What's everyone opinion on them I'm thinking about getting one it's 4" inch stainless dated 1980 with factory wood grips people who own one what do you have to say about it?

You won't regret buying it. The perfect revolver for most anything.

__________________
Remain Viable

For shooting light magnum loads and .38 Specials, it's hard to beat a model 66
I have a 66-1 with 2.5" barrel. It's a great revolver.

I beleive that you will find that the consensus here is that the original model 19/66 K-frame guns are perhaps one of the best designs produced by S&W. It is the ideal size and weight for carry and provides full .357 power or mild 38 Spl. There is a risk of damaging the forcing cone by the constant use of 110 or 125 grain .357 rounds.

I've been curious about that, are 130 grain 38spl perfectly fine? I have several boxes of 38spl Winchester White Box Full Metal Jacket I picked up for target shooting, but was curious if the forcing cone issue applied only to .357 low weight rounds.

Any .38 or .38+P is fine.
Even with magnums it takes many thousands of full power loads to break a K-frame.

The Model 66 was introduced in 1970 during the 19-3 revision ,

The 19-4 and 66-1 relocated the gas ring from the yoke to the cylinder,
The 19-5 and 66-2 revision deleted the barrel set pin and recessed cylinder so was a step down to many purists making the 66-1 the high water mark for Stainless Combat magnums.

The Combat Magnum was designed for any 38 special and for occasional use of 148 grain .357 Magnum,
using lighter 110 and 125 grain 357 loads can lead to barrel forcing cone damage so avoid it if possible.

I have a model 19-3 2.5" inch already and I've shot about 800 rounds through it already with only 3 rounds of 357 through it cause I'm nervous about all the forcing cone stuff I've heard

My 66-2 2.5" is a great shooter! The only .357's I've run through have been of the 158 grain variety due to the forcing cone issue.

I love the size and weight, and it's a wonderful to shoot .38 specials out of, even the the +p's. I don't carry it much because it would be hard to replace!

I think you should go for it!

There's one thing I've been curious about why are people so crazy about only getting the pined and recessed ones? I mean I'll admit it's a nice feature but can someone go into great detail why it's the best optio. To always go with those

The K-22 was S&W's first model to offer a recessed cylinder sometime around 1931 IIRC ,
The second was the .357 magnum around 1935.
Only the 22 caliber and Magnum handguns had this feature until the early 80's when it was deleted in the non rimfire Magnum handguns to save production time and costs, S&W rimfires are still recessed.

The pinned barrel was deleted also to save production time and money although many transitional guns are found with recessed cylinders and non pinned barrels probably until the supply of recessed cylinders ran out.

Here's my 1979 66-1. It's not a carry gun for me so I shoot 38 special 99.9% of the time at the range. It's a fabulous revolver. If I was planning on shooting a lot of 357's or for a carry 357 revolver I personally would use the 686.

Attached Images

IMG_3364.jpg (155.4 KB, 85 views)

Appearance-wise, the recessed cylinders allowed the rear of the cylinder to mate up closely with the recoil shield. You will only see a fine line there. The round of ammo is fully enclosed, and the rims of the cartridges are barely visible. In short, it's elegant and well-finished. If a .357 "balloon head" round from the old days is fired in a recessed chamber, there is better protection against the case giving way. As for the pinned barrel, there is no cosmetic advantage, but it's insurance that the barrel has not been twisted and remains at its original clocked position.

"P&R" guns come from the good old days when parts were forged and hand-fitted to perfection. S&W had a stringent quality control department in those days, too. Modern-day guns are slung together from MIM parts with little if any attention to fitting. Their main advantage is that it costs S&W less to make them, and the company profit is therefore higher.

In short, the P&R guns look more elegant and are visible evidence that you are getting a gun that was made and fitted right. Traditional purists (such as myself and many others here) think that the traditional ways of making things resulted in a superior product, engendering pride of ownership.

By the same token, I prefer not to use a P&R gun for personal protection, in case it winds up being thrown in an evidence bin following a potential fracas. They're just too nice to be treated cavalierly!

John

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

Another thread that's killing me LOL. I suggest getting it!!!

I'm about to post a "want to buy" ad looking for a 66-1 though for sentimental reasons I'm restricting myself to 1978. It'll mostly be a range gun though I won't deny it may spend some time on the night stand as well.

I wish I would have been warned before that great gun porn was shown lol I appreciate everybody giving me this much need info I think I'm gonna go up there and take a better look at it and make my finale decision. If I don't buy from there GunBroker has some that I've been eyeing and just seems like it would fit me perfectly for an all around carry gun and self defense and home.