Several thoughts come to mine when you examine the Smith & Wesson Model 69 Combat Magnum. The old truism, ‘carried much and fired little’ is one of them. A gun for the ammunition shortage also fits well. Twenty rounds is a workout with this firearm, but it has punch and polish and it isn’t a gun for the casually-interested shooter.
The Smith & Wesson Combat Magnum moniker usually refers to a K-frame .357 revolver the Model 66. This one, however is built on the slightly larger L-frame and a five-shooter to boot. Smith & Wesson’s K-frame revolvers earned an unenviable reputation for excess wear when firing a steady diet of magnum loads. The old advice of feeding them twenty rounds of .38 Special for every magnum round generally needed to be followed. Unless you want to carry a bigger gun.
Smith & Wesson introduced the L-frame revolvers to address issues with shooting magnum loads from K-frame revolvers. They tended not to stand up the the pressures and stresses of magnum ammunition. The L-frame Model 69 Combat Magnum features improvements in the forcing cone, frame, and lockup, making it a much stronger, more robust (though only slightly heavier) design.
Don’t be misled. The K-frame magnums didn’t blow up, but they sometimes suffered cracked forcing cones and magnum loads are murder on smaller parts.
The big bore Model 69 Combat Magnum’s balance of power and portability is a good and very handy one. In the L-frame, Smith wanted to maintain a relatively compact revolver that could still be carried fairly comfortably. The L-frame features the same grip size as the K frame revolvers, but with a larger 5-round cylinder.
While the Model 69 was originally introduced with a 4.25 barrel, the more concealable Combat Magnum version has a 2.75-inch barrel, making it work very well for concealed or outdoor defensive carry. Even with its big bore chambering, this versatile wheel gun is far more useful than you may think. It’s primarily designed to be carried a lot and fired sparingly with Magnum loads, but if loaded with .44 Specials it’s a very enjoyable revolver to shoot that delivers surprisingly good accuracy.
Some may question the wisdom of chambering a relatively light weight (34.4 oz) revolver in .44 Magnum. Shooting long strings of magnum loads isn’t something you’ll probably want to do with this revolver. I have fired perhaps one hundred twenty or so magnums over eighteen months and that’s plenty. I have no doubt the design can handle far more, but I’m not sure my hand can. But with well over five hundred .44 Special loads fired, this piece has earned my respect.
A departure from earlier revolvers is the L frame’s much more robust lockup system. It features a spring-loaded ball in the L frame that firmly mates with a detent in the crane that’s designed to stand up to the punishment of big bore magnum loads.
The Combat Magnum’s cylinder is 1.56 inches wide and the chambers are nicely polished.
The barrel is a stainless steel unit screwed into the frame and covered with an outer shroud. This simplifies lining the sights up at the factory and doesn’t seem to affect the Combat Magnum’s accuracy potential.
The fully adjustable rear sight and orange insert front ramp make for excellent sight acquisition. They make getting the Model 69 on target fast and precise and are ideal in a defensive revolver.
The Model 69 Combat Magnum has round butt rubber grips. I have experimented with larger grips, wood grips, and other types and find these factory-issue grips to be the best for all-around use. They are snag-free under cover garments and insulate the hand well from hard steel and do the best job possible of absorbing .44 Magnum recoil. The revolver has a bead-blasted matte finish stainless steel hat is attractive and durable.
The Combat Magnum weighs just 35 ounces unloaded. That’s lighter than a lot of .45 ACP 1911s and about the same as a four-inch barrel K frame .357. The trigger action is exceptional, smoother than a Model 19 Classic and a Model 27 Classic recently tested. On the Lyman scale it breaks in double action at ten pounds and four pounds even in single action.
Firing the piece is easy enough with .44 Special loads. A 200 grain round at 700 fps is pleasant enough to shoot and great for practice. The Model 69 is a joy to use and fire with these loads and accuracy is excellent.
With the revolver in the double action mode I was punching the X rings out at 15 yards. Slow fire single action fire delivers five-shot groups of 1.5 inch or so when you take your time, so this is an accurate revolver for one with such a short barrel and sight radius.
But powder puff loads shot for accuracy aren’t really the intended purpose of this revolver. The Combat Magnum is a personal defense handgun and the .44 Special/Magnum round is used against animals, some of them two-legged. Most attacks occur quickly and can happen at very close range. A revolver can be pressed into the body and fired repeatedly where a semi-auto would jam.
I shot Hornady Critical Defense and XTP .44 Special loads. The 165-grain Critical Defense breaks 925 fps and the 180 grain XTP 900 fps. That’s in the .40 Smith & Wesson range energy wise.
Control with these rounds remains excellent. Recoil is about in .45 ACP territory, perhaps a bit less. Muzzle blast and flash are much less than .357 Magnum. This makes the Model 69 Combat Magnum an excellent all-around, go-anywhere revolver for the dedicated wheelgunner looking for a defensive handgun.
For outdoors use we probably need something stronger. The big cats can get really big. Feral dogs are dangerous and in my home state wild boar have attacked and brought down horses. And then there are bears.
Not quite in .44 Magnum territory, I loaded .44 Special Buffalo Bore 255 grain semi-wad cutters. This load uses the real Keith SWC with a long nose and sharp cutting shoulder. At 980 fps that’s a handful of recoil. The load may be controlled in double action pairs if you take your time and that rubber grip does a good job of recoil absorption. This is my outdoor load of choice.
And then there are .44 Magnum loads. Most factory 240 grain JHP loads can be downright gruesome to shoot and clock at about 1100 fps. I’d just as soon run the .44 Special 255 grain load for outdoors carry. In an emergency, perhaps you wouldn’t notice the magnum recoil at very close range while attempting to get a bear to change his mind, but I find heavier magnum loads do the job
The Smith & Wesson Model 69 Combat Magnum has a lot going for it. While it’s probably most appropriate as a purpose-designed outdoors defense revolver, it’s quite useful for concealed carry as well for those who are willing to carry the load. In the wild it’s lighter than most .44 Magnum revolvers, but offers plenty of very real power. Its L-frame size is a bit larger than most short barrel .357’s but the big bore Combat Magnum offers excellent control and plenty of punch with .44 Special loads, too.
In short, the Combat Magnum is still alive and very well.
Specifications: Smith & Wesson Model 69 .44 Magnum
Caliber: .44 Magnum
Action: Single/double action
Finish: Matte stainless steel
Grips: Soft rubber
Sights: Adjustable rear, ramp front
Capacity: 5 rounds
Weight: 35 ounces
Overall Length: 7.75 in.
Barrel Length: 2.75 in.
Width: 1.5 in.
MSRP: $854 (about $780 retail)
Ratings (out of five stars):
Reliability * * * * *
This is a quality stainless steel revolver. It is reliable in every circumstance.
Accuracy * * * * *
Accuracy is excellent, especially by short barrel revolver standards.
Ergonomics * * * * *
Well-balanced with good, recoil-absorbing rubber grips. This is possibly the perfect size for a defensive revolver.
Fit and Finish * * * * *
The bead-blasted matte finish on the stainless steel wheel gun is attractive and nicely done.
Concealed Carry * * * *
I carry big guns, but the L-frame Model 69 isn’t as flat as a 1911 or as easy to pack as a GP100 or Tracker revolver. Carried on the hip in cooler weather with a cover garment works well.
Overall: * * * * *
The Model 69 Combat Magnum is a handy, versatile revolver that can fill a lot of different roles depending on the loads used. It’s an almost ideal blend of a concealed carry gun combined with a very capable big bore outdoor critter defense revolver.
chest rig, done.
me likey.
I need this in my life
Is that a 6 shot speedloader in the photo?
I have one of these and my son does as well. It is my everyday woods gun here in Maine. I agree with everything in this review except the comments about it being too much with magnum loads. I would probably avoid the custom +p+ loads made for the SBH and SRH but the mentioned standard magnum loads, 240gr @ 1100 fps shoot well in mine and are not as hard to handle as hot loads, 300gr@1100 or 200gr@1500, in my 5″ 629VComp.
Maybe it’s my eyes but the orange front sight seems to wash out for me when there’s vegetation in the background.
Fingernail polish in your color choice fixes it
L Frame .44 mag? For a handloader, a .44 spl +P+ (~25,000 psi) or .44 mag “lite” (typical “starting” level powder load) and the Model 69 seems to be an ideal match. Years ago, got a .44 mag Taurus Tracker, and found that the classic .44 mag reload (240 gr Keith SWC and 8 gr Unique) was more effective than the .357 mag loads then available for anything I hunted. As a home defense gun, believe that the new .44 spl commercial ammo is another great combo. Hawgs – yes. Bears – NO!
This revolver is a great idea. I just can’t get past the barrel shroud and Hillary hole.
Yep a “Hillary Hole” is a definite turn off.
Replace it with the plug.
https://www.originalprecision.com/reviews-and-pictures.html
I wonder what the legal ramifications would be if one was to use a weapon with a safety feature disabled or removed?
Probably not good. But this particular “safety” feature has nothing to do with the actual or intended operation of the gun; it’s meant solely for when you’re *not* using or carrying it.
John, that doesn’t do anything about the barrel shroud. Besides, the abomination is that the hole is there at all. Nope, I’ll stick with S&W 4″ Mountain Gun in .44 Mag. Maybe heavier and not as compact, but it does hold one more round. Big whoop. Most important, it shoots like a house of fire.
I disabled the magazine safety on my Bersa Thunder 380 so I could load one round at a time with no muss or fuss. It’s really easy to do by removing one part. It doesn’t make the gun any less safe otherwise, and it marginally improves the trigger (or maybe it’s just my perception that it does). I doubt that I will be in trouble if I ever have to use it defensively.
I understand folks who would rather not have a lock mounted on the gun. I would be opposed to any law mandating such a device, but I appreciate a free market where folks can buy a gun with one if that’s what they want. My Bersa has one, but that didn’t drive my purchase of the weapon. It doesn’t bother me that it’s there, since it’s engineered well enough not to get in the way during normal operation. I doubt it significantly adds to the price of an already very inexpensive pistol. I used it only once while we were caring for a person with suicidal tendencies, as an extra layer of security inside the gun safe, but that’s it.
the shroud makes it seem yintzy, they will never be pinned again.
the hole really sucks tho. even with all the guts ripped out.
I’m all for the barrel shroud, but then I don’t have any personal history with revolvers. The only revolver I own is an early 80s S&W 64, which I recently inherited (and like very much). I only care that any gun’s parts and construction work and will last, and as far as I’m aware, the barrel shroud does both.
The stupid internal lock on modern S&W’s is definitely a turnoff. Even the irritatingly redundant crossbolt safety on my Marlin levergun serves a legitimate purpose, but an internal lock that introduces a failure point and is a piss-poor substitute for safe storage besides…I can’t imagine defiling a perfectly good firearm with that nonsense.
I wonder if Bill and Ted picked out the model number?
More likely Davie504… 🙂
It would make a whole lot more sense to bring back a five-shot .44 Special in a K-frame with a 3″ barrel, than try to make a revolver capable of handling the .44 Mag into a CCW piece.
I honestly don’t know why S&W has such a resistance to shipping a .44 Special that is actually designed for CCW work. S&W would probably respond “Well, the 3×6 revolvers never sold that well!” Well, duh. Scandium framed CCW revolvers have a pretty nasty recoil snap to them, and shooting even two cylinders of regular ammo becomes painful for most folks. As a result, they’re never shot enough to become really good with them.
What is needed here is a stainless, five-shot, 3″ barrel, .44 Special, with good but de-horned night sights that weighs about, oh, 28 to 30 ounces (empty weight). How can this be so difficult to make? The .44 Special is a round that would be excellent for self-defense work – better than a .38 Special, but without the report and recoil of the .357 or .44 Magnums.
Or just get a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan with .44 spl in it and call it a day…
Didn’t Ruger make some gp-100’s with a five shot .44 special cylinder or is that my wishful thinking.
My gp-100 has the 7 shot .357 magnum cylinder. There must be enough meat in that part to do five .44 holes.
They did: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/gun-review-ruger-gp100-44-special/
They did make one for a time, but not in production anymore, the 329 Nightguard in 44 Special. I found one for a song at a local Cabelas because they didn’t realize what they had. Technically a 2 inch barrel, but otherwise a 5 shot L frame, made from Scandium to keep the weight down. Good sights with a fixed rear and tritium front. I carry mine in a Galco Hi-Ride Silhouette holster. My only serious complaint with it is that there isn’t much for speedloader options, so its the only revolver I own that I carry with speed strips. I would love to get my hands on one of the 625 Nightguards in 45 acp, but theyre very pricey these days!
That’s pretty cheap for a gunm that good. I would not have thought a wild hog could bring down a horse, I’d like to hear more about that. I’d have figured a horse would stomp the piss out of a pig or outrun it.
The intro is a bit confusing and it would have helped if you said this was a .44 in the first couple of sentences instead of a digression on the history of the L frame. I had a hard time wrapping my head around a description of a 5 shot L frame Combat Magnum when the K frame models 19 and 66 are 6 shot and the L Frame 586/686 are either 6 or 7 shot .357 Magnums.
You would have been a lot clearer if you had led with .44 in an N frame and explained that the Model 69 was a downsized .44 by using a 5 shot L frame. The whole disquisition on .357 Magnum K frames is a waste of time in review of a .44 Magnum.
Haha, this is actually my daily carry gun, loaded with Double Tap 200gr JHP .44 Special loads. It’s a mighty, MIGHTY fine piece.
What holster do you carry that with?
Bullard Leather pancake
As good as it gets
I would prefer a Ruger any day over a S&W
I agree with the latest products from both companies. But IMHO the older Smiths were smoother, better finished guns.
If you really like pain, get the 25 oz scandium and titanium version! (329PD)
Should have thrown in a 3″ n frame 629 a la Lew Horton into that photo comparison. I would like to see the frame size difference. Personally I’d rather have the six shot cylinder.
Klaus, I had a 3″ Lew Horton model 24. Excellent revolver. Foolishly traded it away. Replaced with model 24. 4″. 1 of 3000 if I recall. Stolen. Never recovered. Replaced by model 4″ 624. 1 of 5000 I think. Lost to the sands of time. .44 Spl. is a fine cartridge.
Great review. I think I need one of these. Not a fan of the shrouded barrel and lock, but it doesn’t look they they’ll be changing them soon and it would be foolish to go without while holding out for the perfect revolver that will probably never come.
Thanks Virgil!
Nice gun! Coincidentally today Hickok45 reviewed a Taurus Raging Hunter 44mag with 8.5″barrel. And pretty much liked it(one wonder’s if he’s he’s getting paid by Bud’s Gunshop). Dunno about 8.5″ but 4 or 5 ” makes a lot more sense than 2.5″ in a 44magnum. The prices are all the the place on Gunbroker. I want a real revolver but maybe cheap is OK. Mainly want it for scary home defense😏
Could be he’s not a snob and just likes guns. I like most guns I pick up. Even if I know there’s overall better ones. I’ll generally find something I like about most any gun.
Gun guys don’t hate guns.
After reading the review I went to my local gun store and fondled a model 69. Nice handling revolver, however the barrel shroud and the Hillary Hole were a no go. I have a Taurus stainless tracker 41 mag with 4 inch barrel. It”s a fine for bear or meth head liberal trail defense gun. The S&W 69 is just too expensive, a used tracker or Ruger Redhawk is a better choice. Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.
Tracker is the best Taurus revolver made I believe, excellent choice
I have one and love it.
Self defense load I’m working on for this pistol
200gr gold dot 44 mag case
About 10 grains of Unique + or –
1000fps which is the sweet spot for this bullet
This is overkill for social work.
Give me a nice, light, balanced k-frame any day.
Kimber is actually doing the K-frame better than S&W with their bigger versions of the K6S.
Wow what a weapon
Why do they insist on the hole? I never heard of anyone that likes or uses it… ever.
Ignore the hole.
Inspired from the tv series Yellowstone, this Kelly Reilly Blue Coat is poncho-style outerwear. Kelly Reilly portrayed the role of Beth Dutton, daughter of John Dutton in the series.
If you love to wear action movies and games outfits so must check the top 5 superb Cosplay Jackets which gives you a killer and stunning look on this cosplay festival.
I have a 69. Really like it. Probably second only to my 629 5″ vcomp.
Bill: let me know if you ever want to sell your 5″ vcomp.
Comments are closed.