S&W 296
- Thread starter smince
- Start date
Well, they're uglier than a Glock. . . . 
Do a search here and at The High Road on "296" (too bad the S&W forum's search engine is hosed for the post 1945 revo forum, because I think it was discussed there as well).
Take this with a big grain of salt, because it's just what I'm remembering from a couple of years ago. IIRC, these were discontinued and semi-recalled by S&W. Some blew up or something . . . ? I recall reading that some dude sent his back to S&W with some minor problem, and S&W sort of impounded it, wouldn't send it back and sent him a 696 instead (which he was cool with).
CDNN had these on closeout at unbelievably cheap prices a year ago. A woman friend of mine was given one by her father for use as a purse gun - she's happy with it.
Do a search here and at The High Road on "296" (too bad the S&W forum's search engine is hosed for the post 1945 revo forum, because I think it was discussed there as well).
Take this with a big grain of salt, because it's just what I'm remembering from a couple of years ago. IIRC, these were discontinued and semi-recalled by S&W. Some blew up or something . . . ? I recall reading that some dude sent his back to S&W with some minor problem, and S&W sort of impounded it, wouldn't send it back and sent him a 696 instead (which he was cool with).
CDNN had these on closeout at unbelievably cheap prices a year ago. A woman friend of mine was given one by her father for use as a purse gun - she's happy with it.
Sir William
New member
They are discontinued and recalled, many were replaced by S&W. KBs and durability issues. PASS.
44mag@ucnsb.net
New member
smince,
I would definately pass on it. I had one for about a month. Traded it for a 696 the first chance I got. The 696 is getting harder to find it seems, but if you can find one get it. Small frame and a joy to shoot. I keep 240's in mine doing 1000fps. It is a little heavier than the 296, but it is a smaller package. If you want to stay with a lighter gun, get a 445 from Taurus. I have had plenty of experience with them as well. Both guns shoot well, the 696 has a 3" barrel. Good luck. I like your choice of caliber though.. .44 Special is a great conceal cartridge. Good luck.
.44mag
I would definately pass on it. I had one for about a month. Traded it for a 696 the first chance I got. The 696 is getting harder to find it seems, but if you can find one get it. Small frame and a joy to shoot. I keep 240's in mine doing 1000fps. It is a little heavier than the 296, but it is a smaller package. If you want to stay with a lighter gun, get a 445 from Taurus. I have had plenty of experience with them as well. Both guns shoot well, the 696 has a 3" barrel. Good luck. I like your choice of caliber though.. .44 Special is a great conceal cartridge. Good luck.
.44mag
Are we talking about that "L" frame humpbacked monstrosity that was floating around a few years back??
If so, then it really IS uglier than a Glock!
I had a chance to get one in .45LC. I just could not see myself carrying something that ugly and I was hoofing a Glock at the time!!
If so, then it really IS uglier than a Glock!
I had a chance to get one in .45LC. I just could not see myself carrying something that ugly and I was hoofing a Glock at the time!!
Funny????
Never heard of one 'blowing up'.
Mine is carried daily, and has digested at least a 1000 rounds of factory and reloads. Great backup gun.
Love documentation..so would appreciate the person who reported 'blowups' with the 296 to please document the events. Thanks.
Could you destroy this gun? Sure just a few of the old Keith 44 special loads with a case full of 2400 would do it, and do the 696 also.
You cannot expect to make a 44 magnum out of an L frame gun.
Mine has the new Winchester ST 200 gr in it for carry.
Information on the new ST load can be found at:
www.stoppingpower.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6115
Never heard of one 'blowing up'. Mine is carried daily, and has digested at least a 1000 rounds of factory and reloads. Great backup gun.
Love documentation..so would appreciate the person who reported 'blowups' with the 296 to please document the events. Thanks.
Could you destroy this gun? Sure just a few of the old Keith 44 special loads with a case full of 2400 would do it, and do the 696 also.
You cannot expect to make a 44 magnum out of an L frame gun.
Mine has the new Winchester ST 200 gr in it for carry.
Information on the new ST load can be found at:
www.stoppingpower.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6115
44mag@ucnsb.net
New member
I beg to differ on this one. My carry 696 digests every single weekend 100 rounds of 250's doing 1000fps using keith's favorite 2400 loadings for the .44 special.
I have two of these guns and love them dearly. My 296 went to the gunsmith several days after I got it for a timing issue. NIB gun. I can expect to have something done to every Smith I buy, usually a trigger, but this one was a little confusing, never had it happen to a Smith before. After about 500 shots of everything from cowboy loads to mid range 200 grain JHP's I noticed the cylinder was getting increasingly sloppy. At this point, I traded it in. At that point I had a chance to get the 696 as a trade and it seemed prudent to me given my troubles. If you get a 296, good luck with it. I wouldn't load it with anything even remotely warm in my experience. Let us know what you get.
.44mag
I've been carrying a 296 full time for a couple of years now. Outstanding gun. I put some decent sized wood grips on it and then worked the action a bunch to get it to wear in a bit. (Felt rough at first.) I carry with with the full bore CorBon load. I used to carry a 640 with full magnum 125 grain loads but decided I would rather have a bigger hole and more bullet weight. The 296 certainly isn't a small gun but it is very light and that's more important to me. It is easy to shoot using something mild like Silvertips but it DOES have some serious muzzle rise with the CorBon load.
I've only seen one photo of a blown up 296. It sounded like there was something actually wrong with the metalurgy of the cylinder and it just "let go" laterally. That could have happened with any titanium cylindered gun. I don't see the 296 as a utility gun like the 696 can be. I don't carry it around as a field gun. I don't take it out and plink with it for general fun. I fire it enough to feel confident in it and that's it. I think all of the Scandium guns are going to have potential long term wear issues. That's just not a problem for me because I'm going to carry it a lot and just shoot it a little! I've got plenty of other guns to keep my skills up with. But if I need it, I'm fully confident it can do the job.
Like was said, they got sold with low closeout prices. If you can get a new one for $350 or less, then I would say to buy it. This is a purpose built CCW gun and that's it.
Gregg
I've only seen one photo of a blown up 296. It sounded like there was something actually wrong with the metalurgy of the cylinder and it just "let go" laterally. That could have happened with any titanium cylindered gun. I don't see the 296 as a utility gun like the 696 can be. I don't carry it around as a field gun. I don't take it out and plink with it for general fun. I fire it enough to feel confident in it and that's it. I think all of the Scandium guns are going to have potential long term wear issues. That's just not a problem for me because I'm going to carry it a lot and just shoot it a little! I've got plenty of other guns to keep my skills up with. But if I need it, I'm fully confident it can do the job.
Like was said, they got sold with low closeout prices. If you can get a new one for $350 or less, then I would say to buy it. This is a purpose built CCW gun and that's it.
Gregg