Pinned and recessed. [A question]

[HAWKEYE10]

I love pinned & recessed S&W revolvers from 1961 to 1980.
A lot of them are not so high in cost that I can't collect and
shoot some nice guns.
My friend ask this week why I liked pinned & recessed guns
from 1961 to 1980 and I said they don't cost so much that I
can't afford them,and I like them. He then ask what was the difference between pinned & recessed & the modern guns. I
didn't know the advantages of either one. Can you help? Don

 

[Roadranger]

S&W did away with pinned and recessed in the early 80's as a cost cutting measure. Only the Magnums and the 22's were recessed anyway and the 22's still are. Barrels are now a sort of crush fit and won't unscrew without help. I too, like the older guns, but the new one still work as well. Bob

 

[Art Doc]

The loss of the P&R features are symptomatic of a general reduction in quality, refinement and QC. The guns became less artful and more mass produced.

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

Most of us like the P&R guns, but I like both. I like to be able to check at a glance if the cylinder is loaded, which you can't do on a recessed gun. The ability to change the barrel easily is irrelevent for most of us, since we will never have one changed anyway.

I like the endurance upgrades that newer guns have had since the 1988-1990 time period. They do make a difference. I have owned, or still do, both styles, and the endurance guns will take a steady diet of full power magnum loads that pre endurance guns won't without developing problems. A lot of Smith snobs don't want to accept that for the truth, but it is what it is.

I like the quality that P&R represents, like SP said above. I like the way they look too, and the bluing tends to be better on P&R guns, even those made in the '70's and '80's.

Oh yea, one other thing.........firing pins on the hammer, square butts, and no locks for me!

 

[Glock 'em down]

Like Saxon said...it's just a sign of the times.

The days of old men in leather aprons building your revolver BY HAND are over!

Just like the sixgun's role in law enforcement. A buddy of mine still carries the same model 66 no dash he has toted since 1979. We had three big law enforcement funerals this week. Cops from all over the country came to Seminole, Oklahoma to pay honor to three dead LEOs. A young officer...slick headed with $100 sunglasses on...approached my friend, motioned towards his revolver and simply asked, "whats that?"

Pitiful.

 

[GF1]

I like the detail of the recessed cylinders, but the check on loaded status visually is a good point. There is no safety difference here.

I have heard reports of the non-pinned barrels coming loose...that's a good excuse to justify my preference for guns of this vintage.

 

[dobe]

While P&R isn't needed, it does take one back to an era of blued steel and wood stocks.

 

[Zilmo]

While P&R isn't needed, it does take one back to an era of blued steel and wood stocks.

Yup. No plastic to be found. Sigh...

 

[HAWKEYE10]

Thanks guys; I knew I liked P&R guns better now I can
tell my friends why. Don

 

[GF]

Don, just show them some of your nice revolvers and say "That's WHY!"

 

[HAWKEYE10]

They are all P&R guns,I don't have one thats not. I bought my model 18 from him and he has been sorry ever since. He
is a Colt fan and I feel sorry for him. He pays high dollar for
his guns and they aren't a bit better. Don

 

[sjmjax]

Let me preface this with saying I agree with most posters on the subject of recessed cylinders. I'd always chose to take an older P&R gun over a more modern revolver lacking those features all other major considerations the same.

However, the only thing I don't like about the recessed cylinder is that they are tedious to clean properly. They sure accumulate a lot of gunk if you shoot alox treated lead!

 

[dobe]

That's true, but I still like the P&R models. They look classy.

 

[NAYTH]

I have a beautiful old 4" 66 I purchased in the late-70's. Oddly it has recessed cylinders and no barrel pin.

I think they were referred to as "transition" models.

Nayth

 

[Black_Sheep]

Let me preface this with saying I agree with most posters on the subject of recessed cylinders. I'd always chose to take an older P&R gun over a more modern revolver lacking those features all other major considerations the same.

+1
Given a choice, I'd take a P&R revolver over the later version every time...

 

[bk43]

The need for pinned barrels actually went away in 1958 when S&W went to a crush fit. They retained the pin as kind of a tradition thing until 1981. The pin served no useful purpose after 1958 other than to appease the traditionalists.

We have had engineering types on this board go ballistic over the term crush fit, saying there is no such thing. However, that is the term the factory uses. Many long gun makers use the term to describing the barrel/receiver interface. Since I know nothing about engineering, I choose to go with S&W and use the term crush fit. It has been described to me as the threads of the two parts are slightly different and thus they destroy each other and lock up when the barrel and frame are mated.

Recessed cylinders, other than 22's, could be argued both ways by reasonable people. The "need" is certainly questionable with modern casings.

Bob

 

[shadowrider]

Like Saxon said...it's just a sign of the times.

The days of old men in leather aprons building your revolver BY HAND are over!

Just like the sixgun's role in law enforcement. A buddy of mine still carries the same model 66 no dash he has toted since 1979. We had three big law enforcement funerals this week. Cops from all over the country came to Seminole, Oklahoma to pay honor to three dead LEOs. A young officer...slick headed with $100 sunglasses on...approached my friend, motioned towards his revolver and simply asked, "whats that?"

Pitiful.

Did the guy reply "This is a man's gun son, when you grow up they might let you have one"?

To the O/P, I've got one P&R gun and I find that I prefer the non-recessed cylinders. They are more speedloader friendly. But I do like the older models better. I stick with my roll stamped barrels and frames. They can keep the new laser engraving that just looks mass produced and cheap IMO. And unless they get rid of the lock I've bought my last S&W new from a retailer. There's just too many classics out there used that don't have MIM internals. And for crying out loud, get rid of the lock on the "Classic" line! What are you thinking!

 

[afriqueart]

I'm not a big gun buyer yet....but, I don't know if I could ever buy a brand new gun with a hole above the thumbpiece. I know I've looked at a whole bunch of hand guns over the past couple of months online and in stores. Can't get over MIM, either.

 

[Art Doc]

Bear in mind that only the 22 rim fire calibers and the Magnums were recessed. The 38 Specials, 44 Specials, etc. never were.


Here's a recessed cylinder:

When viewed from the side the gap between the cylinder and the recoil shield indicates if recessed or not. Almost no gap and it is recessed, significant gap and it is not. This one is not.

This one is.

Here's the barrel pin.

 

[SmithSwede]

Here is one genuine mechanical advantage to a recessed cylinder:

Having the rims of the cartridges fit into six recessed cylinder holes removes most of the slop between the cylinder and the ratchet "star."

There are two little pins in the cylinder that are supposed to help align the star and remove the play. I have a Combat Magnum that lost one of the pins, and that used to bother me, until I realized that when you load six cartridges into recessed chambers, the play is virtually eliminated.

Of course, loading a non-recessed cylinder also eliminates some of the play, but not as much as a recessed cylinder, because you don't get all the extra surface area of the cartridge heads seating into the recesssed portion of the chamber.