The Awesome L-frames

Petrol & Powder

Well-Known Member
We’ve explored the GP-100 and its little brother the SP101. We’ve discussed the snubnose J-frames and now it’s time to look at the Distinguished Combat Magnum and the Distinguished Service Magnum. The Awesome L-frames!

The other day I was going through an early model 686 owned by a co-worker and I was reminded of just how amazing those L-frames are. In 1980 Smith & Wesson designated the adjustable sight model L-frames as the Distinguished Combat Magnum and that really was an appropriate name. The 4” L-frames had the necessary strength without the weight and bulk of the N-frames. In the days of DA duty revolvers, the 4” L-frames really were the pinnacle of development.

While I’m partial to the simplicity of the stainless steel and fixed sights of the 681 [Distinguished Service Magnum], I can appreciate the adjustable sight model 686 for its positive traits. I’ve handled and shot all the original L-frame models: The 581, 586, 681 & 686. They are ALL great guns.

The carbon steel (with blued or nickel-plated finish) 581 had the shortest production run of the series (1980 to 1988). The stainless steel fixed sighted model 681 made it a few more years and was discontinued in 1992. The adjustable sight, carbon steel 586 (with blued or nickel finish) made it to 1999 and the 686 is still in production, albeit in somewhat modified versions.

The example I had in my hands the other day was an early 1980’s, no dash model 686. It was representative of the early 1980’s L-frames. It lacked the fine internal finishing of a 1950’s era 5-screw S&W but was perfectly serviceable in every regard. The tiny amount of oil placed in the action more than 35 years ago had long ago hardened. The majority of the action was bone dry. The gun needed to be cleaned and lubricated but despite this neglect, the gun was completely functional. It was truly a testament to Smith & Wesson’s ability to manufacture an affordable service revolver with outstanding quality.
 

Glaciers

Alaska Land of the Midnight Sun
The only L frame I have is the 4” model 69, 5 shot which ways 37.4 oz. The 4” model 29 is 43.8 oz. And of course the L frame is slightly smaller.
I have been using the 4” 29 for decades and am just used to it, and really like the 29’s anyway. I bought the 69 with the slightly smaller and lighter size might be a nice way to go. It might be, but, it’s in the safe and I just forget it’s there. I do need to break it out and use it. But, When I want a 44 my habits are to grab the familiar 29. I do need to stop neglecting that shiny model 69 though.
 

KeithB

Resident Half Fast Machinist
I have a .44 Spcl Scandium L-frame DAO concealed hammer model w/a 2" (?) barrel. (M296?) Has a stamping on the barrel that says to use 200 gr or lighter bullets. Have a set of Crimson Trace grips on it. It can be a handful to shoot!
 

Petrol & Powder

Well-Known Member
In the mid to late 1980’s there was a very special sub-set of users that sought out a unique model of the L- frame Smiths. These were professional “gun guys” that had spent a lifetime honing revolver skills. They could have selected just about anything they wanted, even semi-auto pistols, but they were supremely comfortable with revolvers. The gun they wanted was a 2 ½” barreled, round butt L-frame.

Those guns were primary weapons with full length grips (usually smooth S&W combat grips) and there was nothing “lightweight” about them. The shorter barrel and round butt grip made them a little easier to conceal under a suit jacket (often in a shoulder holster). I knew one DEA agent that had spent time as an air marshal that carried one. There were some executive protection folks and detectives that did a lot of surveillance that preferred the short, barreled L-frame. The demand for that type was limited but it did exist. These were not pocket guns or ankle holster guns. These were not backup guns; these were primary guns for serious professionals that wanted full size but short barreled DA 357 magnum revolvers.

Lew Horton distributors ordered a run of RB, model 686 revolvers with 2 ½’ barrels in 1984. I believe there were about 2500 of those made. I saw one custom 681 with a cut down barrel, bobbed hammer and the grip frame converted to the round butt configuration. (The work was top notch). In 1990, S&W introduced a regular cataloged model of the 686 with a 2 ½” barrel but by that time the professional niche for that type had already been mostly satisfied. S&W would later produce several lightweight, short-barreled L and N frame models, some with titanium cylinders, but in the 80’s the heavy, old-school, stainless-steel version was the only option.
 

CZ93X62

Official forum enigma
I have posted many times--here and elsewhere--about my fondness for the 357 Magnum revolver cartridge, and of my assessment of the L-frame S&Ws as that company's best-ever 357 Magnum ideation. Nothing has happened in this series' 40+ years to alter that viewpoint.
 

david s

Well-Known Member
About the time I purchased my L frame 44 special the dealer had one of the model 296? 44 specials that Keith B has. It looked like a cross between a S&W hammerless J frame (S&W 640) and the shrouded hammer J frame (something like a model 38) but on steroids and bulked up to L frame size. I'm beating that that aluminum L frame is something of a rare beast.
 

creosote

Well-Known Member
It was a good time to live close to a store that stocked what seemed like just about every firearm made. (Trader sports) San leandro cal.
They must of had 10 people behind the counter. And you still had to take a number if you got there late in the day.
They got closed down like almost every other. ........And that is all I got to say.
 

Petrol & Powder

Well-Known Member
Just speculation on my part but the 1984 Lew Horton order for the 2.5” RB 686 models may have influenced S&W to add that version to their production in 1990.

Another influence may have come from the John Jovino “Effector” conversions. Most of the Effector models were built on N-frames but I’ve seen people claim to have John Jovino Effectors built on the 686 frame. Because those are relatively easy to fake, I would need to see a factory letter and some other documentation before I laid down any money.

In any event, S&W saw the light and cataloged the 2.5” RB 686 in 1990. Those early pre-lock short barreled l-frames now command a huge premium on the used market, on the rare occasions one is offered for sale.
 

Winelover

North Central Arkansas
Friend, back in Michigan, owns a blued 586 with 4" barrel. I shot it at a indoor range. It shot very well. Trigger almost a good as my Python. Gun has very little round count though it. Friend is not a reloader and shoots very infrequently. He inherited it from his father. Wouldn't mind owing it. However, I have very little use for a service sized revolver. I have my own range for the last ten years. I've shot the Python exactly one time, here in Arkansas!

My ideal DA 357 revolver, is one that's a joy to carry, daily. The LCR is just about perfect for my needs. That being said, the only improvement would be one chambered for 44 Special..........hint, hint, Ruger. In the mean time, I'll have to settle on the CA Bulldog.

I cannot fathom, why the gun manufactures, refuse to fill this niche. Especially, with the increase in carry licenses. Wouldn't own a scandium framed S&W...........to light and too many issues, when shot a lot. The 4” model 69, 5 shot which weighs 37.4 oz, is still too heavy. IMO. See no reason why, ten ounces can't be shaved off, making it carriable as well as shoot able. If they won't go hammerless, at least go with a shrouded hammer. YMMV.............but I know what I want.
 

Glaciers

Alaska Land of the Midnight Sun
Yeah there’s the CA 44 SPL at around 20+ oz’s then you step up to the L frame weight. There’s a big gap as Winelover points out. I’m surprised that that gap has not been filled. I’d be a buyer as I have the both ends, just need to fill that gap.
 

Petrol & Powder

Well-Known Member
To address Winelover's comments - "I feel your pain".
While it's true that the manufactures seem to neglect the 44 Special when it comes to DA revolvers, we do have a few more options these days.
Ruger is close to offering the right combination. They have GP-100 models chambered in 44 Special but they don't offer it in a short barrel model.
Ruger does offer a 2.5" GP-100 in .357 mag, (which is very close to the S&W 2.5" RB 686)
SO.........if we could just get Ruger to put a short barrel on their 44 Special GP-100 model - we would be there. :sigh:
 

Glaciers

Alaska Land of the Midnight Sun
Maybe a SP101 5 shot 3 or 4 inch about 29 oz’s maybe. Probably not enough meat in the cylinder
 

Glaciers

Alaska Land of the Midnight Sun
Well my Rossi 3” 720 weighs in at 31.1 oz’s and my 3” Charter 20.9 oz. the Charter has a fluted cylinder at 1.45 diameter and the Rossi’s solid at 1.465
The SP 101 3” 357 weights 27.3oz with a cylinder diameter of 1.3555
All are 5 shot, but getting Ruger to make the SP 101 in a solid cylinder in 44 SPL I’m thinking is a non starter for them. Weight and size would be right good, but…
So the Rossi is the answer, inexpensive, adjustable sights, and almost as small as the Charter.
 

Glaciers

Alaska Land of the Midnight Sun
So .010 diameter smaller, maybe Ruger could make the SP 101 with a solid cylinder out of that Superhard SS they used in the early 6 shot SRH 480’s