S&w 3906

[Confederate]

I just got a S&W 3906 9mm and am most impressed. I also have a 5906 and 645 and think they're all great, though the 5906 is a bit fatter in the grips, which is only to be expected. With the increase in the cost of steel and decent heat treat, exacting tolerances, etc., I don't think S&W or anyone else could make pistols like these today without them costing close to a grand. Still, many consider them boat anchors, and to an extent they could be right. But that hasn't stopped people from buying and carrying 1911s, which for some reason people spend ungodly amounts of $$$ on.

I'm old enough to remember when "plastic pistols" were a novelty, worthy of being banned because they could slip past metal detectors! Now the shelves are filled with them and they appear almost every month on the covers of magazines.

But I love the craftsmanship of these older pistols and still shy away from aluminum frames, opting to carry a few more ounces for a steel frame.

I just wondered how these guns stood up to +P and +P+ ammo? Do they need stiffer mainsprings?

Also, does anyone have a 3906 and the old 639? If so, what are the main differences? Which do you prefer?




.

 

[Shear_stress]

I have a 3906 and it is a fine piece. As for the differences between it (a "third generation" autoloader) and the 639 ("second generation"), The Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson points to a series of minor, mostly ergonomic, improvements. These include the beveling of sharp edges, thinner wraparound grips, beadblast finish and a redesigned safety. There was also a greater variety of sights available for third generation guns, including fixed, adjustable and Novaks.

I think cost was one factor in the decline of S&W's all metal autoloaders, but not in the way you think. Basically, why would S&W continue to expend the effort to make such guns when people will pay exactly the same amount for a gun with a plastic frame?

 

[Diggers]

I've a 4006. First duty weapon issued to me. When the dept. went to the M&P I bought it. It has the dept. logo on it so it may some day be worth something to a collector if I ever feel like parting with it.

 

[0to60]

I have a 4506 that I bought back in 92 or so. I shot a lot of handloaded ammo through it and it digested a lotta dirty, waxy bullets without many complaints. Eventually I noticed some cracks forming at the fronts of the frame rails. I sent it into S&W and they replaced the frame entirely and gave me a new spring, saying that if I'm gonna shoot hot ammo, use a stiffer spring. I guess I musta been creeping my charges up or something.

At any rate, I only shoot factory ammo through it these days (too lazy to reload anymore). Its a great gun.

So to answer your question, if you're gonna shoot a lotta +p or +p+ ammo through your 9mm, I'd definitely consider a stronger recoil spring.

These are definitely great guns. The finish is amazing. Mine is called stainless, but it looks more like what they call "satin" today. I clean it after shooting each time, and it looks brand new still. They have many of the features you'd find on a tricked out 1911, like a barrel with a polished feed ramp, dovetail front site, adjustable rear site, one piece guide rod, etc... They field strip VERY easy, and the drophammer safety was very nice.

 

[Storm]

I have many 1st, 2nd and 3rd Gen Smiths and I have to say that the 3906 is one of the sleepers. I think that some overlook it because of less capacity and size, but it's a fine shooter and a classic example of what makes Smiths so darned good. While I have no problems whatsoever with the 5900 series pistols, the 3906 just feels so darn good in the hand sharing much of the smooth shooting qualities of the 3913.

 

[rscalzo]

Carried a 659 when we transitioned in 84. It was a reliable handgun but heavy as a boat anchor. Gladly moved to a 669 when they were released and the department allowed. The one negative I've seen with the second gen line was cracked frames after a relatively low round count. S&W will no longer repair them as parts are long gone.

We have never had an issue with a 3rd. gen frame so I must assume some changes were made beyond cosmetic.

Still have that 659 and may clean it up and make a display out of it. Another "one day" project.

 

[Janos Dracwlya]

I have a 5906 and used to have a 915; I have been on the lookout for a 3906 for a couple of years, but without luck so far. I'll find one eventually, and I might end up considering a 639 or other second generation -39 instead.

 

[Confederate]

The S&W 659 is one of the greatest 9mms I've ever owned. As much as I like the 5906 and the 3906, I just don't like bead blast finishes. And the 659 wasn't too heavy on my hip...but I had a great holster. It was just tough to conceal, but so was the 5906. Stuffed under the belt or in a good holster, it wasn't any more inconvenient weight-wise than a cell phone.

I shoot Glocks very well and love them, but am not happy that they jam when limp-wristed. No one can tell if one will be wounded or otherwise disabled in a gun altercation. I was in a boat accident years ago and immediately I had little control in my fingers, hand and arm. If that same thing had happened in an altercation, I wouldn't want my gun jamming because I wasn't able to stabilize my wrist. But I'm impressed with the toughness of the plastic. I think I'd opt for a Springfield.

The steel frame S&Ws really impressed me. The initial 39s/59s had a lot of malfunctioning problems that were finally fixed, but they also went off if dropped with a round in the chamber. I recall one of the first gun mags I ever bought featured an article entitled, "Why a $49 Raven .25-ACP Is Better Than a $220 9mm S&W Model 59." The point was, the 39s/59s they had acquired jammed so often that they thought a fifty-dollar gun that worked would be "better." But I've heard many people who had them praise the guns, so I began asking around and yes, apparently had problems, but they were fixed.

BTW, where's the best place to get stiffer springs? (One thing I like about revolvers is that they don't seem to revolve around springs! With autos, some people swap out their springs every 5,000 rounds. I have a Ruger Security-Six that I'll do a spring change in at about...oh, 30,000 magnum rounds.)

 

[jsbethel]

My 3906 is a favorite - never any issues. I also have a 39-2, 639, 3904 and a 3913NL. I have owned a 5906 and 915 in the past (and they were great pistols) but I just prefer the single stack S&Ws because of the way they feel in the hand.

3904/3906 with Trijicon night sights

 

[Confederate]

The one negative I've seen with the second gen line was cracked frames after a relatively low round count. S&W will no longer repair them as parts are long gone.

Must have missed this post when it was made. Just wondered what sort of cracked frame issues were encountered? Were they with steel frames, aluminum frames or both? Haven't had any problems with my 659 or 645, but am worried about my 457.

May get some stiffer springs for hot loads, but wonder if the stiffer springs might cause malfunctions with standard ammo?

Any further info on this would be greatly appreciated.