The Model 66 is Back!

[Hillbilly77]

Hey Smith, give us a 3 inch.

....in blue.

 

[steamloco76]

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

Every .22 LR & .22 WMR revolver I've ever owned, Colt, H&R, Ruger and S&W has recessed chambers to protect the adjoining cartridge rims from a chain fire if a rim blows out. Remember the priming compound is in the rim on a rimfire.

Back to topic on the new 66. Sure, it does not look like the original, but it will be very svelte compared to Ruger's GP-100 and that in itself should help S&W sell the new guns quickly.

 

[RonS]

IMHO the key is the weight and to a lesser degree the bulk. I have a joke/comment I make about revolver weights, the weight in ounces should equal the bore diameter to two places. A .22 should weigh 22 oz, a .357 should weigh 36 oz and a .44 should weigh 44 oz. This gun is nearly perfect.

 

[Hapworth]

I posted this in the other new 66 thread: anyone looking for one these now, they're starting to appear on the auction sites at a purchase price of just over $700.

 

[BuckeyeS&W]

I ordered one today at local gun shop $800 out the door,I can't wait. I have a 6" Colt Python but hate shooting it very often because of cost of replacement is getting out of hand. I always liked the 66 but never came on to a good deal for one.I hope I like the new 66 I hate buying anything based on pictures alone but I'm tired of wating because I enjoy shooting my Python . It's good to hear a few are starting to show up. I hope I don't have the 4 month wait that my 617 took.

 

[AveragEd]

If you can buy one now for $700 on GunBroker, why would you wait any time at all to pay $100 more?

Ed

 

[BuckeyeS&W]

Is that out the door? I like dealing local if I have any issues there is no problem and if for some reason I don't like the new 66 he will keep it no questions asked . I don't like dealing with people I can't see eye to eye, that's just me I guess I'm old school and if that costs a few more dollars so be it. He's been in business for over 40 years for a reason. If I want to save money I'll buy cheap paper towels or off brand soup

 

[BuckeyeS&W]

If you can buy one now for $700 on GunBroker, why would you wait any time at all to pay $100 more?

Ed

Ed, I was just on Gun Broker.com They have one 66 with 1 current bid of $707 with ten days left. The buy it now is $849. Say you win it for $707 you have to add $27 for shipping and $35 FFL charge? It is located NC I live in Ohio. $770 so far if the auction ended now. I think $800 looks fine to me I just might get it cheaper than Gun Broker.

 

[SWMod10]

Doesn't this have a 2 piece barrel?

 

[Badquaker]

Let's hope a 3" is in the near future

 

[AveragEd]

I'm sorry - I thought the post saying that they are priced at $700 online meant that it was a "Buy Now" price. Not being interested in one, I didn't go there to check.

Ed

 

[Hapworth]

I'm sorry - I thought the post saying that they are priced at $700 online meant that it was a "Buy Now" price. Not being interested in one, I didn't go there to check.

Ed

It is. On Gunsinternational right now there's a reputable dealer selling for $719.

 

[Kilibreaux]

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!

These are all improvements.
Thirty years ago Dan Wesson was selling revolvers with multipart barrels that were proven to be more accurate than monolithic barrels screwed into frames. S&W has finally caught up with that reality.
The ball detent locking system makes sense...as the gun goes BACK in recoil the ball tends to remain in place which increases crane locking forces. S&W's basic cylinder unlatching system works against heavy recoil...but the ball detent reverses that.

 

[Speedieguy]

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

That cylinder latch would have to go though.

I think a 2-3 inch barrel version of the new 66 would be a HUGE seller!

 

[mrwiggins38]

i was glad to see they brought this revolver back. I'm also looking hard at the model 69. personally, i think the model 66 is a perfect revolver, but i'm partial to partial under lug barrels.

 

[Deputy]

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.

My feelings exactly. Geez...that barrel looks like a humongous bull barrel!!!! I don't remember my Model 66 barrel being that large. I'm also not crazy about the new-style black cylinder release, hammer, and trigger. I assume that is done to keep the price down. But it looks kinda ugly. I was lucky enouhg to have a "3T" option. I'd give my left testy to have it back again.

 

[Retired W4]

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.

Sounds like a similar set-up as Jovino's, only reversed. I will probably get pummeled for this but I think the gun looks ugly. S&W has completely lost the S&W look. I hope it functions better than it looks, but my confidence level on their new guns in that area is way down. Here is something for comparison. 66 no dash.

 

[Deputy]

Sounds like a similar set-up as Jovino's, only reversed. I will probably get pummeled for this but I think the gun looks ugly. S&W has completely lost the S&W look. I hope it functions better than it looks, but my confidence level on their new guns in that area is way down. Here is something for comparison. 66 no dash.

Now THAT is the way I remember my old Model 66.

 

[AveragEd]

Moderators, take note that I'm being a good boy.

Ed

 

[Retired W4]

I will apologize publicly right now if I have offended anyone about the ugly part of my post. I own/owned S&W revolvers with the IL, MIM parts, and the two part barrel and I have no problem with any of that. I wish S&W all the luck marketing this gun, and hope all who buy them have a very satisfactory experience with theirs. It was only a comment about the cosmetic/athletic aspect of that particular model compared to the older style. Time goes on, and gun designs change as that time goes on. I'm wishing I never sold my 310NG. Great gun, and except for some minor details (not to mention very modern materials used) it is an outstanding gun, functionally and athletically.

I could go on and on about ergonomics seen on guns like the Glock and early Ruger semi-auto's. That has already been done. They both shoot very well when you get past the ergo part. BTW, after canvasing the big FFL's at set-up tonight no one had one (M-66 that is) to examine. I would like to do that.