5906


PDA






Zombiekid
June 22, 2012, 08:38 PM
Shot my fathers day gift today. I was really impressed how this pistol shot. I have heard a few disparaging comments about the ergonomics, weight and some other things about the smith 5906. Personally I'm a fan, and love this shooter!

If you enjoyed reading about "5906" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Onward Allusion
June 22, 2012, 08:58 PM
it's definitely an old skool kinda pistol, but it is solid and a garbage eater. The weight reduces recoil to practically nothing and the solid SS construction will handle NATO rounds all day long w/o breaking a sweat. It's service pistol accurate but if you get the TSW series, it's darn close to custom jobs. Some complain about the weight, but it's in the same weight class as BHP, 92, 226...etc...pistols.

iLikeOldgunsIlikeNewGuns
June 23, 2012, 02:18 AM
My first center-fire pistol :)

I'll never get rid of it, great gun to introduce new shooters to center-fire handgun with, as you now know that recoil is comfy. Congrats on an awesome gift!

PabloJ
June 23, 2012, 02:24 AM
While dated design by modern standards it's still very good range pistol.

HDCamel
June 23, 2012, 02:51 AM
I bought one several months ago and recently sold it (at a profit, I might add).
I just found it generally underwhelming.
Sure, they're built like tanks, but they're inelegant and unnecessarily complicated.

Just my $0.02

dprice3844444
June 23, 2012, 02:59 AM
it's a boat anchor,but functions well,pick up some spare parts while you can as smith discontinued making parts for them

ugaarguy
June 23, 2012, 03:08 AM
While dated design by modern standards it's still very good range pistol.
Why exactly do you think the S&W 59xx series is limited to range status only?

They're reliable, they'll function with just about any 9mm ammo out there, ergos are just fine on the DAO and Decock only models (or just use the decock safety as a decoker), they carry fine with a good holster (and there are plenty of those available for them), and 15 and 17 round flush fit Mec-Gar mags are easy to find for under $25. I fail to see what makes the 59xx series suddenly unsuitable as a duty or carry gun.

HDCamel
June 23, 2012, 03:19 AM
I fail to see what makes the 59xx series suddenly unsuitable as a duty or carry gun.

Personally, I find them to be clumsy and have poor balance, especially compared to something like the Beretta 92 or the Cz 75, both of which would fill the same niche but better.

ugaarguy
June 23, 2012, 11:35 AM
Personally, I find them to be clumsy and have poor balance, especially compared to something like the Beretta 92 or the Cz 75, both of which would fill the same niche but better.
First, those are both contemporary designs, not more modern. While I personally like the Beretta 92 a little better than S&W 59x6, I like the like the 59x3 better than even the 92. I like the CZ-75, but the trigger reach is a bit long for my short fat fingers, and I'd like the thumb safety to sit a little lower on the frame.

Essentially the S&W 59xx series, Beretta 92, and CZ-75 fill the same niche equally well from my experience.

Omaney
June 23, 2012, 11:43 AM
I rue the day I traded away my 5904. Someday the planets will align and I will have another one.

Arp32
June 23, 2012, 12:31 PM
Ordered one from CDNN last year and loved it until I took it out to the range.

Something about that wide grip, I couldn't hit a thing. Kept pushing my shots down or to the side. Switched back over to a CZ and a 1911 and I was back on target. Sold the 5906 the next week.

Onward Allusion
June 23, 2012, 12:53 PM
Something about that wide grip, I couldn't hit a thing. Kept pushing my shots down or to the side. Switched back over to a CZ and a 1911 and I was back on target. Sold the 5906 the next week.

Have you tried the STRAIGHT grip? It cuts a good 1/4 inch from the depth of the grip by getting rid of the palm swell curve.

Onward Allusion
June 23, 2012, 01:03 PM
PabloJ
While dated design by modern standards it's still very good range pistol.

It is actually over-engineered by today's standards but is built of "dated" materials - SS. For example, the 5906 has 73 parts, while a Glock has 33 and a XDm has 50 (52 if you count the backstrap set). The 5906 is a complex weapon in the likes of a Sig P226 (77 parts).

I wouldn't relegate one to only the range. My nightstand gun is a 5906TSW with a Streamlight TLR2. Ok, I have to admit I drank the kool-aid long ago and now have a dozen 3rd gen Smiths and a couple of 1st gens. :)

Zombiekid
June 23, 2012, 02:49 PM
Wow there are a lot differing opinions on the 5906. One seems to stay constant though, built like a tank. I really don't shoot a pistol very much or terribly well, so my take on accuracy is not gonna hold much water. Could I hit a man at 25 yards, sure, could I hit him repeatedly in the left nostril? Not with any handgun made. I'm looking at a cz75 right now, but not because I suddenly dislike my S&W but because I like the Cz. I'm no field agent but I wouldn't feel under gunned with my smith taking on a zombie horde. :neener:

HDCamel
June 23, 2012, 03:01 PM
First, those are both contemporary designs, not more modern. While I personally like the Beretta 92 a little better than S&W 59x6, I like the like the 59x3 better than even the 92. I like the CZ-75, but the trigger reach is a bit long for my short fat fingers, and I'd like the thumb safety to sit a little lower on the frame.

Essentially the S&W 59xx series, Beretta 92, and CZ-75 fill the same niche equally well from my experience.
I never said they were newer.
I said they were better.

I've always found balance to be the most important factor to shootability followed by ergonomics, then a distant third consideration is the trigger. With S&W autos, the ergos are fine for me and the trigger on my 5906 was excellent, but they're too back heavy for my taste. They don't point well.

Stringfellow
June 23, 2012, 03:02 PM
There are lots of products in our lives that are no longer cutting edge by one or more standards, yet that doesn't make them less desirable altogether (is a Harley cutting edge???).

What I find humorous, is that there are only two very limited scenarios where the 3rd Gen is a bit obsolete:

1) As your sole everyday CC weapon
2) If you are a professional, and it is your everyday carry weapon

For all the rest of us civilians, and for all the rest of us who manage to have pistols in addition to a dedicated CC weapon, the 3rd Gen Smiths are otherwise nearly ideal. I.e., for range use or nightstand use, do those extra 8-10 extra ounces hold you back in the least?

I love classic metal pistols. Sure, I have a tiny polymer Kahr for potential CC use. But I am building my way through my collection of all-time classic metal pistols, and the 5906 (and/or 4506) is on my most urgent short list...

Confederate
June 23, 2012, 05:37 PM
Ordered one from CDNN last year and loved it until I took it out to the range. Something about that wide grip, I couldn't hit a thing. Kept pushing my shots down or to the side. Switched back over to a CZ and a 1911 and I was back on target. Sold the 5906 the next week.
It's just a matter of getting used to it.

My hand just fits the Model 659, but I like the 5906 fine. The 3906 is very nice as well and though these guns are a mite heavy, a good holster goes a long way in comfortably carrying it. I have a Taurus PT-92 stainless and I love it, too. You just have to pick your poison.


http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/Taurus92_2.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/SW5906_3b.jpg


.

MachIVshooter
June 23, 2012, 07:05 PM
Some complain about the weight, but it's in the same weight class as BHP, 92, 226...etc...pistols.

This. All of the metal-framed service 9mm's are within a couple ounces of each other, and the 5906 is not the heaviest in that class.

I never said they were newer.
I said they were better.

That's subjective. Having owned or played with pretty much every combat 9mm extant, I would choose the 5906 above all. I like my 92FS, I like my Baby Eagle, I liked the CZ75 I had, but the S&W is tougher, more robust and, to me, better looking and better feeling than the others.

It is actually over-engineered by today's standards but is built of "dated" materials - SS.

Agreed. It's design is not obsolete, but it is simply too expensive to manufacture a service 9mm today using the design and materials of the 5906 if the company actually wants to be competetive in that market; They were MSRP'd over $700 twenty years ago. We don't appreciate that fact today because of the surplus pricing on them, but, like the Swiss K31 rifles, the materials and manufacturing in today's economy would be astronomical compared to contemporary designs.

iLikeOldgunsIlikeNewGuns
June 24, 2012, 03:30 PM
I <3 my 5906 very much. I happen to prefer weight to my guns, which is why I still don't have a polymer-framed, and one is not near the top of any of my lists. My EDC for goin-on 3 years now is a steel 5" 1911. Before that it was my 5906.
I've that found a proper belt & holster combo takes weight out of the carry equation, making it more about the shape and size of the gun and your body type.


Did someone say this thread needs more pics?? :D

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3342/3551007445_c89ac91c23_z.jpg?zz=1

115 shots ready to go right here :)

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2602/5760760796_2ba54ff7cb_z.jpg


edit: woops meant to mention how the way it happens to fit my hand, and the weight, allow me to rapid-fire this gun as fast as the slide will cycle, into a baseball to paper-plate sized group at ten to fifteen yards, I've had lots of practice with this :cool:

If you enjoyed reading about "5906" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!