Nuances of 3953 vs 3953TSW?

[OlongJohnson]

I'm trying to obtain or confirm some detailed understanding of differences (and the differences they make) between the earlier 3953 and later 3953TSW. I've googled a ton and searched a ton of threads on here, and just want to make sure I've got it right.

Obviously, these questions would apply to 3913s as well.

I know about the TSW slide being shared between DA/SA and DAO, and being (approximately?) the length of earlier DA/SA slides, having a shorter beavertail, and that the shorter slide is the reason for the difference in pre-cocking. I know about the slides generally being machined for decock-only DA/SA parts, if you can find those little unicorn teeth. I know about the riveted-on rail and options to remove it.

My questions have to do with trigger pull and service life.

My understanding is that the reduced amount of pre-cocking on the later TSWs leads to a longer trigger pull, but I'm thinking, based on everything I can find, that the increase is only the travel, with the trigger simply staging a few mm farther forward at rest/reset. The weight should be the same, although it may be lighter/smoother if the MIM parts end up having better surface finishes, and MIM should be more consistent from sample to sample than the highly variable machined parts on the earlier pistols. Is that an accurate understanding?

(In a sample of two earlier DAOs I've inspected with flash-chromed parts, there is a visually obvious difference in the quality of the surface on the rear-facing portion of the hammer, which corresponds to the smoothness of the pull.)

I'm also interested in the increased size of the rails and improved precision of the fit on TSWs. Since all 3953s are getting older and they aren't making any more of them, the wear state and remaining life in the frame is really important. Most of the examples I've seen of non-TSWs have worn through the anodizing, which at least on a Sig is the beginning of the end. The little rails at the front of the dust cover seem to get eaten away faster than the bigger ones farther back. Do the bigger rails on the TSWs wear more slowly, given equal cleaning and lubrication?

Some seem to think the TSWs are or should be more accurate than earlier units, but others discount that. Any experience, A-to-B type stuff someone feels like sharing new or again?

Thanks for your help!

 

[Engine49guy]

I have never owned a TSW but did pick up a 3953 for CCW use a few months back.
The benefit of this model is that it is inherently safer because you do not have two different trigger pulls , another bonus is no safety decocker making it slightly thinner,
The cons are that the slide is longer at its rear to cover the hammer, the DA trigger pull makes for a less accurate firearm and my pet peev is no second strike capability.

Closest thing I have to compare is my only other 3rd gen 9mm thats a Briley barrel bushing equipped PC9 twelve shot ,
the difference between the two is night and day....so is the price going from around $400 for a nice 3953 to around $1000 for a PC9.

For an affordable 9mm CCW the 3953 biggest attribute is its cost and no worries about degrading its finish carrying it.

IIRC the TSW series usually has a rail and Im not a fan of the rail or the doodads that attach to it, simply put IMO a CCW gun should be reliable, deadly, fairly accurate at ranges up 20 feet and light enough that it wont be a burden to carry leading it to being left at home more often than not.
In hindsight I think a 3913 is in my future as a CCW simply because it has the same manual of arms as my Model 39-2 and Model 59.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

I don't have either of the models you're asking about but your statement comparing non-TSW to TSW triggers is generally correct, from what I've seen & experienced. I have a 4056TSW (pre-rail) that has the sweetest (factory) trigger on any DAO I've owned/handled.

According to "the guide" (http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-wesson-semi-auto-pistols/350215-complete-3rd-gen-model-list.html) they did make a 3953TSW pre-rail for two years, if that's of interest to you.

The TSW rails, & machining, are considered better. If you find one you like, in good shape, & keep the rails clean & lightly greased, they shouldn't be a problem. You'll get some battering where the barrel pivots down in the aluminum frame but it's usually self-limiting with good (spring) maintenance & cleaning/lubrication.

.

 

[ZoomieG]

Oolong,

Like Bluedot, I don't have any 3953s, but I just compared a 5944, 5943ssv, and a 5943TSW. This may not be completely fair, as the 44 and ssv are used and well broken in; the 5943TSW I got looks to have been a safe queen.

The 44 and ssv have triggers with about 25% less travel than the TSW, and are quite a bit lighter. I would describe them as somewhere between the two pulls for DA/SA guns. The TSW has a trigger almost if not just as heavy as a standard DA pull. That TSW pull is actually heavier than some 3rd Gen TDA DA pulls. Might just be that gun.