Question for the experts

[Neal]

Currently own a model 39, and have owned a 469 and a 6906, I think that was the number, but I am not familiar with the 40 calibers. Is the 410/411 series the same physical size as the 39? I know the grip has a flat backstrap instead of curved, but I am referring to the width of the frame and the general feel. Thanks.

 

[Sevens]

The 39 is a single stack. The 410/411 is the same size as the 4006/5906 double stack pistols.

The 469 is the same size as the 6906 but the 6906 has real ergonomic improvements that most folks can recognize in their hands. The 410/411 are the exact same width and trigger reach as the 6906, but the 410/411 has a longer full-size grip.

 

[Neal]

The 39 is a single stack. The 410/411 is the same size as the 4006/5906 double stack pistols.

The 469 is the same size as the 6906 but the 6906 has real ergonomic improvements that most folks can recognize in their hands. The 410/411 are the exact same width and trigger reach as the 6906, but the 410/411 has a longer full-size grip.

I have been doing more searching and found the 410/411 are double stack. I wrongly assumed from the photos that they were single stack. I just looked through the list of 3rd Gen autos posted by skijos and did not find any full size single stack 40s with lightweight alloy frame. When the model 59 first came out I had to have one. And later I tried a 659 for a short time, That size grip frame is just too large for my hand. Do the 410/411s feel the same, or are they smaller than the 59 series?

 

[gmborkovic]

Mr. Sevens, you are no doubt the expert. I tilt my hat to you. Mike

 

[Sevens]

The 410/411 is exactly the same dimensions as the 5906/4006. That makes them generally and nearly the same size as a Model 59, however the 3rd Gen pistols offered many improvements to the guns and many of them are ergonomic improvements.

Because of these small improvements, a 3rd Gen double stack 9/.40 absolutely does feel better in the shooting hands than a 59/659.

But these improvements means more to some than to others! The slim one-piece grip, the under cut where trigger guard meets the front of the grip, these are small improvements that REALLY stand out in my hands, but maybe less in someone else’s mitts.

You can absolutely assume that if you get your hands on a 5906/4006/915 just to dry fire and feel... then a 410/411 will feel EXACTLY the same in your hands.

I can say that a 410/411 feels better in the hands than a 59, for sure. But you may not see as much improvement as I do.

S&W never did make any full size single stack .40cal pistol in either steel or alloy frame, unless somehow I’ve forgotten one. They did make a few compact single stack .40’s in the 4013/4014. You might like those. Both are alloy frame.

 

[Sevens]

Mr. Sevens, you are no doubt the expert. I tilt my hat to you. Mike

Not true at all, though I thank you for the kind words. What I do is answer the ones that I know so that our REAL experts don’t get burnt out on some of the things that other folks can share.

 

[Neal]

Sevens, Than you very much for the details answer to my questions. That is more information that I hoped for, and I am very grateful. It's funny about how different double stacks fit different shooter's hands. Back in my younger days I briefly owned a couple Browning Hi Powers, and they felt good to me. However the 59 series, Glocks, the Para Ordinance double stacks, all feel like bricks in my hand. I'm in the process of switching from Glocks to M&P 2.0 40s right now, because the grip angle and ergos feel so much better to me. I also carried my 469, which I bought when they first came on the market. Of course when the 3rd generation 6906 appeared, I had to have one, and you are right, the ergos and sights were better. Now in my senior years, having added .40 and 357 SIG calibers, I still feel that nostalgia yearn for the 3rd gen Smiths. Thats why the questions about the 40 caliber guns. Looks like I need to find a 915 or 410/411 to handle. Thanks again.