Frame Mounted Firing Pin

Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
17
Reaction score
4
Location
Upstate New York
There seems to be some criticism of the frame mounted firing pins on some new S&W centerfire revolvers. I'd like to know what this is based on. For untold years, 22 revolvers used it successfully.

Is there really a problem, or is this just an extension of "it's changed so it has to be bad" syndrome?
 
Register to hide this ad
>>>"it's changed so it has to be bad" syndrome?<<<

It's a combination of the above, plus S&W has shipped some handguns with "short" firing pins to meet unrealistic safety standards (California drop tests, as an example).

For a duty gun (revolver) I replace the OEM firing pin with an Apex "extra length" firing pin. It is also important to be aware of the mainspring tension screw (where applicable) and also the mainspring to maintain 100% reliability.

I don't change the springs in my daily pocket carry (the dbl action only S&W 642) but rely on factory strength springs for positive and RELIABLE firing. I DO replace the firing pin with an Apex.

https://apextactical.com/store/product-info.php?pid4.html

My "N" frame guns have tuned actions with dbl action at 9.0 lbs and single action at 3.0 lbs (my choice) for reliable busting of ALL name brand primers.

For the record - I have had firing pin failures on both hammer mounted and frame mounted. However, over the many years I have been shooting, they have been rare. Out of over 200,000 rounds I have had two or three hammer mounted pins fail and one frame mounted pin.

Dale53
 
Last edited:
Dale has his N frames set up exactly how I've set up all of my revolvers with the exception of my 620. IMO a 9 lbs. DA trigger is perfectly reliable with any ammunition and very easy to shoot well with. However, since my 620 features a lighter Service hammer, I've managed to take the DA trigger down to 8 lbs. without any reliability or accuracy loss.

Now, about the frame mounted firing pins. One aspect of the new system is that it's comprized of the firing pin and a small rebound spring for the firing pin. This provides a bit more access to features that allow tuning for increased reliability with a lightened trigger.

One thing that should be noted is that with the factory or aftermarket firing pins the hammer will NOT drive the firing pin to it's forward limit of travel. To some extent there is a reliance on the inertia of the firing pin itself to insure a good strike on the primer. If you want to see this first hand take a toothpick an push the firing pin forward while the hammer is cocked and compare that position relative to the recoil shield to the position set with the hammer fully forward in the frame.

I'll also note that the "long" version by Cylinder and Slide has the same overall length as the factory pin, what is different is that the travel notch for the retaining pin is longer by at least 1/64 inch. This means that it can travel a bit deeper into the primer during the ignition strike. When I first installed one of these extended travel pins in my 610-3 I noticed that 30% of the primers in fired casings showed dark and there had been gas leakage. Further examination under 10 X magnification showed that the primers had microscopic cracking in the dimples. As a result, I would NOT recomend the usage of this firing pin with the factory mainspring power, there may be a small potential for a pierced primer with the firing pin stuck in it. However, once I had lighted the trigger on the 610 to 9 lbs. installing this firing pin caused a notable increase in accuracy with the lighter trigger, group sizes were nearly cut in half and they lost the tendacy to string vertically.

As for reliability issues, in almost every case of reliability problems it's been reported with just one caliber. That caliber is the 45ACP and it almost always seems to be the model 625 that has problems, most likely due to the popularity of the 625. I suspect that a large part of the cause is due to the interface between the moon clips combined with an ammunition that features a thinner rebated rim. If the chambers in the cylinder are set for a headspace dimension at or near maximum depth the predictable result would be that thin moon clips used with a thin rimmed casing will result in a round sitting just a bit too deep for reliable ignition.

The only other reliability issue of note took place with the model 620 and it's was a European Police agency that had been forced to change from using Fiochi range ammo to the Speer Lawman Cleanfire using lead free primers due to environmental concerns. The department Amorer posted here for help and the consensus was to change the firing pins to those offered by Apex or Cylinder & Slide. Since then that Amorer hasn't posted the results.

Summng it up, the reliability issues with this system seem to be tied to just one model, the 625 in 45ACP. In that case I think that it's a very real concern because about a year back there was a real flood of complaints on this forum. Since then the complaints seem to have dried up, perhaps because S&W is now boring the chambers a bit shallower for the headspace dimension. It may also because the word has spread and those with this model are installing aftermarket pins before the first shot fired because it's a very easy change to make. Bottomline, it may not be perfect but it's a design that is very very easy to correct.

PS, final note of caution. Cylinder & Slide specifically instructs than ALL dry firing with their pin MUST be done using Snap Caps. IMO ALL of the guns that feature a frame mounted firing pin should have snap caps used for any dryfiring. That small retaining pin could get bent or shatter if snap caps aren't used and the only way to remove a damaged retaining pin would be via the EDM machining process, most likely a 100 to 150 dollar charge. Bottomline, if you aren't using Snap Caps you'll probablly come to regret it and I don't care what the manual says, you can hear the firing pin clang off that retaining pin if you listen for it.
 
I'll also note that the "long" version by Cylinder and Slide has the same overall length as the factory pin, what is different is that the travel notch for the retaining pin is longer by at least 1/64 inch. This means that it can travel a bit deeper into the primer during the ignition strike. When I first installed one of these extended travel pins in my 610-3 I noticed that 30% of the primers in fired casings showed dark and there had been gas leakage. Further examination under 10 X magnification showed that the primers had microscopic cracking in the dimples. As a result, I would NOT recomend the usage of this firing pin with the factory mainspring power, there may be a small potential for a pierced primer with the firing pin stuck in it.

As for reliability issues, in almost every case of reliability problems it's been reported with just one caliber. That caliber is the 45ACP and it almost always seems to be the model 625 that has problems, most likely due to the popularity of the 625. I suspect that a large part of the cause is due to the interface between the moon clips combined with an ammunition that features a thinner rebated rim. If the chambers in the cylinder are set for a headspace dimension at or near maximum depth the predictable result would be that thin moon clips used with a thin rimmed casing will result in a round sitting just a bit too deep for reliable ignition.

The only other reliability issue of note took place with the model 620 and it's was a European Police agency that had been forced to change from using Fiochi range ammo to the Speer Lawman Cleanfire using lead free primers due to environmental concerns. The department Amorer posted here for help and the consensus was to change the firing pins to those offered by Apex or Cylinder & Slide. Since then that Amorer hasn't posted the results.



I hate to tell you that you are wrong, the Cylinder & Slide pins are .015 longer than the factory, your apex is the standard length. The C&S is .510 long, factory is .494-.495 along with the Apex. Now Apex does sell one that is .500 long. I install 2 C&S this week in my guns and I measured them :D . Plus if I was Apex - everything that I done or Sold would be better than anyone else.
 
Last edited:
It's funny how a frame mounted firing pin was/is great on the 1955 Python, but not on newer S&W's.

To me Bob it is the best inprovement they have made on the revolver. Easy to replace, easy to make longer,Less parts to keep in stock. In every way you look at it, it is cheaper and easier to operate. Since thier first "K" frame size gun they have used the frame mount on the .22, still works good today :D .
 
The Austrian 1898 Rast-Gasser was the first mass produced revolver with a spring loaded, frame mounted firing pin........it's been in use over 110 years in various revolvers.

Ruger has been using them since day 1, they just added a transfer bar for safety in the Blackhawks after a few years, and all the DA revolvers use the transfer bar frame-mounted firing pin. There are Rugers with 100's of thousands of rounds and never had a firing pin faliure.

If it's done right with a quality spring, there will never be a problem.

On the other hand, Taurus uses a frame mounted firing pin, with some cheap 2 cent spring and they have a bad habit of mashing that firing pin spring into uselessness.

I used the C&S extended firing pin in my 10-14, with a Wilson Combat mainspring, and never had a problem, not even with CCI primers. The dents on the primers are wider and deeper than with the stock pin. Like was said above, S&W just won't use extended pins from the factory for some stupid govt. drop safety tests.

New S&W's are much easier to tune up with drop in parts, too.
 
Back
Top