S&W 66 Border Patrol, thoughts?

[Ttexastom]

Have a model 66 with recessed cylinder, does anyone know approximately when it was manufactured?

 

[Lone Star]

Post y0ur serial number, on the butt of the gun. You'll have to take off the target stocks to see it. All we can say now is that it was made between the time production began in about1970 and when recessed cylinders ended, about 1982.

 

[18DAI]

I must have gotten a few extrodinarily well built model 66s. My former duty gun, a 4 inch 66-2, which is going to the range again today, has over 11,000 rounds through it. In all the years I have carried/qualified/competed and shot it just for fun It has functioned perfectly and shot extremely accurately.

My gunsmith replaced one small part around 6 years ago. It does exhibit a bit of end shake and could probably benefit from a shim. Other than that, no problems.

An aquaintance at the local indoor range has a 4 inch 66-1. He is retired from the US Navy and has stated that his team carried and used model 66s in training and on missions. In training he stated that they fired so many rounds through their model 66s that the guns became too hot to touch and they would wear gloves to shoot them. Ammunition used was Winchester 145 grain silvertip. He has never mentioned a failure and was so fond of this revolver that he purchased his own.

I also have examples of the 66 no dash, 66-1, 66-3 and 66-4. All are well past 1500 rounds fired with no failures. In fact the only issue I have ever had was with the 66 no dash. While shooting at a class back in the early 80s it got very hot and extraction of spent casings became very difficult. Allowed to cool down during lunch, there were no problems finishing the class.

So I am very surprised to read of testing done by the federal government where not one example of a 66 went more than 1500 rounds without failure. Even more surprised when I recall that another federal agency, the Secret Service, authorized and used model 66s for decades. IIRC there are pics of Secret Service agents drawing their snub 66s during the assasination attempt on President Reagan.

It seems odd that they would approve a handgun prone to failure.

 

[joed]

I must have gotten a few extrodinarily well built model 66s. My former duty gun, a 4 inch 66-2, which is going to the range again today, has over 11,000 rounds through it. In all the years I have carried/qualified/competed and shot it just for fun It has functioned perfectly and shot extremely accurately.

I've owned several model 19s and one 66-5, never any issues either. From what I've read the 66 holds up better then the 19. I do stay away from the 125 gr .357 ammo and use 140 gr or heavier bullets. The 19 and 66 were used by a lot of government agencies and police departments over the years.

My favorite S&W revolvers have always been the K frames. For some reason they fit my hand like a glove and balance nicely.

 

[papaairbear]

Good looking 66. I had to look up the values published in my copy of The Blue Book of Gun Values; 26th edition by S.P. Fjested. And the published value for that model at the time the book was printed was $390 for an example at 100%, $320 for one at 98%, and $230 for one at 95%. I found this on page 1446 under Model 66 Combat Magnum. We can add $29 for a 6" bbl and another $49 for the target hammer and trigger. There's no listing for the box and nothing listed for the USBP 50th Anniversary edition. (page 1469) And the book adds no collector value.

Food for thought.

edit: my copy was 10 editions ago, too.

 

[joed]

I think those values are outdated. In my area model 19s and 66s are selling for about $600 used. A few shops have values at $600 and $700. Seems kind of steep to me and I notice them sitting in the gun case for a long time.

From what I see on Internet prices are $700 to $900. Maybe that gun is not priced to high but I'd try to get it cheaper.

 

[GRIZ22]

I must have gotten a few extrodinarily well built model 66s. My former duty gun, a 4 inch 66-2, which is going to the range again today, has over 11,000 rounds through it. In all the years I have carried/qualified/competed and shot it just for fun It has functioned perfectly and shot extremely accurately.

My gunsmith replaced one small part around 6 years ago. It does exhibit a bit of end shake and could probably benefit from a shim. Other than that, no problems.

An aquaintance at the local indoor range has a 4 inch 66-1. He is retired from the US Navy and has stated that his team carried and used model 66s in training and on missions. In training he stated that they fired so many rounds through their model 66s that the guns became too hot to touch and they would wear gloves to shoot them. Ammunition used was Winchester 145 grain silvertip. He has never mentioned a failure and was so fond of this revolver that he purchased his own.

I also have examples of the 66 no dash, 66-1, 66-3 and 66-4. All are well past 1500 rounds fired with no failures. In fact the only issue I have ever had was with the 66 no dash. While shooting at a class back in the early 80s it got very hot and extraction of spent casings became very difficult. Allowed to cool down during lunch, there were no problems finishing the class.

So I am very surprised to read of testing done by the federal government where not one example of a 66 went more than 1500 rounds without failure. Even more surprised when I recall that another federal agency, the Secret Service, authorized and used model 66s for decades. IIRC there are pics of Secret Service agents drawing their snub 66s during the assasination attempt on President Reagan.

It seems odd that they would approve a handgun prone to failure.

66s were in use before and after the tests I related in an earlier post. Failing those tests did not mean all the 66s were recalled from service. It meant S&W didn't get the contract. We're those test guns representative of all 66s? I don't think so but what happened happened.

I have and often carry a 66. I don't shoot a lot of magnums in it. BTW at the time of the Reagan assassination attempt most training and qualifications by Treasury agencies was done with the 110 gr +P+ Treasury load. It was also the duty load for those agencies. Few carried magnums.

 

[bikerdoc]

I carried both the model 19 and then the police service six early in my careers,because the 66 failed my dept testing.

 

[Lone Star]

I think the failures were caused by the continuous firing of hot loads. The guns got very hot and steel becomes brittle under those conditions.

But heavy use with .357 ammo takes its toll. There was a Dallas detective who traded in several M-19's at a store I frequented. All had cylinder endshake. The store owner knew the guy and said he practiced a lot with Magnum ammo.

BTW, I've read that cylinder endshake is best fixed not by shimming, but by having a TRAINED ARMORER (not Bubba) put the yoke on a mandrel and tapping it with a hammer to lengthen the yoke to original specs.

 

[Shaq]

Nice classic S&W that looks like it's unfired, but not worth that price.

 

[silicosys4]

I paid $375 for a 66-1 Chicago PD commemorative a few years ago. Granted it had crappy goodyear grips and is in the same condition wear-wise as the gun in the OP, but with that in mind I'd say the OP gun is about a $600 gun tops.
It seems to be that unless the gun is in extremely good shape with the original box and all accessories are included, many of these commemorative guns hold no extra value over a standard model.

 

[9mmepiphany]

Top prices would be with the wood Presentation Case and the matching knife

 

[RealGun]

The Wyoming Highway Patrol and others dropped them due to failures to fire. The SS Mdl. 66 would chafe and the guns would lock up. A Trooper was shot in the Red Desert by a bank robber. The Trooper's Mdl. 66 locked up and the bandit shot him.
I really doubt that the USBP stamp makes that gun worth $1,000 dollars? That is my thoughts and I am weak minded.

Was that an issue of design or of fitting? Desribe what you mean by "chafe". I picture a cylinder that won't/can't rotate, but guns I have had do that got fixed. I also learned to make sure my ejector was screwed in tight.

 

[RealGun]

I see references to Service Six and adjustable sights. I though that a Service Six was fixed sight by definition.

 

[Dog Soldier]

Was that an issue of design or of fitting? Desribe what you mean by "chafe". I picture a cylinder that won't/can't rotate, but guns I have had do that got fixed. I also learned to make sure my ejector was screwed in tight.

Realgun, The early SS revolvers and semi auto pistols tended to chafe. This caused the guns to lock up. Chafe is a verb meaning to wear or abrade from rubbing.

 

[X-Rap]

Some stainless steels are very prone to galling. It is common in bolting applications.

 

[RealGun]

Realgun, The early SS revolvers and semi auto pistols tended to chafe. This caused the guns to lock up. Chafe is a verb meaning to wear or abrade from rubbing.

I know what chafe means but not as applied to guns. I would be guessing. I thought maybe you would know and be willing to describe it, since you used the word.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I thought maybe you would know and be willing to describe it, since you used the word.

I'm not sure what the confusion is, but I'll try to clarify

Chafe is a verb meaning to wear or abrade from rubbing

Synonyms
abrade, excoriate, fret, gall, irritate

but not as applied to guns

Galling is a form of wear caused by adhesion between sliding surfaces. When a material galls, some of it is pulled with the contacting surface.

Certain stainless alloys used in early M-66 chafed against each other...exhibiting galling

 

[RealGun]

<snip>
Certain stainless alloys used in early M-66 chafed against each other...exhibiting galling

Was that in the cylinder? How is this different than a failure in how the gun was fitted or a failure in lubrication?
I sent a prelock 617 SS back to Smith because the cylinder was binding. They fixed it, same cylinder. Is that different? All but one of my Rugers has gone back for a new cylinder for one reason or another. I had trouble with opening the cylinder in a Smith 19-4. The ejector was loose but the gun was still tight and was milled a bit to fit. All good now, but that was nickel plated, working surfaces all steel, I expect.

 

[X-Rap]

It would just be a guess but I'd say that heat expanded the cylinder and barrel enough that the contacted and the steel of one or both was of a softer composition which allowed the parts to gall.

 

[Lone Star]

I think I already mentioned that gas ring expansion when firing Magnum loads caused M-66's to jam up; the cylinder wouldn't rotate. This is one possibility, if the Wyoming trooper had fired a number of shots. I don't know the whole story here. But that's one possibility.

I think M-66-1 fixed that problem. Smith moved the gas ring within the cylinder assembly. My M-66-3 has been shot with a box or more of .357 ammo at a sitting and caused no problems. I don't think .38 loads got guns hot enough to jam. But stainless steels heat up faster than normal gun steels and retain that heat longer.

To get around this, S&W moved that part in the design and to prevent galling on early stainless guns, they used different alloys that then no longer rubbed aggressively against one another. BTW, stainless hammers and triggers were replaced with std. parts and those were flash chromed. Later still, they just used normal color case hardened parts.

I don't think Ruger ever experienced those issues. But they may have planned for it from the first, and their guns were designed from the ground up to handle Magnum loads.

That said, hot loads will abrade the forcing cone of even Rugers, and I've seen pics on the Net of a GP-100 that was severely eroded there. Turned out the owner bought that line you see so often on the Net about the Ruger being a "tank" that he was firing LOTS of very hot 125 grain bullets at or above max. specs. (Reloaded ammo.)

 

[Dog Soldier]

The early SS firearms had a problem with a too soft alloy. I think another issue was most gun owners were used to the more for giving 4140 high cabochon gun steels. The SS guns needed more cleaning and lubricating. Failure to do so caused mechanical failures. The problem were usually related to loss of timing. The cylinders jammed tightly into the forcing cones. The cylinder pawls failed to align on the ratchets.

 

[Lone Star]

I see references to Service Six and adjustable sights. I though that a Service Six was fixed sight by definition.

Yes. Service-Six and Speed-Six had fixed sights. Security-Six had adj. sights. I've seen a few posts on the Net where a frame was mismarked and the gun was incorrectly labeled. But that 's rare..

In my opinion, I think Ruger furnished the Border Patrol with fixed sight guns to avoid having the rear sight retention pin back out and get the guns a negative review.

 

[Confederate]

Bill Jordan once told me that USBP had bought some Rugers, but didn't add that the M-66 had failed trials. I was amused to note that the gun he had that day was a S&W M-59 9mm auto! He said that his M-59 worked well. I should add that he was by then long retired from the Border Patrol.

Jordan was the one who always wrote the opposing articles on using autos, opting (or so he said) for the more traditional revolver. That he would carry a S&W 59 is surprising given the poor reputation of the pistol. But when you're Bill Jordan you can always get someone to work on one until it works. I remember wanting one of the nickel plated models back then, but I went with the Italian Beretta 92 because they worked out of the box and was the most reliable auto on the market.

I later latched on to a S&W 659 and it became my all time favorite 9mm auto! It's a bit blocky, but I love the gun's looks.



Regarding the Service-Six, many departments preferred not having to worry about adjustable sights. I have a Speed-Six with a 3-inch barrel and it's one of my favorite guns. The fixed sights seems to be dialed in just right and I love the sight picture.

If I were going to get a S&W 66, I'd get a factory standard, preferring the standard stamps over the specialized police models. And like everyone has said, a grand is too much to ask. Hang the box!