With different firearms there tends to be specific years that are more desirable then others and specific years that are least desirable.

Does this hold true for the Model 25 and if so which ones and why?

I asked a similar question for the Model 29 and received a simple yet very useful summary along with an explanation.

These was a response with the order of preference.

1. 29-1 and older
2. 29-2
3. 29-5
4. 29-4 & -6
5. 29-3

It would be great if something similar can be provided for the Model 25.
Damn, these revolvers are a bit addicting.

Sir, I've owned three Model 25s--a mid-'60s 25-2, a 1980-ish 25-5, and a 25-9 I bought new in 1990. Here are my observations on each, FWIW.

Only the 25-9 has proper size chamber mouths, and it's the most accurate of the three. Otherwise, it came with some problems straight from the factory: out of time, terrible double-action trigger, rough forcing cone, and all sorts of rough edges internally. Apparently this was not the zenith of Smith's QC.

The 25-5 had the nicest trigger, both single- and double-action. Fit and finish were quite good. Chamber throats were huge, and consequently accuracy was basically "minute of bad guy" at 25 yards. Not a bullseye gun.

The 25-2 had a very nice trigger, but I suspect someone other than the factory made it that way. Fit and finish were quite good. Accuracy was better than the 25-5, but not as good as the 25-9--again, really big chamber throats. It did better with hardball than lead bullets, which I suppose is to be expected. Not a bad gun, but not a target-grade gun, either.

All three guns tended to print high, much more so than my .22s, .357s or .44s, or any of my autos. This can be ameliorated somewhat with lighter bullets, such as 200-grain slugs rather than 230s or 250s, but is still irksome. All three had excellent single-action trigger pulls. All three came with the wide target triggers, hammers, and grips, which I personally do not like; some people do, though. Just sayin.'

For my money, the 25-9 is the best of the three despite its lousy QC. The problems it came with are all cheap and easy to fix--oversized chamber throats are not.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

__________________
Wishin' don't make it so.

The best years made for ANY S&W is pre 1995. Anything after that is the worst years S&W made revolvers...YES, I am talking about the MIM and LOCK.....

That is just my opinion.....
The model 25 is an awsome piece, in both 45acp and 45LC. Remember the metalurgy has changed drasticlly from the 1950's to today. Now there are a ton of short cuts being done which makes the metal stronger, and weaker at the same time.

Like the saying goes. THEY DONT MAKE THEM LIKE THEY USED TO!!!!

That is so true.

__________________
M.J.Hanna

Is this expected of the 25-9, common to the 25-9, or has on a rare occasion been seen on the 25-9?

Thanks for all the good information.

Sir, I've owned only one 25-9, so can't speak from vast experience, but I understand that proper chamber throats are expected of the 25-9 and also the 25-7. The rest of the QC, I don't know.

I've read reports here of 25-5s and 25-2s with proper size throats, but those seem to be exceptions rather than the rule. Both proper and improper throat sizes have been reported in pretty much all vintages of these two models, so there's little predictability about it. Catch as catch can.

It does seem from reports here that the later guns without the barrel pin are more likely to have proper throats.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

__________________
Wishin' don't make it so.

Im told the later models have the proper cylinder throat dimensions. The only way to tell for sure is to measure them or try my old trick. Take a jacketed .452 diameter bullet along (bullet only not a loaded round) on the inspection, open the cylinder and drop the bullet in nose first, if it falls through and bounces off your toes too big! If it drops in and stops with just the nose peeking out of the cylinder just right! Check all six chambers. I have a M-25-5 that fortunetly has the proper throat size, it's a shooter.

__________________
Stay safe people!

With 25-2's it's a **** shoot. They can be from the same year and have vastly different throats.

The 25-5's will be good if they have the three leter, four number serial number. If they have an N pre-fix, check them as VB said above. Don't use a lead bullet, and do use a .452" bullet (Hornady).

The 25-7's are well know for their accuracy.

The gun that Ron H mentioned (25-9) is the exception to the rule for that model. The 25-7's have some of the endurance upgrades, while the 25-9 has all of them.


My 25-7 is a lazer. My 25-5 is quite accurate, and it has throats that measure out at .453"

VB-where did you pick up that trick?

I passed this along to a friend with a 625-3 and he said 3 dropped straight through, 2 stuck out about 90% and only 1 had just the tip out.

I like simple tests like these.

These are all .45 Colt and not ACP, right?
Thats the only down side as I am trying to stick with the .45 ACP for now.

Maybe I should rephrase the question to ask about the ones specific to .45 ACP.

It is my understanding that some, maybe many, 25-2's had this problem, but that all the 625 guns have the throat diameter problem corrected. Of course, a particular specimen of any gun can be off spec.

Right on the money.

I have measured at least 7 or 8 of my .45 Colt handguns, made up of Smiths and Rugers. In all guns, the cylinder throats have been the same i.d., within 0.0003", according to my dial calipers. I would be quite critical of the gun that shows such a variance...unless the thing shoots good groups at 25 yards. And the "simple test" backs up my measurements.
When Jeff Quinn checked one of the Mountain guns in .45 Colt, his handloaded target ammo put five shots into less than one inch at 25 yards. My eyes aren't that good to see the sights anymore, but I'd sure like that gun.
Sonny