So S&W IS releasing a Model 66 snubby ...

[cal44mag]

I have a 3" Model 60 in 357 Magnum.

I'll think about the new 66, but my M60 weighs 10 oz less, and given the smaller frame is about the same length even though the barrel is longer.

It's thinner also.

Only 5 shots, though.

It can be pocket carried with the Mika holster shown.

And it shoots 357 Magnum just fine.

 

[USSR]

USSR said: ↑
Hmm, let's see. You can buy a new one with the lock, MIM parts, and rubber grips for the same price as a used one in Excellent condition with no lock, forged parts, and wood grips. Decisions, decisions.

Don

Yeah, nice thought ... but at least in my area, finding "a used one in Excellent condition" is almost like buying a winning Powerball ticket.

Gun Broker is your friend. I bought an Excellent Condition 2.5 inch Model 66-1 (pinned and recessed) for $800 last year on Gun Broker. Also bought some 2.5 inch Model 19's which I prefer. You guys keep buying the new stuff and leave that old quality stuff to guys like me.

Don

 

[Tacoma]

if only they made it in a scandium frame....

 

[DPris]

Should have a T&E sample of the new 66 snub in about three weeks.
Already have an original minty 66 snub in the vault.

I'll do a shoot-out between the two for a write-up.
Should be moderately interesting to see how they stack up against each other.
Denis

 

[18DAI]

The s&w two piece barrel is not tensioned at both ends like the Dan Wesson revolvers. It is only tensioned at the muzzle by a nut that requires a proprietary tool to tighten it when it loosens. s&w will not sell the tool.

As far as accuracy goes, Mas Ayoob evaluated the accuracy of the s&w two piece barrels some years back. He had nothing to write home about and damned them with faint praise.

The one piece K-frame barrels, with traditional broaching are known far and wide for their exceptional accuracy.

 

[gotboostvr]

The one piece K-frame barrels, with traditional broaching are known far and wide for their exceptional accuracy.

The traditional barrels are also known for splitting their forcing cones on the flat at the bottom. The new barrels have been beefed up at the forcing cone, which was only possible with the two-piece barrel.

The X-frames also have the dreaded two-piece barrels and are known for great accuracy at long distance and strength.

Either way, if it's an improvement or a step backwards in accuracy I'm willing to bet I'm not going to be able to hold a 1" group at 25 yards with a <3" barrel.

 

[MrBorland]

The s&w two piece barrel is not tensioned at both ends like the Dan Wesson revolvers. It is only tensioned at the muzzle by a nut that requires a proprietary tool to tighten it when it loosens. s&w will not sell the tool.

Yes, S&W's 2-piece system is a bit different than the DW.

The S&W barrel has threads on one end, and a T-shaped flange on the other. The shroud is first placed on the frame with indexing tabs. Once the shroud is in place, the barrel is screwed in, and the flange covers the muzzle end of the shroud and tensions the barrel and shroud. Rather than a tool that engages a nut, the barrel is tightened with a mandrel that engages the rifling. It is true (or used to be) the tool isn't available outside S&W, which is why barrel replacement is a factory-only job.

Since the barrel is (relatively lightly) screwed into the frame and held at the muzzle by a shroud flange, my impression is that it's tensioned at both ends - or perhaps it's more correct to say that there's less overall tension and that it's spread out over the length of the barrel.

The one piece K-frame barrels, with traditional broaching are known far and wide for their exceptional accuracy.

Guns with traditional barrels can, of course, be very accurate. One area that can be an Achilles heel, though, is where the barrel tenon meets the frame - it can be an area of stress, that, when shared by the forcing cone, can affect accuracy if everything's not perfect. All else being equal, the 2-piece design is thought to enhance accuracy by relieving this stress. DWs, for instance, have a reputation for excellent accuracy.

 

[Mizar]

...The new barrels have been beefed up at the forcing cone, which was only possible with the two-piece barrel...

This has nothing to do with barrel design - S&W eliminated the cylinder collar so the crane profile at the cylinder joint can be lowered.

 

[The Bushmaster]

Think I'll stick with my Mod 19-5 2 1/2" barrel nickel plated Combat Magnum.

 

[38riverrat]

It sounds like the two piece barrel design eliminates the need for a crush fit at the frame. The crush fit can cause a barrel constriction just where there should be none. This is why fire lapping can improve accuracy. It removes the constriction. Maybe no need with a two piece barrel.

Best,
Rick

 

[DPris]

Borland has it.
No nut on the S&W two-piecers, and the actual barrel tube is under at least some tension.

It's not the same as the way DW approaches their barrels.

To the best of my knowledge, S&W is still not making the barrel tool available.
Four or five years ago somebody came out with one privately, but I can't recall who & don't know if he still sells it.
Denis

 

[MrBorland]

Four or five years ago somebody came out with one privately, but I can't recall who & don't know if he still sells it.

yup - I recall some enterprising soul made one, though I can't recall who, and don't recall if he ever actually sold it. Seems likely to me that it would have infringed some some patent/IP rights had it been marketed & sold.

 

[Mizar]

A radiograph image of S&W 69, courtesy of one Thunderball315. I believe it settles a couple of questions - the barrel is tensioned just like a Dan Wesson, but without the ability for quick & easy changing. It's not free-floating - there is not enough room, the barrel is in full contact with the shroud.

Best,
Boris

 

[DPris]

Dunno.
I was emailing with him about it, but didn't get a chance to do any followup.
Denis

 

[DPris]

No, not tensioned just like a DW.
Unless DW's changed since I was encountering them, they use a barrel nut to tension a straight tube.
That isn't the same approach as the S&W version & isn't as strong.

I've seen photos of the front flange busted off a Smith barrel.
You can't get that with a DW.

You do get tension in the Smith, but it's not the same.
Denis

 

[Mizar]

Either a nut, or a flange, it doesn't matter - both barrels are tensioned at the front.

 

[DPris]

Yes, just not to the same degree or in the same way.
And it does matter.

Can't argue that the Smith method would, could, or should provide the same degree of accuracy as the DW method.

The Smith can't be tensioned as tightly, or you risk that flange busting off.
Denis

 

[Mizar]

Denis, I'm looking at this from a clearly mechanical standpoint. I'm not arguing which is stronger, easy changing, or more accurate, or how does it look. I'm discussing only the type of barrel fitting. Both guns use basically the same method for attaching the barrel, but with different features. That is why I said that S&W is just like a Dan Wesson (or Korth) - because we were discussing only barrel/frame/shroud fitment. At the same time, the S&W barrel is not free-floating - not enough space, i.e. different than DW in this case.

The Smith can't be tensioned as tightly, or you risk that flange busting off.

Dan Wesson's barrels are not tensioned super-tight either.

 

[DPris]

I didn't bring up the comparison, but I AM clarifying the differences between the two.
And that's largely to address any potential accuracy expectations in Smith's system vs the DW guns.

Tension is provided by different methods, and the end result is not necessarily the same.
Denis

 

[9mmepiphany]

Seems likely to me that it would have infringed some some patent/IP rights had it been marketed & sold.

There was a local FFL whose primary use of it was for his work as forensic firearms expect, who had one made for a case. He just took a cast of the muzzle end of the barrel, about 2-3", and had a local machinist make him up the tool to remove the barrel. The tool looked like an oversized (I think it was .45 cal) twisted Philips screw driver head with a T-handle...don't think you can patent something like that

 

[DPris]

What????
Can't patent an oversized Phillips screwdriver head with a T-handle?????
There goes my retirement plan....
Denis

 

[blue32]

I wouldn't trade my MIM 686-6 circa 2012 for any forged S&W whatever. I say bring on the MIM. Just need to drop the hole of uselessness. Good on S&W for getting back to 6 shot snubs.

 

[MrBorland]

The tool looked like an oversized (I think it was .45 cal) twisted Philips screw driver head with a T-handle...don't think you can patent something like that

Can't patent an oversized Phillips screwdriver head with a T-handle?????

I was imagining that S&W has some strong Intellectual Property/Patent(s) on their entire 2-piece barrel concept, including methods and materials to modify and work on it. Making your own mandrel for your own use would be ok, but you couldn't likely patent or sell it for this use.

 

[alicechan11]

thanks for sharing

 

[Dog Soldier]

It is interesting. The revolvers are making a come back. I was in a busy gun store yesterday. I am a "JAFO". There were as many looking at the new revolvers as the semi-autos?