Quantcast
S&W 547 9mm Video Review (Memorial?) - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Tools and Technologies > Handguns: Revolvers

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 14, 2014, 06:52 PM   #1
boricua9mm
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 925
S&W 547 9mm Video Review (Memorial?)

As my namesake implies, I have always been a fan of the 9mm cartridge. The S&W Model 547 has intrigued me for many years, and I am lucky enough that one of my family members owns two of them in his collection, both 3"and a 4" versions. The gun pictured was graciously loaned to me for the purpose of this review. I have invested a lot of production time in creating a Video Review of this fine revolver. If you can spare 8 minutes, please be sure to watch it! As revolver aficionados, I'm sure you can appreciate taking a look inside this odd specimen.

CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE SMITH AND WESSON MODEL 547 VIDEO REVIEW!


I believe that the 547 K-frame is a very misunderstood revolver. It often gets slammed as being pointless or useless, when in fact it posts higher velocities and greater energy than comparable .38 Special Loads (citation). Discussions of the 547 often pit it against .357 Magnum revolvers, which of course it cannot supplant. It is much more fair to say that the 9mm, even when fired from the 547, sits firmly placed in between the .38+P and the real Magnum loads.

The ejection system is genius. I made no attempt at disassembly of this mechanism, as the firearm in question was a loaner. Without a doubt, it is more complicated than your traditional ejector star for rimmed cartridges.

Sadly, the concept of a 9mm revolver never seem to take hold. People say they would buy one, but when a company steps up to produce them, they languish in the glass cases of dealers until fading away into obscurity once again.

Unfortunately, if you want to buy one of these right now, you will need to bring Performance Center cash to the negotiating table.











boricua9mm is offline  
Old July 14, 2014, 07:03 PM   #2
tekarra
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 13, 2007
Posts: 1,230
Having owned six or seven 547s over the years, I agree the 547 is a truly remarkable revolver. Unfortunately the one in the photos has been altered with a sight rail and the grips have been changed. Still a fine looker though.
tekarra is offline  
Old July 14, 2014, 07:10 PM   #3
boricua9mm
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 925
I suspect this particular gun was used in competition 20 years before they became $o coveted.
boricua9mm is offline  
Old July 14, 2014, 07:25 PM   #4
ATLDave
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 30, 2011
Posts: 1,768
PPC gun?
ATLDave is offline  
Old July 14, 2014, 07:30 PM   #5
boricua9mm
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 925
That is my guess, but I don't know for sure. As mentioned in the video, the hammer and trigger are also jeweled. These mods were done either in the 80s or 90s. This particular gun has been in my family since the late 90s and it was purchased on the used market in this configuration, minus the Ahrends grips of course.
boricua9mm is offline  
Old July 14, 2014, 07:35 PM   #6
Jim Watson
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 24, 2002
Posts: 17,980
I sat through all that and never heard a shot.
Phooey.

I have shot a 547. The DA trigger pull was tough; it takes a lot of mainspring to drive down the positioning pin and the firing pin both. Unless this one had a lot of work done besides the quaint engine turning, it is not something I would have bothered to put a Bomar rib on.
__________________
I have a few facts and a lot of opinions.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old July 14, 2014, 07:50 PM   #7
boricua9mm
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 925
Quote:
I sat through all that and never heard a shot.
Phooey.
The gun is on loan, a reluctant one at that.

Quote:
I have shot a 547. The DA trigger pull was tough; it takes a lot of mainspring to drive down the positioning pin and the firing pin both. Unless this one had a lot of work done besides the quaint engine turning, it is not something I would have bothered to put a Bomar rib on.
Might have been great advice for the anonymous previous owner 30 years ago

The trigger pull is not unlike that of my no-dash 686. I would guess it had some work done in its previous life.
boricua9mm is offline  
Old July 14, 2014, 07:58 PM   #8
C0untZer0
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 7, 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,743
The reason I didn't get the 547 was that I wanted an under lug and didn't want an exposed ejector rod, and I wanted adjustable sights.

I could live without the under lug, but I really wanted adjustable sights. I thought S&W would eventually make the 547 with adjustable sights but instead, they stopped making them altogether !

BTW, I am on the waiting list for a S&W 929.
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old July 15, 2014, 08:28 AM   #9
boricua9mm
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 925
Quote:
The reason I didn't get the 547 was that I wanted an under lug and didn't want an exposed ejector rod, and I wanted adjustable sights.
What you're describing would be on my "must buy" list!
boricua9mm is offline  
Old July 15, 2014, 09:42 PM   #10
Confederate
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 19, 2005
Posts: 2,680
You make some good points, even though showing the 547 with a Glock really is a cheap shot! Had you pictured a Smith & Wesson 659 or 5906, some might have been distracted. Certainly a 547 is more durable than a Glock right out of their respective boxes. With a single set of springs a Glock will begin to fail by the 3,000 mark. A 547 will just be getting started at 3,000 rounds and its springs will go the life of the gun.

One question I've always had is why someone would buy a 9mm revolver when they could buy a .357? The .357 can take both .38 and .357 and while .38+P can't equal a 9mm, it can come pretty close. And .357s can more readily put down both humans and fairly large animals depending on the ammo. Having said that, I can answer my own question by saying that if the 547 had been widely available when I had $$$ and no wife, I would have bought one. Why? Who knows? My favorite calibers are the .22lr and the .357, and were I frugal, I would take a .357 revolver over a 9mm any day.

I also liked the Ruger Speed-Six 9mm and looked around for one at the time it came out.
Confederate is offline  
Old July 15, 2014, 11:26 PM   #11
Radagast
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: December 24, 2002
Location: Australia/OZ
Posts: 4,804
Confederate, I replaced the recoil spring on my Glock 17 at 7,500 rounds, haven't bothered since then and its well over 25,000 rounds with no issues.
On the other hand I've had problems with half the S&W revolvers I've owned. They are a great product, but they are not indestructible.

As for the 547, I think you will find it was driven by a French police requirement for a revolver that used the same caliber as their military. 9mm revolvers are a niche market. In 15 years of gun forum discussions there is usually a thread discussing them, but when they come on the market, few get sold.
That said, I would like to own one myself, but I have a Model 28 for .38 & .357, so I have no pressing need for a 9mm wheel gun.
__________________
$25 a year to keep The High Road on line AND block adds? Bargain!
Become a contributing member today!
http://www.thehighroad.org/payments.php
Radagast is online now  
Old July 16, 2014, 12:54 AM   #12
Girodin
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 22, 2008
Posts: 5,075
it is recommended to replace the recoil spring every 3K rounds. They are cheap ($7) and it is preventive maintenance. However, most guns don't start having problems right at 3k in my experience. I ironically have had more issues with my S&W revolver than all 3 of my glocks combined.
__________________
The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic. --Justice Joseph Story
Girodin is offline  
Old July 16, 2014, 08:21 AM   #13
boricua9mm
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 925
Quote:
You make some good points, even though showing the 547 with a Glock really is a cheap shot! Had you pictured a Smith & Wesson 659 or 5906, some might have been distracted. Certainly a 547 is more durable than a Glock right out of their respective boxes. With a single set of springs a Glock will begin to fail by the 3,000 mark. A 547 will just be getting started at 3,000 rounds and its springs will go the life of the gun.
I don't think it's a cheap shot at all. In fact, by 1982 the Glock 17 was in the market and its precisely that type of gun that ultimately sealed the fate for 9mm revolvers, as well as S&W's line of metal framed DA/SA pistols. Once we get past the grumblings of the aesthetics and "soul" of firearms and come around to viewing them as tools for a job, it is easy to see how revolvers have been pushed aside over the past few decades.

As to the service life, I have not had any issues with Glocks failing under 5k rounds. I have had some issues getting my Glock 19 to run suppressed, but that's another issue. Many semi-auto pistols will require some sort of preventative maintenance spring swaps at around 5k rounds.

Quote:
One question I've always had is why someone would buy a 9mm revolver when they could buy a .357? The .357 can take both .38 and .357 and while .38+P can't equal a 9mm, it can come pretty close. And .357s can more readily put down both humans and fairly large animals depending on the ammo. Having said that, I can answer my own question by saying that if the 547 had been widely available when I had $$$ and no wife, I would have bought one. Why? Who knows? My favorite calibers are the .22lr and the .357, and were I frugal, I would take a .357 revolver over a 9mm any day.
The .357 Magnum can do things that the 9mm can't; no question about it. The difference really becomes crystal clear when we get into 158 grain and heavier loads. Nonetheless, for general personal protection, I find a higher capacity 9mm to be a better choice than a 6-shot revolver of any caliber. My primary reason for owning and carrying .357s is for hiking and camping scenarios, where the additional power might be needed/welcomed. They also happen to be good-looking and extremely fun to shoot.

What is puzzling is how people will decry the concept of a 9mm revolver, yet turn around and praise revolvers chambered in .38 Special (only). It just doesn't make sense to me.
boricua9mm is offline  
Old July 16, 2014, 12:12 PM   #14
scaevola
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 8, 2010
Location: A bit north of Glitter Gulch
Posts: 30
I've always wanted a 547. The only one I've shot belongs to a friend and the action is great; the revolver is a joy to shoot. My friend never shoots it and the only time it leaves his safe is when I take it out. He won't sell it to me but he's cool with me shooting it any time I want.

__________________
“Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the Jolly Roger and begin to slit throats”. - H. L. Mencken.
scaevola is online now  
Old July 16, 2014, 04:33 PM   #15
Jim Watson
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 24, 2002
Posts: 17,980
The excuse for 9mm revolvers seems to be the French police.
The Gendarmes were then commanded by a guy who was trained and strongly influenced by the FBI in the late revolver era. But they wanted 9mms to share ammunition with their SMGs and with the army. One writer of the period said that was false economy, outfitting a whole national force and most of the local ones with .38 Specials would have led to large economical ammo contracts and no mechanical jiggery-pokery.

Any road, the S&W 547 had their own "umbrella rib" extractor.
Ruger came up with a simpler design, a loop of piano wire threaded through the star to snap into the extractor grooves. It did not work on some tough European SMG ammo, so they ended up going with clips.
Manurhin had a similar but stiffer design.
The Korth looks to have a system that cams the extractor star enough to pick up the 9mms.

I have only shot the 547 but have seen a Ruger Speed Six in action with clips. I looked hard for one of those with 4" barrel in the early days of IDPA. But then they changed the rules and it would no longer have been suitable.
__________________
I have a few facts and a lot of opinions.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old July 21, 2014, 12:46 AM   #16
clang
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 17, 2005
Posts: 564
Here's what one looks like in original condition:


I bought this one at least 10 tears ago. It's a great shooter, but I don't take it out much because repair parts are not available.
__________________
__________________________________________
If the horse don't pull you've got to carry the load.
clang is offline  
Old July 21, 2014, 09:41 AM   #17
BigG
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 24, 2002
Location: Dixieland
Posts: 7,027
I have the J frame model. It has the standard extractor and works with moon clips. The 547 was built to meet a French spec. That was the reason for the spring fingers, IIRC.
BigG is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.