Good morning everyone.

My interest in J-frames lately has been growing and I came up with what might be a stupid question. What, besides the engraving on the side, a different set of grips and maybe a different box or gun sleeve, makes a Ladysmith different from any other similar firearm? Anything internal? Or, is this just a couple of cosmetic changes for marketing purposes?

As an example, i you look at the current .357 J-frame offerings, 162414 is the Ladysmith and the "twin" (with synthetic grips) is the 162420. Looks like only difference is the grips.

If we look back at the Ladysmith of old, any difference in them compared to their standard model (besides the cosmetics)?

Thanks!

I have handled a few K frame Lady Smiths that had outstanding (light, smooth) DA trigger pulls; don't know if it was a coincidence or due to extra factory work but I suspect the latter. Can't speak to any J frames, especially modern ones.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

That was some of the sentiment I have heard in the past. If the Ladysmiths in the past were hand tuned due to their price and market, that'd be great to know as I also love pre-lock S&W revolvers and have contemplated a few older Ladysmiths in the past. However, the price difference has always made me shy away. I am a shooter so if the engraving on the side adds $200 to the price tag and adds no shooting value, I naturally pass.

The internal lock work was smoothed and trigger pull was lightened to allow women to better use the Ladysmith double action. More labor was put in the assembly and that is why they cost more. Basically you got a trigger job from the factory. This was done to make the firearm more attractive to the Ladies and sell more pistols.
SWCA 892

Do you know if that is still the same or is it just marketing now?

K frame ladysmith I believe is the only 3" fixed sight with shrouded ejector rod

I came across this 65-5 "Ladysmith" last year. The double action is noticeably lighter than my 3" 66-2. It also came with a spiffy Bob Allen padded case with "Ladysmith" logo printed on it - another marketing ploy no doubt. It's a great gun - my wife has commandeered it as her CCW.

This one pulls pretty smooth (tho I have slicker non-LS K's) but I have another one new/unfired that is pretty stiff, for what it's worth. Down the road I'll get this blasted, not too fond of the matte finish.

^^^^what he said. I purchased mine because it's frosted finish was nicer than that of the regular Model 60. AFAIC, the trigger is standard.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

I rekon you'll just have to buy one and lift up the skirt to find out.

__________________
NRA Benefactor

at, you state that as fact, but are you speculating, or do you have some inside knowledge? If so, from who?

I think some LS's received extra attention and lighter springs, in years past. But that's just my opinion.

Today S&W does not overtly claim a lighter smooth trigger pull on LS's, and they're usually not shy about taking credit when they put forth extra work. However, in the past, IINM, S&W literature DID hint at lighter smooth trigger pulls.

__________________
~ S&W aficionado in training ~

My wife's Model 36 Ladysmith has pretty rosewood grips, the Ladysmith name in script and a fancy box.

__________________
Paul
Salome, AZ

I bought a used 65-5 LS last year. I've been wondering what makes them different, too.

Here's the problem, mine didn't come with the original grips, but I have heard the originals are smaller for a shorter reach to the trigger. And, mine has a 6 lb 10 oz, smooth, double action trigger pull. (compared to the 11 lb 8.5 oz trigger pull on my other non LS 65-5) I think somebody did a trigger job on the LS. I have gotten light strikes on the primers on Magtech ammo with it. I intend on beefing up the springs and testing it more before carrying it.

Obviously mine isn't a pristine example of a Lady Smith, so I'm still wondering the difference is.



Bill

Attached Images

65-5 LS.jpg (73.8 KB, 31 views)

Kernel
OK. other than personal experience when the Ladysmith came out in 1989 in the M-36. The standard catalog of Smith & Wesson states: "The grips are anatomically designed for women, round butt on 2 inch, wood combat on 3 inch, .312 smooth combat trigger with beveled edges, redesigned double action". 37th edition Blue Book of Gun Values basically says the same thing.

If they came out in 1989, this would be one of the first ones. I kind of like the look of the grips. It's a 60-7.

Attached Images

M60-7 Ladysmith.jpg (94.6 KB, 54 views)

__________________
Dr. B

Seems like a strange choice of words. Are lighter springs really a "redesign"? In any event, I can understand why S&W would not want to fess up to lightening the action on a LS.

It would open them up to legal liabilities. Something I'm sure they were well aware of. ("Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, this gun was sold to women with an unsafe and negligent HAIR TRIGGER!!").

If the trigger pulls were reduced, S&W would be very careful with how they would word that feature in their ads. Why give ammunition to the Plaintiff's Bar.

__________________
~ S&W aficionado in training ~