Model 66-2

Thomas Jackson · Nov 8, 2021

Smith and Wesson model 66-2. Need some information in general. I notice the firing pin is hammer mounted and is replaceable. Is it safe to dry fire? Is there danger of a negligent discharge? Should snap caps be used for dry fire? Is the forcing cone being flat on the bottom a big enough or real enough concern to stay away from lighter and faster loads? Thanks to all in advance.

Sevens · Nov 8, 2021

It is generally safe to dry fire but your mileage may very. MANY hard core competition shooters do more dry firing than us average folks could wrap our brains around. I don't do a heap of it.

Danger of an ND, or you asking if it is drop safe or if the hammer-mount firing pin changes it's propensity for being drop safe? Well, modern S&W (since the mid-1940's I think?) have an internal hammer block safety, so regardless of whether firing pin is hammer or frame mounted, these revolvers and specifically a 66-2 is indeed drop safe.

Regardless of the can of worms you may be opening by asking about the 6'o-clock barrel flat/forcing cone and the K-frame legend, yes it is real, but it may be over blown and it also seem to occur more in the carbon steel guns (13, 19) than in the stainless (65, 66) K-frames.

It is a nicer gesture to your revolver to choose 158 grain .357 ammo rather than 110 or 125 grain, but either way it would likely take a lot of shooting to crack that forcing cone. For me this situation is easy to handle -- I love the .357 Magnum round but I don't enjoy it from any K-frame so I use the L-frame and far more often the N-frame for all my .357 Magnum revolver work. K-frame's are phenomenal with .38 Special for me in my world.

Thomas Jackson · Nov 8, 2021

Yes I was asking if it was drop safe. I have yet to fire any 38 special from it yet. But I have a good number of 125 grains in 357 and was reading about the forcing cone issue. Just got into revolvers last year and love them. Also have Smiths other than revolver. Thanks for the reply and info.

PeteC · Nov 8, 2021

Model 66-1 and later have the flaw that led to the cracking of the forcing cone. See this article for a longer discussion, and you can make your own decision on the ammo you want to shoot:

The Smith & Wesson L-Frame Story - RevolverGuy.Com

It is a long read, but it explains how the relocation and changes to the gas ring led to a larger weak spot in the forcing cone. There are pics explaining the difference between the Model 66 and the 66-1, and a pic of a cracked model 66. There is also a discussion of the 110/125 grain bullet, and the effect of its shorter length, compared to the heavier and longer 158 gr.

Excerpt:

PERFECT STORM

Taking all this into account, it’s likely that the mechanism of injury for the cracked K-Frame barrels was a combination of the following:

-A weakened barrel extension, caused by the aggressive milling of a flat at the 6 O’Clock position (which was required for the models with yoke-mounted gas rings, but unnecessary—yet still continued–for later 19-4 / 66-1 models with cylinder-mounted gas rings), and;

-An increased use of high-pressure, .357 Magnum and .38 Special +P+ ammunition which placed more stress on the forcing cone than standard pressure .38 Special ammunition, and;

-An increased use of .357 Magnum ammunition loaded with lightweight (110 and 125 grain) projectiles, which exposed the forcing cone to greater amounts of high pressure / temperature blow-by gases, which caused accelerated wear on the forcing cone, and;

-Selected brands or lots of ammunition that were more prone to cause cracking, by virtue of their internal ballistics.

Long story short, the L-Frame was developed to avoid this problem and allow unlimited use of the 110/125 gr .357 rounds.

Thomas Jackson · Nov 8, 2021

Thanks for that great info.

Model 66-2

Thomas Jackson

Sevens

Member

Thomas Jackson

PeteC

Member

Thomas Jackson

Similar threads

Latest posts