Does "Pinned & Recessed" have any practical value?

[bushmaster1313]

Other than cachet, do the "pinned" barrels and the "recessed" cylinders have a ny practical value?

Does the pin make it easier to swap barrel?

The recess for the cylinders looks like a great place to collect gunk.

 

[Maximumbob54]

I believe the pin in the frame and barrel had to do with preventing any barrel twisting as the bullets went down the barrel. The barrel forces the bullets to spin and for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, so the pin guaranteed the barrel would stay true. It seems that modern manufacturing has made it no longer a problem. I would like to see it come back only as a mark of over engineering and a sign of quality.

The recess in the cylinders I’m not so sure of. They collect as much gunk as anything else in the cylinder. They make it a touch more difficult to use speed loaders supposedly. I have never tried one in my Model 19. I know I read somewhere it had something to do with helping you out in case of a ruptured case. Once again, I think of it more as a sign of quality. It would be nice if they brought it back at least as an option.

And I think any of the Classics should have both of these options if they originally shipped with them previously. I love the new 27 Classic but think it’s an odd bird for having the right looks but missing the P/R touches. But it’s still one sweet reproduction.

 

[Geronimo Jim]

I am pretty sure the recess was for a extra margin of safety. However, the most important feature is the warm and fuzzy feeling I get when I fondle my guns!

 

[s&wchad]

.22 rimfires occasionally suffer case head failures, so recessed chambers offer a measure of safety to the shooter and bystanders. That's why they're still recessed today.

Modern magnum centerfire cartridge cases have solid rims and just don’t suffer failures like that. A lot of us think recessed chambers make a gun look better, because there’s less of a gap between the cylinder and recoil shield. On the plus side, you can easily see if a non-recessed gun is unloaded, because the case rims are visible from the side. With a recessed cylinder gun, you need open it to see.

As I understand it, S&W barrels had been crush fit for a long time and the pin was just a carryover selling point. Colt didn’t pinned barrels and it gave S&W another feature to tout.

 

[alfsauve]

Recessed Cylinder

I had always understood that recessed cylinders were a safety feature, especially in rim-fire ammunition, where case (specifically head) ruptures could occur. That was in the days of transition between low pressure black powder and higher pressure smokeless ammo.

I believe that stronger brass has made this feature unnecessary and it is rarely found on modern revolvers.

While crud could keep rounds from seating properly on one hand. On the other the tighter fit of the cylinder might keep crud out of the rear gap.

 

[Art Doc]

Recessed was just a deluxe feature. Colt never did it and the Pythons shoot fine.

The pinned barrels worked better when swapping them. The crush barrel is harder to change out. Also, I believe S&W has had many problems with barrels since eliminating the pin.

 

[Dave T]

P&R may not have any actual mechanical advantage but are indicative of a manufacturing era when the whole revolver was put together with a bit more care and attention to detail.

Then too, if the whole reason for dropping the P&R was "production cost cutting" then there may have been some advantage to their use but it was deemed "not worth the extra trouble" and dropped by order of the bean counters.

Dave

 

[Pook]

I don't think the pinned barrel and recessed (counterbored, really) chambers have any practical advantage. They are more a call back to the "they don't make 'em like they used to" traditionalist point of view, which is understandable when collecting artifacts of historical interest like S&W.

I do not like the counterbored chambers because they do tend to trap more gunk. I have shot C'bored revolvers that, with even a small amount of dirt in the "recess," would cause the cartridge heads to drag on the back of the frame. I never have had that problem with "non"-C'bored chambers that were less likely to trap dirt.

I think the C'bored chambers were originally a safety nod to the old folded, or "balloon" head cases, which could rupture. I do not know if the magnum ammo was ever produced with balloon-head cases, but the modern solid-head cases have made that concern obsolete. The .22 caliber rimfire revolvers still use C'bored chambers because .22 rimfires do use folded heads.

As for the pinned barrel, I don't know when in Smith's engineering history the "pin" appeared, but it could have been a necessity of older manufacturing technology that was carried forward. This is just a guess; I defer to forum members who are much more knowledgeable than me.

It seems to me that Colt has always done fine without the "pinned and recessed" features.

 

[bk43]

As I understand it, S&W barrels had been crush fit for a long time and the pin was just a carryover selling point.

Your memory is right on. S&W went to a crush fit in 1958, eliminating the need for the pin. However, the pin was kept until 1981 as a traditional feature that purists might miss. Clearly they were right as purists are moaning to this day about the pin.

Bob

 

[BE Mike]

I once saw an earlier unpinned barrel become unscrewed while being fired. The group on the paper shifted accordingly. I've never seen a pinned barrel come unscrewed.

 

[Maximumbob54]

Your memory is right on. S&W went to a crush fit in 1958, eliminating the need for the pin. However, the pin was kept until 1981 as a traditional feature that purists might miss. Clearly they were right as purists are moaning to this day about the pin.

Bob

MMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, couldn't resist. I do wish I could pay extra and get the pin and recessed or counter bore. I think a 686 with a Model 66 styled barrel with P&R would be pretty sweet. I doubt I'm alone. And I still say all the Classics should have said treatment if they came with them in the first place.

And:

Dang it all, bring back the Model 19 and 66!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[stevieboy]

"Pinned" and "pinned and recessed" make a gun a bit more collectible. That's about it. My 27-3, unpinned and unrecessed, is worth less than an otherwise comparable 27-2 that is pinned and recessed. Yet, there's no difference whatsoever in the two guns' performance.

I have a few pinned and recessed Smiths. I agree with other posters, cleaning the gunk out of the recesses is a real pain.

 

[deanodog]

I have had both types of M28s and I never could tell any difference in shooting them. I sold 3 28 p&r and I still have a 28-3 that is not P&R. It makes no difference to me. The quality is as good on the non P&R as the others in my opinion.

 

[Dave T]

I think the C'bored chambers were originally a safety nod to the old folded, or "balloon" head cases, which could rupture. I do not know if the magnum ammo was ever produced with balloon-head cases, but the modern solid-head cases have made that concern obsolete. The .22 caliber rimfire revolvers still use C'bored chambers because .22 rimfires do use folded heads.

I've heard (read) this explanation several times and it just doesn't wash. Except for the rimfires the only chamberings that Smith counter bored were the Magnums. Magnum cartridges were never loaded with balloon head brass. It had gone by the way side a number of years before the first Magnum was introduced in 1935.

Despite being called a "purist", for preferring pinned barrels and counter bored chambers, I'm not knowledgeable enough to know for sure why Smith decided to CB the Magnum's chambers. The explanation I've always heard was because it provides an extra margin of safety (like with the rimfires). Sorry but I just don't see much worng with an extra margin of safety at 35,000 psi right in front of my face. Does that make me a "purist"?

Dave
Dave

 

[bmcgilvray]

I once saw an earlier unpinned barrel become unscrewed while being fired. The group on the paper shifted accordingly. I've never seen a pinned barrel come unscrewed.

There's a reason for that and it's the pin.

I've seen this business of crush-fit beginning years before the pin was dropped but then I've heard some debunk this claim. I wonder who is right.

If the recessed cylinder is cleaned after each use then there is no problem with build-up of gunk and clean up is a snap. It is just not an issue.

 

[Drail]

I wish they still pinned the barrels on. I have two later "crushed fit" S&Ws and there is a slight constriction in the bbl. where the frame meets the bbl. on both of them. I would happily pay for the extra manufacturing costs to have the bbl. pinned. It was a better way.

 

[cp1969]

I once saw an earlier unpinned barrel become unscrewed while being fired. The group on the paper shifted accordingly. I've never seen a pinned barrel come unscrewed.

Assuming RH threads on the barrel and RH twist in the barrel, it seems to me the barrel should tighten itself on firing.

Colts, with their LH twist would tend to loosen it. (Assuming RH threads on the barrel)

 

[Retired W4]

Assuming RH threads on the barrel and RH twist in the barrel, it seems to me the barrel should tighten itself on firing.

Colts, with their LH twist would tend to loosen it. (Assuming RH threads on the barrel)

This is the same concept Smith Enterprises uses on their flash suppressors. Just look at the rotation of the fingers, for the lack of a better term. The AR suppressors have a twist one way and Their AK model has the twist in the other direction (the AK threads are left handed). That's so as you shoot the weapon the suppressor gets tighter, not looser.

When I look at the window in the frame of a non-recessed gun as compared to that of the recessed, the recessed window is nominally smaller. From an engineering stand point, and I am certainly no engineer, it would seem that the smaller that window is, the more rigid the frame would be, allowing less stress on the frame, all other things being equal. That, in itself, could be the best reason for the recessed cylinders. Maybe a mechanical engineer or a mertallurgist should get involved in this discussion.

 

[redlevel]

I expect the non P&R guns to start falling apart any day now, if they haven't started already.

I personally use the pinned barrel as a money-saving feature. One of my criteria for purchasing a S&W is the pinned barrel. It keeps me from spending a lot of money. Same goes for the magnums. If there is a counter-bored model available, I won't buy a non recessed model. I doubt if these particular features really make that much difference practically speaking.

 

[Nframe357]

P&R may not have any actual mechanical advantage but are indicative of a manufacturing era when the whole revolver was put together with a bit more care and attention to detail.

Then too, if the whole reason for dropping the P&R was "production cost cutting" then there may have been some advantage to their use but it was deemed "not worth the extra trouble" and dropped by order of the bean counters.

Dave

This, they may have no practical value in todays throw em together world but they are a sign of quality that Smith has long since thrown away.