59/459 pistols
- Thread starter rogo123
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
BigBoss3006
Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2022
- Messages
- 132
- Reaction score
- 113
It has some generational changes from the original 59. They added a FP safety and reinforced the frame forward of the slide stop channel. They changed the sights to the adjustable rear with large protective wing or the traditional lower profile dovetail. Takes the same barrels, grips, mainspring housings, etc.
People commonly say 2nd Gen guns have the worst triggers of all Smith autos. My 459 has a trigger equivalent to my 4006TSW CHP (slightly better) but your mileage may vary
People commonly say 2nd Gen guns have the worst triggers of all Smith autos. My 459 has a trigger equivalent to my 4006TSW CHP (slightly better) but your mileage may vary
Last edited:
Is the trigger better or worse than a 39-2?
BigBoss3006
Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2022
- Messages
- 132
- Reaction score
- 113
Consensus on the forum is probably that its worse. The 2nd Gens were short lived in comparison. The triggers did not have quite the level of hand fitting/attention like 1st Gens, nor was their production streamlined like late MIM Gen 3 triggers.
Of my personal S&Ws, i'd rank them from best worst: 3566 Briley Comp, 4006 Shorty Forty, 39-2, 459, 469, 4006TSW CHP.
Im sure someone else will chime in. That said, i still find even the worst Smith trigger better than quite a number of the the competitors, both of their time and more contemporary offerings
The second gen S&W autos generally are considered to have worse triggers than 1st and 3rd gen. It's not that they are horrible, just not the same. They are acceptable. I was issued a 39 then we went to the 439. The 439 was a lot worse than the 39 but the 39 had been worked on by our range guys and ended up one of the best triggers of any gun I've carried.
After we went to the 439 those of us on SWAT were allowed to carry the 459 if we bought our own. I picked up a used 459 from a local cop. It wasn't a bad trigger, not great. Better than the 439, not as good as the 39 that had been tuned. I let our range guys tune it and it was a lot better. Still not as good as the 39 but very acceptable for duty. I still have the 459 and carry it sometimes.
If it came down to picking either a 59 or a 459 for roughly the same price as a range toy I'd still go with the 459. As bigboss mentioned the 459 has a few improvements over the 59.
Here's my 459.
After we went to the 439 those of us on SWAT were allowed to carry the 459 if we bought our own. I picked up a used 459 from a local cop. It wasn't a bad trigger, not great. Better than the 439, not as good as the 39 that had been tuned. I let our range guys tune it and it was a lot better. Still not as good as the 39 but very acceptable for duty. I still have the 459 and carry it sometimes.
If it came down to picking either a 59 or a 459 for roughly the same price as a range toy I'd still go with the 459. As bigboss mentioned the 459 has a few improvements over the 59.
Here's my 459.
Attachments
I will agree with the consensus so far and add some of my own.
It's been my experience that most every 1st Gen 39/59 has a really very nice single action trigger break. The DA is typically quite heavy but smooth.
The 2nd Gen guns seem to be hit or miss and I have owned a few. My 469 has a decent trigger. My 645 is okay. My 639 is okay, mushy but typical for a 1980's "service" kind of gun. My 659 has a decent SA trigger but the DA is heavy and gritty.
And the real crapweasel: I owned a -NIB- 559 and the trigger was an abomination. The SA trigger was embarrassing and the DA was atrocious in any way you might measure it. Matter of fact, everything about that 559 was a dumper. If that 559 had been my first ever S&W semiautomatic, there's a fine chance I would never have opened an account at this forum.
There is one 2nd Gen model that is irrelevant in this conversation — the 745. 745's are all single action only guns and while both of mine have a fairly heavy trigger break, both are extremely short and beautifully clean, so the heavier weight isn't a distraction. I love the 745 and the ONLY production 1-2-3rd Gen that I would choose over a 745 is a Model 52.
It's been my experience that most every 1st Gen 39/59 has a really very nice single action trigger break. The DA is typically quite heavy but smooth.
The 2nd Gen guns seem to be hit or miss and I have owned a few. My 469 has a decent trigger. My 645 is okay. My 639 is okay, mushy but typical for a 1980's "service" kind of gun. My 659 has a decent SA trigger but the DA is heavy and gritty.
And the real crapweasel: I owned a -NIB- 559 and the trigger was an abomination. The SA trigger was embarrassing and the DA was atrocious in any way you might measure it. Matter of fact, everything about that 559 was a dumper. If that 559 had been my first ever S&W semiautomatic, there's a fine chance I would never have opened an account at this forum.
There is one 2nd Gen model that is irrelevant in this conversation — the 745. 745's are all single action only guns and while both of mine have a fairly heavy trigger break, both are extremely short and beautifully clean, so the heavier weight isn't a distraction. I love the 745 and the ONLY production 1-2-3rd Gen that I would choose over a 745 is a Model 52.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2023
- Messages
- 150
- Reaction score
- 309
I have several S&W 1-3rd gen semi autos, inclusive of both 59 and 459, 39-2, 559, 4006 TSW, etc, and they all have sloppy triggers with a lot of take up and feel mushy. The only exception is the 52-1 but this is a competition / target pistol in SA only, so a different breed.
If you are looking for plinking, and are used to better triggers, you may not find them as enjoyable. I have shot my nickel 459 (which I love the looks of) a couple of times and do not shoot it anymore, rest are now all collectibles or I will be disposing off (4006 TSW, etc).
If you want to plink with a S&W auto, I would consider the model 52. Or you can always go with M41 - those are sweet, and truly a pleasure to plink with, but they are a little more expensive. If you want to stay in the 9mm caliber for plinking, any Beretta 92 would do better for that purpose...full size, compact, compact L, etc...
If you are looking for plinking, and are used to better triggers, you may not find them as enjoyable. I have shot my nickel 459 (which I love the looks of) a couple of times and do not shoot it anymore, rest are now all collectibles or I will be disposing off (4006 TSW, etc).
If you want to plink with a S&W auto, I would consider the model 52. Or you can always go with M41 - those are sweet, and truly a pleasure to plink with, but they are a little more expensive. If you want to stay in the 9mm caliber for plinking, any Beretta 92 would do better for that purpose...full size, compact, compact L, etc...
Mine is in pristine condition (59) and I is accurate and reliable . 415 & 5903 are similar. I wouldn't hesitate to carry one as a duty weapon .
I've owned a 59 for a long time, trigger is fine just needs a bit if getting used to , when shot enough you will stop over thinking it every squeeze and it will be fine. Mine has been a workhorse and has eaten every type and style of bullet weight and profile, it has great balance and mine has been totally reliable and accurate, it is truly one of the early wonder nines.
The "WonderNine" term came in to vogue probably in the 1980's when the larger share of LE departments were transitioning from 6-shot .38 Special revolvers to 9mm handguns.
I believe the qualifications are double action and double stack hi-cap magazine and 9mm chambering.
As it was introduced in 1970… would the S&W 59 be the first ever "WonderNine" even though the term had not yet been coined?
A quick search says the Beretta 92 arrived in 1975. The CZ-75 was the same year. I don't believe the Sig P226 arrived until the 1980's.
Is the S&W Model 59 the first?
I believe the qualifications are double action and double stack hi-cap magazine and 9mm chambering.
As it was introduced in 1970… would the S&W 59 be the first ever "WonderNine" even though the term had not yet been coined?
A quick search says the Beretta 92 arrived in 1975. The CZ-75 was the same year. I don't believe the Sig P226 arrived until the 1980's.
Is the S&W Model 59 the first?
I believe the M59 was truly the first wonder nine.
SGT ROCK 11B
Member
SGT ROCK 11B
Member
I would pick a 5906 over the others. The 559 was the all steel version if you want blue.
When I was a cop they started issuing S&W 9mm pistols. Since lots of cops are not gun enthusiasts they tend to handle their tools roughly. The stainless steel ones were more durable than the blue alloy ones. Still we ditch S&W for Beretta.
Last edited:
This is a silly argument for me to undertake on the S&W Forum but the S&W 5906 is a much better handgun than the Beretta 92F or 92FS and I would think anyone without a preconceived bias would agree.
I certainly do have a preconceived bias, so all I can do is make my argument, but at least admit my bias.
Every different gun has its group of fans and all will make their arguments, but I find many reasons to dislike the Beretta specifically.
I certainly do have a preconceived bias, so all I can do is make my argument, but at least admit my bias.
Every different gun has its group of fans and all will make their arguments, but I find many reasons to dislike the Beretta specifically.
SGT ROCK 11B
Member
As a cop my Department went with S&W 9mm since they had been issuing S&W revolvers since 1940. Beretta and later Glock was chosen. I never would've tried Beretta or Glock but the Police Department bought them.
Today Glock is the choice and Beretta and S&W is just nostalgia. For us who are great shooters we can shoot anything great. But how about the average cop? Glock has no silly decockers, safeties and such. Just basic like a revolver and learn trigger finger discipline.
Just like full size trucks we have many choices.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Ammunition choice - dead horse, maybe - J frames only - .38 Specials only
- Latest: walkin' trails
-
-
-
-
-
-
