39/59 Drop-Safe?

[JohnHL]

There's been a lot of discussion lately (again) about just how "drop-safe" S&W 39/59 pistols actually are.

Curious fellow that I am, I went looking in the safe for a model 39 or 59 that I was willing to load and drop, muzzle first, onto concrete.

Just kidding, I don't have any 1st gen pistols.

What I DID have was an old, rusty, pitted 5904 slide that I had cleaned up a few years ago and I now use for "experimental" (emphasis on the mental) purposes.

Serendipitously, it had a firing pin and spring installed but I had removed the firing pin safety from the slide.

The firing pin was free to move, just like a 39/59.

I placed a piece of scotch tape over the firing pin hole in the breech face and unceremoniously dropped the slide onto concrete from a height of three feet.

Keep in mind, this was just the slide.
No additional mass or momentum from the extra weight of the barrel, frame, or magazine.

I tried it several times.

Each time, the firing pin punctured or broke the scotch tape.

Would that be enough force to ignite a primer?

Probably yes.

John

 

[k22fan]

Technically S&W 1st generation pistols are not drop safe but can anyone document a case of one going off when hitting the ground? The Walther P-38 firing pin block used in Series 80 Colt 1911s and 2nd generation S&Ws is designed to prevent the pistol firing if it lands on its muzzle. In the real world that does not happen. The heaviest part of standard shaped hand guns is high and to the rear so when dropped from waist height or higher they usually land on their rear sight or hammer spur.

I suggest you run your experiment again with the slide mounted on a frame that is wrapped with something soft to protect it from scratches. Also, be sure to have the factory firing pin spring installed so that the pin has to acquire enough momentum to over power the spring before it contacts the tape.

 

[Fastbolt]

Technically S&W 1st generation pistols are not drop safe but can anyone document a case of one going off when hitting the ground? ...

Only second hand.

One of my former partners used to carry a 1st gen 39 at a former agency.

One day, while we were talking about our 3rd gen guns (we were both S&W armorers), he told me about a time when he was carrying an older 1st gen 39 on-duty, and it discharged when it hit the pavement. He said he became involved in a foot chase of a suspect. If I remember right, he'd decided to reholster his weapon so he could run after the suddenly fleeing suspect, but hadn't secured the strap.

Anyway, he said that at one point he felt the 39 come out of the holster, and that it tumbled in the air beside him and then landed muzzle down on the street. It fired.

Nobody was hit by the bullet or its fragments, but while he was having his "aw, damn it" moment, the suspect suddenly stopped running and surrendered.

Yep, the suspect had thought the cop had decided to shoot at him, so he stopped and gave up. My partner said he got a little grief over that incident because of the unintentional discharge.

 

[JohnHL]

Technically S&W 1st generation pistols are not drop safe but can anyone document a case of one going off when hitting the ground? The Walther P-38 firing pin block used in Series 80 Colt 1911s and 3rd generation S&Ws is designed to prevent the pistol firing if it lands on its muzzle. In the real world that does not happen. The heaviest part of standard shaped hand guns is high and to the rear so when dropped from waist height or higher they usually land on their rear sight or hammer spur.

It looks like Fastbolt just described a "real world" case..

I suggest you run your experiment again with the slide mounted on a frame that is wrapped with something soft to protect it from scratches. Also, be sure to have the factory firing pin spring installed so that the pin has to acquire enough momentum to over power the spring before it contacts the tape.

I wasn't trying to prove how often a handgun lands muzzle down when dropped.
I was trying to find out what would happen if it did.

And yes, the firing pin spring was installed during the testing.

John

 

[JohnHL]

BREAKING NEWS!!!!

Update.

I realize some will say my use of a third gen slide and firing pin (with spring) does not completely duplicate a 1st gen slide.

I DO have a 39/59 slide assembly that is far too nice to drop on concrete.

So I ran the test by dropping the 39/59 slide onto a somewhat dense piece of packing material that came with some ammo.

Guess what?

IT STILL BROKE THE TAPE!!!

I love all the gens, but I don't think I'd carry a 1st gen.

John

 

[jimbo728]

Not a disqualifying factor for me, if I still had a 1st Gen, as the pistol is a great pistol. Knowing about the drop issue is just another "be careful".
Jim

 

[Fastbolt]

Consider there might've been more than one reason for some agencies to have once required their folks carry their early 39/59's On-Safe.

 

[Alk8944]

Technically S&W 1st generation pistols are not drop safe but can anyone document a case of one going off when hitting the ground?

Yes, I can document one case of a Model 39 firing when dropped, or more directly when being used as a bludgeon when nothing else was at hand in an extremely stressful situation. I will not elaborate!!!!!

I can duplicate the situation and have demonstrated this tendency of the Model 39, and by extension the Model 59, several times with witnesses.

We even had an officer who claimed his M-39 discharged in his holster when jumping down from a chair, with witnesses! No, I didn't believe that one when it happened and I don't believe it now.


"In the real world that does not happen. The heaviest part of standard shaped hand guns is high and to the rear so when dropped from waist height or higher they usually land on their rear sight or hammer spur."

BS! A gun is not a cat! It is a heavy chunk of metal that when dropped with no outside force acting upon it will strike the ground in the same position as when dropped. Go to any gun store and look over the used guns and you will see damage in every location imaginable from being dropped or striking a hard surface. The typical distance dropped, about three feet, is not sufficient distance for aerodynamic forces to cause it to rotate so the heaviest part is down.

 

[vegasgunhand]

As a Public Service, I will gladly take any of these potentially dangerous Gen 1 39/59 pistols from their owners. I will supply my
shipping address to anyone who feels threatened by these pistols being in their possession. Again, I am simply doing this as a public service. LOL.

 

[BC38]

"In the real world that does not happen. The heaviest part of standard shaped hand guns is high and to the rear so when dropped from waist height or higher they usually land on their rear sight or hammer spur."

BS! A gun is not a cat! It is a heavy chunk of metal that when dropped with no outside force acting upon it will strike the ground in the same position as when dropped. Go to any gun store and look over the used guns and you will see damage in every location imaginable from being dropped or striking a hard surface. The typical distance dropped, about three feet, is not sufficient distance for aerodynamic forces to cause it to rotate so the heaviest part is down.

While I wouldn't play the BS card, I have to agree with this statement.

As David Scott proved, weight of an object does not determine its falling speed or orientation. On earth that is determined by it's aerodynamics/air resistance. For a solid object like a pistol to reorient itself to land heaviest part first it would have to fall a lot farther than 3-5 feet for air drag to cause the lightest part to be up/heaviest part to be down. It would take more like a 3 HUNDRED foot drop for that to happen. Try holding an arrow horizontal at head height and dropping it. It will still land almost flat - even though it has a heavy head at one end and feathers at the other. Both are aerodynamic features that are specifically designed to make it fly through the air point first. The obvious conclusion is that a gun isn't nearly as aerodynamic as an arrow - so if the arrow can't reorient itself in a 3 foot fall, a gun certainly won't either.

 

[stansdds]

Other than being a solid, as opposed to being a gas or liquid, tape and a primer cup have little in common. A much better test would be to place a primed, but empty cartridge case in the barrel, tape the barrel to the slide so that it cannot unlock, then perform the test drop.

 

[10ring]

Curious...

1. I assume the firing pin spring was not "worn out"

2. I wonder how much change a Wolff XP firing pin spring might make? (not that it would render the gun drop safe in the broader sense)

3. Maybe we should get a group order together and find someone to make a bunch of titanium firing pins.

 

[Fastbolt]

Guys, don't you think that S&W engineers did formal testing of this sort in their 1st gen guns after a while? Hence, the development of the firing pin safety plunger and lever system, and the requisite revision of the firing pin in the 2nd gen and 3rd gen guns?

 

[10ring]

Sorry, double post

 

[10ring]

Guys, don't you think that S&W engineers did formal testing of this sort in their 1st gen guns after a while? Hence, the development of the firing pin safety plunger and lever system, and the requisite revision of the firing pin in the 2nd gen and 3rd gen guns?

Undoubtedly, but it is still interesting to chat about. FWIW, here is a quote from an Ayoob article in American Handgunner 1978:

It has long been established that a 39 or 59, if dropped on the muzzle from a height of three feet or more, will go off. Smith Parabellum buffs argue, logically enough, "If it's only going to go off when it hits the muzzle, that
means the one accidentally-loosed round will go into the floor, so why worry about it?" It is true that while this accident has happened in some police departments that issue such guns, including Salt Lake City PD and Illinois State Police, no one has been injured. That's because they usually get dropped on the street or in the squadroom. And it's true that the 39 or 59
won't go off if dropped on the hammer.

 

[BC38]

Guys, don't you think that S&W engineers did formal testing of this sort in their 1st gen guns after a while? Hence, the development of the firing pin safety plunger and lever system, and the requisite revision of the firing pin in the 2nd gen and 3rd gen guns?

Absolutely.

But that does nothing to address the fact that it is still an issue with the tens of thousands of M59 & M39 pistols still out there in circulation. Therefore it is a valid topic to discuss in a forum dedicated to S&Ws, right?

...FWIW, here is a quote from an Ayoob article in American Handgunner 1978:

It has long been established that a 39 or 59, if dropped on the muzzle from a height of three feet or more, will go off. Smith Parabellum buffs argue, logically enough, "If it's only going to go off when it hits the muzzle, that means the one accidentally-loosed round will go into the floor, so why worry about it?" It is true that while this accident has happened in some police departments that issue such guns, including Salt Lake City PD and Illinois State Police, no one has been injured. That's because they usually get dropped on the street or in the squadroom. And it's true that the 39 or 59
won't go off if dropped on the hammer.

My answer to the highlighted question above would be that the accidentally loosed round may go THROUGH the floor - and into someone or something in the room below. For example: the floors in my house are made of plywood sheathing - and my kids hang out in the basement a lot.

That's why I would worry about it.

 

[JohnHL]

Other than being a solid, as opposed to being a gas or liquid, tape and a primer cup have little in common. A much better test would be to place a primed, but empty cartridge case in the barrel, tape the barrel to the slide so that it cannot unlock, then perform the test drop.

That is a good point and I considered it before I settled on using tape for the test protocol.

I abandoned the idea of using a primed cartridge for several reasons.

First is that I didn't have any primed cases without resorting to bullet pulling and powder dumping.

Second is that I'm unaware of any universal standard for primer sensitivity.

Third (related to the second) is that I don't want to depend on the most explosive part of the loading equation (the primer) as a "safety device".

Fourth, I wanted quick and easy repeatability.

Fifth, I wanted inexpensive (my nature).

Sixth, I consider ANY time a firing pin strikes a primer as a potential discharge.

My testing surprised me in that it didn't take a great deal of force to get the firing pin to move enough to protrude through the hole and puncture the tape.

One of the tests involved hitting the slide noses against a wood block on my bench.

Yup. That also broke the tape.

Bottom line:

On a 1st gen pistol, a sensitive primer and a sudden jolt could very likely result in an unintended discharge.

Sufficiently likely that S&W (and other gun makers) was willing to spend a bunch of money to re-engineer for a firing pin safety.

John

 

[JohnHL]

Curious...

1. I assume the firing pin spring was not "worn out"

Neither firing pin spring on either slide seemed to be "worn out".
Both were used, but judging by the relative pressure required to compress them by hand, they felt about the same as any other.

Besides, it was two different slides, from two different generations (1st and 3rd) with two different firing pins and springs.

Yet identical results.

2. I wonder how much change a Wolff XP firing pin spring might make? (not that it would render the gun drop safe in the broader sense)

I thought about that but didn't test it.

And yes, theoretically it should make a difference.

But maybe not enough. (And not enough to make me comfortable.)

3. Maybe we should get a group order together and find someone to make a bunch of titanium firing pins.

Much like the extra power spring, it should provide some relief, but it's still not a positive lock.

John

 

[JohnHL]

Guys, don't you think that S&W engineers did formal testing of this sort in their 1st gen guns after a while? Hence, the development of the firing pin safety plunger and lever system, and the requisite revision of the firing pin in the 2nd gen and 3rd gen guns?

Yes.

I certainly did!

But until I conducted these tests, it had all been anecdotal and conjectural.

These tests were an eye opener for me and (I hope) for others.

John

 

[Sevens]

I've found this discussion interesting but wanted to comment in a couple of your enumerated bullet points, if nothing else then simply to add my opinion.

#2 re: primer sensitivity... there exist no "official" source that I have been made aware of but it's almost universally agreed upon that the Federal SP primer is THE lightest sensitivity primer available on the market, hands down, and I have some revolvers that have proven this to me over and over again. I'd bet my wallet on this. Bottom line is, for this kind of testing, if you seek the most sensitive primer, get the Federal 100 SP non-magnum.

#3 agreed and it leads me to:

#6 any time a firing pin contacts a primer... well, let me first say that I CANNOT AGREE MORE and at the same time, the AR-15 is designed this way and it's easy to see (every single time) and I hate hate hate this aspect of the AR-15 design. FWIW, my Walther GSP-c .32 Wadcutter target pistol, though I love it so... does also. With absolutely every chambered round in both firearms, the damn firing pin (by design!) bounces off the primer. ARRRGH!

My position... I found your test interesting and spawning great discussion, and I take your side in not particularly caring to carry a 1st Gen for exactly this reason.

But point#6 is what finally spurred me on to add my comment. The AR-15 will leave it's mark on EVERY round that you chamber, I can only suggest that if anyone reading may not agree with this... FIND A SAFE BACKSTOP and check your own, you'll see. I've not seen an AR-15 that doesn't. I really hate it.