Pinned vs Non-Pinned

[jumbeaux]

Asked this question a good while back and didn't really get an answer. I have owned Smiths for a very long time all of which are pinned barrel except a new Model 10 snub round butt which I bought new in the 1983 time frame. It was my only revolver to have problems....went back to factory and still had timing problems/failure to index at times and so on...so this experience put me off of the non-pinned models. I realize that this has nothing to do with the pinned barrel but I belive it was a quality issue that took place around the transition time. So my question is there a certain vintage K Frame to avoid ?? Thank you...

rick

 

[chief38]

My personal experience is that for the most part, the older Smiths from the 50's 60's and early 70's were made with a better work ethic, and have never given me much of a problem. The 80's started to become a bit sloppy when Smith was going through acquisitions, and in the early 90's they seemed to redeem themselves slightly. I do not own any Smiths that were made much after the mid 90's because I do not care for the mechanical and physical changes they made in their revolvers, so I can not comment on the new ones.

That said, about 10 years ago I purchased a new in the (red) box, 3 digit Chief's Special from a gun store that thought I was a sucker for buying it. It was unfired because it left the factory with defective internals and was incapable of being shot. I was able to fix the little revolver and now it is one of my prize revolver finds, but I was quite surprised that it had left the Factory in 1950 - 1951 in that unsatisfactory condition. On the other side of the coin, I have a Model 60-7 made in '94 - '95 that is one of the highest quality production guns I have even seen come out of the Factory!

So the bottom line here is this..............
Which ever Model Smith you are thinking of buying, THOROUGHLY check it out both mechanically and aesthetically before you lay your cash down. No matter when it was made, there were "good days" and "bad days" on the production line!!

Regards,
Chief38

 

[JcMack]

Bangor Punta was a holding co. that was in charge of S&W during some of the suspect period. I had a model 19 2.5" I bought new from that period. You could hold the gun on a 45 degree angle and see where the milling machine had "chattered" across the flats on the frame. Yet it was blued and sent out. The internals also proved to be less than acceptable. I also bought a model 60 new that the hammer head snapped off of on the 3 rd shot out of the box.

 

[redlevel]

Now, I look for guns from early post-war through the end of the 70s/early 80s. I do not buy non-pinned guns. I set that as one criteria mainly to keep from spending too much money. It is just an arbitrary decision on my part to limit the pool of potential purchases. I don't think the pinned barrel in itself is necessarily that important, it just represents a time when quality was better.

I firmly believe that the guns from the late 40s/early 50s are higher quality. I also believe the 60s and 70s guns are better than those produced later. Ironically, I remember back in the early 70s, when I was an aspiring young deputy and gun buyer, hearing the old-timers lament about how S&W quality had declined with the advent of the Bangor Punta era. The B-P ownership was what, 1965-1985? Those late 60s and early 70s guns are the ones we old-timers are singing the praises of now.

 

[Armyphotog]

I certainly no gunsmith, but common sense would tell me that a barrel, pinned or not, has nothing to do with timing.

 

[fyimo]

Now, I look for guns from early post-war through the end of the 70s/early 80s. I do not buy non-pinned guns. I set that as one criteria mainly to keep from spending too much money. It is just an arbitrary decision on my part to limit the pool of potential purchases. I don't think the pinned barrel in itself is necessarily that important, it just represents a time when quality was better.

I firmly believe that the guns from the late 40s/early 50s are higher quality. I also believe the 60s and 70s guns are better than those produced later. Ironically, I remember back in the early 70s, when I was an aspiring young deputy and gun buyer, hearing the old-timers lament about how S&W quality had declined with the advent of the Bangor Punta era. The B-P ownership was what, 1965-1985? Those late 60s and early 70s guns are the ones we old-timers are singing the praises of now.

+1 and represents my feeling also. I only own two non pinned revolvers a 686 no dash and a Model 18-4. Both of them are excellent shooters so I can't say I have had a problem with them. I usually end up buying S&W revolvers from the 50's, 60's, and 70's.

 

[jumbeaux]

Pinned

Appreciate the replies.....Armyphotog......please note that I mentioned that the pinned barrel had nothing to do with timing...I also have enough common sense to realize that....was only asking about time frame sir...

rick

 

[feralmerril]

I am so sick of all this stupid talk about pin & ressessed. Colt never done it, it should be a non issue. Do you for a moment think that smith wouldnt drill a hole and knock a lousy pin in it if it needed it? That opperation shouldnt cost a extra buck a gun! The saftey insults my intelligence the same way helmit and seat belt laws do! Rugers printing the safety manuel on the barrel does too.

 

[jumbeaux]

feralmerril

feralmerril.....I was just trying to date the transition from one to the other and see if there might be a common thread sir....besides....don't like the question....don't read the post....

rick

 

[JcMack]

I am so sick of all this stupid talk about pin & ressessed. Colt never done it, it should be a non issue. Do you for a moment think that smith wouldnt drill a hole and knock a lousy pin in it if it needed it? That opperation shouldnt cost a extra buck a gun! The saftey insults my intelligence the same way helmit and seat belt laws do! Rugers printing the safety manuel on the barrel does too.

With all due respect Merril: S&W at least had the forsight to think you might need to remove a barrel on a revolver. It's much easier with the pinned approch using a tapered pin to firmly secure the barrel yet facilitate future removal. It suggests quality and "craftsmanship". The recessed (I prefer counter bored) chamber was a safety thing when magnum Calibers might experience case head separation. It's long since a non problem (I hope). I'm sure you're aware of these things and I don't want to insult you. The P&C thing cannot be denied as a most desirable feature.

Some issues can be resolved here:http://www.handloads.com/misc/Smith.Model.Changes.asp

 

[feralmerril]

Could be, but tell me just how many other revolvers and rifles made since time began done it besides s&w? I got a feeling smith probley now wishes either they never had done it, or if they went back to it, they would be damned either choice. Like saying it was always nessasary and we were wrong, or it never needed it but for some reason it needs it now?
That aside, I wasnt intending on hurting anyones feelings on purpose although it seems I did. Sorry for that! I was trying to get across I never though P&R was ever a big deal. Perhaps I am wrong. In my case I next to never, if ever, had a problem with a gun "Breaking down" on me!
That may well be because I never shot one gun enough to wear out. That probley was due to me buying and trying and then turning them over years ago to try others. I have had close to a dozzen custom guns done years ago just to have something different or whatever. That and I never bought a "dog" to start with, unless it was a "historical" gun.
Tell ya another qurik of mine. On one hand I acknowledge stainless steel is a valueable addition to the gun industry, I still am not fond of them. I do own a 66-3 and once owned a early model 60. I think my adversion came as being old as I am, years back seeing cop`s and others toteing them, was to me, the mark of a newby! I never had a blue gun rust on me anyway. Now if I lived in lousianna or florida and grew web feet I probley would have mostly stainless.

 

[tops]

I think most people agree that the best workmanship was when the 5 screws were made. In the 60s and 70s the last thing that S&W was doing to show extra craftmanship was the P&R so that makes them desireable. The trouble with pre 60 .357 and .44s is that there are not enough to go around and they are too expensive for poor people like me. I wish I still had the 5 screw, 4 in. .44 Spec. I bought in 1960. Now I shoot a 27-2 and a 29-2. I would be ashamed to be seen with a MIM gun. Larry

 

[paladin42]

I was wondering how long it would be before someone mentioned MIM.

 

[bmcgilvray]

I never looked for the union label but I look for the pin.

Only have 2 Smith & Wesson revolvers without a pinned barrel. They're fine but I've made up my mind to buy pinned models.

 

[tops]

I was wondering how long it would be before someone mentioned MIM.

I'm slow. Always been a day late and a dollar short. Larry

 

[bk43]

Going back to the OP, the pinned barrel has nothing to do with quality in the time frame he's talking about. After 1958 it was purely a cosmetic feature having nothing to do with function. I also don't see the timing issue as a quality thing. Really, clean the slots and a couple licks with a file on the cylinder stop if needed and you're good to go. Isn't that routine maintenance? Maybe it's just me.

Bob

 

[jumbeaux]

bk43

Revolver was bought new....went back twice to S&W for repair....third time it went back to dealer for refund....just wondering about quality during this time frame sir....

rick