New 66 Combat magnum concerns ?

[HK-N-THE-HOUSE]

I am thinking about picking up a new Smith & Wesson model 66 combat magnum with the two and three-quarter inch barrel , however I have seen a couple of YouTube reviews where they felt that the quality control of the new models weren’t quite up to par. I was wondering what you all think , and if you have any issues with yours. Thanks.

 

[Dpris]

Biggest issue I've seen is the non-existent forcing cone & particle spitting that results.

In the one I briefly had here, it was annoying with more than one bullet type.

They have hopefully corrected that by now.
If not, I would not buy one.
Denis

 

[Macinaw]

I have shot both the 66 and 69 in EDC shooting competition. Both are problem free and accurate. Sure, the forcing cone and muzzle crown may not be "perfect". Accuracy doesn't suffer on my examples. I have only shot .38 Specials in the 66. Don't know if it "spits" lead like some have said with .357 magnums.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

66-8 forcing cone issue

I previously posted about my issue with it here:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/139663997-post59.html

.

I suspect it was a short run issue that has been resolved but can easily be checked for before buying.

With that corrected I like it more than I thought I'd ever like a K-frame. Shoots great!

.

 

[Dpris]

The one I had here had, as I said, virtually no forcing cone & shaved every bullet I ran through it, all were .357s.
The worst were 140-grainers.

It spit lead on my hand & spit lead into my face.

I HOPE they've corrected it, but at the time (last year) there were other reports here of bullet shaving & absent forcing cones in other new ones.

Just saying inspect before you buy, and look very carefully at the cone.
Denis

 

[Narragansett]

I am just wondering, other than maybe saving a couple manufacturing dollars, why would you not have a forcing cone??

 

[Ashlander]

I have had mine for several months now. I bought it after the spate of forcing cone issues. The issue seems to have been addressed. Mine is fine. The forcing cone looks precisely like my 66-5 and my 686-6 from 2012. Moreover, recently Hickok45 did a review on the gun that was very positive.

 

[Dpris]

The only speculation that I'd have on those early cones was either ineptitude at the plant or specs requiring manufacturing to keep the cone walls as thick as possible to resist the dreaded K-Frame Cone Cracking common to the older K-Frame .357s.

Engineering could possibly have thought that manufacturing was precise enough in that revised K-Frame that a cone wasn't necessary.

As far as Hickock goes- he does positive reviews on every gun he covers, and almost never addresses either problems or technical issues.
Denis

 

[Ashlander]

As far as Hickock goes- he does positive reviews on every gun he covers, and almost never addresses either problems or technical issues.
Denis

I should have been more precise. Hickok45 had no issue with lead being spit back at him. As for him alway giving positive reviews, my recollections are different. As examples, he is no fan of double/single action pistols; he was not a fan of the SP101 as being far too heavy for a gun that is supposed to be for concealed carry; and if a trigger brakes too far back on any gun he always mentions it as a negative. At the moment, I am hard pressed to give other examples, but in many of his videos, the results of his shooting speak for themselves -- a gun may just not shoot well no matter what he says (if he misses too many times we draw our own conclusions).

 

[Skeptic 9c]

You do not understand! These are COLLECTOR'S ITEMS! You are not supposed to shoot them, just pack them in preservatives and lock them away in a nice, secure safe!
Geoff
Who notes his recent S&Ws have been well built, yes I did inspect carefully.

 

[iPac]

Hickok45 had no issue with lead being spit back at him.

The good old "hickock45" seal of approval. One of the largest youtube gun channels but expert on absolutely nothing, I wouldn't even call him proficient. His videos are good for seeing how a gun may shoot/handle before purchasing, but little more than that. Nothing technical or in-depth is ever shared like mechanical design/function.(beyond very basic, common knowledge)

Find a 2.5"/3" model 66 or 19 and be happy you have a classic. Modern S&Ws are just as soulless as the polymer semi autos. If that's your thing though, then I guess enjoy. Just make sure you examine the gun really well before taking ownership, chances of needing that fancy warranty are high.

 

[mrmike7189]

I agree that you should find an older used Model 19 or 66 , I had one and regret selling it(model 19 blued 4" from 1994). They are superior to the new ones. As for Hickkok45, I watched his review last night of the Ruger PCC 9mm carbine, He loved that it used Glock mags, since he is a Glock fanboy for sure, but he kept having jamming issues, and let everybody know that he would have to get another one and do a Part 2 video. So ,NO he doen't like every gun.

 

[lbm]

I purchased a model 66-8 the first week of March, 2018.

Very, very accurate. No spitting problems. I love mine.
lbm

 

[Dpris]

On Hickok-
I do enjoy watching the guy, most of the time.

He does entertainment, he does not do gun reviews.
He does a folksy overview of some features, plinks with maybe 40-50 rounds of maybe two different loads, gives just about zero technical info, I've never seen him discuss the type of in-depth thing we're talking about here.

I never see him mention useful things like accuracy, trigger pull & weight, specific performance trivia like the sights (how well they work, were they an asset or a detriment, did they need a lot of adjustment, etc.), and so on.

Never any commentary on such things as this cone issue, the early .44 Spec Ruger GP100 chambers, the occasional issue with the Ruger 7-shot GP .357 snub creating rim-lock with some loads, nothing like that.

Very superficial, and while I, again, do enjoy watching him (when he doesn't do a Nut'nfancy extension of a 10-minute video into a 30-minute ramble), I have never learned anything from his videos.

In fairness to the man, that may be because by the time I watch one of his videos on a given gun, I already have it in hand & I'm only surfing to see what a short sampling of other reviewers are saying.
Occasionally I do pick up the odd useful bit of info on the gun in question, but never from Hickock.

Not knocking him or his presentations, just saying that "But Hickock liked it!!!!!" carries pretty much zero weight here.

And he really is that tall. Passed him in the hallway once in Vegas.
I'm 6'2" & I had to look waaay up there.
Denis

 

[kthom]

One thing I'll say about Hickock ... He doesn't have to say much about a firearm's accuracy. He generally demonstrates it, and with a LOT of different brands and sizes of handguns! I never have seen anyone hidden down range banging and moving those steel targets, and he does make those two liters spew! Yes, he entertains and has done very well at it. Perhaps he and his son edit out any times when there is a problem with a gun? In any case, big, little, high dollar, low dollar, what ever caliber, he seems to ring the bell with 'em with those great big old hands of his!

 

[Dpris]

Judging from the number of guns I've gotten in that needed sight adjustments, I'd say he fires everything that comes in before the camera lights up, just for familiarity & point of aim.

I can't count the number of guns I've gotten in over the years where I've had to do some sight adjustment out of the box & before the actual testing begins.

He does at least the same volume as I do, and I can guarantee that you can not ALWAYS just pick up a new gun & immediately start ringing 50-yard gongs with it.

He has to be doing some pre-camera work with each gun, and generally he's down to just one or two factory loads.
We get no real comparisons, no real idea of the intrinsic accuracy of the gun overall.

He's entertaining, likable, and a very good shooter.
But he does not do gun reviews.
Denis

 

[Dave Lively]

I don't watch as many Hickok videos as I used to. Mostly because after you have seen several hundred of them you have kind of seen them all. But whenever I am considering a new gun I always check to see if he has a video of it.

What Hickok provides is subjective opinions on how well a gun shoots and feels from someone who's opinions are pretty close to mine on guns we both own and shoot. His side by side size comparisons are useful too. I go elsewhere for objective tests of how well a gun shoots off a bench, trigger pull weight, etc. But often the sites that concentrate on hard data provide little about how a gun feels or how accurately it shoots offhand. I have bought guns that looked great on paper but I quickly sold off after I had them in my hand. There are guns with a light trigger that are very accurate when shot off a solid rest I cannot shoot well because that light trigger is gritty and the ergonomics don't work.

I disagree about his never reporting problems with a gun. I was hot to buy a Ruger PC 9mm carbine until I started seeing reviews, including Hickok's, report problems. Instead of labeling the gun an unreliable piece of junk he summarized it as a fun plinker not reliable enough for self defense but he did report the problems. I bought my S&W 69 before he did a review but his criticism of the hard rubber grips being uncomfortable with full power magnums was pretty accurate.

Speaking of the grips if the OP does find the recoil of a 66 harsh with full power 357s the same grip options for the 69 should work with the 66. I replaced the original grips with the 500 grips direct from S&W and really like them. I am currently experimenting with the Packmyer Diamond Pro grips which provide more cushioning than the original grips but are smaller than the 500 grips. If this is going to be a CC gun I would recommend the Packmyers, if it is going to be mostly a range gun I would switch to the 500 grips. I have never shot a 66 so it could be the stock grips are fine in 357 gun. I had a couple of minor issues with my 69 (shot high with heavy loads and cosmetic defect on muzzle crown) but overall really like it. It's not exactly a 66 chambered in 44 but is close enough that if I was in the market for a 357 it would be at the top of my list.

 

[gnystrom]

A co-worker came in with a 2-3/4" new mod 66 in early October. We all shot it and it was clear it was spitting lead. He immediately shipped it back to S&W along with a note and billing information to include a master action job.
He has made repeated calls to S&W as to the progress and was assured it was in their gueue for service. Three weeks ago he was notified his gun was repaired and now off to another division for the action job.
He just called and they said his gun would be completed and shipped in approximately three weeks which bumps it into end of April-early May.
Other major manufacturers, Ruger (MK IV) and Sig (320), have had major recalls on hundreds of guns and have handled them quickly in a very efficient manner but, a seven month wait for a new model revolver to be repaired and trigger slicked up?

 

[Dpris]

Had not intended to divert this into a discussion of Hickock, but one final note in passing- I didn't say he never reports problems.
He just doesn't get into any real detail.
Denis

 

[diyj98]

Had not intended to divert this into a discussion of Hickock, but one final note in passing- I didn't say he never reports problems.
He just doesn't get into any real detail.
Denis

I have a hard time taking reviews too seriously of anyone accepting pay from companies selling products they review. I'm not bashing him personally, it's him, Gunblast, or any of the gun magazines.