All steel single-stack 9's
- Thread starter scwv67
- Start date
I think there was an aftermarket company making steel frames for the 39 series guns, but they ran afoul of both S&W and the ATF. At least that's what I remember from a not too in the distant past thread here.
Plus it appears that the Model 52 frame is steel and based on the Model 39.
I'm far from an first generation expert, so hopefully someone will come along and give you better information.
Plus it appears that the Model 52 frame is steel and based on the Model 39.
I'm far from an first generation expert, so hopefully someone will come along and give you better information.
there were some model 39 steel frames made. you see them for sale from time to time. watch the internet sites. smith also made a model 539 in blue and 639 in stainless. either of these would be easier and much cheaper then an original steel frame 39.
Were the 539 and 639 steel framed? I was under the impression they were alloy.
I'm with you on the 3916. As much as I love my '13, I'd love an all-steel version of it. I've occasionally seen a 3906 for sale, but I just can't get past the square trigger guard. I know some either love them or don't care, but I'm not one of them.
I think a 3916 might have defeated the purpose of having a compact single stack. But, that's just me. Other people might say that if you want a lightweight single stack 9mm, buy a Shield.
I do wish that there was a S&W 9mm single stack compact with a frame mounted decocker. Or at least one that didn't say SIG on the slide.
I think a 3916 might have defeated the purpose of having a compact single stack. But, that's just me. Other people might say that if you want a lightweight single stack 9mm, buy a Shield.
I do wish that there was a S&W 9mm single stack compact with a frame mounted decocker. Or at least one that didn't say SIG on the slide.
You may be right, but I still want one. But I sometimes I will IWB carry my 5906 though
so I don't think the extra weight over the 3913 would bother me.
I never carried my 5906 in anything but a duty holster. Loaded it weighs a ton. Even the 5904 I had for a couple of years was heavy with a 15 round magazine.
My 6906 feels much lighter on the few occasions when I carried it concealed.
My 6906 feels much lighter on the few occasions when I carried it concealed.
You may be right, but I still want one. But I sometimes I will IWB carry my 5906 though
1775usmarine
Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2013
- Messages
- 694
- Reaction score
- 677
My LGS has had a 3906 in his case for about 2 yrs now wants 599 is that a decent price? It appears in good shape needs a cleaning though and has adj rear sight. I have yet to find one in my searches online.
Here are my all steel single stack 9mm's. They all shoot better that I do. Enjoy
Steel 539
Stainless steel 639
Stainless steel 952
Steel 539
Stainless steel 639
Stainless steel 952
I want a 39, a 439, a 539, a 639, a 952, a 3904, a 3906, a 3913, and a 3914.
I don't want much, do I?
And, I don't even LIKE Smith & Wessons. (I keep telling myself that, hoping to convince myself to stop buying them. It's not working)
I don't want much, do I?
And, I don't even LIKE Smith & Wessons. (I keep telling myself that, hoping to convince myself to stop buying them. It's not working)
Last edited:
Engine49guy
Member
The 2nd gen numbering system used the "4" to indicate aluminum frame, "5" to indicate steel frame (in blue or nickel ) and "6" to indicate SS in the S&W autos such as the 439, 539 and 639 single stacks or the 459, 559 and 659 double stacks.
Thank you.
Too much IMO. Fairly price S&W autos in my area are usually gone in few days.
nocents
Member
I do wish that there was a S&W 9mm single stack compact with a frame mounted decocker. Or at least one that didn't say SIG on the slide.
are you talking about this sig????........I shot one and I like it almost as much as my 3913's...........................almost..alloy frame..SS slide..single stack....frame decocker ...gee...where have I heard people wishing they could find that gun and with
parts readily available.....P.S. it has a hammerAttachments
I've seen a few listed lately, both by private parties and dealers. The best price I saw was $550.00 with box, two mags, and a holster by a private party. That was listed the day after I bought the 64-6, so I had to pass even if I wanted it. Lately, I've been tempted to stray from the true path of S&W. I think what I'll do is the modifications to the 3913TSW ambi decocker/safety that I talked about in that thread.
are you talking about this sig????........I shot one and I like it almost as much as my 3913's...........................almost..alloy frame..SS slide..single stack....frame decocker ...gee...where have I heard people wishing they could find that gun and with
nocents
Member
I have trained with the slide decocker on the 3rd. gens I have and it is intuitive for me ..........but a frame decock only TDA 3913 would be....................................................you could leave your files in the toolbox
.........you could leave your files in the toolbox
They would of course by the S&W 3933. They pop on on GB about once a week.
I have trained with the slide decocker on the 3rd. gens I have and it is intuitive for me ..........but a frame decock only TDA 3913 would be...........................................
Yeah, not a fan of the square trigger guard either, but you could always round it off and have it bead-blasted. As long as your cool doing that to a hard-to-find model (i.e. - committed to keeping it).
Or a 3913.
For me, I don't think the weight difference would be a big deal. It probably wouldn't be heavier than a loaded compact .45, like a 457 or 4513, or maybe even a full-size double-stack 9mm. With a good belt, I've found that weight is usually not a big factor.
The only reason I haven't jumped on a 3906 yet is the longer grip, which pretty much negates any advantage over a double-stack for me with carrying.
cpeblue
Member
The only reason I haven't jump on a 3906 is not finding a good adjustable sight version yet.
brentb636
Member
are you talking about this sig????........I shot one and I like it almost as much as my 3913's...........................almost..alloy frame..SS slide..single stack....frame decocker ...gee...where have I heard people wishing they could find that gun and with
Or THIS !
Only a couple of hundred made but there is also the PC, SD9.... which was a stainless steel frame 6906 (so not a single stack) with a 4.25 inch barrel.........
Shoots like a .22
Shoots like a .22
Last edited:
Racer X
Member
539 blued steel frame and slide, 639 stainless frame, stainless slide
I own a 439, with a clear anodized alloy frame, blued steel slide, not the more common "blue" or "black" coating. So mine is 2 tone. I like the look. Also has the adjustable later rear sights
legelegel
Member
I have three single stacked S&W Models in 9mm, 39-2, 639 and 3913LS. Only the middle one has a steel frame. I never liked the look or the feel of the Model 59 or S&W's 2nd or 3rd generation followups except the Models 915 and 910. I have a Model 910S. I doubt that I will ever buy another S&W Model pistol in 9mm, unless someone can convince me that I do not have the primary different looks of the S&W 9mm pistols covered in these 4 pistols.
The S&M 910S with one in chamber and a fully loaded 17 round flush magazine make this pistol a bit heavy for carry. It is really amazing though that it can provide twice the firepower of my S&W Models 39-2 and 639.
The S&M 910S with one in chamber and a fully loaded 17 round flush magazine make this pistol a bit heavy for carry. It is really amazing though that it can provide twice the firepower of my S&W Models 39-2 and 639.
Attachments
Last edited:
Similar threads
