I ran across this post browsing a forum. Thoughts? Do you agree with the "Gold Standard" comment?

The model 19 is, in my not-so-humble-opinion, the best balance of power, practicality and handling anyone's ever seen. Medium frame: easy to carry, handles and points like a dream. Powerful Caliber: drops badguys DEAD, with the option of soft-shooting .38 Special. The Model 19, or "Combat Magnum" as it was originally called, was the Gold Standard for police sidearms from it's introduction in 1955 until the "wundernine" revolution of the 1980s. Accurate, powerful and ergonomically perfect. What more could you ask for?

__________________
Aaron Terry

There is a whole lotta truth in that saying - it sounds like something our fellow member 18DAI would say!

Regards,

Jerry

I have a 66 which, as we all know, is the 19's stainless cousin. A terrific gun in every sense of the word except that I find it a little on the light side for the heavier magnum rounds. I save my 27 for that chore.

While I can imagine situations where I might choose one of my other sidearms, I have to say when I open the safe my hand always seems to reach for the m19 or m66 first. I think it is a truly magnificent design.

That quote, or something very similar, could have come from most any of the popular gun magazines in the 60s and 70s, along with Bill Jordan's "peace officer's dream" statement.

__________________
Georgia On My Mind

I don't remember writing that, but I sure could have! I agree with every single word.

I agree wholeheartedly. The Model 19 and 66 are perfect. I have both and carry them without hesitation.

Yes, it is. Regards 18DAI.

__________________
7 +1 Rounds of hope & change

Well said! The M-19/66 may not be THE perfect gun for all things........ but it's pretty damned close. Carried one for years on the job and NEVER felt undergunned.

If you had to choose ONE pistol out of the safe to do it all. One of my 4" 66's would probably be THE CHOICE. And if I could take two....... I'd grab a 6" K-22.


FN in MT

As all us old guys know, the 19 was developed specifically for police carry at the urging of Bill Jordan. I would agree that it is the perfect revolver for police carry-not too heavy, but plenty powerful.

However, for hunting or any application where any considerable amount of full power .357 loads are going to be fired, there are better choices. I owned a Model 19 back in the early 70s, and I know from experience that full power .357 magnum loads were absolutely punishing. I owned a three-screw Ruger flat top Blackhawk in the same caliber, and it was much more comfortable with the same loads. I later owned a Model 27 and a Model 28, and either of those was much more suitable for a regular diet of magnum loads.

So yes, it was/is the "gold standard" for police carry, but not for someone who was/is going to consume large amounts of magnum loads.

__________________
Georgia On My Mind

The 19 is too small in my opinion. The perfect 357 is the model 27.

Quite possible the M19/66 could be considered the best ALL AROUND handgun ever produced. If it isn't the winner, it's certainly in the top two or three. IMHO, of course.

When some one mentions 357 magnum the first gun that pops into my mind is a picture of a 19 or 66 with that distinct half lug look....in the 2.5" 4 that is classic S&W.

__________________
M.J.Hanna

Nothing like a 19.

I echo the sentiment that the Models 19 and 66 are "just right" in almost all respects.

I did a two-page article on the Model 19 which appeared in the center of the December '08 issue of Dillon's Blue Press catalog/magazine. I'm not sure if the web site (dillonprecision.com) still might have it available online. You could call Dillon at 1-800-223-4570 and perhaps they could send you a back copy of that issue.

I've done a number of articles (the "classic handguns" series) on S&W handguns for Dillon. You can get a free subscription to the Blue Press by calling the number above.

John

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

I would put caveats on the short statement that is the title of this thread.

But reading your entire original post, it puts in the justifications.... without saying the basic negative of a 19... the medium frame can't take a constant pounding of Mag loads.

I find it a perfect balance, perfect frame size... the best revolver I've owned.

But it's not the tank my Ruger GP100 is, but the Ruger's trigger and lock work don't feel as refined as my 19 does.

I can see carrying the 19 , if I was an LEO and my life depended on it.

Mine was owned by two LEO's since it's birth, and now I own it.
It was tired , and cylinder shot out, lock work tired, and forcing cone eroded, from I assume a steady diet of mag loads.

I think a 1911 is right there for weight, ergonomics (for me), and slender profile for carry and relative punch.

My two favorite center fire pistols to shoot is a 4" 19 and a 1911.
I can shoot both all day long, just perfect (to me) and great engineering.

If I had to have only one .357 it would be my 4 inch Model 19. I am a little too mature to enjoy full bore loads anymore so I load to suit both me and the gun. Any full bore loads that I shoot go in an N Frame.

If it's not the best, it's among the top two.
Here's a couple of 3"

Newer than 1980 but still a great gun 19-6 19-7 top

As a field shooter, I certainly could get along quite nicely with just a Model 19, and be happy. It is a very versatile design, and though your question addresses that from a LE perspective, the 19 is just as well-balanced to a field shooter. Sure a .22 will do some things better, just as a .44 will, but overall, with just one gun - how could you improve on the 19?

On another level, of interest to me, personally, speaking as someone who has worked around metal cutting all his life, I think it is the outstanding creation of its type that I have seen. When I was a lad, the Python had a determined following that split the difference in the S&W camp between the 19- and 27-devotees, viz. portability and durability. Of course what it gained in frame size/weight over the 27, it seemed to lose right back with its heavy barrel - and its finickiness. I couldn't see it, as any sort of a problem solver. And while I do not imply that the Python is not a quality weapon, the elegance factor is just not there, in my view.

I sure like mine!

So what do you all think of the Model 19/66 vs. the 586/686? The L Frames are magnificent guns and of course more durable with certain loads but they just don't seem to have the balance of a 19 or a 27 to me.

I have always felt the 686 as some kind of Frankengun, like putting a Ferrari engine in a Chevy Tahoe and wondering why it just didn't feel right.. I don't know. Maybe if I had never started out shooting K and N frames the L frame would seem "perfect" to me.

__________________
Aaron Terry

my 4 inch 19 has seen a lot of use. still shoots great. i long for the day when you could pick them up clean for 200-250 a pop and i'm not even 35!

i take my 19 every time we go camping. it was my first revolver i bought with my own money. fun to shoot cheap 38's but can be quickly loaded with major league stuff. nothing wrong with keeping hard cast 180s in it for a backup while rifle hunting. if you really need it you wont notice the blast or recoil

the 4 inch just handles so well. so very well balanced.

just found a line on another P&R 19 but it has severe cosmetic issues and the price is steep at 599
waiting for the price to come down a bit

I think the 19 and 66 are the best looking Smiths ever made - sleek is the word that comes to mind. Further, a 4-inch model feels just right in my hand.

What he said.

Won't get into the "vs." thing, as I now like both models. When the 586 first hit the road, probably like most S&W hacks, I was appalled.

I still have a bit of a hard time with the barrel profile, but do admit it does make the guns a lot nicer to shoot with .357 Magnum loads (same for the design in the 29 & 629 with 44 Magnums), and the 586s I have had have shot exceedingly well. As the years passed, I had to grudgingly admit I liked the 586s and quit bad-mouthing them because of the similarity in the shape of their barrels compared with those of the other brand.

I still believe a 586 with a traditional barrel would be a great gun and would like to have one, but have never gone to the trouble to arrange one for the experiment. It is easy enough to remove the non-functional part of the full-length lug, but it is not so easy to do it and make it look right.