New Model 66-8

[BuckeyeS&W]

I bought a new 66 early this year and really like it a lot . I shot about 500 rounds of my 158gr lead reloads and it shoots very well. I did notice the cylinder would tighten up with certain loads using Speer S W C bullets and 4.5 gr of Bullseye. The first trip to range the cylinder tightened up after only 50 rounds. I cleaned pistol at range and everything was back on track. I have found that my 66 likes 158 gr Lasercast SWC with 4.9 gr of 700 X and for light target loads it really likes 158 gr Missouri .38 Match SWC with brinell of 12 over 4.1 gr of Trail Boss. I can shot over 100 rounds with no cylinder binding from dirt or leading . I also had best luck loading the 158 gr Speer's with 4gr of Trail Boss .
I love the feel and balance of this revolver and I can use the same holster that I carry my 4" 617 with.

 

[JKN1]

I am new to the forum and am curious about what has caused pitting under the ejector and along the edge of the cylinder of my model 66-8, i have only used 142 gr Fiocchi, 158 gr RAUG Swiss competition and 158 gr Federal ammunition through it. I've fired about 600 rds/ 357 mag now and noticed pitting while cleaning with CLP. any advise on how to prevent this in the future and if its something wrong with the revolver?

i have not had this problem with my M28 or GP 100 which I've owned for years.

 

[jaaeatax]

I have one and it's turning out to be one of my favorites. It's dead on accurate and the recoil with 38 plus p's is smooth and easy. I love the finish the the way it is. Beautiful gun. Keeper..

 

[SeamasterSig]

It's a full profile forcing cone -- like an L or N frame -- rather than snipped at the 6-o'clock like they used to be on the K-frame magnum guns to make room for the yoke.

That's interesting. A model 66 with a fully round forcing cone? How'd they make room for it on the K-frame? Can you post a picture?
I agree with Paul105: if you want that square butt feeling, round-to-square conversion grips will do the trick.

 

[Paul105]

Seamaster, another look at the picture in post #15 -- notice how the crane is contoured to fit under the barre shank, not the other way around as on the 19/66.

Here's a picture of the barrel shank itself -- much more metal and no "snip" on the bottom.

Have almost 1,800 rnds thru mine, mostly 158s at 1,100 fps. No problems so far, and am thoroughly enjoying it.

Paul

 

[SeamasterSig]

notice how the crane is contoured to fit under the barrel shank, not the other way around as on the 19/66.

Here's a picture of the barrel shank itself -- much more metal and no "snip" on the bottom.

Interesting, thanks for posting those photos! I wonder why no one at S&W thought of this in the first place when they redesigned the K-frame for 357 magnum or came up with such a simple fix after cracked forcing cones became an issue with the rising popularity of hot 125 grain loads. It would have been a brilliant upgrade worthy of a new dash number that would have breathed new life into a classic revolver. Maybe they thought it would steal the L-frame's thunder. And surely it would have – at least to some extent. But such concerns would have been unjustified IMO. I love my model 66-2, despite it's "Achilles Heel", but greater recoil-absorbing weight, a more robust design, and higher capacity remain the L-frame's unique selling points to this day.

 

[PR24]

I checked out a 66-8 today @ the shop. Nice action, well made; buuuut, the barrel was canted to the left. It was so apparent that the post was clearly listing to port & the serrations on the barrel weren't lining up with frame. What a DEAL BREAKER! I want one but not with that crappy QC!! Must have been made on a Monday.

The other glaringly obvious issue was the ball wasn't sitting in the notch on ejector rod shroud.....because of the cant of the barrel. Grrrrrrgh

 

[686 SSR]

PR 24 - I've never seen the 66-8 in person, but if the 66-8 design is similar to my Model 69, the barrel shroud has a large notch that is "keyed" into a matching mating piece on the frame. With that design, I wonder how that's possible to ever end up with a canted barrel? Someone must have really had a bad day.

In any event, it appears that the spring-loaded ball detent is not supposed to rest at the bottom its mating groove. By always pushing against the sloped part of the mating groove, the spring-loaded ball bearing applies consistent and continuous pressure forcing the cylinder against the frame. This ensures a tighter lockup of the cylinder when compared to revolvers using the end of the ejector for lockup.

 

[raylan007]

M66-8 4.25 Price check

Not for $850.00 ...

.........If you are accustomed to paying MSRP that price is about right. If you don't mind buying on GB you can find one for $700. They are not exactly flying off the shelf but I was just pricing them this morning. kY Guns has them in stock for $685 with free shipping. A lot of deep discounts on this fine looking revolver.

 

[SilentKnight]

Oh my!! Had a 2.5 inch round butt with pinned barrel that I had a four inch barrel fitted to. It was a shooter. Put several thousand rounds down range. Now it is my son's. I may have to splurge.

 

[flagman1776]

I grabbed an ex-PD trade in 4" M66-7 a couple of years ago. It needed cleaning up but I liked the HB profile of the 2 piece barrel. I paid $399 which I thought was steep at the time but I wanted it for a house gun / loaner. I never liked the backstrap covering Goodyears, it it has factory RB targets on it for now. It's a fine shooter... trigger is as good (or better) than anything coming out of Springfield these days. Probably cycled enough to slick it up.

Not my only K frame magnum...

 

[CajunBass]

I'm just glad to see that S&W had enough confidence in the revolver market outside of the J-frame concealed carry market, and with not much hope for large law-enforcement purchase, to go ahead and design and start-up a totally new revolver.

 

[joe44va]

Wiley Clapp said in an American Rifleman article on the 66 and 69 that the frame of the 66-8 is larger than the old frame height wise so they didn't have to notch the barrel. December 2014 issue I think.

 

[Paul105]

I think ol' Wiley is full of Clapp. Sorry, couldn't resist. Look at the picture in post #25.

It regards to the M69 from Biran Pearce's article in Handloader Mag:

"S&W Reengineered yoke to place enough supporting steel surrounding bbl threads to handle Magnum pressures and allow increased barrel shank diameter."



Here are some measurements (New Model 66-8 vs 19-3) – remember these are quick and dirty with dial calipers.

Frame window front to back:
M66 - 1.815”
M19 - 1.805”

Frame window top to bottom:
M66 - 1.475”
M19 - 1.475”

Top strap:
M66 - 0.665”
M19 - 0.655”

Cylinder Diameter:
M66 - 1.450”
M19 - 1.450”

Cylinder Length:
M66 - 1.670”
M19 - 1.675” (Recessed charge holes)

M66 Barrel is larger in diameter than the M19 – I didn’t measure it.

FWIW,

Paul

 

[joe44va]

Paul: Would you measure from the top of the frame in front of the rear sight mount to the bottom of the frame below the crane on both. This is what Wiley said changed.

 

[Paul105]

2.375" +- a couple 1000ths on both.

Paul

 

[bigfatty]

PR 24 - I've never seen the 66-8 in person, but if the 66-8 design is similar to my Model 69, the barrel shroud has a large notch that is "keyed" into a matching mating piece on the frame. With that design, I wonder how that's possible to ever end up with a canted barrel? Someone must have really had a bad day.

In any event, it appears that the spring-loaded ball detent is not supposed to rest at the bottom its mating groove. By always pushing against the sloped part of the mating groove, the spring-loaded ball bearing applies consistent and continuous pressure forcing the cylinder against the frame. This ensures a tighter lockup of the cylinder when compared to revolvers using the end of the ejector for lockup.

THIS is how:

 

[Paul105]

Joe44va,

Just wanted to make sure you saw the measurements you requested -- post 36 above.

Paul

 

[BuckeyeS&W]

THIS is how:

My new 66 was a little off ,I didn't notice when I picked it up from LGS after a few cleanings I noticed the groves in barrel shroud were off.I didn't want to send it back to Smith & Wesson because it shot so well. What I ended up doing was to place pistol barrel first in a padded vice and grabbed frame by grip and rotated clockwise and the shroud moved and the serrations line up. An added plus was opening and closing of cylinder was smoother.

 

[bigfatty]

My new 66 was a little off ,I didn't notice when I picked it up from LGS after a few cleanings I noticed the groves in barrel shroud were off.I didn't want to send it back to Smith & Wesson because it shot so well. What I ended up doing was to place pistol barrel first in a padded vice and grabbed frame by grip and rotated clockwise and the shroud moved and the serrations line up. An added plus was opening and closing of cylinder was smoother.

Mine needs to be turned counterclockwise (when facing the bore), or clockwise if approaching it from the other end. Either way, the direction it needs to be turned in is maxed out. As you can see from the pic, they churned a good chunk of steel out of the barrel shroud's female notch apparently in a futile attempt to get it straight. Didn't stop them from letting it go out.