Found 547

M2,
I made the same mistake of calling a stainless 547 a 647 and was corrected. A 64 should handle 9mm +P as the 64 and 547 share a common frame design. After all, the 65 is chambered for .357.

With all the model 10s, 64s and 65s appearing on the used market of late, I am tempted to purchase on and have it re-chambered to 9mm. Having said that, nothing can compare to a 547, at least to me.
 
Tekarra, I'm still with you about that original 547, just looking for a gap filler for now, and much as I like stainless, nothing beats an old fashioned blue. Imagine though S&W making a stainless 547 in the traditional extraction mode (and whatever alphanumeric soup they settel on)...I just can't understand why S&W isn't getting it. I think just the novelty of it would bring it people that have never heard of the berylium (sp?) clips. I like moon clips okay, but love that 547 system and can't help but wonder if stainless would help with the sticky cylinder issues. I can't remember Tek, do you have a 3", 4" or both?

and thanks, gunrunner ;)
 
M2,
I have several 4" but only one 3". All I ever see are 4" models, would like another 3". If I ever get photobucket sorted, I will post some photos.

I do not understand your comment on "sticky cylinder issues"? Are you referring to roughness on the chamber walls? The chambers on my 547s are smooth. The only "sticky cylinder issues" I recall reading on the forum have been with the 940, and some of the photos showed pretty rough chambers.

As to S&W not getting it, I can only suppose the 547 is expensive to produce. The extractor system is more complicated than a star and the retaining pin requires additional parts and additional work on the frame. Having said that, I would still be interested.
 
tekerra,

Wish I had a 3" and a couple of 4"ers to spare!

I have not experienced this, but have heard several 547 owners report spent casings stick after firing (I believe to be quite a bit) of ammunition to the extent of very difficult extraction. A veteran 547 owner's recommendation was to clean the cylinders with acetone and leave no oil in them prior to firing. Some have used these accounts to discredit the 547, but I've even seen that with other calibers as well and so give the story little or no value. I have heard of the expense of producing the 547 and have also heard that it didn't really cost that much. S&W mystifies me at what the keep and what they drop on production...I have a 619, and can't quite understand why S&W dropped it and the 620 either, I think they are terrific alternatives to the 686 (I don't like the full lug, never have), and it seems like many feel the same way. For now, I'm happy I've got what I got. Maybe S&W have got guys like me figured out...drop it from production and we want it even more!
 
M2,
.


As to S&W not getting it, I can only suppose the 547 is expensive to produce. The extractor system is more complicated than a star and the retaining pin requires additional parts and additional work on the frame. Having said that, I would still be interested.
I hope they don't ever get it! For those of us that have a few stashed away for an investment, not interested in devaluaing my assets for those that "wish they had one" when prices were lower....There are still plenty for sale, open up your mattress and buy it. Kind of like gold, I wish I had purchased some when it was much lower...
 
Good point Big Foot, maybe I'll just satisfy myself with my one real 547 and do a little model 64-to-9mm conversion project.

One thing I've been meaning to ask fellow 547 owners...my 547 has a pinned barrel, but I understand some are not pinned. I wonder why S&W changed up in the middle of production? Or were they all pinned?
 
The 3" that I recently bought at a pawn shop dirt cheap is not a pinned barrel. I'll have to dig the first one I bought years ago, when J&G was selling them cheap to see the barrel on that one.

I've been shooting the latest one a bit, and I haven't run across any problem extracting, but I hit the ejector with a pretty good whack. The short 9mm cases clear the chambers quickly. I would think 9mm would shine in a small-frame gun.

I have found that sometimes that extractor fingers don't retract completely. Probably my ejector retrun spring, but if they stick out too far, your reload cases can hang up while loading. Usually when it happens, it's not that bad, but it will keep a case from fully seating, and can effect closing the cylinder. You can't just drop them in, you have to physically seat them with your thumb, etc. It's not like it takes much force at all, just something to remember to do. I have a couple HKS 547 speedloaders, but I haven't tried them out on this gun to see if it keeps doing it. I think it probably will still hang un cases, because the HKS seem to rely on gravity a bit. A speed strip-type might be the way to go.

I haven't had any other problems with the gun at all. I think the only "weak spot", if you can call it that, would be in the reloading. And none of the issues I've ran across are big deals. Probably if I replaced the ejector return spring and gave everything a good cleaning, the problem would be gone.
 
Boy if I had only kept all the nice guns I sold off over the years.

I used to own a beautiful 3 inch one, nearly 100% condition.

It had the original box, papers and everything.

I sold it off several years ago. As I was reading this post it occurred to me that maybe one of you got my old gun.

I do remember firing it on a few occasions and do recall the sticky extraction. I remember having to give it a good, sharp smack with the palm of my right hand to eject/extract the fired casings most of the time. If I hand-loaded some to a little lower pressure, it seemed to work much better and shot fine with lead bullets.

I had read they were discontinued due to the high cost of the beryllium (sp?) copper extractors that mushroomed out to extract the empty casings.

I'm not a metallurgist so I don't know why beryllium copper is so tough but it must have been a very special metal to be able to spring out like it did to catch on the case rims and eject/ extract the casings and then return back to its resting position and to do that over and over without breaking.

I purchased that one several years before after having handled a few at gun shows in the early 1980's. In fact I remember seeing a broken one I passed on back then for a couple of hundred bucks at a gun show in Detroit. I almost bought it but thought after sending it back to S&W for repair, the shipping plus the cost of the gun would have been more than it was worth.

I agree that S&W is really missing the boat with items they could produce that would be very profitable (I think). With what most of us are willing to pay for quality S&W revolvers, I think S&W could definitely produce models from the past that would be money makers even considering the handwork that went into many of their older guns.

If we consider that when S&W did make these models, America was strong on employment and manufacturing, I think a return to our older ways would indeed make sense, especially in light of all the unemployed factory workers with machining experience.

I tend to think I feel like most of the people around here. Who wouldn't love to see models like the 547, the K-32, the convertible revolvers in 22 LR/22 WMR, 9mm/357, 44-40/44 special, 45 ACP/45 Colt and even new ones like the 17HMR/17Mach2, the pinned and recessed K-frame 3 inch models 65 and 66 and L-frames in 3" and 5", the model 27, model 57 and model 29 in 5" versions. Remember the Pinto revolvers? How many of you would love the chance to get a model 651 J-frame stainless kit gun in 22LR/22WMR.

I always hear that because of liability or manufacturing costs or other reasons, they can't go back to making them like they used to. Frankly I don't know how they can afford not to. It seems like there is a market and a real profit potential out there-all someone needs to do is go out and tap into it.

Just my thoughts...
 
My guess is that beryllium copper was used for the extractors as it is a good spring material with a high fatigue cycle. It also has good strength and good machining properties and is relatively easy to machine into small parts.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top