I also go to where the sig p320 .45 is lighter and has more capacity. I haven't even held one in my hand but I maybe ought to...

It's called OLDER MODEL Rugers and S&Ws, BEFORE the confounded giving into the commies!! Case in point: S&W 629-4 3" barrel: no lock, forged metal internals, solid barrels, forged steel frames that don't break...but OH MY GOD!!!! IT WEIGHS 10 OUNCES MORE (or whatever)!!!!! I CAN'T CARRY THAT AROUND!!!! Really? Why not lose 10 pounds of your gut, then you should be able to carry around 10 more ounces!!!

I am thinkin of trading a 1911 for one of the 69's, my thoughts are that for self defense CCW the 9mm is more than adequate, I carry a P365 and am very good with it, for a woods gun the 44 mag seems to make more sense, I don't let the lock bother me I have had a lot of rounds through 3 different 29's and never had a problem. I don't hate ruger or smith, get the one that you want if you don't like it trade it for the other and when you don't like that one trade it back for the other one. I support my local gun shop.

Guess it really boils down to what you plan on using it for. My all day every day carry gun is a Kahr CW45 with a Laserguard and loaded with Cutting Edge 200gr Monometal Flat points over a charge of Silhoutte that gives me right at 1,000 pfs from the 3.6" bbl. I carry it in the left front pocket of my carharts. When we go further afield, I drop the 2 3/4" M69 loaded with 260gr WFNGCs (or 300gr) in the back pocket of my carharts. I've been retired for almost twenty years and my "further afield" outings get shorter every year. Not less often, just shorter in duration.


Here's the little Kahr along side the M69s:



and the Cutting Edge monometal flat points:



and some 300gr .44 Miss Bul Co Hammers:



I think Hickock45 overdramatized the recoil of the 2 3/4" M69. I'm not a recoil junky, but with the X Frame 500 grips (factory grips exacerbate recoil for me) full on .44 Mags don't hurt. Remember, velocity is only in the 1,100 to 1,150 fps range with the short barrel and velocity is what makes for sharp recoil. Also, you can pretty much choose the level of performance (recoil) with .44 spec and .44 mag factory and specialty ammo avail today. JMHO.

Paul

That's a slick mount. Allchin offers a similar looking mount called the Mini STS, which looks to have more holes drilled in it to increase the number of sights it's compatible with.

John,

As You noted S&W releases some revolvers w/o the lock, but there is no telling if they ever will for the M69. None have been released yet that I am aware of. You might pester Lipseys about this. There are a couple of guys over at the S&W forum who make plugs for the locks.

I had the 4 inch M69 and now have the 2 3/4 inch, as I feel it is the right size to drop in your back pocket for short walks.

The older I get the less I care to be hammered by recoil (used to actually enjoy it), My handloads are a 250 grain SWC at 1,000 fps plus and I do not find it obnoxious, YMMV.

I prefer the factory grips to anything else I've tried for shooting and carrying... but will try altering a set of the X-frame grips as Paul has done.

The front sight on the 2 3/4" is too large for me... I generally replace them with Dawson Precision's fiber optics anyway.


Paul,

Thanks for posting the picture of Your altered X-grips... will give that a try. Also will look up the mono-metal bullets you pictured.


DesertOakie,

I'm with You, prefer the pre-locks and pre-MIM to the newer guns by far.

But I do tire of the posts that be-little guys for prefering a lighter revolver, I am biased as I carried almost daily while working in the mountains/deserts of the western U.S., possibly because it is only a small part of what I was packing and by the end of the day it was all too damn much. The M69 is only slightly thinner but you can really tell when packing it, and the 2 3/4 inch version only weighs approx. 35 ounces. Try one... if You can get over the stupid lock You might actually like it.

Jerry

I think the only revolvers S&W released without the locks are those that have no exposed hammer. They figure that's enough to make them lawyer proof.

Paul I was very surprised that Hitchcock complained so much about the recoil. I like the 45 ACP but seem to be able to shoot a cheap smith and wesson 45 shield better than a 1911 these days, don't know why. I had a PM9 good gun very accurate but for me these days the P365 with 13 rounds in it has proven reliable and very accurate. On the other hand the attraction of the 45ACP has always been lower decibels on firing. Having fired a 9mm a few times without earpro I want to avoid that. I have finished a few deer/pigs/killed snakes with a 2 inch 38 or a 3.5 inch 45ACP and they are not awful in report. I believe you can achieve about the same thing with a 44 at 900 fps??

The weekend of Nov 3rd, I cut out 90% or more of the bread and potatoes that I normally eat. Since then I've consumed one slice of garlic bread, one cheeseburger with bun, and one 2" square piece of baked potato skin with shreds of potato attached.
and I've lost 12 pounds in 11 days.

And I still prefer to carry the smaller of my carry pistols.
At work I still carry the smallest wrench I think will do the job.
And I still carry a #3 lead "pussy whip" to weld with rather than use the 3/0 "stinger" hanging with the welding machines.

And I could drown baby ducks for a french fry...