Shot the Model 3913 and the P239 (9mm) the other night. Both were reliable and accurate, and shooting them together reinforced the idea that these are similar pistols. This comparison has been made before, but following are some observations and comments:
Both have steel slides, aluminum frames, and traditional double actions (aka “DA/SA”). Both have decockers; only the 3913 has a safety. Both hold 8 rounds in their standard magazines (10 round magazines are also available for the P239). .
The P239 remains in production; the 3913 ceased production in 1999, although some small scale bespoke production continues(d) intermittently for LE customers. P239’s list for $777, and 3913’s in good shape can be had in the $400-500 range on auction sites.
P239
Overall length 6.6
Overall height 5.1
Width 1.2
Barrel length 3.6
Weight (ounces) 29.5
Model 3913
Overall length 6.75
Overall height 5.0
Width 1.0 – 1.4 (at decocker)
Barrel length 3.5
Weight (ounces) 25
The sights on both pistols are versions of the Novak Lo-Mount style. My P239’s sights are larger and easier to see than my 3913’s.
Both guns were well-oiled with Breakfree LP prior to the session – perhaps more than necessary. The 3913 has a tendency to push oil out the back of the rails, next to the hammer – copious amounts of oil. (I may switch to using grease in the future).
My 3913 throws the brass further – even though it has a new recoil spring, the slide seems to cycle a bit faster.
The 3913’s factory Xenoy grips are excellent, in my view a little “grippier” than the stock P239 grips were – but I had replaced those a while ago with Hogue G-10 grips, which are excellent and better even than the S&W grips. Neither pistol can be faulted in the grip department, though. I added some 3M stair tape (aka skater tape) to the front strap of the P239, where the 3913 has cut checkering that works pretty well.
The P239 is easier to field strip. In terms of mechanical robustness, the P239 enjoys a simpler and perhaps more elegant design, with fewer parts. And these parts are available from Sig, if needed, whereas the 3913 has been out of production long enough that many parts are in short supply. A threaded barrel, suitable for a silencer, is available for the P239, but a similar barrel for the 3913 would be hard to find. I can see the virtue in a silencer for a pistol of this size, particularly if one ever has to use it for self-defense in a closed-in environment.
Both guns fit the same niche – somewhat heavy TDA single stack 9mm pistols, good at controlling recoil, easy to conceal in a holster. The 3913 was introduced a number of years before the Gun Control Act of 1995, and the P239 was introduced right after it, but both meet the below-10-rounds requirements of the law, which probably contributed to their popularity in the later 1990’s. It’s funny in a way that we think of the 3913 as an “old” design, part of the family of 3rd Generation S&W pistols that are slowly disappearing. The P239, from roughly the same era, has survived and is still in production so may be said to be thriving, although I see it criticized on the forums for being large and heavy for its relatively low ammunition capacity – especially when compare to the polymer striker-fired pistols of the current generation.
Overall, I think both the P239 and the 3913 are underappreciated by most, but generate strong loyalty among those who have chosen them for keepers. Which is the “better” pistol? That depends on personal preference. This is my favorite size pistol, with a nice compromise between number of rounds, size, and weight. I shoot both well. I’m keeping both of them.
Both have steel slides, aluminum frames, and traditional double actions (aka “DA/SA”). Both have decockers; only the 3913 has a safety. Both hold 8 rounds in their standard magazines (10 round magazines are also available for the P239). .
The P239 remains in production; the 3913 ceased production in 1999, although some small scale bespoke production continues(d) intermittently for LE customers. P239’s list for $777, and 3913’s in good shape can be had in the $400-500 range on auction sites.
P239
Overall length 6.6
Overall height 5.1
Width 1.2
Barrel length 3.6
Weight (ounces) 29.5
Model 3913
Overall length 6.75
Overall height 5.0
Width 1.0 – 1.4 (at decocker)
Barrel length 3.5
Weight (ounces) 25
The sights on both pistols are versions of the Novak Lo-Mount style. My P239’s sights are larger and easier to see than my 3913’s.
Both guns were well-oiled with Breakfree LP prior to the session – perhaps more than necessary. The 3913 has a tendency to push oil out the back of the rails, next to the hammer – copious amounts of oil. (I may switch to using grease in the future).
My 3913 throws the brass further – even though it has a new recoil spring, the slide seems to cycle a bit faster.
The 3913’s factory Xenoy grips are excellent, in my view a little “grippier” than the stock P239 grips were – but I had replaced those a while ago with Hogue G-10 grips, which are excellent and better even than the S&W grips. Neither pistol can be faulted in the grip department, though. I added some 3M stair tape (aka skater tape) to the front strap of the P239, where the 3913 has cut checkering that works pretty well.
The P239 is easier to field strip. In terms of mechanical robustness, the P239 enjoys a simpler and perhaps more elegant design, with fewer parts. And these parts are available from Sig, if needed, whereas the 3913 has been out of production long enough that many parts are in short supply. A threaded barrel, suitable for a silencer, is available for the P239, but a similar barrel for the 3913 would be hard to find. I can see the virtue in a silencer for a pistol of this size, particularly if one ever has to use it for self-defense in a closed-in environment.
Both guns fit the same niche – somewhat heavy TDA single stack 9mm pistols, good at controlling recoil, easy to conceal in a holster. The 3913 was introduced a number of years before the Gun Control Act of 1995, and the P239 was introduced right after it, but both meet the below-10-rounds requirements of the law, which probably contributed to their popularity in the later 1990’s. It’s funny in a way that we think of the 3913 as an “old” design, part of the family of 3rd Generation S&W pistols that are slowly disappearing. The P239, from roughly the same era, has survived and is still in production so may be said to be thriving, although I see it criticized on the forums for being large and heavy for its relatively low ammunition capacity – especially when compare to the polymer striker-fired pistols of the current generation.
Overall, I think both the P239 and the 3913 are underappreciated by most, but generate strong loyalty among those who have chosen them for keepers. Which is the “better” pistol? That depends on personal preference. This is my favorite size pistol, with a nice compromise between number of rounds, size, and weight. I shoot both well. I’m keeping both of them.
Last edited:
