[DDGator]

I am seriously thinking about one of the new 646s.

This run is limited to 900 guns. Does that mean I will have a hard time finding one or have to pay a premium?

I have heard about problems with the earlier 646 PC version. Anyone have any thoughts on this? Can we assume those would be worked out before they offer a new run of the gun?

[Robert inOregon]

Considering that the original 646PC guns sold for over $800, these new ones are a bargain. My understanding is that these new guns are in the mid five range, which is not bad for a somewhat unique weapon.

The older Performance Center variant was very temperamental. For revolvers that are suppose to be extremely reliable, this gun failed the test. Ammunition selection for the 646 was critical. Gun digests most brands of commercial ammunition, but handloads were a totally different ballgame. The titanium cylinder has a problem absorbing pressure spikes due to the extremely thin walls and requires medium to slow burning powders in order to function properly. Bullets also require a firm crimp.

Been playing with this gun for some time now and was very frustrated at first. I was bent on either figuring the problems and mastering the gun or blowing the darn thing up. My 646 spent lots of time with the cylinder removed on my work bench and pounding out cases with a dowel. A true test that these guns are stronger than what most think. Over time I mastered the gun and today it is one of my favorite shooters.

Anyone looking for a turn key, I'd pass.

Looking for something unique that requires a little bit of a learning curve and the end result will produce a new level of performance, then don't pass this one up.

[DDGator]

Hmmm. Robert, was yours an earlier PC model then? Do you think the new ones are any different?

I would be curious to see a pic of the PC version. Did it have a different barrel shape like the current PC guns?

[Jim Watson]

The PC646 had the sculptured barrel, the reissue (parts cleanup, I think) has a regular L frame underlug barrel. No keyhole, either.

THE CYLINDER IS STILL TITANIUM.

[DDGator]

Well don't stop there Jim -- why is that bad?

Thanks.

[Robert inOregon]

I would be curious to see a pic of the PC version.

Here you go! Its a large file (104K) and a bit crude, but will give you the general idea.

[SnWnMe]

Can anybody postulate why Smith won't make these things with SS cylinders?

[caseydog]

I have seen unsubstantiated remarks that 6 .40 caliber holes in an L frame cylinder left the walls very very thin and thinwall Ti actually resulted in a stronger cylinder than the same thickness of stainless. I would rather have a 5 shooter in stainless (ala 696), for me the jury is still out on Ti cylinders.

Some are reporting dowel rod and hammer type extraction on the 646 when used with lead bullets, supposedly because the lead has a better initial gas seal and expands the fired case and cylinder more (Ti has elastic properties) the cylinder then returns to normal while the brass case does not resulting in the stuck cases, those more intimate with metalurgy than me can pontificate further on this , but to me it sounds plausible. As for me , i'll be lookin for a 5" 610 to fire my 40's from a revolver. Case

[Norm Lee]

Hey Everyone:

I think I need one of these. Where are they? Who's got 'em? How much?

Cheers,

Norm