2nd gen. compared to 3rd gen. pistols?

[heisler]

I have come across a 669 that has caught my attention. How does this model (and other 2nd gen. models)
compare to the 3rd generation models in regards to accuracy and reliability?

Anything I should watch out for?

What were they normally going for before the current bump in prices?

Thanks!

Heisler

 

[824tsv]

I can't comment on 3rd gen pistols, but I have (2) 2nd gen's, a 645 and 659. Both have adjustable sights. The 645 is a tack driver, and the 659 is very accurate with factory ammo. I have reloaded some 9mm and find the 659 a little finicky with some of the loads I've made, but factory ammo is no problem. I'm quite pleased with both and would recommend them.

 

[S&W5906]

The sights on them makes a big difference. My 59 has fixed sights. The 659 has fully adjustable. The 5906 has Novak sights. While I like Novak sights, the adjustable ones are better.

 

[357larry]

I have a few 2nd generation pistols. A 645 and a 659, both with fixed sights, along with a 639 that I have 2 slides for, one with adjustable sights, and the one that came on the gun with fixed. I actually prefer the fixed sights. The only 3rd generation I have is a 4006.\

I am fonder of the 2nd generation smiths than I am of the 3rd generation pistols. I have never had any problems with them and I like their triggers. I really have not found anything with the 3rd generation guns to get excited about. I hate the one piece, one size fits all grips. The only thing the 3rd generations offer which I considered an improvement was the option of Novak sights.

The 669 is a gun I have been looking at lately. I think it would make an excellent car gun. I just wish S&W would have made it with a steel frame instead of alloy.

 

[flyguy8555]

I carry a 469 (Blued version of the 669) and I love it. Great concealed carry weapon. I painted a couple of white dots on the rear sight and touched up the front sight slot with flourescent orange paint - helps a lot. The 469 and 669 should be considered "almost 3rd generation", since they don't have the barrel bushing that the 1st and the other 2nd generation pistols have. As far as I know, the only improvements the 3rd gen compacts (like the 6906) have over the 2nd gens are the improved sights, better attaching of the ambidexterous safety/decocker (no phillips screw), and different grip. On the 469 and 669, save yourself some grief and put a drop of locktite on the phillips screw that holds the right side safety/decocker lever on, otherwise it'll work it's way out when you're firing. Other than that it's a great pistol.

 

[boatboy]

I have a 6906 its great
I also have a 669 I just hate that stupid screw on the starboard side

But this is picking pepper out of fly poop they both great

Hank

 

[AzRedleg]

I currently own/owned a few second generation pistols and a few third generation pistols.

For me:

Reliability: Never had a malfunction that I didn't induce with either second or third generation (low power handloads). Mine have shot everything from semiwadcutter to roundnose with no issues.

Accuracy: Slight edge to the 3rd generation guns. I have found that frequently the removable barrel bushings used in the 2nd generation pistols are not a tight fit. They seem tight when the pistol is in battery but pull the slide slightly to the rear (which is where it will be prior to the bullet exiting the muzzle) by a couple hundredths and they are usually a pretty loose fit. The fixed bushing 3rd generation guns do not seem to have as much play.

I had a 639 that wouldn't shoot better than about 5 inches off the bags at 25 yards and a 559 that would do about 3 inches consistently off the bags at 25 yards, and better on occasion. This is plenty accurate for a service pistol.

Most of the 3rd generation pistols I have fired shoot more in the 3inch range with a bullet/load combo it liked. Your results may vary.

Ergonomics: I personally prefer the 3rd generation pistols, especially the double stacks. The grip feels slightly thinner and has a better contour at least for me. By far the best ergonomically for me are the 2nd generation single stacks.

Look out for: I have owned loosely and more tightly fitted pistols in both the 2nd and 3rd series, even when they were in new condition. Either way they all were reliable, just accuracy falls off with the more loosely fitted pistols. Unless it is a police trade in it is unlikely it has seen more than a couple thousand rounds. I have yet to wear one out and I shoot about 300 rounds average each week. If it passes a functions check it will most likely work just fine even if the exterior is well worn.

 

[Gunhacker]

The 2nd and 3rd gen pistols have more in common internally than what people realize, the majority of changes are refinements on the existing design, changes to simplify the manufacturing process to make them easier (cheaper) to produce, such as eliminating the grip frame back strap and incorporating it into the newer 1 piece grip style of the 3rd gen, and the addition of other safety features.

Going to a fixed barrel bushing versus the removable one on the 2nd gen was one of the changes that simplified things and may have gave them a bit more accuracy in the process... but remember, they are both designed to provide "service" not target grade accuracy. And as previously said "your mileage may vary" depending on the ammo used and your abilities.

The S&W pistols (and most of semi-auto pistols without a removable bushing... SIG, Glock, Browning, etc) have a built in delay that does not allow the barrel to unlock from the slide until pressure levels drop to a safe level and by which time the bullet has usually exited the barrel.

The looseness felt when you slightly pull the slide rearward is there to allow the rearward travel of barrel to continue as the rear of it begins to cam downward (from the action of the cam on the barrel block that engages lugs on the inside of the frame), and not bind at the muzzle end as the slide moves back to start the release of the barrel from the barrel locking lugs on the underside of the slide and extract the spent casing.

Typically before all of this motion starts to happen after firing, the bullet is either just exiting the muzzle or is well on it's way to the target.

I have two 2nd gen's (a 459 and 559), and a number of the 3rd gen's.

Biggest differences I've noticed... on the 3rd gen, much better fixed rear sights with the Novak Lo-mount style, better ergonomics with the slimmer one piece grip and the reshaping (slimming) of the trigger and the frame opening (relief cuts). The ambi-safety lever on the right side is more streamlined with the elimination of the big honking Phillips head screw used on the 2nd gen to affix it to the safety cam.

I say don't give it a second thought about getting a 2nd gen pistol. Prices... depending on condition, in my neck of the woods they were going for between $300 - $400.

 

[sniper47]

I lean towards the 645 in the large frame size and the 659/59 in the medium frame S&W's. I like the grips and angle better with the 2nd gens, but the sights are superior on the 3rd and I prefer the fixed sights.

 

[WHS 5906]

But this is picking pepper out of fly poop they both great

Hank

I have picked the fly poop out of the pepper because I don't like fly poop! But why would you not want to pick the fly poop out of the pepper?

I don't get it.