S&W Titanium .44 Special

[Armorerjon]

Have just obtained a S&W Model 296, titanium 44 Sp. Finally, a "round" gun in a serious caliber! I would like some input as to carry ammo for this gun. Barrel inscription limits me to 200 grains or less....

 

[Stephen A. Camp]

I have a 296 as well. Recoil is not that severe in return for what you are getting. I chronographed several loads from mine and settled on the Triton 165 grain QuikShok which is moving out at about 1100 ft/sec. Accuracy is fine out to about 15 yards which is as far as I've tested this gun. By the way, mine will chamber .44 MAGNUMs. You might want to see if yours does, too. I notified S&W and they didn't seem too concerned. I don't intend to fire any! S&W, as you noted, says not to use bullets over 200 grains. I loaded it up with the old, slow, 246gr LRN at about 750 ft/sec. Sure 'nuff, the fifth round's bullet worked itself foreward in recoil until it protruded beyond the cylinder face, jamming the revolver. It seems that the crimp on lead bullets is not sufficient to hold the bullet in place. No such problems occurred with lighter jacketed bullets that produced even more recoil. Hope this is of use.

 

[olegunftr]

I like the fed SWC/HP lead bullet in my Taurus. Personaly I'd stay away from the HOT stuff. the fed has a good street record according to EM (I always quote him when he agrees with me).

------------------
Vinny

 

[Phil Degraves]

Steve,
Was that Remington 246 Grn RNL? I had the same thing happen with my full weight S&W624. It is because Remington is sloppy with their ammo. Some of the ammo I got I could push in and out with my fingers. It would not have mattered how heavy the gun was. It is just bad ammo.

As for the 296, the Speer Gold Dot 200 grn HP is also a good load for it.

 

[Stephen A. Camp]

S&W states that case crimp on the lead rounds like the 246 gr. LRN I was shooting is just not enough to always hold the bullet. I believe that is the true reason in the lighter guns. I've shot a ton of factory 246 gr RNL in an old M29 with no problems, so I suspect the problem you experienced was with an even less-gripping case crimp than normal.
Best to you and yours.

 

[Armorerjon]

My experiences with my S&W model 296 are not so good so far. After firing about twenty rounds of CCI Blazer 200 grain HP, the frame developed a crack. The crack ran length wise beneath the rear end of the barrel. This is the aluminum portion of the gun, not the titanium part! I stopped firing and cleaned the gun up for shipment back to Smith and Wesson..
To be continued....

 

[jimmy]

Armorerjon--FWIW, I once experienced a crack in an alloy-frame S&W, specifically a Model 12. The crack was in the recoil shield area, but was not nearly so severe as the one you describe in your 296. Anyway, S&W replaced the entire frame. I look forward to hearing how your 296 works out.

 

[Armorerjon]

Update to S&W 296 story....
Smith and Wesson customer service is to be commended! I received a new 296 back from them within 11 days, including shipping time!The frame crack that was the problem with the first one was evidently a freak occurence. This one is smooth and perfect and after some shooting, I examined it and it shows no sign of any problems. It is not a plinker however. After about 100 rounds, you are ready to try something else! I see this gun as a outer coat pocket weapon for the colder climates. If you holster something this large, it may as well have a steel frame. I am open to ammo suggestions, as before. I have tried Remington SWC, CCI Blazer and Winchester Silvertip. They all shoot about the same. All in all, I like it! You need fiendish concentration on the front sight to shoot it though....

------------------

 

[jimmy]

Thanks for the update. Whatever the cause of the problem, I hope S&W has fixed it on the 296s of later production.