639 vs. 659
- Thread starter spistols
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
The 639 was produced between 1984 and 1988 and is the stainless steel model of the S&W 39. It had a single-stack magazine with a capacity of 8 rounds. Early ones had rounded trigger guard and in 1985 that was changed to a square trigger guard.
The 659 was produced between 1982 and 1989 and is the stainless steel model of the S&W 59. It has a double-stacked magazine with a capacity of 14 rounds. In 1984, the rounded trigger guard was changed to a square trigger guard.
The 659 was produced between 1982 and 1989 and is the stainless steel model of the S&W 59. It has a double-stacked magazine with a capacity of 14 rounds. In 1984, the rounded trigger guard was changed to a square trigger guard.
Last edited:
Engine49guy
Member
The 639 and 659 also had stainless steel frames unlike their predessors the 39-2 and 59 which were aluminum.
The 639 and 659 share the same barrel and slide assemblies which are interchangeable between the two models.
The earlier Model 39-2 and 59 also share barrel and slide assemblies although they have a slightly different safety system so their slide assemblies do not swap with the later 439,539,639,459,659 series.
The 639 and 659 share the same barrel and slide assemblies which are interchangeable between the two models.
The earlier Model 39-2 and 59 also share barrel and slide assemblies although they have a slightly different safety system so their slide assemblies do not swap with the later 439,539,639,459,659 series.
Last edited:
I have only pictures to add to what others have stated
639
659
639
659
GatorFarmer
Member
I believe the 639 and 659 also are notable for having the second generation improvements meant to increase reliability. I have a 459 myself, the alloy frame blued contemporary. Off the top of my head, I do not recall the changes between first and second generation guns.
loeman
Member
Here's another related question. Did all the 639s and 659s come with adjustable sights as shown in 625smith's excellent pics? Or were fixed sights available too?
Engine49guy
Member
I dont recall any 2nd gen improvements for "Reliability",
The Model 39-2 and 59 safety system was similar to the Walther P-38 and like the P-38 reportedly could have an accidental discharge under a very specific set of circumstances like worn safety/firing pin and being dropped on the hammer or in rare instances from decocking the gun.
The biggest improvement from the 1st gens to 2nd gens was the new safety system,
Other improvements were made such as the new adjustable rear site and squared trigger guard (later changed back to round), ambi safety (some versions) but 2nd gens were otherwise the same design IMO.
Interestingly Walther addressed the same safety issue when they updated the P-38 / P-1 design to the newer P-4 design .
The 639 and 659 were available with fixed or adjustable sites
The Model 39-2 and 59 safety system was similar to the Walther P-38 and like the P-38 reportedly could have an accidental discharge under a very specific set of circumstances like worn safety/firing pin and being dropped on the hammer or in rare instances from decocking the gun.
The biggest improvement from the 1st gens to 2nd gens was the new safety system,
Other improvements were made such as the new adjustable rear site and squared trigger guard (later changed back to round), ambi safety (some versions) but 2nd gens were otherwise the same design IMO.
Interestingly Walther addressed the same safety issue when they updated the P-38 / P-1 design to the newer P-4 design .
The 639 and 659 were available with fixed or adjustable sites
Last edited:
flagman1776
Member
The M39 & M39-2 hammer drop safety blocked the firing pin & but did not lock it in place, so there is a risk of AD if dropped. (Same situation as original 1911 design.)
Subsequently, a firing pin lock was incorporated, locking the firing pin unless the trigger was in the firing position. I don't own a 639/659 to compare but suspect this is the change mentioned.
Subsequently, a firing pin lock was incorporated, locking the firing pin unless the trigger was in the firing position. I don't own a 639/659 to compare but suspect this is the change mentioned.
A big difference between 639 and 659 that is really, REALLY obvious to those who own both or are very familiar with them... but may not be so obvious if you have never held them is that they feel so VERY much different in your hands from each other.
The pictures above give visual clues-- obviously, the 659 is a wider/fatter double stack while the 639 is a fairly slim and trim single stack. The 39/639 also has a curved rear profile on the grip frame and grips/stocks of a very standard or typical width. The 59/659 however is really quite -FAT- and uses a very thin plastic grip panel to try and keep the width in check, and the rear of the grip frame is far more flat rather than curved.
It is difficult to find nearly as many die-hard fans of the 59/659 in comparison to the svelte and seemingly perfect fit & feel of the original 39/39-2
Folks with small hands will likely not care much at all for a 59/659. And the original plastic grips don't offer a lot of grab to them... if you change to a grippy rubber Pachmayr, the pistol gets almost irrationally thick & bloated.
Don't mistake my words for "hate", I absolutely love my 659 and I have a blast mowing down steel plates with it. I have larger than average hands it seems... judging by my glove size, and I have always gotten along well with physically large handguns.
The pictures above give visual clues-- obviously, the 659 is a wider/fatter double stack while the 639 is a fairly slim and trim single stack. The 39/639 also has a curved rear profile on the grip frame and grips/stocks of a very standard or typical width. The 59/659 however is really quite -FAT- and uses a very thin plastic grip panel to try and keep the width in check, and the rear of the grip frame is far more flat rather than curved.
It is difficult to find nearly as many die-hard fans of the 59/659 in comparison to the svelte and seemingly perfect fit & feel of the original 39/39-2
Folks with small hands will likely not care much at all for a 59/659. And the original plastic grips don't offer a lot of grab to them... if you change to a grippy rubber Pachmayr, the pistol gets almost irrationally thick & bloated.
Don't mistake my words for "hate", I absolutely love my 659 and I have a blast mowing down steel plates with it. I have larger than average hands it seems... judging by my glove size, and I have always gotten along well with physically large handguns.
Similar threads
