3rd Gen Frankengun build

[1775usmarine]

So I won a stripped 5906 frame off that auction site a few weeks back and had my local ffl/custom shop bead blast it back to its matte finish for $25. I also at that time won a 915 parts kit sans guide rod/spring, slide stop assembly, and sear pin. I order a new guide rod/spring from midway usa and topped it off with an order from numrich for a sear pin, new hammer strut, new hammer pin, new main spring, new drawbar plunger spring, and new blued slide stop assembly.

I'm torn from this point on as i would like to use a 6904,6906/3914,3913 slide which if blued which is where I'm leaning would be refinished. The 06/13 slide would get stripped and bead blasted. I would probably also use a spurless hammer as well hence the strut and pin. I currently have a bid on a S&W 33-1 as well.

I noticed on that auction site that there is now a glut of majority imported 6904's and 6906's ranging from 389 to 225 without shipping as well as quality of fit and finish. I have $425 to spend which is my allowance from items I sold off. I could go with the nicer $389 6904 and swap slides, or I could go with the low end 6904 and have both slides cerakoted to as close as to the factory color and also do the 6904 frame. I'm just concerned with the finish on the high end of the 6904 as this would be the second blued S&W I own though the first to see extensive range and carry use. I know the value series finish on my 909 and others isn't that great, but does the same hold true for the 6904's and the rest of the line up?

I know if I go with the lower end I will have cash left over to refinish and if need be rehab the 6904 frame parts wise outside of springs. I could still try my luck on another 33-1 that's been around the block a few times as I was outbid on it while typing and posting pics. I guess I'm just a bit stuck in my build as I have too many options and outcomes to consider.


BEFORE FRAME

AFTER FRAME

 

[BAM-BAM]

Well I won't be much help..... FWIW ..... I went the opposite way.

My FrankenSmith is a 6915....... a short frame from a 6906 mated to a 915 upper.

Added a full hammer and will be adding a fiber optic front sight. . Really liking it as a "CCO" concealed carry.... two tone for good looks...... IWB the longer slide doesn't matter...... balances well ........ full hammer for those long first shots ........ short butt for concealed carry (extra mag is a 15 round 59xx mag with +2 adapter).....


Good luck .................

 

[1775usmarine]

Well I won't be much help..... FWIW ..... I went the opposite way.

My FrankenSmith is a 6915....... a short frame from a 6906 mated to a 915 upper.

Added a full hammer and will be adding a fiber optic front sight. . Really liking it as a "CCO" concealed carry.... two tone for good looks...... IWB the longer slide doesn't matter...... balances well ........ full hammer for those long first shots ........ short butt for concealed carry (extra mag is a 15 round 59xx mag with +2 adapter).....


Good luck .................

I have about $350 invested with the 5906 frame and 915 parts so spending 389 for a decent 6904 would allow me to have 2 frankenguns without having to refinish till later down the road. I'm going to try my luck one more time on a 33-1 since I do have probably 60ish rounds left and would be neat to reload for a 33-1. If I lose again I will give away the ammo so as not to be tempted to buy another 38S&W and focus on the frankenguns.

 

[squidsix]

Well I won't be much help..... FWIW ..... I went the opposite way.

My FrankenSmith is a 6915....... a short frame from a 6906 mated to a 915 upper.

Added a full hammer and will be adding a fiber optic front sight. . Really liking it as a "CCO" concealed carry.... two tone for good looks...... IWB the longer slide doesn't matter...... balances well ........ full hammer for those long first shots ........ short butt for concealed carry (extra mag is a 15 round 59xx mag with +2 adapter).....


Good luck .................

I did this too, then added hipower cuts to the slide. My 6915 is my favored carry piece now.

 

[TercGen]

I almost bid on what was likely the same 5906 stripped frame and 915 kit, glad it went to a good home in the end. Have fun with your builds.

 

[oldman10mm]

How about a 3 1/2" CS9.
3913LS slide on a CS9.

 

[tennexplorer]

I did this too, then added hipower cuts to the slide.

Now we need pictures.

 

[TercGen]

How about a 3 1/2" CS9.
3913LS slide on a CS9.

Unfortunately, the problem with that combo is the gap between the CS9 dustcover and the slide. It's too bad, as I have yet to see a longer top end that will fit on any of the Chiefs Specials without that gap.

 

[1775usmarine]

Well I won a 469 slide and parts yesterday so looks like it will be a 2nd/3rd Gen Frankengun.

 

[Fastbolt]

How about a 3 1/2" CS9.
3913LS slide on a CS9.

Just speaking as an owner of a CS9, 3913 and a 3913TSW, I'd not be interested in trying such a thing with my 3rd gen guns.

Looking at the pictures in the other post, you can see how there's an obvious gap between the rear of the slide's spring box and the front of the frame's dustcover.

What would bother me about this is that the rear of the slide's forward located rails (on the spring box area) aren't already engaged within the frame's forward rails.

The rear of the slide's spring box rails are going to have to move and "meet" the front of the frame's rails as live-fire occurs.

Granted, there's a guide rod body aligned in the slide's guide rod hole, but with generous tolerances I'd still be leery of possible repeated "slightly off center" impacts as the rear edges of the STEEL slide rails might be slamming against the front edges of the ALUMINUM frame rails. Aluminum tends not fare as well as steel when it comes to heavy impacts outside that envisioned by the engineers.

The front of the frame wasn't really intended to be subjected to that sort of high stress impact. The opposing rails were intended (designed) to already be aligned with each other and just slide alongside each other.

Just my thoughts.

 

[1775usmarine]

Still working slowly on finishing my build. I have since bought a 3913 upper and will do all stainless with blued slide release. In the process of polishing the frame and contact areas. Next I will do the slide and hopefully before the end of the year based on the speed I'm going will have it complete.

 

[JohnHL]

Just speaking as an owner of a CS9, 3913 and a 3913TSW, I'd not be interested in trying such a thing with my 3rd gen guns.

Looking at the pictures in the other post, you can see how there's an obvious gap between the rear of the slide's spring box and the front of the frame's dustcover.

What would bother me about this is that the rear of the slide's forward located rails (on the spring box area) aren't already engaged within the frame's forward rails.

The rear of the slide's spring box rails are going to have to move and "meet" the front of the frame's rails as live-fire occurs.

Granted, there's a guide rod body aligned in the slide's guide rod hole, but with generous tolerances I'd still be leery of possible repeated "slightly off center" impacts as the rear edges of the STEEL slide rails might be slamming against the front edges of the ALUMINUM frame rails. Aluminum tends not fare as well as steel when it comes to heavy impacts outside that envisioned by the engineers.

The front of the frame wasn't really intended to be subjected to that sort of high stress impact. The opposing rails were intended (designed) to already be aligned with each other and just slide alongside each other.

Just my thoughts.

The possible mis-alignment of 3913 and CS9 front rails will never be a problem even with the unsightly gap, because the CS9 frame has no front rails to intersect with the 3913 slide's front rails.

That is why you can put a 3913 slide on a CS9 but you can't put a CS9 slide on a 3913.

Of course it is all academic at this point.

I'd like to think that the gap promotes barrel cooling for mall ninja multiple mag dumps.

John

 

[Fastbolt]

The possible mis-alignment of 3913 and CS9 front rails will never be a problem even with the unsightly gap, because the CS9 frame has no front rails to intersect with the 3913 slide's front rails.

That is why you can put a 3913 slide on a CS9 but you can't put a CS9 slide on a 3913.

Of course it is all academic at this point.

I'd like to think that the gap promotes barrel cooling for mall ninja multiple mag dumps.

John

You're right. I overlooked that, but ...

I just grabbed my CS9 & 3913, took them to bench and switched the 3913 slide/barrel onto the CS9 frame. The front of the 3913 spring box is tighter inside the CS9 frame's dustcover than that of the CS9 slide's spring box. The side of the slide rubs against at least one side of the frame as I slowly hand-cycled it.

When I put the CS9 back together, there was a bit more space between the sides of the slide and inside of the frame than when the 3913 slide was on it. Interesting.

I'd still be concerned the sharp leading edge of the rear of the 3913 slide's spring box might hit against the soft edge of the frame during live-fire. Dunno. Not gonna try it.

 

[TercGen]

I'd still be concerned the sharp leading edge of the rear of the 3913 slide's spring box might hit against the soft edge of the frame during live-fire. Dunno. Not gonna try it.

John makes a good point, but this is also my thinking in why I would not put a 3913 slide onto a CS9 frame. If the bottom lug on the slide somehow struck the aluminum frame and gouged (or possibly cracked) it, there's no getting a new one. And I would hate to think of something getting caught in the gap before firing as well...

As I mentioned in another thread on this subject, a 3913TSW pre-rail or a flush-fit, 7-round 3913 metal base plate magazine both achieve the same effect in a much safer manner. And I have both in my collection.

 

[1775usmarine]

Did a test fit of the guts in the frame on Friday. Since it had been a while I last completely stripped on of my smith's I used my 4506 as reference. With everything in place when I manually cock the hammer it locks everything up. I have to remove the sear in order to free it up. Not sure if a DAO sear makes any difference or if using a spurless hammer changes things but need to go back to the drawing board.

 

[Fastbolt]

... With everything in place when I manually cock the hammer it locks everything up. I have to remove the sear in order to free it up.

... Not sure if a DAO sear makes any difference or if using a spurless hammer changes things but need to go back to the drawing board.

What do you mean a DAO sear? Are you trying to use an older (machined) DAO sear in a TDA gun (meaning with a TDA hammer and trigger)? The older/machined TDA & DAO sears are different.

Or a New style MIM sear? (The new MIM sears worked in both TDA & DAO guns using the appropriate new style MIM TDA or DAO hammers and triggers.)

A TDA spurless or spurred hammer has the same geometry, but a DAO hammer is different (and there's a difference between the machined & MIM DAO hammers).

 

[TercGen]

Did a test fit of the guts in the frame on Friday. Since it had been a while I last completely stripped on of my smith's I used my 4506 as reference. With everything in place when I manually cock the hammer it locks everything up. I have to remove the sear in order to free it up. Not sure if a DAO sear makes any difference or if using a spurless hammer changes things but need to go back to the drawing board.

+1 on Fastbolt's questions about your sear, and also some pics might help. Here's a link to BlueBellyYankee's video on frame re-assembly. I personally do it a little bit different, but it's a good guide and will let you know if you missed something.
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8gHexjFR-I[/ame]

 

[1775usmarine]

the sear says "For DA gun use only M Hammer". I'll try to snap a pic tomorrow. Been soaking up the ot at work with little sleep.

 

[Fastbolt]

That's the right language for the MIM sear.

Make sure the tail of the sear isn't caught on the wrong side of the sear spring. That can be an easy oversight when installing it after the hammer has been installed.

The rounded lip of the sear's tail should be on the front (forward side) of the sear spring, so the spring pushes forward against it and tensions the top of the sear to the rear.

 

[1775usmarine]

So its been over a year and decided to get back to putting this thing together. Ive got 3 sears which appear to be the same. The hammers which i didnt really look at in the beginning are shown. Trying to use the hammer on the left. I would assume the hammer is a 2nd gen and some half cock notch?
upload