Smith Brings back the Model 66!!!
- Thread starter cometpx4
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,020
- Reaction score
- 7,101
There is no "middleman." Ruger uses a transfer bar. The hammer hits the transfer bar, which in turn strikes the frame mounted firing pin (FMFP).
S&W uses a hammer block, which is moved out of the way when the trigger is pulled. The hammer strikes the FMFP directly. I do not believe the mainsprings are any heavier than they have ever been.
Man, the haters are out in full force here!! Can't these people get over something that happened almost 15 yrs. ago? Why do they keep posting their venom in threads like these? If you don't like S&W's new models fine, but don't stop & piss in every thread like some drunken brother in law at Christmas! This BS was old TEN YEARS ago. Get over it & move on. This is why S&W is making money & Colt has had the wolf at the door since '86. Technology changes and people do as well or they get left behind.
5Wire
Member
I kind of agree with what you posted. Some of the attitude has to come from the reason one has a firearm in the first place. If it is for self defense, I suspect the main characteristics sought would relate to function, capacity, and reliability as well as one's ability to be sufficiently accurate with it for the purpose.
I happen to think Glocks are ugly but there is no denying their accuracy and reliability. I think the S&W Models 19 and 66 snubbies are a great combination of aesthetic balance, reliable function, and solid material usage. I like almost anything by H&K but strongly favor the unique accuracy and reliability of the P7 series.
If reasons extend to nostalgia, historical significance, cosmetic appearance, materials, and so one, there is no "one right answer" beyond one's own tastes.
I'm glad they brought it back. If I didn't have my 686 mtn gun I'd jump right on it. May still down the road. I get so tired of the "grumblers" on here bashing all New Smiths. Folks we don't want Smith to go the way of Marlin. If you don't like it.......Don't buy it........But don't discourage others from doing so.
RIDE-RED 350r
Member
Absolutely!
Many of us despise ABS on our automobiles, but it's here to stay.
My first Smith was a brand new 686-6. Great revolver.
But since then, I have grown to appreciate and favor the old P&R classics for my own reasons that I suspect are no different than many others here.
I still would not hesitate to buy a brand new S&W. The new m69 being squarely on my "gotta have" list, if not on top along with a 4" m57 no-dash.
But good Lord, what would we do if S&W ceased making revolvers all together??!! IMHO, they are IT. There is no other revolver currently in production that I would spend my hard earned money on...period. Not one.
Locks, MIM parts, FMFP... I could give a rats posterior about all of that as long as the piece functions as it should and puts a round downrange where I want it.
I fully understand and appreciate others opinions, we all have them. And the above is mine.
I say "Thank you" to S&W for listening and bringing back a classic wheelgun that we all love with the return of the M66, even with it's departures from the classic M66. And kudos as well for thinking outside the box and coming out with a totally new wheelgun in the M69!
flagman1776
Member
I own a IL, MIM M66-7, (LE trade in from Australia I think). It's fine gun. Not as nice as my M66-2 but it is my ready gun in the bedroom. It makes sense to stretch the 4" to 4.25" for greater sales without making a special export model. Glad to see the 66 return.
05CarbonDRZ
Member
The new model 69 L Frame 44 mag actually is the most tempted I have been to buy a new S&W.And why is there a blued thumb latch on a stainless Gun?.....Did they run out of the MIM stainless thumb latches?
Last edited:
I swear I think some folks would complain even if they were getting hung with a new rope. I'm just glad Smith is still making revolvers. I have some new and some old, some with the lock and some without. I even have one with the two-piece barrel. Guess what? They all go bang when I pull the triggers. I'm more interested in the new 686 model but the new 66 just might find a place in my gun safe too.
WaMike
Member
I have new....and I have old. Both look good, work well and make holes wherever I point them.
Doin' what they gotta do to make ends meet. When Colt stopped selling double actions the price was over a grand and they were probably breaking even on them at best. A forged and milled, hand fitted revolver would probably cost as much as an Ed Brown or Wilson flagship 1911 does.
Hate the lock, have reservations about MIM, think some of the fit and finish could be a lot better but hey, my 627 Pro shoots like a house a fire and I'm darned glad to have it.
Hate the lock, have reservations about MIM, think some of the fit and finish could be a lot better but hey, my 627 Pro shoots like a house a fire and I'm darned glad to have it.
RIDE-RED 350r
Member
Ball detent?? As in like the X-frames have??
Last of the Mohicans
Member
My understanding from a thread on a Canadian gun forum is that the new 66 comes with a 4.2 inch (4.25?...I can't remember at the moment) barrel. This has understandably caused some excitement amongst hand gunners up here since anything with a shorter barrel is prohibited and cannot be brought into the country. Most Canadian handgun owners are not permitted to own short barrelled handguns under our Firearms Act (spit!). Some of us are grandfathered and allowed to continue to own, buy and sell such guns amongst ourselves. But have no illusions...when we owners are finally all gone, so will all such guns have been turned into scrap.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,020
- Reaction score
- 7,101
I have never had an issue with the FMFP, the 2-piece barrel, and if the ball-detent lock-up helps with the barrel shank split issue, its addition is welcome. The lock can be removed, and the extra 1/4 inch is no problem apart from the fact that finding a holster will be an issue, at first at least.
I am just excited about the prospect of a K frame with a 4 inch round butt, very similar to the ONI/FBI Model 19s, which were about the best compromise for really hitting your target and carrying ease, and with less corrosion issues.
This is good news from S&W. I am excited. The other thing is that this new model can be shot without fear of damaging the collector value of an older Model 19 or 66 as repairs and parts are just a little easier to come by.
Kudos to S&W. This Model 66 is certainly better news to self-defense oriented old-timers like me than any of the Performance Center competition guns that have been announced for 2014.
Good show!
I am just excited about the prospect of a K frame with a 4 inch round butt, very similar to the ONI/FBI Model 19s, which were about the best compromise for really hitting your target and carrying ease, and with less corrosion issues.
This is good news from S&W. I am excited. The other thing is that this new model can be shot without fear of damaging the collector value of an older Model 19 or 66 as repairs and parts are just a little easier to come by.
Kudos to S&W. This Model 66 is certainly better news to self-defense oriented old-timers like me than any of the Performance Center competition guns that have been announced for 2014.
Good show!
+1 . . . Seeing Smith & Wesson revolvers thrive is "all good" from my point of view.
I wonder if S&W employs any marketing people? It is a little surprising to see them limiting the revolver's sales potential by including an unpopular "feature".
5Wire
Member
Maybe their marketing and sales people see a favorable market position opportunity catering to Canada's restrictions with sufficient projected revenue to capitalize expanded domestic variations.+1 . . . I wonder if S&W employs any marketing people? It is a little surprising to see them limiting the revolver's sales potential by including an unpopular "feature".
Not so surprising, perhaps?
Last of the Mohicans
Member
I keep seeing FMFP come up in this discussion...as a Canadian gun owner, I don't know what that means. Google says it stands for Foreign Military Finance Program. Is this correct? And, if so, what does providing grant money to foreign governments have to do with the reappearance of the Model 66?
Last of the Mohicans
Member
Canadian gun owner reaction to the new 66 is one of rejoicing. Other 4.2 inch revolvers from Smith and Wesson, and, Ruger seem to be flying off dealers shelves as fast as they can be stocked.
5Wire
Member
FMFP = Frame Mounted Firing Pin referred to in the Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson as the "floating firing pin".
Last edited:
Last of the Mohicans
Member
Ah. Thank you. I was aware of the firing pin location change, but didn't make the connection with the acronym. Thanks again.
Agreed. I count that as being on the positive side.
I was thinking about the visceral reaction of dyed in the wool S&W enthusiasts to the inclusion of "the lock". Although I was not a revolver enthusiast at the time, I have read that the original introduction of "the lock" was pretty damaging to their market share, with something like a 40% shrinkage attributed to that decision.
Admittedly, I am neither a good student of commercial history nor a marketing guru. But, losing that much of your market had to be painful. Sticking to that decision may have continuing negative effects.
It reminds me of what Microsoft seems to be doing with their Windows desktop operating system. Reportedly, their management's insistence on unpopular Windows 8.x features and excluding popular older features has accelerated their demise in a market where they were once "the 800 pound gorilla".
The IT trade rags point to decisions about a seemingly small details as being very damaging to Microsoft, long term.
Admittedly, Microsoft faces a lot of serious competition. Arguably, there are fewer contenders for S&W's crown as "King of Revolvers" . . . unless you count the plastic pistols and Ruger revolvers.
S&W1006
Member
I can't wait to get my hands on one. I want to get a look at the forcing cone with the 2 piece barrel. I know some people seem to hate the idea of a 2 piece barrel I can't help but wonder if that is the solution to the forcing cone failure. It would be a welcome change for me to be able to shoot 125 grain magnum ammo without fear of cracking my forcing cone. I love the balance and feel of my 4" 66 and I don't think an extra 1/4" is going to upset that balance. I might have to buy one and let my 66-3 rest. The new 66 might not ever have the collectibility but I have an older one for that. Maybe if we are lucky they will make a short barrel version as well. Also I don't get what the big deal is about the frame mounted firing pin. I have 2 revolvers with them and 2 with hammer mounted firing pins and they both work just fine.
stantheman86
US Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2010
- Messages
- 2,479
- Reaction score
- 531
Already have a 4" 66-7, excellent gun and a very sweet shooter.
I could care less about the IL but hate the CA compliant firing pin.....nothing an Apex pin and spring won't fix.
I could care less about the IL but hate the CA compliant firing pin.....nothing an Apex pin and spring won't fix.
5Wire
Member
I'm curious. What is the CA Compliance rule? What about an Apex pin and spring makes it compliant?
Ed, sharpen your reading skills as I NEVER said that I LIKE it. I merely ACCEPT it as I know there is no going back. Ain't gonna happen. I own classic S&W revolvers and appreciate them for what they are. I also know that Chevy ain't ever gonna make a '57 again. I don't post on GM forums saying "GM is stupid because they don't still make a '57!!". Well, that's how ridiculous these anti-MIM & anti-lock threads appear. It is the reality of the matter. You can choose to accept it or not. However, the incessant whining, harping and bellyaching makes the naysayers appear as nutjobs and it is beyond just getting old. Just quit pissing in every thread like a broken record.
KLYDE
Member
AE stated that everyone has a right to an opinion. Obviously you don't agree with that.
Clearly you feel strongly and there's nothing wrong with that, though your tone's harsh and you aren't considering all the facts in arriving at your rather pointed conclusion.
As least as far as the lock goes, consider that since S&W has in recent years shown a willingness to produce new revolvers without it, that fact appropriately encourages those who don't like the lock to continue to voice discontent, because apparently someone in the company is listening and the complaints have had an influence on the current product.
Water on rock. Takes time but it can work, so long as the vocal don't listen to the naysayers who tell them to shut up.
No worries!
At some point in the past, S&W was shipping slightly shorter firing pins in response to a California drop test requirement. As I understand it, some people experienced light strikes with the shorter pin, hence the popularity of the full length Apex replacement firing pin.
Based on my limited experience, I believe that the current S&W firing pins being installed in new revolvers and offered as spare parts are the original design length again. In other words, the current S&W part is the same length as the Apex replacement. So, replacing the S&W part with an Apex part is no longer a big deal, pun intended.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
