They just don't make them like they used to...

[PALADIN85020]

I'm still lamenting changes in S&W revolvers that don't make them necessarily better, but mostly cheaper to manufacture and/or politically correct. I like to look for cherry older, P&R models - they get scarcer every year.

Not long ago, I found this one, which I consider the poster child for my nostalgic tastes. It's a Model 66-1, the last of the pinned and recessed model 66s. When I got it, it was as new in the box, with all the related goodies. According to Roy Jinks, it left the factory in May, 1978. I treated it to a primo action job by Nelson Ford in Phoenix - the outside was not altered in any way. I also had a set of really nice smoothie target stocks, which are my preference (I kept the original checkered stocks), and applied them to the gun.

Now I have a first class "old school" K-frame .357 that looks good, has not been abused, works VERY smoothly, and suits me to a T. Here's a pic to drool over!

John

 

[Iggy]

Can't argue with that.

 

[bobs330]

Drool fest indeed. May I ask a few questions? I'm learning about Smith and Wesson revolvers about unsure what recessed and pinned means. That is a very nice firearm.

 

[PALADIN85020]

Drool fest indeed. May I ask a few questions? I'm learning about Smith and Wesson revolvers about unsure what recessed and pinned means. That is a very nice firearm.

In the good old days, the barrel on Smith & Wesson revolvers was screwed into the frame, and then pinned into more or less permanent position with a small transverse pin that went through the frame and the top of the barrel. This prevented the barrel from twisting, and had to be removed before the barrel could be unscrewed from the frame. You can see the pin on this one.

"Recessed" refers to S&W's former practice of counter-boring the rear of the cylinder chambers to accommodate the rims of magnum cartridges (and .22 rimfires). Seen from the side, the rear of the cylinder will appear to be in very close proximity to the frame, no unsightly gap. About 1980, both practices were stopped, more in the interest of manufacturing efficiency and speed than anything else. The older P&R revolvers just seemed more elegant, although in practice, no performance advantage accrued to them. P&R has become a hallmark of more careful attention to detail in the old days, and collectors look for these features.

Hope this helps.

John

 

[Rick_A]

20140707_133632 by Slick_Rick77, on Flickr

Top gun had an internal lock, uses MIM trigger parts, barrel is not pinned, stocks are laminate, the firing pin is frame mounted, and though very low production numbers has no collectable value.

Bottom gun is forged trigger parts, P&R, pre lock, hammer mounted FP, is currently highly collectable and has real wood grips numbered to the gun.

55 years separate their production. They're both excellent shooters. The top one you feel better about using on a daily basis, and the bottom one I'm more content to admire, with use on rare occasion.

The non informed will like them both as cool old guns. The collector often considers one junk and the other a prize.

I value them both the same.