The Model 66 is Back!

[LaVistaBill]

I was happy to see at SHOT 2014 Media Day that the S&W Model 66 (-8) is back in the lineup. It's not the Model 66 I carried as a deputy sheriff in 1979, but it is a K-frame .357 Magnum and it has a number of design changes. First the barrel length is now 4.25" and I learned that this is to make it Canada compliant. The barrel is actually covered with a shroud that forms the underlug and rib, plus the forward locking point is no longer on the end of the ejector rod, but is a ball-detent on the crane. It has all the refinements of modern Smith DA revolvers, including some well-designed synthetic combat-style grips. I was able to shoot 6 rounds of .38 Special 130 gr. FMJ "Ball" ammo thru it and firing SA and DA I had no trouble keeping it on target at 15 yards. I'd really like to see it in a 3" barrel or even 2.5" but won't be holding my breath...still it's good to have it back!

 

[colt_saa]

Many of us have missed the K-frame 357 Magnums

As you probably already know, the old concern over forcing cone cracks was eliminated with the metallurgical and design changes that were introduced in the -6 engineering revision to the model 66.

I enjoyed shooting this nicely balanced 357 Magnum. I am certain we will see some additional barrel lengths added in the near future

 

[Treis]

Many of us have missed the K-frame 357 Magnums

As you probably already know, the old concern over forcing cone cracks was eliminated with the metallurgical and design changes that were introduced in the -6 engineering revision to the model 66.

I enjoyed shooting this nicely balanced 357 Magnum. I am certain we will see some additional barrel lengths added in the near future

If that 66 is in your possession could you measure the barrel to see if it is 4.25? I would love to get one to use in IDPA. IDPA rule book is 4 1/8 inches. I'm sure that is a photo. Non off of the production line?

 

[colt_saa]

If that 66 is in your possession could you measure the barrel to see if it is 4.25? I would love to get one to use in IDPA. IDPA rule book is 4 1/8 inches. I'm sure that is a photo. Non off of the production line?

As stated above, to be legal for sale in Canada the barrel needs to be in excess of 105MM. That is why the 4 1/4" choice was made. A 4 1/8" barrel would be too short.

 

[old bear]

I'm sure the new M-66 is in many ways an improvement on the old M-66 so many of us knew and loved, but it would have been nice if they could have included the barrel pin and cylinder recess features. Oh-well.

 

[Hapworth]

I'm sure the new M-66 is in many ways an improvement on the old M-66 so many of us knew and loved, but it would have been nice if they could have included the barrel pin and cylinder recess features. Oh-well.

Out of curiosity, why? By the time they were discontinued, approximately 1982, pinned barrels and recessed cylinders were all but redundant.

The barrel pin doesn't keep a barrel from shooting loose; at best it prevents complete revolution should the barrel come loose. Thing is, a factory tightened barrel is unlikely to do this. The pin can certainly be viewed as a potentially helpful hedge, but arguably an over-engineered one that adds time and cost to the production process (so too the finished product), in the service of preventing an event unlikely enough to not justify the added expense.

The recessed cylinders were originally developed when magnum cartridge manufacturing was new, developing and unstandardized. Case heads were occasionally rupturing, and recessed cylinders arose as a safety measure -- containing near the entire cartridge inside the chamber made for less flame and debris blasting outward should a rupture occur. By the 1950s, the manufacturing process improved to the point that weakness in the case heads was solved and risk of magnum-induced rupture dropped off; recessed cylinders arguably had twenty years or more of being completely unnecessary. And, again, added production cost that was passed to the consumer, to no particular purpose.

I understand the association of the pinned and recessed era with superior craftsmanship and products -- though I'm not entirely convinced of it -- and a desire for a return to the old hand-fitted, artisanal gunsmiths days expressed by pinned barrel and recessed cylinder appreciation, but as far as actual engineering components, what value do they have now?

Honest question, I'm open to a different way of looking at it...

 

[edstuff]

I am excited by this as I never owned an original 66 and to be able to be the first owner is pretty cool. Not that I'd mind owning a used one but to be the first guy(besides test firing) to play with it is pretty sweet.

I can't be the only one who is thinking since it's stainless they should have named it the 666

 

[colt_saa]

I am excited by this as I never owned an original 66 and to be able to be the first owner is pretty cool. Not that I'd mind owning a used one but to be the first guy(besides test firing) to play with it is pretty sweet.

I can't be the only one who is thinking since it's stainless they should have named it the 666

The model 66 is the stainless version of the model 19. It was introduced back in the days of 2 digit model numbers.

Had it been introduce during the 3 digit numbering system, it might have been designated 619.

 

[Hillbilly77]

I'd like to see them bring back the Model 19, too.

Too much emphasis on stainless guns.

 

[Hillbilly77]

Out of curiosity, why?

I understand the association of the pinned and recessed era with superior craftsmanship and products -- though I'm not entirely convinced of it -- and a desire for a return to the old hand-fitted, artisanal gunsmiths days expressed by pinned barrel and recessed cylinder appreciation, but as far as actual engineering components, what value do they have now?

Honest question, I'm open to a different way of looking at it...

Pinned barrels are usually less likely to be canted - a cosmetic "problem" that has existed since the pinned barrel was eliminated.
An actual "problem"? Not really. Just ugly.
Just like anything, I've seen some examples that were much worse than others, and some not canted at all.
Even the modern factory-replaced barrel on my 586 no-dash has a slight cant - not much, but it's there.

Recessed cylinder? It just looks cool.

 

[Hapworth]

Pinned barrels are usually less likely to be canted - a cosmetic "problem" that has existed since the pinned barrel was eliminated.
An actual "problem"? Not really. Just ugly.
Just like anything, I've seen some examples that were much worse than others, and some not canted at all.
Even the modern factory-replaced barrel on my 586 no-dash has a slight cant - not much, but it's there.

Recessed cylinder? It just looks cool.

I've wondered about canted barrels, then and now, and what actual numbers might be given instances of them cited in all eras; also to what degree the Internet influences the impression that there are significantly more now, which nonetheless might be true; and if the older revolvers often seem superior simply because for the most part only the good examples are likely to have lasted.

Who knows, but the questions are interesting.

I agree, though, the recessed cylinder looks cool.

 

[shocker]

There's no purpose for pinning a two piece barrel, right? My new 63 has a recessed cylinder, why does 22 lr need that?

 

[Hillbilly77]

I've wondered about canted barrels, then and now, and what actual numbers might be given instances of them cited in all eras; also to what degree the Internet influences the impression that there are significantly more now, which nonetheless might be true; and if the older revolvers often seem superior simply because for the most part only the good examples are likely to have lasted.

Who knows, but the questions are interesting.

I agree, though, the recessed cylinder looks cool.

I'm only talking about the guns I have seen myself.
I've seen some with the barrel canted so badly that the rear sight blade must be moved all the way to the right just to zero the windage adjustment.
I've seen some that would pass an examination with a straight edge.

I've never seen a pinned barrel canted. I'm not saying there aren't any - I've just never seen one.

 

[Led4thehed2]

I was excited to hear this news, but when I saw photos of this revolver on the Smith website, I was no longer excited. I hoped this to be a true re-production in looks and crafting.

To me, this revolver barely resembles the old 66. The barrel and ejector shroud seem to be differently proportioned, the thumb piece of modern styling and inexplicably black, lock (of course), and some stocks that I don't find to be very attractive.

 

[Engine49guy]

This is the one they should be making in 9mm with the 547 extractor system,

Is the ejector rod current style ? almost looks like a Colt rod with the large end.

 

[LaVistaBill]

This is the one they should be making in 9mm with the 547 extractor system,

Is the ejector rod current style ? almost looks like a Colt rod with the large end.

I think the lighting in one of the photos makes it look like the ejector rod has a "large end." It doesn't, it is just like all the other S&W DA revolvers of today. If anyone thinks they are going to repro a Model 66 from back in the day, think again. The price would be more than most would be willing to pay and I doubt they could even do it. Any resurrected "Classics" will be similar in appearance to the originals, but will have features found on the present-day products.

 

[RonS]

Make that in a 2 3/4 - 3" barrel with smooth combats. . .

That cylinder latch would have to go though.

 

[Engine49guy]

I like that they added "Combat Magnum" to the barrel rollstamp on the right side,
Tried to find a closeup of the new ball detent but no luck, Does it lock into a notch in the ejector rod shroud ?
On the plus side the detent and 2 piece barrel should eliminate canted barrels ?
Interesting they have a traditional Baughman ramp but the interchangeable DX system is the bomb and would be a nice upgrade as would a set of nice wood grips for a more traditional look , that new rubber is pretty hard on the eyes.

 

[LaVistaBill]

I like that they added "Combat Magnum" to the barrel rollstamp on the right side,
Tried to find a closeup of the new ball detent but no luck, Does it lock into a notch in the ejector rod shroud ?
On the plus side the detent and 2 piece barrel should eliminate canted barrels ?
Interesting they have a traditional Baughman ramp but the interchangeable DX system is the bomb and would be a nice upgrade as would a set of nice wood grips for a more traditional look , that new rubber is pretty hard on the eyes.

Engine49guy,

I have a close-up photo, but don't have access to it right now. Anyway, yes the ball is in the crane (yoke) and the detent is the lower rear portion of the ejector rod shroud or underlug.

 

[ladder13]

Hey Smith, give us a 3 inch.