Does anyone know if a model 52 slide and barrel mate up with an early 59 no dash frame or did smith specialize the lower?

As far as I know, the M52 lower is unique and trying to fit a M52 slide/barrel will just be frustrating.

I don’t know whether you are hoping to build a double stack Model 52 in 38 Spl, but if you are, consider how hard it is to get a single stack mag to handle the rimmed case. I have serious reservations about trying to get a double stack magazine of 38 Spl rimmed cases to function reliably.

Froggie

Kinda like putting a Ferrari V12 in a Chevy!

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

A double stack magazine 38 Special? I agree with Green Frog, it's probably going to be a genuine jam-o-matic.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

That would be an interesting application in the Corvair convertible in the garage... might need some better tires and brakes though.

Uhhhhh... yeah, definitely better tires and brakes!

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Besides the fact that you have no hope of getting a magazine to fit or work...

This question appears from time to time and more often, the poster is asking if you can fit a 52 upper on to a 39/39-2 lower and there are problems here too. Could this happen, could this work? I believe it could work, but I think there are too many reasons to not do it.

Such as:

--the 52 top end is a hand fitted part, mated to a frame, so if you want to make it work on some other frame, it will either be too loose (no good solution here unless you are a gunsmithing wizard, and if you were, you have plenty of better projects to work on) or it will be too tight, where you would need to take down the 39/39-2 frame... which is alloy. Also not going to be a great idea.

--a 52 top end exists out in the world but this is definitely not something you will find easily. And to simply take a top end -OFF- a 52 to place it on a 39/39-2 goes far beyond the definition of "stupid." If anyone disagrees, I would love to hear the thought process. Did you want an alloy frame lighter Bullseye pistol? Did you think an alloy frame is better than a factory fitted steel one? And, to the next huge point:

--the 52 trigger is one of the most amazing triggers in the complete history of production semiautomatic pistol in man's history. If you wanted to make a trigger better than a Model 52, using a Model 39/39-2 frame is not your answer unless there is LSD involved.

So the original question is thought provoking and has been pondered before, but it's a dead end. The reference above about putting a Ferrari V-12 in to a Chevy is a good comparison. If a Ferrari V-12 was a cheap crate motor than anyone and everyone could purchase for the cost of a new TV, then maybe it's an idea with merit. However, getting a Ferrari engine is no simple, low-cost endeavor. And if you happened to have a Ferrari sitting in your garage and you pull the engine from it and drop it in to your '85 Camaro, then you have lost your mind.

There are few things that may be considered impossible and afraid this project is one of them...

__________________
S&W factory revolver armorer

[QUOTE=Green Frog;141062938]That would be an interesting application in the Corvair convertible in the garage... might need some better tires and brakes though. :

Hey, Froggie is that there Airvair 'vertible an early 1st gen model with the beloved Ralph Nader "end swapping" VW bug style swing axles or one of the '65 and later models with the vastly superior Corvette style rear suspension?

Oh, and is it a Spyder (turbocharged)?

re: The model 52 slide on a 59 frame.

I've never had the slightest interest in the archaic model 52, its bizarre archaic cartridge, or for that matter, the archaic game of "bullseye" (other than a weird curiosity, at best), however, with all the "experts" proclaiming that it "can't be done", it makes me want to fit a model 52 slide to a model 59 frame (and shoot it) for no other reason than darn contrariness.

And Yes, I believe I could make it work.

John

P.S. I apologize for the snark,but I've been on the phone with cell phone carriers and I'm ready to bite the head off of the next contradicting "Customer No-Service" Representative with which I'll have the distinct displeasure of her garbled unintelligibility.

C’mon Sevens, don’t hold back. Tell us how you really feel? Truth to tell, we’re actually on the same page here.

JohnHL, it’s actually a second Gen car, a ‘67, I think. It’s a Monza with the two one barrel carbs. My Dad had an extensive rebuild done on it about 30 years ago and now it’s owned by niece and was last seen on the lift having work done on that legendary rear end.
As for the double stack mag for 38 Spl rimmed cartridges, I’m sure it would be possible for someone determined enough to do it, but the question remains, “Why?” What would the end result be for all that work?

Froggie

JohnHL, this is WAY too easy since it won’t cost me a single dime to throw down the gauntlet, but prove it. I think you are way out in the weeds if you tell us that you could get a Model 59 frame to feed and function with .38 Wadcutter ammo in a gun you built with a 52 top end.

Now since it is (most likely) your customer service frustration that has fueled your post, I have no problem giving you a pass on the idea that you could actually make this work and agree that we are simply having fun with the subject but on a serious note, I am half shocked that you are professing no interest whatsoever in any 52 when we both know how much respect you have for Mr. Dwayne Charron, and the 52 is with no doubt his most fantastic single accomplishment at S&W, where he certainly had many.

For that reason alone, I’m a little perplexed at the tone of your post.

The S&W Model 52 and it’s descendants have a magic and an aura to them. It’s my opinion that if a handgun lover were to handle one and be lucky enough to shoot one and came away unimpressed in every way, that person needs their head and heart checked.

My dear honorable Forum Brother Sevens, I respectfully beg to differ...

The talented and prolific Dwayne Charron (for whom I am unfit to carry water) and the team at S&W were able to make a model 39 frame feed and function with the .38 wadcutter and we all know that the model 59 frame is simply a model 39 with a widened magazine well.

Modifying the magazine (tweaking the feed lips, possibly staggering the rimmed cartridges) would seem to be the biggest challenge.

I must agree that I was somewhat frustrated by my week long travails with the cellphone racket and its toadies.

But I am also dismayed by the lack of support when an O.P. posts a notion and it is immediately shot down by the "intelligentsia".

I say, "Bravo. Go for it." and may practicality be damned!

Dwayne Charron is one of the very few "heroes" in my life, based entirely upon his accomplishments.

However, it's my maddening (to others) ability to compartmentalize (heavy on the "mental") that allows me to simultaneously appreciate the engineering and craftsmanship that went in to the design of the model 52 and yet, have no interest in its niche.

On a similar note, I built many specialized motorcycles and ATVs for a variety of uses (motocross, flat track, drag race, road course, custom, street cruise, touring, etc.).

I enjoyed building and riding them, but my passion was always for building large displacement street rockets that would handle, stop, start easily, idle, and pull like a Saturn 5 out of a corner.

No mean feat.

That particular subset of motorcycling may also suggest my passion for combat handguns.

No argument there.

As I earlier related, part of my frustration was due to a week long immersion into the piracy of the cell phone business and its lackeys.

All week long it had been "bait and switch" by the c/s (make that b/s) folks.

We were told that while we qualified for the discounted service, "internal problems" dictated that we could only get the much more expensive plan.

Last night, when I had finally had enough, I sent a rather pointed e-mail to the CEO of the difficult company.

Within 15 minutes, one of his subordinates was on the phone with my wife, acquiescing to the lower priced plan we had originally chosen and GIVING us one of the two new smart phones for which we were previously willing to pay.

Like I said, I can make things work!

John

Methinks you take the “intelligentsia” thing too seriously.

This isn’t a guy asking if he can turn his decocker in to a hammer block that doesn’t drop the hammer.

If you are going to show us that this CAN be done, I’ll suggest that you weld or solder a bunch of metal INSIDE the cavernous 59 magazine well, and make that wide body hold a 52 magazine. That would be easier than getting a double stack 9mm magazine to feed .38 Wadcutter I’ll bet.

In the end you won’t get to enjoy the 52 trigger or the fantastic steel frame and comfortable, natural single stack design, but then again, it’s a lousy idea so a lousy result should be expected.

While the O.P.'s notion or idea, may be impractical, unusual, even intriguing, it is hardly "lousy".

One of the most telling signs of intelligence is the ability to see connections in seemingly disparate items.

The O.P. certainly did, and for that he deserves encouragement for his vision.

John

Don’t know why I’m letting myself get dragged in to this but if you take a legendary pistol and find HALF the reasons that it’s phenomenal, discard them and willfully replace them with inferior parts, then yes, I’m comfortable calling that a lousy idea.

Next, we can take a Davis P-32 and a S&W 3913 and mesh them. Could this work? Ummmmm, maybe? But I’ll go out on a limb and say that neither donor gun is going to be improved and the work, cost, time and energy would be poorly managed in the project.

Rube Goldberg might give it a thumbs-up.

While we are at it, please don’t assign emotion where there was none. Your take really makes it sound like the OP is or should claim victim status when some of us point out that this is not at all a good idea, regardless of whether or not it is possible. And making a victim here isn’t my angle. Quite opposite, I’d like to save someone some time and money from pursuing a lousy idea.

John, I hope you run out of your monthly data limit before you can reply! (now that there WAS a joke...)

I hope Mr. Charron reads this idea and rolls his eyes.

"Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?"

John

My grasp is going to choose a steel frame if that’s on the menu.

And I’ll bring two of my e-friends back from the brink by saying I prefer single stack in 9mm with a (stainless) steel frame and upgraded target sighted blue slide. I want more dependability and versatility than a would give with a 38 Spl - that’s why I’ve got a K38, and I want more comfort and concealability than a double stacker gives, so I spend several months bugging you guys while I build my Model 639 Franken-Smith.

BUUUTTT, if the OP has a dream for a double stack 38 Spl target gun and is willing to spend the time and money to accomplish his quest, I say more power to him. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it!

Froggie

I might be throwing gasoline on a dying fire, but I do have two complete Model 52 parts sets. If a serious effort was to be made to high cap a 52, i'm in.

Everything but the frame.

Even on the Smith & Wesson Forum, never argue with a Browning!

John

Well, when I rebuilt my 469, I fit it with a model 52 single action trigger with upper and lower stops. All the benefits of a Mod 52 trigger pull. Wood stocks also. Now, on to that tricky magazine.

I like the extra detail on the controls too!