I have a Blue Model 3954 that is like new. One small scratch on it and 3 mags. 1 blue and 2 SS.
No Box.

With how much spare mags cost ($40!) I'm thinking of selling it to get a Glock 17.

I'll try and post some pics if I can.

Thanks!

You see a lot more 3953's than you do 3954's up for sale. At the same time they both seem to sell for as low as $300 and as high as $400. I have been watching the market for a year or so now for the right deal and it seems $350 is the average selling price for a compact single stack DAO. Accessories rarely bring the value up that much, just make the package more attractive to potential buyers. After you get some more responses and decide what you want for it, send me a PM.

I would not trade/sell a 39xx to aquire a Glock 17.

+ 100

I have a 3953 and would never sell it. great shooter and beautiful to boot

The correct response is to keep the 3954 *AND* buy a Glock 17. (kidding)

Used 3rd-gen S&W autos are common at gun shows in my neck of the woods. You may be able to find some used mags for your 3954 at less than $40.

Plus, at $32, won't these fit the bill? Smith & Wesson 3913-14 908 8rd Stainless Curved Bottom Mag New Factory

You should have no problem getting $450 or more, at auction, for your 3954. It is an umcommon variation of a single stack 9mm. The odds of them ever being produced again are slim, even though the demand for such compact pistols is going up.

No matter how you look at it, a glock is a $200 gun. It is made by the lowest bidder, using the least expensive production methods. There are enough used ones around, and there will be for years to come.

The trigger on both guns uses the same pre-cocked, short pull concept. The difference is that the 3954 uses a hammer, steel trigger and a smooth camming action. The glock feels like you just sprung a mouse trap.

Try both side by side, I think you will easily see where the quality lies.

Looks like only one 3954 sold on GB in the last 90 days and it went for $355. Couldn't find a history of 3954's on AA or GA.

Welcome, I appreciate you posting your question here.

Your model was only made in 1991-1992 so there likely aren't that many around and as KurtC indicates, won't likely be made again.

Post some pics,
Scott

I am a fan of S&W as much as many of you, but let's ease up a bit on the Glock-slam, shall we?

I have several S&W revolvers, as well as 3rd G semi's, and they are fine weapons. I also happen to own a Glock 19 and 26. They are fine weapons.

For you to disparage their manufacture and claim they are made by a low bid process is pure and simple bullcrap.

Glock is the weapon of choice and mandate by more LEO's at the local, state and Federal level than Smith & Wesson could ever dream of. They did not inherit that selection, they earned it. They earned it by out-performing virutally any and every weapons manufacturer on the face of the planet.

Now you may not like Glocks. You may not care for the trigger pull, the safety mechanisms, the style, or the color...that's fine. But get a grip on reality, fella. Glocks are among the best quality and finest performing pistols in the world. Need more proof? Talk to someone who stakes their very life on a daily basis on the Glock.

Enuff said.

I agree that we need to above bashing any gun, even Glock.

But as a certified Glock Armorer, certified Glock Firearms Instructor and head of firearms purchasing for a LE agency I can tell you that Glock dominates the LE community because of relentless marketing and extremely low prices. Very very few agencies select Glock firearms because of their reputation or performance. Most civilian consumers presume that LE agencies buy the best of what's available. So if their local PD issues a Glock, they will run buy a Glock. Prop people see this and they start using more Glocks on television and movies, more people run out and buy Glocks. I am not saying Glock's are junk, they do go bang and perform just like they're supposed to. But Glock's law enforcement and civilian market share is because of marketing.

But Glock's law enforcement and civilian market share is because of marketing.

Yep. Good guns like many others but very well marketed.

When glock came out with the 17, just about every LE holster in the US had a Smith 2nd Gen pistol in it, or a revolver. Nobody would touch the glock. The media slammed it as a plastic gun that could go thru airports, and the agencies that tested them were having AD's left and right.

It wasn't until glock started giving them away for free (with trade in) that agencies started showing interest. It had nothing to do with quality, it was all about budget. That sad part is that the trade-in pistols were worth far more than the glocks, and the middle men made a huge profit (especially after the 1994 HC ban).

I've always said glock makes the best $200 gun on the market, and would not feel underarmed if issued one (unless it is a .40 ). The problem is that in order to give freebies to LE departments, they have to up the retail price to cover costs.

I qualified with G17 back in 88 or 89, and a G30 whenever they came out. Easy to shoot, but they couldn't hold a candle to a Smith 3rd Gen DAO like the 3954.

I almost took the last few posts seriously, until I realized I was on a S&W board. Of course!

The only POSSIBLE reason for GLock OWNING the LEO market is because they give their guns away.

It could not possibly be that Glock passed all of the field trials...which they did.

Or that Glock out-performed every other manufacturer in virtually every category from dry firing, feeding malfunctions, failures to feed, failures to eject, maintenance, safety, or any of the other 30-something test criteria.

Nah.

Glock just offered to give away their guns to EVERY LEO, local, state, and Federal, in the country...AND internationally... and avoid getting caught in the truckloads of state, local and Federal watchdogs making sure that the company was abiding by all of the local, state and Federal laws. Sure. That HAS to be the reason.

And naturally, every other gun maker in the world KNOWS that Glock just gives away their guns, and have done exactly what in order to level the playing field? Nothing.

Now gentlemen. Let's stop all this non-sense. Do you forget that the largest contract for weapons in the world is with the US military? And do you know who won the last contract to supply the military with a pistol? That's right: Beretta. Not Glock: they came in 2nd. Gee whiz. If Glock just gives away their guns, I wonder why the US military didn't scoop-up a few hundred thousand instead of offering the program to Beretta?

Oh, that's right: Beretta gives away their guns, too! That must be it. Glock and Beretta BOTH must give their stuff away, since that is the only possible reason that S&W isn't in the discussion. It's a world-wide conspiracy to keep S&W down, right?

You guys are too funny.

Thanks for the laugh!

Quote from KurtC: It wasn't until glock started giving them away for free (with trade in) that agencies started showing interest. It had nothing to do with quality, it was all about budget. That sad part is that the trade-in pistols were worth far more than the glocks, and the middle men made a huge profit (especially after the 1994 HC ban).

Not to hijack this thread any more, but back in the early 90s I was assigned to my agency's FTS during pistol trials. We frankly tested the SigSauer 228/226 platform, Beretta 92 platform, Smith 3rd. Gen. 3953 platform and the GLOCK platform. My department tested these pistols in as many ways as we could think of and found flaws with all of them. The problems were addressed in varying forms by the manufacturers, and frankly some of the responses from the manufacturers left a bit to be desired! But the GLOCK won out. They stood by their product for the most part and were open to suggestions, for the most part (IE: NY Trigger). I can tell you with complete confidence that GLOCK definately wanted the contract from my department to piggy back the NYSP contract and the NYPD contract (that was still in the works.) But they did not give the pistols away to us! The price certainly did have a play in the final decision but I can assure you that my Rangemaster would not have made that final decision had the GLOCK not been better or at least comparable to the others. And, no, the Rangemaster did not retire and go to work for GLOCK thereafter.
I have been carrying my G19 confidentally for close to 15 years now and around ten years ago it got me home in one piece when the "manure hit the fan!" This is not to say that any other high quality service pistol would not have done the same, but my G19 did exactly what it was designed to do- nothing more, nothing less.

__________________
Stay Safe...
jd SWCA #3276

Hey tomshilling, I just made a statement of fact based on actual professional experience and an inside perspective. Then you decided to go TROLL with it. So I will just walk away content in my knowledge and let you feel like you have won the debate.

Go TROLL with it?

I hardly think that having a different opinion and using factual evidence to support that opinion makes the comments "troll-worthy", but to each his own. You have every right to your opinions, but don't attempt to present them as facts and expect to have 100% agreement.

In this particular case, your "opinons" are not facts, but you have every right to express them...I, and about a million other Glock owners, simply disagree.

But if you would rather "be content in your knowledge", and leave it at that, you are in good company. William Shakepeare once said "Tis better to be thought the fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."

Pretty catchy, Huh?

I'm picking up a 1006 & the guy said he would throw in a 3954 for an extra $300(how could I say no.) Had no clue what it was so did a search on it and stumbled on to this thread.

It's so rad to see how hard you guys ride for Glocks. I wana run down to the shooting range and try one out for the first time and see what all the hypes about. They must be pretty awesome. Say something bad about Glocks and ya'll act like somebody kicked your dog.

I wouldn't give these up for a boat load of Glocks

I just won a g/b auction yesterday for a 3953. I paid $399+25 to ship. A tad more than some would pay, but I feel pretty good with that number.
For what its worth, I would have preferred the 3954, as I like the Blue guns better for concealment. Either way, its a win win situation.
I do own a few Glocks, and wouldnt sell them, but there is something about the Smiths that feels right in my hand.
Tom
P.S. I own a 3913 and a 3914 same love affair with them.
JMHO

I seen the auction and it was dated in 2003, I just come across the same S&W 3954 and having trouble finding info on it? Does anyone have any more info on this gun?