Performance Center "one off"

GHEN · Jul 5, 2010

Hello all,

This is my 1st post in the non-intro area of the Forum so I thought I would share something (I find) interesting.

This attached picture shows my prototype alloy cylinder 442. I had a very good friend in the Performance Center one day in the mid-1990s who knowing I liked weird stuff called me and said they had finished a run of 442 revolvers for the U.S. Secret Service who wanted an extra light gun to wear on the ankle for Clinton's morning jogs.

They had one of the un-fluted alloy cylinders left and he told me "go buy a 442 and send it to me, I'll put this cylinder in your gun and it will be identical to the guns we made for the Secret Service".

So I did and a few weeks later I had my gun back, it feels like it weighs as much as a potato chip. This is the variation discussed in the "Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson" Second Edition Page 190.

I have carried this gun, shot it a little, and enjoy having a unique piece of Smith & Wesson history. I hope you enjoy seeing it as much as I do sharing it.

I have some other Performance Center "one off" guns that I will be sharing on the semi auto boards in the next few days.

All the best,

GHEN

M29since14 · Jul 5, 2010

Very interesting story and gun. Pays to have connections.

How does that piece compare in weight to a 340PD?

Sonny Crocket · Jul 5, 2010

Cool story. I wish Smith would make that today. They said in the SCSW that it survived a 5K round test of +P and on a non-magnum frame.
I had something similiar but it was a SIG P228 with M11 parts done up for me back around '03/'04. Only thing missing was the marking on the frame as they weren't allowed to do that by the Government.

bronco45 · Jul 6, 2010

Sweet lookin hideout/belly gun. Should be a joy to carry and fun to shoot standard pressure 38s in it.

GHEN · Jul 6, 2010

M29since14 said:
How does that piece compare in weight to a 340PD?

Honestly I couldn't say. I have never bothered to weigh the gun.

GHEN

M29since14 · Jul 6, 2010

That's odd - I've never weighed my 340 either.

I notice the 340 is definitely lighter feeling than my 442s (with steel cylinders), but it is still heavy enough that I would rather have it in a holster than a pocket.

Of course any decent holster weighs almost as much, or more, than the gun.

kscardsfan · Jul 6, 2010

Sonny Crocket said:
Cool story. I wish Smith would make that today. They said in the SCSW that it survived a 5K round test of +P and on a non-magnum frame.
I had something similiar but it was a SIG P228 with M11 parts done up for me back around '03/'04. Only thing missing was the marking on the frame as they weren't allowed to do that by the Government.

I know for a fact there is at least on M-11 floating around out there as a mistake through the sig CPO program. Summit gun broker got it and wanted somewhere north of $2000 for it when I saw it last. Very cool piece, but way more than I'm prepared to pay for a govt. marked p228 lol.

Sonny Crocket · Jul 6, 2010

kscardsfan said:
I know for a fact there is at least on M-11 floating around out there as a mistake through the sig CPO program. Summit gun broker got it and wanted somewhere north of $2000 for it when I saw it last. Very cool piece, but way more than I'm prepared to pay for a govt. marked p228 lol.

Seen more than one. Rumor is they were NCIS M11s that were traded back to the factory when they made the switch to the P229R DAK in.40. SIG refurbed them and sent them out on the market. Some lucky people got one for a decent (normal) price by luck before the sellers marked them up.

My story was I had one of the factory "camo" 228s that started peeling its finish and I hadn't even shot it yet. When I sent it back I asked if they could just strip the finish and give me back a regular finished one. When they did they hurt the slide somehow and had to replace it. While talking to the guy at SIG about this the M11 topic came up and he said he could put a M11 slide on my frame, ended up with a M11 barrel also. Only difference was finish. They couldn't mark the frame because of Government contract stipulations. Still thought it was pretty cool of them.

kscardsfan · Jul 7, 2010

That's still a pretty awesome gun. I know I'd hold onto that one to pass down the family line.

Allen-frame · Jul 7, 2010

Neat gun. For a one off I'd put a pair of
Spegel boot grips in some exotic wood on it.
Would really set it off.

Allen

HEADKNOCKER · Jul 7, 2010

That is very cool indeed..
I too wonder if that cylinder weighs less than a Titainium one..
So that's the Clinton Era 442-1..

It does pay to have friends that work in the PC @ S&W

kscardsfan · Jul 7, 2010

Still a shame such a neat concept of a gun will forever be associated with the Clinton era of gun rights and ownership lol.

Sonny Crocket · Jul 7, 2010

As quoted from the 3rd ed. SCSW...."This variation is actually lighter than the Ti series because of the all-alloy cylinder. This is the first use of Modern Aircraft Alloys since 1951 in an S&W cylinder. Acutally lighter than the Ti series."

M29since14 · Jul 7, 2010

I am beginning to wish I hadn't seen this thread.

A little investigation: If steel is the baseline at 100%, Titanium would be somewhere around 57.6%, and Aluminum somewhere around 35.6%. My 442 cylinder weighs 5.1-ounces. (Of course this includes the various small steel parts that would be common to all cylinders.) An aluminum cylinder could weigh as little as 2-ounces, compared to a bit over 3 for Titanium. Maybe an ounce of difference?

A current 442 is listed at 15-ounces, a 340 at 11.4. If you dropped an Aluminum cylinder into a 340PD, you might come awfully close to 10-ounces with some trick stocks. Would make an interesting "science fair" project, but of course hardly worth the extraordinary bother - unless you just happen to have that friend in the PC.

GHEN · Jul 7, 2010

I will try and get an accurate weight...now my interest is peaked!

GHEN

f2 · Jul 7, 2010

Sonny Crocket said:
As quoted from the 3rd ed. SCSW...."This variation is actually lighter than the Ti series because of the all-alloy cylinder. This is the first use of Modern Aircraft Alloys since 1951 in an S&W cylinder. Acutally lighter than the Ti series."

unreal...

tekarra · Jul 7, 2010

Ghen,
Great story of a good revolver. Can you post some details?

Frank237 · Jul 7, 2010

You had a friend at Smith? And all you had done was ONE special gun??? I'm dissapointed.

Cool gun...wonder how it would letter? You may want to get your Buddy to write up something.

FN in MT

Andy Griffith · Jul 7, 2010

I would suggest getting it lettered.

f2 · Jul 7, 2010

scsw...

these prototypes have no markings on the sideplate, and have a matte or polished blue finish... both fluted and non-fluted cylinder were reported to have been manufactured... from the performance center. product code 170023 "ultralight".

Smith & Wesson..., I'll take one (1) no-lock pls.

Performance Center "one off"

Member

Attachments

US Veteran

Member

Member

Member

US Veteran

Member

Member

Member

Member

US Veteran

Member

Member

Member

Absent Comrade

Member

Member

Similar threads