TWO PIECE BARREL?

Some one please tell me about S&W making two piece barrels.
True or false? Why would they do that? Jerry

Absolutely TRUE.

Most folks will tell you that it is because it allows the firearm to be produced for less money. This is mainly due to the savings in assembly cost. Traditionalists hate the design. I admit it is not a elegant as the one piece barrel.

However, as a bonus it increases the accuracy of the firearm. The tensioned barrel concept has been in use by Dan Wesson for decades. Their patent expired several years ago.

Uniformity in B/C gap from revolver to revolver has also been improved with the multi piece design.

The multi piece barrel assemblies (2, 3 or 4 pieces) are producing some outstandingly accurate revolvers. My 2" and 5" 327s are fantastic (both 3 pieces). I have at lease 6 other multi piece barrel assembly S&Ws and all are GREAT performers.

Jerry, just to begin the answers (and I don't know much about this topic) I know they've begun to do this within the last few years on certain revolver models where weight is a factor but it also saves manufacturing costs as well. The idea is to have a light weight metal shroud around a rifled steel inner lining or core.....again, to save weight. I believe this particular line of revolvers have scandium alloy frames and barrel shrouds and stainless steel cylinders and, I think, stainless steel barrels within the shroud. I believe the "Night Guard" series are made like that.

You can check the S&W website and look at the "Night Guard" series and see, but I don't think the technicals will mention anything about the two-piece barrels.

Hoping other more knowledgeable folks will chime in here.

Sounds as if one great big bill of goods has been sold to some misinformed believers! Sleeved barrels are nothing new and were tested among the precision rifle shooting community over 20 years ago. Since that time they have been reintroduced and tested time and time again yielding the same results - not so good. There is absolutely no advantage to sleeved barrels with the exception of weight reduction - period. The rifle bench rest community clearly found that not only accuracy was not improved but conversely it diminished with sleeved barrels due to an interference with harmonics. Testing results of handguns (when using standard mechanical accuracy testing fixtures) have shown that absolutely no improvement in accuracy has resulted. However, it was not diminished as with rifles barrels merely because the impact upon barrel harmonics is reduced with shortened barrel lengths. I would wager, however, that there may be a negative impact upon an 8 3/8" or longer barrel. Unquestionably whether or not a barrel is sleeved has nothing to do with the throating, chambering or fit and alignment.

firearmsunlimited said:

Sounds as if one great big bill of goods has been sold to some misinformed believers! Sleeved barrels are nothing new and were tested among the precision rifle shooting community over 20 years ago. Since that time they have been reintroduced and tested time and time again yielding the same results - not so good. There is absolutely no advantage to sleeved barrels with the exception of weight reduction - period. The rifle bench rest community clearly found that not only accuracy was not improved but conversely it diminished with sleeved barrels due to an interference with harmonics. Testing results of handguns (when using standard mechanical accuracy testing fixtures) have shown that absolutely no improvement in accuracy has resulted. However, it was not diminished as with rifles barrels merely because the impact upon barrel harmonics is reduced with shortened barrel lengths. I would wager, however, that there may be a negative impact upon an 8 3/8" or longer barrel. Unquestionably whether or not a barrel is sleeved has nothing to do with the throating, chambering or fit and alignment.

Click to expand...

The problem with your analysis is that it has nothing to do with S&W.

S&W does not use sleeved barrels, they use tensioned barrels.

Precision rifle makers like Volquartsen and others have proven the performance advantages of tensioned barrels time and again over the last several decades.

Hi guys, Thanks for all the great information. Jerry

If you do a forum search, you will find some photos and discussion about complete failures of the sleeved/tension/multi-piece/whatever barrels in normal service. For example, the barrel literally falling off the gun! If that is an improved product, I'll stick with the unimproved version. I realize there may be some theoretical accuracy advantages to these new barrels, but I am not sure that means very much to the average revolver shooter.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/93537-s-w-blow-up-fall-off-2-pics.html

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/102430-new-style-barrels.html

The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!

A major maker had "normal" barrels falling off the revolvers (due to using the wrong lubricant when assembling them). "Stuff" happens...

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a two piece barrel. If you don't like them, then don't buy them. However, slamming them for sheer prejudice is pathetic.

I'm pretty happy with my example:



FWIW
Dale53

Dale,
I agree with you AND what type of wood grips is that?
Steve

My only experiance with them has been the model 64's (not 65's )that lost barrels..while working with the NC DOC.
That my friend is not a internet myth..I saw it with my own eyes.
Like anything else ,I'm sure they have made inprovements and the newer guns are improved but I humbly submit I'd not own one .

Patrick

Anyone got a copy of that memo from S&W to dealers telling them the two piece barrels were being discontinued? It was posted here about six months ago.

Wonder why S&W is cancelling these "wonderful innovations"?

18DAI said:

Anyone got a copy of that memo from S&W to dealers telling them the two piece barrels were being discontinued? It was posted here about six months ago.

Wonder why S&W is cancelling these "wonderful innovations"?

Click to expand...

Gee, does that mean they are going to discontinue "tensioned" barrels after they have been proven for decades to be so outstanding by a company that specializes in .22 rim fire barrels. Let's see, sleeved or tensioned - isn't that a matter of semantics? Why that must mean that Krieger, Shilen, Hart, Lilja, BarSto, Douglas and Pac Nor just don't understand barrel making.

colt_saa said:

The problem with your analysis is that it has nothing to do with S&W.

S&W does not use sleeved barrels, they use tensioned barrels.

Precision rifle makers like Volquartsen and others have proven the performance advantages of tensioned barrels time and again over the last several decades.

Click to expand...

Clearly you shouldn't dis another poster's opinion when you obviously have no conception or understanding of how certain internal and external stimuli impact the yield of something. To make the statement that: "your analysis has nothing to do with S&W" is ridiculous. If S&W uses barrels on the firearms everything in my analysis is completely applicable. Possibly you are under the convoluted impression that there is some significant difference between rifle and pistol barrels that makes pistol barrels exempt from the normal stimuli effects that impact accuracy.

Further more you should be a little more careful about misleading statements like "not sleeved - tensioned." Here is a quote from your beloved Volquartsen barrel company, who buy the way, only specializes in .22 rim fire barrels:

"The carbon fiber or aluminum sleeve is “tensioned” on the barrel to provide a very rigid, accurate, lightweight barrel. This is the ultimate lightweight barrel in terms of accuracy and functioning." I believe that they used the word "SLEEVE" didn't they?

Of the major barrel makers who are renowned for accuracy, namely: Kreiger, Shilen, Hart, Lilja, Douglas, BarSto and PacNor be advised that NONE of them produce SLEEVED barrels. Maybe you could send them your dissertation on the virtues of barrel SLEEVES that are tensioned to the barrel and they will modify their thinking about how accuracy barrels should be manufactured.

Sleeved traditionally has a different meaning from "tensioned" when applied to handgun (and rifle) barrels. Sleeved generally means a rifled insert in either a shot-out & drilled-out bore, or a steel insert in an otherwise synthetic barrel. The inserts are not usually user removable.

Tensioned traditionally means a removable rifled tube in a handgun barrel shroud that's supported at both ends by a method of applying pressure at the muzzle to create tension at the rearward point of contact.

The two actually are, within their traditional meaning & usage, quite different.
Sleeves are normally pressure fitted & held in place by some sort of tight friction fit, glue, and/or soldering. They are not normally threaded for retention.
Tensioned HANDGUN barrels are only retained in place by either a muzzle nut (DW) or a muzzle flange (S&W), and they are retained by some type of threading at one end.

There is obviously some overlap depending on how a given company may choose to describe its products.

S&W IS dropping the two-piece barrel on at least two revolvers, and where the idea will go from there is unknown.

S&W's method is also quite different from the older Dan Wesson method, and is not user adjusted, removed, or replaced.

Denis

Dale53 said:

The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!

A major maker had "normal" barrels falling off the revolvers (due to using the wrong lubricant when assembling them). "Stuff" happens...

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a two piece barrel. If you don't like them, then don't buy them. However, slamming them for sheer prejudice is pathetic.

I'm pretty happy with my example:

FWIW
Dale53

Click to expand...

Dale53,
What is the make and brand of that red dot scope you use? Is it any good? Thanks for your help.
Cary

Iggy said:

Click to expand...

+1 still interesting though.

n4zov said:

If you do a forum search, you will find some photos and discussion about complete failures of the sleeved/tension/multi-piece/whatever barrels in normal service. For example, the barrel literally falling off the gun! If that is an improved product, I'll stick with the unimproved version. I realize there may be some theoretical accuracy advantages to these new barrels, but I am not sure that means very much to the average revolver shooter.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/93537-s-w-blow-up-fall-off-2-pics.html

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/102430-new-style-barrels.html

Click to expand...

Maybe you should look at the photo more closely. That is not a 2 piece barrel. It is an L frame with a conventional barrel that separated from the frame due to a failure of the metal at the base of the threads. The gun is in two pieces, but it was a conventional one piece barrel.

firearmsunlimited said:

Clearly you shouldn't dis another poster's opinion when you obviously have no conception or understanding of how certain internal and external stimuli impact the yield of something. To make the statement that: "your analysis has nothing to do with S&W" is ridiculous. If S&W uses barrels on the firearms everything in my analysis is completely applicable. Possibly you are under the convoluted impression that there is some significant difference between rifle and pistol barrels that makes pistol barrels exempt from the normal stimuli effects that impact accuracy.

Further more you should be a little more careful about misleading statements like "not sleeved - tensioned." Here is a quote from your beloved Volquartsen barrel company, who buy the way, only specializes in .22 rim fire barrels:

"The carbon fiber or aluminum sleeve is “tensioned” on the barrel to provide a very rigid, accurate, lightweight barrel. This is the ultimate lightweight barrel in terms of accuracy and functioning." I believe that they used the word "SLEEVE" didn't they?

Of the major barrel makers who are renowned for accuracy, namely: Kreiger, Shilen, Hart, Lilja, Douglas, BarSto and PacNor be advised that NONE of them produce SLEEVED barrels. Maybe you could send them your dissertation on the virtues of barrel SLEEVES that are tensioned to the barrel and they will modify their thinking about how accuracy barrels should be manufactured.

Click to expand...

WOW. I have seen nerves get touched on unenlightened folks in the past, but I have never seen anyone blow up like you have. Where does all this anger come from?

I am glad that your brief reading of my posts during your short tenure on this fine forum has told you everything about my conceptions and understandings of stimuli. Or do you always resort to insults as your first tactic when you are on the wrong end of a intellectual conversation?

The quote "your beloved Volquartsen barrel company" is another stretch of your imagination. How have you ascertained how I feel about Volquartsen?

You actually went looking for a single word from Volquartsen that you could quote out of context in order to prove your point? You must have lots more free time on your hands than most working people.

Just because a barrel assembly contains a sleeve among it's parts list does not make it a sleeved barrel. Sleeved and tensioned barrels are different concepts.

Other forum members have already posted trying to explain to you the differences between traditional sleeved barrels and traditional tensioned barrels. We will see if you choose to open your eyes and learn a new fact or just remain stubborn and in the dark.

I'm surprized that the Dan Wesson revolvers haven't been discussed yet. They all featured a tensioned barrel and were renowned for their accuracy and dominated silhouette shooting for at least 30 years and some still use them. BTW, Dan Wesson was the grandson of one of S&W's founders and went out on his own when the company showed no interest in his concept of a barrel mounted under tension within a surrounding shroud. Since Dan Wesson firearms were a pretty small operation, at many times the Quality of the guns produced was determined by the cash on hand in the company coffers. So, many times during DW's history there were guns produced thatt required the attention of a good gunsmith before the first shot could be fired. Mis-timed guns, guns with out of square cylinder faces, and badly machined chambers were common complaints. In spite of all these issues, silhouette shooters kept on buying them because there wasn't another revolver made that could even approach the accuracy of a DW that was set up properly.

Fact is, a simple Engineering Statics and Dynamics analysis will reveal that a barrel under tension and supported at each end will be less prone to movement when a round is fired through it and less sensitive to harmonics. This means that the barrel will be more accurate than a one piece barrel and less sensitive to bullet weight and velocity.

S&W's 2 piece barrels are basically a copy of the concept that Dan Wesson first tried to interest the company in back in the late 60's. However, it's been modified from the original Dan Wesson design in that the barrel is formed with a flanged cap at the end of the barrel that engages the barrel shroud. Dan Wesson revolvers were threaded into the frame and retained at the end of the shroud by a nut that threaded onto the end of the barrel. This allowed the Barrel/Cylinder gap to be set and adjusted by the user in the field in order to optimize accuracy. Unfortunately, this also allowed the shooter to mal-adjust that B/C gap and I suspect that this is the reason why S&W changed to a capped barrel and also why CZ USA has chosen to halt production of the Dan Wesson revolvers. Basically, liability concerns have taken the option of an adjustable B/C gap out of the hands of a shooter.

Now, I happen to own a S&W model 620, which uses a 2 piece barrel and I believe that it's the most accurate S&W that I own. On 2 seperate occasions I've manage 3 shot cloverleafs at 30 feet with it that could be completely covered with a dime. However, that was with the iron sights and I've recently discovered the benefits of optics. Ive also started using a nearby indoor 50 yard rifle range for long range practice with my 610 and 617. Sometime in the next month I'll be purchasing a J Point reflex in a direct mount for the 610 and plan on trying it out on the 620. At which point I'll get a better idea if the 620 can shoot with my 6 inch 617 at 100 feet, the longest distance at which my old eyes can still see the contrasting bullseye on an 8 inch shoot-n-c in the poor lighting at this range. I suspect I'll find the 620 is capable of shooting well under 2 inches, my limit with the 617, at this range and may even get down to an inch or less.

Fact is, these barrels produce a revolver with accuracy that borders on stunning. Frankly, I suspect in the coming years the 620 will become a bit of a collectable once enough people catch on to the accuracy that this model is capable of. I also suspect that the reason that the 2 piece barrels are being dropped from some guns is that they cost more to produce. Unlike some who state that these are a cost cutting scheme, I happen to have been directly involved in Manufacturing since 1982 as a Manufacturing and Design Engineer. So, I am well acquainted with the costs that are incurred as parts counts are increased. There are overhead costs for each part that many ourside the field don't account for, such as the requirement for Quality control measures and inventory tracking. S&W may have implemented this design by analyzing just the Machining costs and have now found that when the costs for ISO 9000 implementation are added in, the higher parts count for the 2 piece barrels don't actually result in a cost savings. It's also a fact that the 2 piece barrels on the models that used these barrels were not well recieved by some shooters.

IMO, it's a loss for us shooters. We've not only lost the potential for accuracy these barrels can exhibit, we've also lost some of the drive for improvement that S&W exhibited when they tried makings guns with this feature. BTW, one thing I have found in using my 610, which has a 1 piece barrel, is that the one piece barrels are EXTREMELY sensitive to being "sandbagged". If you want to make a fairly accurate gun shoot miserably, try resting the muzzle of a 610 on a sandbag, groupings will quickly open up from 2.5 to 3 inches to well over 5 inches at 100 feet. I suspect that the sandbag interferes with the barrel harmonics at the muzzle end. Personally, I wish that the 2 piece barrels had been widely accepted and acclaimed, because I would love to have one on my 610.