39-2 vs 915

[csdmann]

Ok, I have just purchased a 915. I am a sucker for 3rd Gen S&W's (like all of you). I am wondering how the 915 compares to the 39-2. The reason I am asking is that when I first got my 39-2 it was jamming on me. I have seemed to cure the jamming with new springs. The 39-2 has not been shot a lot and is in great condition. I have always had great experiences with the 3rd Gens. Again just looking for input and information from you guys. Thank you in advance.

 

[petepeterson]

My 39-2 doesn't have a lot of rounds through it (by me). It's worked so far.

I own, or have owned quite a few 3rd Gens, including two 915s. I have thousands of rds through them with only one mishap- a stovepipe ejection on a 5906. Happened in the first few mags I fired, and never a problem since, no matter what ammo I'm shooting.

As far as reliability goes, S&W got it right with their 3rd Gen series.

 

[Sevens]

I have a pair of 39-2's and a 915. I'm not exactly sure WHAT it is you'd like to compare about them, but I'll take a few swings anyway.

The double action trigger pull on either is basically lost on me since I don't use either. The single action trigger break is finer on the older 39-2 pistols, but it's certainly acceptable on the 915. Edge: 39-2

The sights are a trade off. The 915 has dovetails so you can change sights if you were to choose, but the 39-2 offers a windage adjustable rear sight, and (IMO of course) a better sight picture. I understand why the 915 has such a cheap/cheesy sight, but it is a slight deficiency. Edge: 39-2

Finish/durability of finish. The 39-2 seems to have varied over the years with some having very nice bluing and anodizing and some with plum coloring and quickly fading anodizing. The 915 came new with a very dull, workmanlike finish that I found pretty attractive! But that finish isn't much for durability. Slight edge to 39-2 here.

Grips: the 39-2 wears classic wood stocks and options are available. The 915 uses the very typical 3rd Gen delrin (plastic) grip. I think the grip is one of the true weaknesses in the 3rd Gen design. They look good but they are slippery and grip options are not much. On the good side, new old stock one-piece delrin grips are not hard to find. Slight edge to 39-2.

Magazines/capacity. The 39-2 is a single stack that originally held 8 in the mag, new production replacement mags are 9-rds now. The 915 uses the familiar 5906 series double stack magazine which are even easier to find and also made by Mec-Gar (the 39-2 is not) which gives you more capacity and are easier and less expensive to buy. So in magazines... Win for 915.

Ammo, feeding, operational reliability: the 39-2 was originally designed in an era where JHP ammo was either very new to market or suspect. Many of the oldest S&W pistols did not have the world's finest reputation for feed reliability in days past. By the era of the 3rd Gen, that had pretty much been solved. Myself -- I use all my S&W pistols for -FUN- and not for carry, so I never feed them anything but FMJ/RN so I have never explored the ability of my older ones to feed odd stuff. But as a blanket statement -- the 915 will certainly have any edge here if there is an edge.

Build quality/longevity. Which is more likely to run and run and not stop and not BREAK? Well, even the "newest" 39-2 is going to be at least 10 years older than the 915 and built on older equipment. The 3rd Gens are often referred to as "tanks" and the 915 fits right in with that description. Fix-it parts aren't hard to find for either pistol if you do break something. Both are well built but the edge has to go to the 915 here.

Curb appeal, "cool factor" ? We'll have to agree that this one will be assessed differently by each person. The 915 is a low-buck, economy version of a workingman's service or duty pistol. The 39-2 is a classic icon in American semi-auto pistol history. I think the 39-2 has it ALL over the 915 here.

Concealed carry, home defense, personal protection? With higher capacity, more feed reliability, better safety features and a fairly thin grip for an otherwise fat double-stack, I think the 915 is the clear winner here as long as your hands fit it and you can handle the carry weight. The 39-2 is slimmer but you give up a LOT for that thinner profile. As a defense gun, generally speaking, the 915 has a large edge here.

Value, future collectibility? The 915 was made only two years... but don't let that fool you in to thinking it is rare. It was made is irrationally high volume for a short stretch before S&W elected to go further in to cost cutting for the "value line" pistols. It was and still is a good buy to get a quality gun for low money. But it's chance of ever being highly sought after as a collectible or iconic gun are extremely low. The 39-2 seems to be more collectible, but they also made tons of them over a far, FAR longer production span. While still collectible, the great number of them tends to keep their prices reasonable. But as I've said a few times... it's a historically significant and iconic pistol. So it may not be the world's humdinger for an "investment" collectible, but it's certainly FAR more suited to that role than a 915 ever could hope to be. Win for the 39-2.

 

[HOUSTON RICK]

The S&W Model 915 is a highly under rated hand gun.

 

[petepeterson]

Sevens- Terrific study! Well said.

 

[TTSH]

Sevens- Terrific study! Well said.

I agree! A pretty impressive and well-thought-out presentation!

While I can't agree 100% on every point, partly because I live in a place where market and desirability is skewed by crazy laws, I think he did an excellent job.

 

[MTS Cop]

The whole 3rd gen line is highly under rated. I can't understand why.

 

[BAM-BAM]

Can't add much to what Seven's has written........

Over the past 25 years I've owned 2/3 39s... all are now gone... wish I still had one for the collection (639)...... but for use/carry........

I'd rather have ..... and do have ...... the smaller 3913/14s with the same 8+1 for concealed carry; and 2 915s for home/range and hi-cap carry.

 

[csdmann]

Sevens thank you for the Great write up and information. I always get the best info here and appreciate all of your input.

 

[Sevens]

Wow guys, appreciate all the nods. I thought I went too long winded. Honestly, I saw this thread when it was first posted and I didn't reply because I figured others would do it in less space and more to the point. But after a whole day-plus, he just wasn't getting anything.

I'm a tremendous fan of all the Smith & Wesson metal frame pistols Gens 1-2-3... some of them MORE than others. But as I use them for fun shooting (usually at steel plates... 10-15 yards away) I usually have no opinion on how any of them rate as a carry, duty or defense gun because I don't choose to use them in that role. But I know that so many of us around here certainly do exactly that. So my opinions tend to fit the role I have for them.

That's why I bought... tried for a short bit... and then sold a CS-9. Great little pistol and I'm glad I had a dance with it, but of precious little use to me.

 

[Sevens]

The whole 3rd gen line is highly under rated. I can't understand why.

I think we'd have to dissect the idea that 3rd Gens are under-rated. If you mean that now, here in the year 2016, they seem to not have a huge following and don't bring higher prices that might represent their ability and stamp on history, I might agree with you that seemingly -many- people don't realize how completely capable, durable and enjoyable these guns are.

However, if we look over their body of work since their late 80's introduction and the fact that these pistols found themselves in duty holsters all across this continent and even in many places around the globe... and we also look back at how many they managed to produce and sell (and this fact is hammered down with EVERY new group of re-imports or "former LE batch" of guns recently made available for sale...) it would simply be wrong to say that they were under rated back in their day.

Obviously, the bulk of the market wants a polymer frame and a striker fire design today. It's not like the Beretta 92 is killing the market that S&W has seemingly abandoned (it is not) and DA/SA (some call it TDA) guns are simply an older design that many or most would agree was fine for the time but that time has since passed.

I suppose I can't really see the 3rd Gen pistols as under-rated, but really, we kind of just end up discussing the definition of "under rated" as much or more as we do the pistols themselves. I would imagine that almost ALL of us can agree that simple economics has helped doom the 3rd Gen line. You only need to look at a completely bare, stripped, empty 3rd Gen frame to see every little hole, rail, edge, and spot where that steel had to be milled or cut or worked over and you can see why and how a for-profit manufacturer simply HAD to move on from building them. They can not only sell ten M&P pistols in the time it would take to sell one 3rd Gen... they can probably make three M&P's for the same manufacturing cost as a 3rd Gen and they can do it infinitely faster with far less actual work, wear and tear on equipment and sadly... they can do it with a lot less human skill.

 

[tsillik]

Very good info sevens, I am new to the S&W line, I like the older pistols in any make, I really like the 539 but they seem to be few and far between seems there are a few more 39's out there, probably go that route. terry

 

[Triathloncoach]

Sevens, if you write anything else I promise to "like." I've got an eye open for the 39-2, but 2016 I caught the 10mm bug, 1076 & Glock 40. There is only so much financial infidelity shenanigans one can get away with when married to a gun loathing CPA. But for some reason she loves me .

Thank you for taking the time to share. Maybe I can start with sneaking in a well used shooter 39-2.

 

[grcoffman104]

I lighten my 915 for carry using this ammo. Each round feels like a snap cap weight wise over traditional ammo
55 grn and 2000fps.

 

[jimbo728]

All of Smiths metal auto`s will have a place in my heart. At a LGS I visited recently, with a lot of pistols on display there was not one in the cases. All that were there all looked alike,so a 1st, 2nd or 3rd gen Smith would have looked like a pizza in a Chinese restaurant.
Sevens, I enjoyed your comparison.
Jim

 

[thedr15]

I agree! A pretty impressive and well-thought-out presentation!

While I can't agree 100% on every point, partly because I live in a place where market and desirability is skewed by crazy laws, I think he did an excellent job.

WOW sevens! That was a looong write up but thoughtful.
I've owned many S&W autos over the years but I always seem to come back to the First Gens. They just have an appeal to me that no other pistol has. I've been shooting and collecting guns for more than five decades now and just recently bought a 439. It is just an updated 39-2. I presently have a 3913, a 1911 E-series 45ACP , a model 15 and a model 19. I've owned 3 39-2's, 3 3913's, a 4563, a 645 and a 915 over the years.
I just love S&W for their quality and history in gun manufacturing.