Smith & Wesson 27-2 .44 Mag. [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Smith & Wesson 27-2 .44 Mag.


CarryTexas
07-27-2012, 15:57
Has anyone heard of a S&W M27 in .44 MAG?

I recently picked up this gun thinking that the seller had made a mistake and misread M29. However, he was right it is a 27-2...

Does anyone know anything about this gun? I mainly bought it as a shooter so I am not too concerned about it, but I would like the know what about it.

427
07-27-2012, 16:16
I think the Model 27 is a .357 mag.

CarryTexas
07-27-2012, 16:19
This one is a .44. That is why I am confused.

southernshooter
07-27-2012, 16:25
Can you post a pic? The 27 has always been a .357 with the premium bluing. The model 28 is the same thing with a more satin finish. The 28 used to be common for the highway patrol. They are heavy duty 357's.

427
07-27-2012, 16:25
Can you post picts? Maybe it's a factory mis-mark.

CajunBass
07-27-2012, 16:28
It's either a factory mis-mark (not unheard of) or someone converted it to 44 magnum somewhere along the line.

countrygun
07-27-2012, 16:32
Before S&W reintroduced the Mod 24, it was not uncommon for folks to convert a 27 or 28 to .44 Special. Being an "N" frame it was possible, although highly unadviseable to run a magnum reamer in the chambers.

Some of the SAFE .44 special versions used either NOS mod 24 barrels or the untapered mod 29 barrels. It was easy to rechamber the original .357 cylinder for .44 special.

IIRC Bob Sconce of MMC and MagnaPort did a lot of these

bac1023
07-27-2012, 16:39
Sounds like a conversion maybe. :dunno:

Bruce M
07-27-2012, 18:33
As suggested it might be a conversion or it might be a mismarked gun. If it was done in the early 70's I would guess it is a conversion. After the movie Dirty Harry .44 magnums were supposedly difficult to come by. I'll bet a letter from Smith and Wesson might indicate for certain.

bac1023
07-27-2012, 18:36
I think its a shame, actually. The original 27-2s are certainly more valuable than 29-2s.

The 27 was Smith's flagship revolver.

teumessian_fox
07-27-2012, 19:27
There were no model 27s chambered from the factory for 44 magnum. There were also no such mismarked 29s. You apparantly have something somebody converted.

But, what makes you think it's for 44 mag? For a while it was trendy to convert models 28s to 44 special, but the assumption was that a 357 just wouldn't leave enough metal to endure 44 mag loads.

If it was converted to fire magnum loads, I would not shoot it unless and until a competent gunsmith checked it out.

Even then, I would only shoot reduced (read, 44 special) loads.

countrygun
07-27-2012, 19:39
There were no model 27s chambered from the factory for 44 magnum. There were also no such mismarked 29s. You apparantly have something somebody converted.

But, what makes you think it's for 44 mag? For a while it was trendy to convert models 28s to 44 special, but the assumption was that a 357 just wouldn't leave enough metal to endure 44 mag loads.

If it was converted to fire magnum loads, I would not shoot it unless and until a competent gunsmith checked it out.

Even then, I would only shoot reduced (read, 44 special) loads.


If it had been converted to MAGNUM chambering I don't think a gunsmith could find the dangers that might be waiting, unless he could magnaflux.

bac1023
07-27-2012, 19:52
There's no way I'd shoot it, that's for sure.

CarryTexas
07-27-2012, 20:22
I have asked the seller for a refund due to the fact it is a modified gun.

Pictures:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-lrgNQakjr20/UBNMQAgKyvI/AAAAAAAAAyg/tC2vnGlZ85U/s800/27_220121001.jpg

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-TyBJc4o11ds/UBNMQLKgIbI/AAAAAAAAAyg/TqiDjR_T9L4/s800/27_220121002.jpg

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-t4VXC0dakY8/UBNMQAF5kqI/AAAAAAAAAyg/dxRx8hgCpRM/s800/27_220121003.jpg

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-r7WYXC6msY0/UBNMQq3ikpI/AAAAAAAAAyg/ty5sl4nQqM8/s800/27_220121004.jpg

kirgi08
07-27-2012, 20:24
:wow:

countrygun
07-27-2012, 20:35
Yup, that is a 29 barrel on a 27 frame. See the cutting above the model number in the crane? Even on the bottom of the forcing cone to get the 29 cylinder in there. I will bet they may have used a 29 crane. That looks like nickle on my monitor

CarryTexas
07-27-2012, 20:47
Yes, it is a nickel finish. From pictures I thought I was buying a nickel M29. Never expected this...

I compared the cylinder with my M29-2 using a digital caliper and they're the same size...

true believer
07-27-2012, 20:56
Yes, it is a nickel finish. From pictures I thought I was buying a nickel M29. Never expected this...

I compared the cylinder with my M29-2 using a digital caliper and they're the same size...

what did the seller say about a refund?
:whistling:

CarryTexas
07-27-2012, 21:09
what did the seller say about a refund?
:whistling:

Nothing yet....

We'll see hopefully he will be a standup guy and do the right thing.

rhino673
07-27-2012, 21:15
Very weird. Tagged.

kirgi08
07-27-2012, 21:23
Bob!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .'08. :wavey:

G36's Rule
07-27-2012, 21:37
Frame and cylinder should be same dimensions. If conversion is done correctly then it will be fine firing full power loads. Big question is, was it done correctly...

teumessian_fox
07-27-2012, 22:07
If it had been converted to MAGNUM chambering I don't think a gunsmith could find the dangers that might be waiting, unless he could magnaflux.

He'd check the dimensions with a micrometer and, if he's truly competent, test fire some magnum loads.

Regardless, I would not keep it as I would have bought a model 29. The OP will never be able to get rid of that gun for anything like he paid.

true believer
07-28-2012, 18:32
Bob!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .'08. :wavey:

Roger.....!!:wavey

bac1023
07-28-2012, 19:14
Frame and cylinder should be same dimensions. If conversion is done correctly then it will be fine firing full power loads. Big question is, was it done correctly...

You wouldn't catch me testing it to find out! :outtahere:

bac1023
07-28-2012, 19:14
Nothing yet....

We'll see hopefully he will be a standup guy and do the right thing.

Hopefully.

El_Ron1
07-28-2012, 19:15
http://madamepickwickartblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/freaks2.jpg

CarryTexas
07-28-2012, 19:35
Hopefully.

Been in communication with the seller. He seems willing to do the right thing.

Still hopeful.

Zombie Steve
07-28-2012, 22:32
http://madamepickwickartblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/freaks2.jpg

:goodpost:

thepish
07-29-2012, 03:44
Sorry about the mix up I had no idea it was of lesser value due to this and I am a wheel gun noob. I was just looking to get a good 44 and had no idea this gun was unstable or converted/frankenstein monster or that It should be valued at a lesser amount. I traded this
http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/350601935/m/2890034382?r=2890034382#2890034382
and passed on a offer for 710 plus shipping to take the trade on the smith that I had gave my word on. The guy that traded it to me has agreed to refund me and I will be refunding you as well Texas. I know you already agreed to the transaction even though I informed you of its markings as did I but please be patient I am working on this and like the guy that traded it to me said I don't want to screw anyone over.

my guys response was - If you don't like the revolver, you can send it back & I will pay you for the 229. I ain't wanting to screw anybody, so just let me know. barry1975freed@yahoo.com

As far as the functioning of the gun It seemed to perform flawlessly with 44 mag loads and had a much much better trigger than my redhawk. Sorry for the troubles and we will get this resolved.

banger
07-29-2012, 05:26
Actually, there is one easy way to tell if it was really a model 27 frame.

The top strap of the model 27 was checkered, the model 29 was not.

As to a "mis-mark" this was really not all that uncommon.

The way Smith and Wesson produce firearms in the sixties and seventies was in batches.

They would "tool up" and produce numerous "N" frames and then warehouse them until needed.

The same thing occurred with cylinders, hammers, triggers etc..

As a batch was called for, the parts were retreived and the weapons assembled.

Outside of cosmetic differences, all "N" frames were the same across similar model lines.

All model 29 frames were the same as model 57, (.41 magnum) frames. Outside of the aforementioned checkering on the 27 (.357 magnum) the frames themselves would have been the same.

This situation was also not unique to "N" frames as the same things were done with the "K" and "J" frames.

I hope this helps.

ak103k
07-29-2012, 05:59
As far as the safety standpoint goes, its possible that the cylinder is a .44mag replacement, and not just a bored out .357mag. Seems like it would be a lot less work too. Since the gun has a nickle finish (or has been refinished), you cant see if the original finish matches.

I have a 6" model 28 I picked up cheap and was considering doing just that, changing it over to a 4" in .45Colt.

Highspeedlane
07-29-2012, 06:33
I would be extremely leary of a steady diet of .44 Magnum loads in that.

Aside from cylinder wall thickness, the other crucial variable in the ability to contain high pressure is heat treatment. I have no idea if 27's were heat treated to the same levels as 29's.

If that's a reamed out 27 cylinder (vice a 29 cylinder) and I couldn't verify that aspect or if the heat treatment of the original cylinder was affected by the reaming operation, then it could be asking for trouble at some point.

Just a thought. I could be completely off base but that's something that would worry me about it until proven otherwise.

CarryTexas
07-29-2012, 12:58
Sorry about the mix up I had no idea it was of lesser value due to this and I am a wheel gun noob. I was just looking to get a good 44 and had no idea this gun was unstable or converted/frankenstein monster or that It should be valued at a lesser amount. I traded this
http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/350601935/m/2890034382?r=2890034382#2890034382
and passed on a offer for 710 plus shipping to take the trade on the smith that I had gave my word on. The guy that traded it to me has agreed to refund me and I will be refunding you as well Texas. I know you already agreed to the transaction even though I informed you of its markings as did I but please be patient I am working on this and like the guy that traded it to me said I don't want to screw anyone over.

my guys response was - If you don't like the revolver, you can send it back & I will pay you for the 229. I ain't wanting to screw anybody, so just let me know. barry1975freed@yahoo.com

As far as the functioning of the gun It seemed to perform flawlessly with 44 mag loads and had a much much better trigger than my redhawk. Sorry for the troubles and we will get this resolved.

thepish,

Thanks for your reply. I am very relieved that you're standing behind this deal.

When you told me it was a 27-2 I incorrectly assumed you had misread and actually had a 29-2 since the M27 is a .357

I don't believe that you purposely misrepresented the revolver.

PlasticGuy
07-31-2012, 06:20
I believe there are a few documented cases of S&W shipping .44 Magnums with Model 27 marked frames. However, that particular revolver doesn't look 100% correct to me. I strongly believe it was rebuilt into a .44 Magnum. I would give it back and keep looking.

CarryTexas
07-31-2012, 07:21
I believe there are a few documented cases of S&W shipping .44 Magnums with Model 27 marked frames. However, that particular revolver doesn't look 100% correct to me. I strongly believe it was rebuilt into a .44 Magnum. I would give it back and keep looking.

Agreed, thepish and I are working out the details for a refund now.

Sgt127
07-31-2012, 08:14
Actually, there is one easy way to tell if it was really a model 27 frame.

The top strap of the model 27 was checkered, the model 29 was not.

That the easiest way to tell...Is the top of the frame checkered? If not, its simply mismarked.

Bren
07-31-2012, 09:02
Has anyone heard of a S&W M27 in .44 MAG?

I recently picked up this gun thinking that the seller had made a mistake and misread M29. However, he was right it is a 27-2...

Does anyone know anything about this gun? I mainly bought it as a shooter so I am not too concerned about it, but I would like the know what about it.

No. However, both the 27 and 29 use the same frame, so could it be a 27 that had a mod. 29 barrel and cylinder added?

CarryTexas
07-31-2012, 09:17
That the easiest way to tell...Is the top of the frame checkered? If not, its simply mismarked.

The top of this frame is checkered. It is certainly a M27 frame.