Folks,

I had started this thread on another forum about a project I am starting on...

Like a Phoenix from the ashes, I am working to recreate the S&W Mk 22 Mod 0 Hush Puppy pistol used by the SEALs during Vietnam and throughout the 1970s. So far, I possess a complete slide assembly for a 39 series pistol, which has the short extractor, 4" barrel, and the rear sight with "wings." That is where things are right now in hand physically...

What I have done so far is to create PDF mechanical drawings for the following parts:

Front Sight - http://www.artisanccw.com/images/mk22mod0frontsight.pdf. The first front sight is being made currently. Installing the new front sight requires the existing front sight be milled entirely away. And I just learned the gent working of the front sight will have pics for me of said item later today!!!

Faux Mk 3 Suppressor - http://www.artisanccw.com/images/mk3can.pdf. The faux Mk 3 suppressor has been totally designed and will be made come next May. Before going too far with this unit though, I saw a "dust cover" in a picture of a Hush Puppy with the can attached, which is on this post as well. A "suitable sub" for the "dust cover" was found and is on its way. Once I have that part in hand, I will again modify my drawing to incorporate the "dust cover," thus finalizing the drawing for the faux can...


Rear Sight "Wing" & Elevation Screw - http://www.artisanccw.com/images/mk22mod0rearsight.pdf. This part is also in a prototype manufacturing stage. The longer elevation screw is in process as well. I will also note Dockery is WRONG with regard to the use of a Model 52 rear sight with the Mk 22. The confines of the rear sight "wings" will NOT allow for windage adjustment for the rear sight, as the 52's rear sight windage blade is MUCH larger than the sight used on the Mk 22...

Barrel - After an extensive search online, I believe I have found a custom barrel maker who can make the 5" extended, threaded barrel needed. By stroke of luck, said person owns a 39-2...

The book I am using as reference is Special Warfare, Special Weapons by Kevin Dockery, his first book on SEAL weaponry. (I had bought his second book on SEAL Weaponry for a cheap price, but gave it away because it was merely an "updating" of the first book and it contained the very same errors within the first book as well...) I do admit there was some errors in the book, notably for the section on the Mk 22 Mod 0 about the threading pitch for the barrel to screw on the Mk 3 can. Page 34 claims the pitch was 1/2" - 20 tpi, while the text on the very next page stated 1/2" - 32tpi. With the barrel I will have made early next year, the maker and I had already determined to use 1/2" - 28tpi, today's standard threading for a 9mm suppressed sidearm...

Once I get my grimy mitts on a real 39 pistol, I will be able to quickly reverse engineer the double-sided slide lock. I am having a debate in my mind right now though if the actual Hush Puppy slide lock was also a slide hold open. I am questioning this based upon an image taken from an old book on military weaponry. Please see the attached image of the disassembled slide lock for further details...

Additionally, I am continuing to study images of the Hush Puppy and I just learned one thing: this pistol could NOT have been made based on the original Model 39...

Why?

With the original Model 39, if you look at the opening for the slide hold open, the top of the opening is kind of like a "ski slope," in that there are 3 small curves that form a kind of "hill" in the profile. With every image I have found and have seen of the Hush Puppy, that same area is merely a slanted straight line, hence it can only be either the 39-1 or 39-2 as the basis for the pistol.Production of the all steel 39 ended in 1966, over a year before the contract was signed to produce the Hush Puppy. This should also lead to one to deduct the Hush Puppy DID, in fact, have an aluminum alloy frame, since the 39-1 introduced said feature and the shorter extractor in 1965, while (I believe) the 39-2 brought about an even smaller extractor in 1967. S&W used up their inventory of parts when transitioning between the 39-1 & 39-2. It appears there was some overlap of production with the two models...

This is all I have currently. I shall keep folks updated as new things come to the fore...

Mods,

I am merely documenting my discoveries of this historic and fascinating military handgun. Please email me at [email protected] before you do anything with this thread...

PLEASE????

Attached Images

	mk22mod0actsize.jpg (56.0 KB, 1121 views)
	slidelock.jpg (30.5 KB, 780 views)
	sealmk22mk3can.jpg (82.9 KB, 979 views)
	39info.jpg (87.7 KB, 971 views)

Folks,

The gent making the prototype front sight just completed it and sent me a few pics, which I combined into one image!!! This is GREAT news!!!

Attached Images

newfrontsight.jpg (42.1 KB, 472 views)

It sounds like an interesting project but some of your info is slightly off as S&W never made a 39-1. In the late 1950s, S&W started experimenting with 39s chambered in .38 AMU for the Army's Marksmanship Training Unit. The .38 AMU was essentially a modified .38 Special case made to function better in magazines and to avoid confusion with the 39 they ended up calling it the Model 52A.

On your picture with the four slides, the middle two appear to be 39-2 and the bottom one is a 439. You can tell the 439 by the different sights and the short extractor which appeared on the early 439s.

I have had this one for many years now




BTW, why a faux suppressor? Just file a form-1 and build a working can.

Not allowed in the Illinois Democratic Republic...

Your profile does not include your location.

I am quite familiar with IL laws. I was born and raised in Chicago. Firearms rights is a major part of why Florida was chosen for relocation.

From another thread:

"The wide short extractor was one of the recommendations made by our range folks along with a few other modifications. Our range people worked very closely with S&W for a lot of years on various modifications which ultimately resulted in the 3rd gen autos.

Most of our 39-nothing were converted over to the wide short extractor. Might have been a some early 39-nothing that were issued and then bought by retirees before being converted. The one pictured below is the one I was issued. You will see on the top of the slide an indent for the roll pin which holds the extractor in place. Yours has the same roll pin. The older long extractors did not have that roll pin in that location."

I found the complete slide for sale online listed as a 39-2. Now given the above and what you said, I am confused. On my slide, the extractor does NOT have a roll pin, nor any type of pin holding it in the slide. I found a few schematics online showing the extractor that way and the drawing was listed as a 39-2. Can you point me in another direction? TIA...

.

I TRULY wish I can join you down in the South...

Your listed quote in thread #7 is referring to a modification of a 39 no dash extractor, none of yoyr photos depict that particular extractor, and it is true there never was a mkdel 39-1, your pictures clearly show a model 39, then a model 39-2, then finally an early 439 or 539 slide, with the short extractor that was only used on early second gens, they went back to a dash 2 style extractor not too long after second gen production started....the slide you have was simply mis-identified by the person you acquired it from, it has a firing pin safety and is not readily compatible with a first gen frame (39 or 39-2).....great project, sounds like you've done some good hush puppy research, just do a little more research on the first and second gen 39s and you should have all the info you need to complete it....

It sounds like you have a 439 slide to me. Does it look like the bottom slide in the forth picture above?

Forgot to mention the slide notch you talked about went through a few variations in shape during the 39 series production, the function did not change, just the appearance, they all work the same, and yes, the Mk22 model 0 was based on the 39, and from what I have read about them, the later versions used a frame very similar to a model 59, giving it the fourteen round capacity.....

Folks,

Okay, so given the info stated previously, every Hush Puppy was a 39-2, with alloy frame and a narrow, short extractor. That fact may NOT be such a bad thing, since most of the 39-2s used the "lollipop" style rear sight. To create a dovetail for the rear sight "wings," material will need to be added on to the slide, then shaped to match the rounded top profile of the slide, prior to milling the dovetail itself...

Actually, all 39 and 39-2s used the lollipop, the "winged" rear sight did not appear until the introduction of the second gens, 439,539,639, etc. And I believe the hush puppies were BASED on the model 39, and later were apparently built on a 59 style frame.....from the hush puppy photos I have seen, your best bet would be to use a later second gen adjustable sight slide with the dash 2 style extractor, you would have to eliminate the firing pin safety though, but you would have the correct type of milled out area for a taller winged rear sight....

I've looked through the Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson 3rd Edition (you should get this if you don't already have it) and the Smith & Wesson Handguns 2002 Special Collectors Editon publication and here's some more information for you.

Both publications say that the Mark 22 Model 0 as adopted by the Navy was a 14 shot pistol......not 8 shot like the 39. Per the Smith & Wesson Handguns 2002 Special Collectors Editon, in 1968 after examining prototype high capacity Model 39s, the Navy ordered suppressed, 14 round, black finished STAINLESS STEEL guns.......this 14 round concept eventually became the Model 59, which appeared in 1971. The Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson says these guns were 14 round but lists them as alloy frame and steel slide......again, very similar to what was to become the Model 59.

The Smith & Wesson Handguns 2002 Special Collectors Editon shows a nice picture (see below) of what they call a "rare single stack version based on the Model 39 and the 14 round double stack contract version". The rare single stack Model 39 pictured has a serial number of A123334 which falls into the Model 39-2 timeframe. This gun also has "MK 22 MOD 0" stamped below the SN on the left side of the frame. The double stack gun's SN is partially obscured but appears to be a "T" followed by numbers which could indicate a Tool Room gun.



With that all said, it appears that while there were a few (possibly prototypes) single stack, Model 39-2 based Mark 22 Model 0 Hushpuppys, the actual Navy contract for 200 units were 14 round double stack pistols more like the Model 59.

Hope this helps. Nothing wrong with building a clone on a Model 39-2 frame, in fact I'd probably prefer the slimmer single stack grip profile.

civil, I have read this as well, but most pictures I have seen are of the single stack type, I have only seen a couple of pics of the double stack variety, it would be nice to get someone on the forum with first hand knowledge of these models....I do believe both versions are displayed in a museum, just can' t remember which museum.....

Attached Images

	SC20120714-211210.jpg (227.8 KB, 3740 views)
	SC20120714-211200.jpg (226.3 KB, 420 views)

grif,

I had those images before, but when I blew them up to see the details of the writing on the slide's left side, the words "Air System Gun" are the entire second line of the markings. And after looking at that pic again, the top line reads "Model 39 S&W."

The first book by Kevin Dockery on SEAL weaponry did discuss a bit about the 14 shot versions. Dockery stated basically because of the way S&W had its production lines set up, it took 18 months to deliver 12 pistols...

civil, et al.,

I think there may be errors in S&W's books. The Hush Puppy was an 8 shot pistol. Any later changes which resulted in the 59 came a great deal later...

Kevin Dockery's books have errors too, such the thread pitch for the barrel for the can In his first book, Dockery claims 1/2"-20tpi on Page 34, then on Page 35, he states 1/2"-32tpi. Additionally, he claims the rear sight used on the Hush Puppy was the rear sight of a 52. However, the rear blade of the 52 sight is unable to fit within the confines of the "wings," hence that too is an error. And for his second book, he and/or the publisher did NOT even bother to correct the errors prior to publishing the book...

While we are discussing details, please look at the second image below of the slide lock unit. From what I can discern, the slide hold open "lever" to function with the magazine appears to not even exist, hence the pistol would NOT cause the slide to lock back when the last shot was fired. Are we in agreement on that point?

Sidebar: does anyone have an idea where to buy black plastic 39 grips that have the logo and the checkering, but without an faux wood grain?

Attached Images

	sw39_01.jpg (74.5 KB, 354 views)
	slidelock.jpg (30.5 KB, 225 views)

There is no reason for a magazine actuated slide lock, the slide does not cycle when fired, it is locked in battery.....

I managed to buy nearly a complete 39-2 (sans frame) pistol off an online site. Since it is a true 39-2 slide, I will need to have the lollipop cutout welded over and a dovetail cut...

Folks,

More GREAT news!!! Attached below are two images of the very first three prototype rear sight "wings" prior to bending!!!

Once they get bent and sent to me, I will MOST DEFINITELY post further pics...

I just got up and this already made my day start off right...

Attached Images

	rswings1.jpg (103.1 KB, 206 views)
	rswings2.jpg (79.8 KB, 175 views)

Interesting project but it appears to me you've got a mix of good and bad information about the originals. Do you have the article Dockery did for The Small Arms Review in June 2002? What about Dwayne Charron's new book (discussed elsewhere on this forum)? Are you going to replicate the accessory kit with muzzle and breach plugs? I think I can help with some of this if you want to email me at kevin at kwill dot com.

Regards,
Kevin Williams

__________________
Kevin Williams SWCA1649 HF208

Kevin,

ANY and all help is appreciated. I emailed you...

Folks,

My attention has now turned to the rear sight itself. While some online gun parts site may have these sights, I am not too throilled at our possibilities...

Any ideas? TIA...

Attached Images

rearsightbody.jpg (90.8 KB, 203 views)

Folks,

I started talking with kwill, who is a WEALTH of knowledge. He brought up the point of the various plugs used with the Mk 22. I then thought about an A Zoom aluminum or a black plastic snap cap, which would then have to have a small, shallow slot milled into it to let a rubber O-ring sit properly in...

The question now becomes where can one find an item that can be used as a muzzle plug for the Mk 22 barrel and/or the chamber plug for the faux Mk 3 suppressor which will be made...

Inquiring minds want to know. TIA,,,

Attached Images

Hush Puppy chamber plugs (2).jpg (169.2 KB, 182 views)

Folks,

Again, based on input by kwill, I contacted S&W via email and they said one can order parts by calling 800-331-0852 ext.4125 directly. kwill stated the Third Generation rear sight for the 5906 is precisely the same sight and visual verification confirms that...

Additionally, please look at the attached image of an exact copy of an Mk 22 Mod 0 made for a retiring S&W employee, which now resides in the S&W Museum. If one looks VERY carefully at where the slide lock cut is, one can see the lock cut is just a simple triangular cut completely through the side of the slide, both left and right. And the slide lock is nothing but mostly straight cuts, so duplicating it should be simple, though I am going to REALLY think about whether the extended level on the left side should in fact be a second piece of steel to reduce manufacturing costs...

Attached Images

A147000 display.jpg (99.8 KB, 628 views)

What exactly is the deal with the barrel bushing, it definately looks like it's either not present, or a type similar to the later fixed bushing is used....

grif,

In the image above, I am in aggreement the bushing is NOT there, hence there had to be something to both support the barrel at the muzzle and to restrain the recoil spring guide...

And I think I found out what it is by looking at an image of an airsoft copy. Look at the attached image. It appears the web of steel between the barrel opening and the recoil spring guide opening had a "figure eight"-like piece of steel silver soldered in place to both support the front of the barrel and to hold the recoil spring guide under tension...

And NOW I need to design yet another component...

Attached Images

mk22mod0.jpg (27.9 KB, 320 views)

The slide itself will capture the recoil spring (later model 39-2s anyway) but to me it does appear to be a smaller round pressed in bushing, like the third gens....

grif,

You are indeed correct for the recoil spring guide and spring that the slide itself will restrain/contain it all, so here's an idea to have the needed bushing without pressing one in place: Merely take a spare bushing, mill off the external portion of the bushing, insert said newly-milled bushing and turn it into its final position, then silver solder the thing in place. BINGO!!! That works perfectly!!!

There is just one issue with that, you won't be able to install or remove the barrel with the bushing permanently fixed. Later fixed bushing pistols have the barrel end relieved to accomadate this feature....

grif,

*Tries this with a slide, barrel and bushing*

Point validated. I think the internal length of the bushing is what the issue is...

If the bushing was shortened from BOTH ends to just be a "nub" in the muzzle end of the slide to support the barrel, that should allow the extended barrel to be moved forward, then tilted up and out of the slide...

Took the shortened bushing out of my chopped 39, put it in a dash 2 slide, and was able to install three different dash 2 barrels, two of which are new and never used, with the bushing in place, looks like your theory is correct, it does work.....

grif,

That is GREAT news!!! Thank you for trying my theory out...

Next question for you: is the Mki 22 Mod 0's finish blued or a black parkerizing?

Folks,

Based on a suggestion by kwill, I found the patent drawing from Dwayne Charron for the civilian version of the Hush Puppy's rear sight. It is interesting to note how S&W was able to take a few pieces of the Mk 22 Mod 0 program and bring them into product lines for themselves...

Attached Files

US3662469.pdf (156.5 KB, 321 views)

No-dash 39s were also used for early Mk22s.

The -2 engineering change happened in roughly 1971, but the Mk22 had been issued several years earlier.

Edit: In rereading your opening post, it appears that you're calling the models between the phase out of the steel frames and the 39-2 a 39-1. Most of the 39 no dash production was alloy framed. Steel frames weren't common. Don't equate the issues you're seeing in the steel frames with the alloy frames of the no-dash.

I suspect there was a bit of refitting applied to early pistols later, but the fact that teams were receiving 45 pistols in FY1968 suggests that for most of Vietnam, it was no-dash slides in the most part.

Folks,

Thanks to the resourcefulness of kwill, I am presenting for your indulgence the patent drawings and documentation for the Mk 3 Mod 0 suppressor, the "can" used on the Mk 22 Mod 0...

I have already designed a faux can. I just have to reconfigure the front end to allow a lens cap to snap in place to simulate the watertight cover that suppressor had...

Attached Files

US3677132.pdf (136.5 KB, 305 views)

Folks,

Quick update: I am about to start working on the most difficult part of the Hush Puppy system, the slide lock. It is a complex piece that has parts that operate on both side of the slide, PLUS it has to be able to hold the slide back...

Folks,

NOTE: What I am about to write may be heresy to some and unsafe to others, but in the interests of full and complete accuracy and authenticity, I shall post this info. KIDS!!! DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME UNLESS YOU ARE SUPERVISED BY A PARENT OR GUARDIAN!!! (Okay, legal disclaimer over...)

With the original Mk 22 Mod 0, the Navy had them modified to not have a magazine safety, nor would the slide mounted safety drop the hammer, while still protecting the firing pin. After speaking with a knowledgable expert, he told me the following to duplicate what the Navy had done:

1 - To disable the magazine disconnect, one must first remove the rear sight from the 39-2 slide, then remove the ejector depressor plunger and ejector depressor plunger spring, then reinstall the rear sight. The ejector has a spring under it to keep it in position for ejection...

2 - To allow for putting the pistol on safe while NOT dropping the hammer, please first look at the attached image. This is the sear release lever. The area highlighted in white must be removed. In operation, the top portion of the lever is pushed down by the safety and in turn pushes down the disconnector, disabling the trigger. The highlighted area pushes the sear away from the hammer, causing it to drop. So after removing this part from the frame, amputating the bottom "leg," then reinstalling it in the frame, the safety will work only on the firing pin to protect it and not drop the hammer...

For my Hush Puppy, I will be performing these two tasks, but I shall NOT state everyone should. PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!

More updates will follow shortly...

Attached Images

searreleaselevermod.jpg (69.9 KB, 194 views)

Folks,

GREAT NEWS!!! Another member of this forum did the mod for the sear release lever on his 59. Guess what?

IT WORKED!!! Please review the attached image...

So while I will do this mod on my 39-2, I will again state doing this mod is up to an individual owner's discretion...but it DOES make things more authentic!!!

Attached Images

cock-locked.jpg (240.4 KB, 190 views)

Folks,

I am PLEASED to report another success on the path to a Rebirth of the Mk 22 Mod 0!!!

Attached below is a dual side-by-side image of how a 39-2 slide looks once the front sight has been milled away and two small holes drilled for installing pins, which will mate with the new Hush Puppy extended height front sight, which is shown being in position prior to silver soldering...

Merry Christmas, y'all!!!

Attached Images

during-after.jpg (99.8 KB, 253 views)

Folks,

Is there a kind soul in the northeast Illinois area who owns a 39-2 or 39? I would like to examine said pistol (since I have not bought one yet), so I can continue work on the slide lock for the Hush Puppy replica. This is pretty much the last thing that needs to be done...

Thanks in advance...

Happy New Year!!!

Folks,

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO EVERYONE!!!

To keep moving forward, I am about to reconnect with a custom barrel maker in North Carolina about custom 5" threaded barrels. BUT, in the event this fails, I feel a barrel sleeve will work. Anyone know of gunsmiths anywhere in the country willing to do such sleeving work? TIA...

Hi Dave,while searching the silencer forums,i found a thread about a company called "Hooper Ordnance" who have done threaded barrel sleeves in the past for customers for their model 39 pistols that turned out great.

I’ve been watching your build with interest. In an earlier post you stated the Mk 22 Mod 0 rear sight was the same as on the 2nd and 3rd generation pistols.

If so, how does the standard 2nd/3rd generation rear sight compensate for the much, much taller front sight? I have a 559 and I don’t see any way a shooter could actually zero the pistol with a stock rear and the Mk 22 Mod 0 tall front sight. Not enough travel.

I think the Mk 22 Mod 0 rear is taller. Look at the position of the locating pin in the side of the protective “ear”. Looks to be located much further up than a stock sight. I suspect the “ears” are also taller.

Az,

Welcome to this addiction, my friend...

You ARE correct in stating the rear sight "wings" are higher in height than the conventional wings are. What I was referring (I humbly beg your apologies...) is the actual rear sight body within the wings. I previously posted a PDF copy of the patent drawings as award to Dwayne Chirron for that sight. The ONLY truly different part is the elevation screw, which is much taller than the standard screw...

I am trying to determine how to most cost-effectively recreate the 5" threaded barrel for the Hush Puppy. Whether a barrel sleeve, a threaded barrel extension, or an entirely new barrel is the point under discussion now...

Is there any reason one of the 5inch PC barrels for the 952/PPC9/3566/IDPA 5906 would not fit? I do not know if it would be the most cost effective and I have never measured the OD of my 559 barrel against one of my PC pistols but they are probably close. The PC still stocks the 5inch barrels. I have re-barreled two of my PC pistols and I think the total cost was less than 250. Would be much less since you only need the barrel.

Az,

I will look into this idea later this week...

AZ,

I received an email from S&W regarding those 5" barrels in a 39 or 39-2. They said no way...

Back to the drawing board...

AZ, et al.,

Based on the lack of communication with the custom barrelmaker, it has been decided to use a threaded barrel extension to lengthen the barrel to 5"...

More details soon...

Folks,

Based on the decision to go with a threaded barrel extension, I have attached a PDF copy of the drawing to this post...

Yes, I am disappointed to have to go this route, but given the fact no one wishes to make a true 5" threaded barrel for the 39 series, we are "stuck" going this route...

Attached Files

mk22barrelextension.pdf (168.4 KB, 199 views)