Popularity of metal/alloy S&W pistols?

[Targetshooter08]

The metal and aluminum framed pistols aren't made anymore (AFAIK). IIRC, there was 1st through 4th generation models.

Are they still popular with some concealed carriers and competitors?

 

[Sevens]

There was never a 4th Generation. Their popularity now is relative -- on this forum, their popularity is HIGH. Out in the world, their popularity has waned.

 

[S-W4EVER]

The vast majority of S&W pistols and revolvers will outlive the people that own them and there is really no reason to replace something that is perfectly serviceable. I still have the Model 59 I purchased new when I was in college (1977).

 

[stansdds]

There were only 3 generations.
First: Models 39, 39-2, 59.
Second: Models x39, x59, x69, x45
Third: 4-digit models with the exception of the budget line such as the 457, 909, 910, 410, 411, etc and the CS (Chief's Special) line.


They are still quite popular, a 6946 has been and continues to be my daily carry weapon.

 

[max]

I carry a 669 daily.

 

[Rlg#17]

I wouldn't hesitate at all to carry, shoot, etc with any of those generations of pistols. Parts may be a bit hard to locate, but the seem to just keep running well! Much better then the current offerings from S&W! My personal experience ranges from the 39-2, up to a 4506, both carrying and maintaining them. (S&W factory armorer!)

Regards, Rick Gibbs

 

[RufusG]

Some refer to the TSWs as the fourth generation. Since you can AFAIK swap more parts between a second and non-TSW third gen than with a TSW it's a fair point.

 

[murphydog]

It's not a direct comparison, but the new CSX seems to be selling well, indicating there is some demand for metal pistols.

 

[quikdraw67]

Some refer to the TSWs as the fourth generation. Since you can AFAIK swap more parts between a second and non-TSW third gen than with a TSW it's a fair point.

I disagree with the TSW series being considered a 4th Generation.

If S&W continues to bring out alloy frame pistols like the CSX, I would consider them a 4th Generation.

JMHO YMMV.

 

[BigBoy99]

When the Glock 21 came out, I bought one and on the return from my first trip to the range with it, I used it as a deposit on a SIG P220. My one and only experience with polymer frames has convience me that metal frames are the only way to go with handguns. Just my $0.02.

 

[PALADIN85020]

I still consider the 3913NL the best discreet carry 9mm that S&W ever made. I'm glad I own it!

John

 

[Green Frog]

I have no interest in Combat Tupperware. My Model 639 based Franken-Smith was assembled from the parts with features I like and unless I do something stupid with it, my eldest grand nephew will probably inherit it from my estate.

 

[Heinz]

I have a 645 and a 5906TSW. They both get carried and regularly shot. I don't carry both at once, that would be heavy.

I will admit I am old fashioned, but I prefer steel in guns I have to rely on. Both guns are very comfortable to shoot. The 9mm holds so many rounds you almost get bored by the end of the magazine. The 45 ACP is never boring.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

The metal and aluminum framed pistols aren't made anymore (AFAIK). IIRC, there was 1st through 4th generation models.

Are they still popular with some concealed carriers and competitors?

Last time I looked (anyway) aluminum was still considered to be a metal...?

My satisfaction with my 3913 is the primary reason I never really felt the need to jump on the Shield Bandwagon: and they are obviously a wonderful line of pistols!

Just look at what the original Shield started! (Well, for the most part...?)

Cheers!

 

[oysterer]

Steel on Aluminum guns are not of interest to me. Alu wears different and lifespan will be limited. Love carbon steel on carbon steel. Got a 226 Legion and that's the only exception. Not shooting it either. Recoil on Alu frame guns is also never as good as on a steel/steel pistol.

 

[Sevens]

I'd like to counter the bolded portion of your quote.

In spirit and in practice, I do agree with you. By far, most of my semiauto pistols are steel on steel and I own few aluminum alloy frame handguns.

Most of my handguns are for pure shooting enjoyment, I reserve only a select few for carry.

Steel on Aluminum guns are not of interest to me. Alu wears different and lifespan will be limited. Love carbon steel on carbon steel. Got a 226 Legion and that's the only exception. Not shooting it either. Recoil on Alu frame guns is also never as good as on a steel/steel pistol.

Intellectual honesty matters here. While the argument is true, you're talking about tens of thousands of rounds typically, so you're talking about ammo costs (even if you handload) that greatly exceed the cost of the pistol.

Making the argument that an alloy frame won't hold up is much like the argument that only lead bullets are good for a barrel and that jacketed bullets are going to wear out a barrel much, much faster.

This argument is also technically true, but in actual practice, it's a questionable argument.

Another questionable argument is that a handgun that you never, ever shoot with live ammo is certainly going to live a longer functional life than a handgun that you actually send 400 rounds through each year. True, for sure, but a very questionable argument.

Alloy framed handguns (especially S&W 1-2-3rd Gen handguns) have shown over more than half a century that they can handle a heavy volume of shooting and the volume of shooting required to attack the weaker alloy frame amounts to ammo that far exceeds the cost of the gun.

Similarly, traffic accidents claim countless lives all across the planet, this is not up for debate, this is true. If all motorized vehicles were governed to limit speed to 25 mph and never exceed, we could wipe out such a massive portion of traffic fatalities that it would be stunning.

We aren't going to do that. And an alloy framed semiautomatic is a phenomenal choice for a duty/carry gun for anyone who is going to wear that on their belt for 12-16 hours a day. Regardless of the "shortened" lifespan.

 

[oysterer]

I shoot 1,000/month and in the USPSA I have never seen an alloy frame gun of a sort. That's where the CZ75 and clones, 2011s etc rule the roost.

Plus all of the alloy frames are awful clunky and ill balanced anyway. I got a Dan Wesson PM-C 9mm, officer/commander. Ohhh sexy gun, slim, balanced, got to love it. No cracking there.

 

[Rock185]

I don't know if they are popular with competitors, but the &Ws are still popular with me for carry.

BTW, I agree with Oysterer and Sevens about steel vs. aluminum frames. For maximum longevity, I prefer a steel frame. But, I have seen steel framed guns crack too. That being said, I have S&Ws with aluminum alloy frames, one owned for over 20 years. It was my duty gun for a few years, and now in my CCW rotation. This, along with an alloy framed 9mm I've probably owned for about 15 years, are both in my carry rotation. The aluminum alloy frames have not cracked, broken, or crumbled.

I've also had several aluminum framed SIGs. Carried one every working day for several years, trained with it, shot it recreationally, etc. Same overall experience, i.e., no issues with the aluminum alloy frame.

About 40 years ago IIRC, I did have an alloy framed Colt Commander crack, so I realize it could happen, but it's nothing I have any particular concern about.

 

[Sevens]

Agree that I wouldn't task an alloy frame gun with high volume competition shooting. Weight savings isn't a typical goal in a competition gun.

 

[DUSTYDOGDAN]

Smith & Wesson 457 , 4013 single stack or 4013TSW Double stack along with a 3913 Lady Smith is a good choice.