S&w 39-2

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Hizzoner

Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Messages
46
Location
Upstate NY
I'm an old(er) guy with not very big hands and I want a decent (non-plastic) 9mm to put holes in paper with.
I have nothing against Polymer guns as my SD/CC pistol is a Ruger P345 but in this one I want a metal or alloy frame.
I have this urge to buy a 39-2 but I don't know a lot about them.
The price and specs look like it will fill the bill.
Besides, it just looks right to me.
Silly? Maybe, but esthetics are one consideration.
The first thing the people I have talked to say is "it's only a single stack that holds 8 rounds".
That is a non-issue since in NY State, with exceptions, I can't have a pistol that holds more than 10 rounds anyway.

What are people's opinions pro and con (with reasons)?
 
Underrated classic. People will complain about the single stack mags, but it makes it slim. I normally shoot single stacks anyway, so its right up my alley. I have an uncle who carried one his entire LEO career. The 39-2s have an alloy frame, the steel framed versions bring big bucks.

My one complaint is that I have large hands and the hammer will bite me if I don't adjust my grip. Other than that, it is a smooth shooting gun that has been really reliable.

It has a bit of historical significance too, if I recall it was the first double action 9mm automatic built in the U.S., and is the foundation for the popular 3rd generation of S&W automatics.
 
I bought one sometime in the 70s. Really good ergonomics and easy to carry and shoot. Mine was plenty accurate but I’ve heard of other folks having issues. Don’t know. The only problem I ever had was the weapon wasn’t reliable with the hollow points of the time but was flawless with ball. Can’t say how they handle modern loads as I passed the gun to my father a couple of years later and some how my brother ended up with it. He still has it but only carries it when deer hunting and keeps it loaded with ball.

Over all I think they’re great guns within their limitations and I would feel well armed if that was all I had.
 
I have small hands also, and the 39 is about the only Smith auto that feels comfortable. You might find you a used Browning HP. Here's mine, it's a custom by the late Austin Behlert. It shoot and fits like a dream. The 1911 is a 1924 Colt also by Behlert... IMG_2952.gif
 
The S&W M39 has a lot of history behind it, it was my first DA/SA handgun.

The M39 was born from a Air Force request for a handgun for it's aircrews back in the 50's...this request also gave birth to the Colt Commander. The requirements were that they be chambered in 9mm and that they be light weight (alloy frames)...neither was ever adopted by the AF (they got .38s instead). The M39 was the first DA/SA autoloader to be adopted by a major LEA (ISP - Illinois State Police)

My M39 very very accurate and pointed very naturally. It's only reluctance to feed had to do with 90gr JHPs (I just fed mine 124gr bullets). I always found the trigger a bit spongy, but it was still very shootable. The M39 was the basis for S&W's steel framed 5" target pistol the M52 chambered for the .38 special wadcutter...this evolved into the current production M952 which is chambered in 9mm and available (on a limited basis) in 5" and 6" versions
 
Cocked with safety "on" is how the "big brother" S&W SA .45s are built.
While I don't recommend doing so, you can dry fire these with a round in the chamber when the safety is "on". It blocks the hammer from striking the firing pin.
Totally different than the decocker action on the traditional DA/SA S&Ws

745-cocked.jpg
 
RedCent,
I'm having a similar problem with mine. Took it apart but didn't see any obvious cause. Still the same when reassembled. If I operate the decocker repeatedly, it will fall sometimes.
 
I encountered a similar problem after acquiring a second slide (adj. sights) for my 639. The decocker would not play nice, decocking only occasionally. After speaking with a knowledgable 'smith, it seems that these 2nd gen pistols sear lever and slide parts are hand fitted. He has it now, working to make the 2 slides both work.
 
My 59 is not a problem. I intentionally made it that way. Mod one little tiny part. Now I gotta figure out if I can turn the decocker bar around, TIG a thumb piece, cut off the original and see if it works. Why did Smith do that anyway?
I left the 39 as factory.
I have never incurred a problem with the 39 and decocking.

psssst! Don't tell Rimes.
 
S&W Model 39-2 equipped with factory ajustable sights (both windage and elevation). Evidently, some were so equipped although I suspect most were added on later. Normally, the 39 series came from Smith & Wesson with a windage-only adjustable rear leaf.

attachment.php


9mm, DA/SA action, anodized aluminum receiver, steel slide, single stack 8-round magazine, factory checkered wood grips. An elegant Smith & Wesson pistol from the days before plastic...

Every few months, I see a few in my local used market for ~$350-$450. Pristine examples (NIB or LNIB with original accessories) obviously go for a bit more ($550-$700 depending on region).


My very first handgun purchase (many moons ago) was a 39-2. They are classy looking, accurate, and a joy to shoot. The grip is really comfortable for most shooters. As noted by others, they were designed in an era before widely available hollow points were the carry norm, but mine always fired anything that replicated a 124 gr FMJ ogive. Remington 115s JHPs were always a dependable favorite in my first 39-2.

BTW: You can use widely available factory 9-round S&W mags designed for the S&W 39, 39-2, 3914, 3914NL, 3953DA, 3954DA, 439, 539, 639, and 908. They fit and function in the 39-2 just fine. They are available at most well-stocked gunshops, S&W's website, or parts vendors like NumrichArms:

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...4_750001_750051_758019_-1_757846_757837_image

http://www.gunpartscorp.com/

Nine in the mag plus one in the chamber = (almost) the 10 rd. capacity allowed for your location.

Size & weight-wise, I categorize them in the same range as the Glock 19 & CZ PCR, but slimmer and easier to conceal. The aluminum alloy lower makes for a lightweight carry package. One minor difficulty is that only a few manufacturers currently make holsters designed specifically for the 39.

Lobo Gunleather is one:
http://www.lobogunleather.com/4_1-sl_pancake_style_snap-loop
 
Last edited:
I bought mine new in the seventies. Still have it. For a fairly compact, fairly lightweight single stack 9mm, I don't feel that the 39-2 has any drawbacks at all.

Mine has been exceptionally accurate and is not at all finicky with differing brands of ammo.

And it has more classic looks and lines than does much of the more modern fare.

There are a variety of grips available for it, so sizing the thickness of the grip to your hands isn't difficult. Ebay is a good occasional source for cheap, used grips to try out.

Replacement mags from S&W are not terribly expensive and work fine.

Finally, S&W is known for good customer service and product and parts support if you ever need it.

I don't know that molded-to-the-gun holsters are all that widely available. Holster design, especially for IWB, has come a long way since 39's were discontinued and I would want the benefits of modern holster design for any carry piece.
 
That is late. It doesn't fit with later Air Force test either...that was with the modified M59s, when they were developing the 124gr Flat Nosed slug for the 9mm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
S&W 39-2 on gunbroker
Replies
13
Views
1K
CajunBass
CajunBass
8
  • Locked
S&W model 39-2
Replies
10
Views
3K
Cocked & Locked
Cocked & Locked
C
  • Locked
Any issues w/ 147 gr. ammo in S&W 39-2?
Replies
1
Views
339
Ala Dan
A
C
  • Locked
Opinions on S&W 39-2?
Replies
7
Views
524
Ala Dan
A
M
  • Locked
Dating a S&W 39-2
Replies
2
Views
403
modifiedbrowning
M
Back
Top