Jim Watson
Member
Nowhere close.
The Bomar shown by KP was made specifically to fit the 52. Bomar is long out of business and none of the copiers have picked up the low volume sight cuts like Smith.
Model 52 sights
- Thread starter BC38
- Start date
Nowhere close.
The Bomar shown by KP was made specifically to fit the 52. Bomar is long out of business and none of the copiers have picked up the low volume sight cuts like Smith.
I have a couple of Bomars salted away, from Denny's Shooters Supply. One for 3rd 45 S/W, and a couple for 9mm. Never had the guts to stick one on my P/C autos. When the rules changed, I installed the Kensight DAS , I think, like a Novak but totally adjustable. Had to modify the bases but didnt have to change the slides on my service type 5906/6906 P/C autos. Just add a taller front, which is what I wanted for matches.
Attachments
OP
Gotcha. And I am betting the 1911 dovetail cut is much smaller - so a 1911 version of the Bomar is too narrow (rather than too wide) and can't be cut down to fit the M52?
Last edited:
OP
Thanks man. If nobody else does it first your assistance will be much appreciated.
Allright, here is what I've got. please keep in mind that I'm a little out of my league here, I am no machinist nor craftsman. The only tool I used is a low-buck Frankford Arsenal dial caliper. I think these dimensions will get you shooting, but I also believe that if someone more skilled than me fact-checked my numbers, you would get a more refined answer.
With that said:
A: 0.091"
B: 0.338"
C: 0.330"
D: 0.739"
NOTE: Dimension "A" was measured not at the front end, where you had shown with red color what was to be measured for "A" but rather at the rear of the sight, away from the muzzle and closer to the breech. I did this for two reasons... first is that it was easier to use the dial caliper at the back but more so because the numbers would differ. At the muzzle end of the sight the slide is rounded and at the back end of the sight, the slide is dead flat.
Width of rear dovetail: 0.419"
^^I think this measurement is next to useless! It's a trapezoid and extremely difficult to measure. This number is at the base of the cut. However, in eyeballing it extensively, I see zero difference between this rear sight and the rear sight on my Model 41. Unfortunately, I cannot tell you even a ballpark date of my 41 because while the frame is a 1991 gun, the slide is older and I have no idea how old. But I would be shocked if the 41 and 52 rear sights were different.
Subject pistol for this was an extremely late Model 52-2, TZT-prefix. They literally do not get much later than that. This is likely a 1992 or 1993 production pistol.
With that said:
A: 0.091"
B: 0.338"
C: 0.330"
D: 0.739"
NOTE: Dimension "A" was measured not at the front end, where you had shown with red color what was to be measured for "A" but rather at the rear of the sight, away from the muzzle and closer to the breech. I did this for two reasons... first is that it was easier to use the dial caliper at the back but more so because the numbers would differ. At the muzzle end of the sight the slide is rounded and at the back end of the sight, the slide is dead flat.
Width of rear dovetail: 0.419"
^^I think this measurement is next to useless! It's a trapezoid and extremely difficult to measure. This number is at the base of the cut. However, in eyeballing it extensively, I see zero difference between this rear sight and the rear sight on my Model 41. Unfortunately, I cannot tell you even a ballpark date of my 41 because while the frame is a 1991 gun, the slide is older and I have no idea how old. But I would be shocked if the 41 and 52 rear sights were different.
Subject pistol for this was an extremely late Model 52-2, TZT-prefix. They literally do not get much later than that. This is likely a 1992 or 1993 production pistol.
OP
THANKS MAN! Those dimensions and notes are very helpful.
One other question - did you happen to take measurements E and F as shown in the second photo (the width of the base and of the blade)?
I really appreciate the help man!
OP
LOL, easy to do since it was a separate photo. I sure appreciate all the work you did to get these for me. Let me know if or when there's anything I can ever do for you in return. I owe you one!
A single 52 magazine will be plenty.
Of course I am kidding!
Now I’ll be serious:
Someone, with pull or with contacts or clout or mojo or _______ needs to open a line of genuine communication with Mec-Gar. Again, I’m absolutely serious.
Mec-Gar even suggests on their site that they are listening to ideas for new products.
I’m not a fool, I don’t expect the Earth revolves around me. I get that the market for 52 magazines isn’t as big as many other pistols. I also do understand that development of a whole new product that really isn’t even adaptation of an existing product is expensive and time consuming. I’m not suggesting that Mec-Gar could tool-up for this in a few days.
However! The market for these magazines left the rational planet at least a couple years ago. What used to be $65 and a bitter pill to swallow 3-4 years back is now quite literally a $200 each proposition auction.
To be totally honest, I hate to even say it out loud in an open forum because I know internet is littered with jerks who raid our discussions, never add a single thing to any of them, never help to spread or share the knowledge… and just to fill out a price tag. But it’s fact. The market for these magazines should be all that Mec-Gar needs to convince them to tool up and make them.
I’ve never seen a single product from Mec-Gar priced at $100, but if they offered a S&W 52 magazine that was as quality and reliable as every other product they make… priced at $100 each, they would sell tens of thousands of them just as fast as they could pinch them off.
Okay, apologies for the rant. Anyone who agrees with this rant should e-mail Mec-Gar.
OP
Yeah when I first started this thread and mentioned it comes with 3 mags I was shocked to hear people reply that the mags alone were worth nearly the $700 price tag!A single 52 magazine will be plenty.
Of course I am kidding!
Now I’ll be serious:
Someone, with pull or with contacts or clout or mojo or _______ needs to open a line of genuine communication with Mec-Gar. Again, I’m absolutely serious.
Mec-Gar even suggests on their site that they are listening to ideas for new products.
I’m not a fool, I don’t expect the Earth revolves around me. I get that the market for 52 magazines isn’t as big as many other pistols. I also do understand that development of a whole new product that really isn’t even adaptation of an existing product is expensive and time consuming. I’m not suggesting that Mec-Gar could tool-up for this in a few days.
However! The market for these magazines left the rational planet at least a couple years ago. What used to be $65 and a bitter pill to swallow 3-4 years back is now quite literally a $200 each proposition auction.
To be totally honest, I hate to even say it out loud in an open forum because I know internet is littered with jerks who raid our discussions, never add a single thing to any of them, never help to spread or share the knowledge… and just to fill out a price tag. But it’s fact. The market for these magazines should be all that Mec-Gar needs to convince them to tool up and make them.
I’ve never seen a single product from Mec-Gar priced at $100, but if they offered a S&W 52 magazine that was as quality and reliable as every other product they make… priced at $100 each, they would sell tens of thousands of them just as fast as they could pinch them off.
Okay, apologies for the rant. Anyone who agrees with this rant should e-mail Mec-Gar.
I got to looking on Gun Broker and sure enough $200 each seems to be the going price. And I doubt that it will get lower. If MecGar sold just 1000 of them at $100 each I'd think a hundred grand in sales would generate more than enough profit to make it worth their while.
Rick H.
Member
Not to throw a wet blanket on an idea, but a while back I wrote Mec-Gar asking about making magazines for a Model 52. This was when M52 magazines were going for around $150.00 or so. Mec-Gar sent me back a polite response that more or less said they have no intentions of tooling up for M52 magazines as it wasn't a very requested item and the pistol had been long out of production. Things change of course and money drives all, but I think this would be a difficult idea to bring to fruition with Mec-Gar, but you never know. The bad thing is that the M52 magazine is a more complex magazine when compared to most which would no doubt enter into the decision to make these. Perhaps a poll could be done here to see how many people would actually be interested in buying these magazines and what the maximum price is that they would pay. That information could then be given to Mec-Gar to assist in their decision making process, but I don't know how much good it would do. On the plus side, the M52 magazine already exists so all that is needed is a little reverse engineering.
Rick H.
Rick H.
Last edited:
OP
I'll see if I can get that poll started...
OP
Welp, I went and picked it up today.
First thing I did when I got it home was put a couple of batteries in the vintage Aimpoint. It worked like a new one.
Next thing I did was to remove the Aimpoint and the Picatinny rail to see what was under it. That was a much bigger job than it sounds. Taking the Aimpoint off was easy enough. Just 2 screws that loosened up pretty easily. However, the 3 screws that held the Picatinny Rail on the slide were a different story all together.
The original owner who put the optics on this pistol obviously NEVER intended for them to be taken off. The screws were liberally glued in place with RED Loctite. LOTS of it. You can even see some traces of the excess on the top surface of the slide.
It took heating both the rail and the slide with a butane torch to soften up the Loctite enough to get the screws out - especially the center one. I darn near stripped it out before I finally got it loose.
Of course I was hoping against hope that the front sight would still be there fitted into a slot cut in the underside of the rail. Alas, it was not to be. Once I got all the screws out and removed the rail I found exactly what I expected underneath. The front site is gone, machined off the slide.
A pity that someone chose to do something so irreversible to such a classic gun that is otherwise in such incredible shape. It's obvious that the owner decided to make the gun into what he wanted with no intention of ever letting it go. Since it came from an estate sale I guess it is pretty safe to say that he followed through on that intention.
So, now I'm on the hunt for a new slide. Though I also intend to silver solder a front sight on this one and install the Bomar rear sight that Sevens was gracious enough to sell me.
Below are a few photos of the slide with the rail removed.
First thing I did when I got it home was put a couple of batteries in the vintage Aimpoint. It worked like a new one.
Next thing I did was to remove the Aimpoint and the Picatinny rail to see what was under it. That was a much bigger job than it sounds. Taking the Aimpoint off was easy enough. Just 2 screws that loosened up pretty easily. However, the 3 screws that held the Picatinny Rail on the slide were a different story all together.
The original owner who put the optics on this pistol obviously NEVER intended for them to be taken off. The screws were liberally glued in place with RED Loctite. LOTS of it. You can even see some traces of the excess on the top surface of the slide.
It took heating both the rail and the slide with a butane torch to soften up the Loctite enough to get the screws out - especially the center one. I darn near stripped it out before I finally got it loose.
Of course I was hoping against hope that the front sight would still be there fitted into a slot cut in the underside of the rail. Alas, it was not to be. Once I got all the screws out and removed the rail I found exactly what I expected underneath. The front site is gone, machined off the slide.
A pity that someone chose to do something so irreversible to such a classic gun that is otherwise in such incredible shape. It's obvious that the owner decided to make the gun into what he wanted with no intention of ever letting it go. Since it came from an estate sale I guess it is pretty safe to say that he followed through on that intention.
So, now I'm on the hunt for a new slide. Though I also intend to silver solder a front sight on this one and install the Bomar rear sight that Sevens was gracious enough to sell me.
Below are a few photos of the slide with the rail removed.
Attachments
Last edited:
Rick H.
Member
BC38: I really feel for you in this situation. I had hoped that the front sight was still in place under the rail, but not to be. I guess even at 70 years old I will never understand why people do some of the things they do to a firearm and this is just one of many of those occasions. With just a little bit of extra work they could have kept the front sight intact. If nothing else just mill a slot in the darn rail and call it good.
You may get lucky and find a decent slide for your pistol, but it will no doubt be costly. The plus side to this is that I think more 52's are being taken out service than repaired these days for lack of parts. Keep an eye on the usual sources for parts including a place called Hog Island. I have no connection with them, but they do have a ton of parts for old S&W's. If I happen to stumble on anything I will let you know. Don't buy something if you can't return it. If you find a good slide then have if properly fitted. Big gun shows are your friend in cases like this.
Rick H.
You may get lucky and find a decent slide for your pistol, but it will no doubt be costly. The plus side to this is that I think more 52's are being taken out service than repaired these days for lack of parts. Keep an eye on the usual sources for parts including a place called Hog Island. I have no connection with them, but they do have a ton of parts for old S&W's. If I happen to stumble on anything I will let you know. Don't buy something if you can't return it. If you find a good slide then have if properly fitted. Big gun shows are your friend in cases like this.
Rick H.
Mistaken identity! I only took measurements, I did not sell or send anything.
JohnHL
Member
Mistaken identity! I only took measurements, I did not sell or send anything.
Maybe you did and you just don't know it yet!
John
OP
Mistaken identity! I only took measurements, I did not sell or send anything.
My sincerest apologies to Kp321 - he's the one I have to thank for selling me the Bomar sight! It should be arriving soon.
Though I still want to thank Sevens too - for getting me all the front sight measurements.
IIRC when the time comes to change it, the rear sight blank should be drifted out from the shooter's left to right and installed right to left - correct? Or did I get that backwards?
OP
With a little browsing on the Midway USA site I've come up with a couple of potential front sights. Neither is going to work "right out of the box". They will take a little modification to make them work, but I wanted to get some opinions on which might be best.
The first one is listed as a "Universal" sight. It is .5" high and has a step on the bottom side. I figure that if I grind the step off to make it flat on the bottom and shave a little off the top I can get it down to the correct height of approximately .338" (per Seven's measurements in his previous post). See the yellow cut lines on attached thumbnail to get a better idea of the modifications I'm talking about.
Here is a link and a photo from the Midway site for this one
Power Custom Universal Front Sight .500 Height Ramped Steel Blue
The second one is a replacement sight for a Browning Buckmark. It is already very close to the right height, it would just need to be ground flat on the bottom (it is shaped to fit a curved barrel). I'd also probably shorten it's length a little since it is 1.33" long, and I'd probably re-shape the front of the blade to make it more like the original. See the wire-framed drawn in red lines on the attached thumbnail below to get and idea of the modifications I'd make to this one.
Here is the link and a photo from the Midway site for this one
Browning Sight Front Buck Mark Pistol
One of the big benefits of these two sights is that they both secure to the barrel with a screw, so I can drill and tap a new hole and secure them with a screw in addition to using a little silver solder.
Personally I'm leaning more towards the BuckMark sight. With a little file & grinder work, I think I could make it look almost "right". However, I'd appreciate any and all opinions on either of these sights - or even suggestions of others that might look/work even better with less modification/work.
Thanks for all your input so far guys!
The first one is listed as a "Universal" sight. It is .5" high and has a step on the bottom side. I figure that if I grind the step off to make it flat on the bottom and shave a little off the top I can get it down to the correct height of approximately .338" (per Seven's measurements in his previous post). See the yellow cut lines on attached thumbnail to get a better idea of the modifications I'm talking about.
Here is a link and a photo from the Midway site for this one
Power Custom Universal Front Sight .500 Height Ramped Steel Blue
The second one is a replacement sight for a Browning Buckmark. It is already very close to the right height, it would just need to be ground flat on the bottom (it is shaped to fit a curved barrel). I'd also probably shorten it's length a little since it is 1.33" long, and I'd probably re-shape the front of the blade to make it more like the original. See the wire-framed drawn in red lines on the attached thumbnail below to get and idea of the modifications I'd make to this one.
Here is the link and a photo from the Midway site for this one
Browning Sight Front Buck Mark Pistol
One of the big benefits of these two sights is that they both secure to the barrel with a screw, so I can drill and tap a new hole and secure them with a screw in addition to using a little silver solder.
Personally I'm leaning more towards the BuckMark sight. With a little file & grinder work, I think I could make it look almost "right". However, I'd appreciate any and all opinions on either of these sights - or even suggestions of others that might look/work even better with less modification/work.
Thanks for all your input so far guys!
Attachments
Jim Watson
Member
I have the Power on a couple of sawn off revolvers. It works to aim the gun but looks a bit clunky. Screwed down, it won't likely need silver solder, epoxy will fill the gaps and add some hold.
The Ruger is REAL clunky and the ramp is so high you might not have much working blade above it.
The Ruger is REAL clunky and the ramp is so high you might not have much working blade above it.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
M&P9 1.0 Custom: Apex Barrel/Trigger, Upgraded Sights: $525 Shipped
- Latest: GunsandCoffee
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
