625 45acp Mountain gun/new trigger system

W

wayne

New member
The 2 S&W revolvers I use for IDPA are both 25+ years old, and obviously have the old firing pin system.

I've been thinking about a 625 45acp Mountain Gun. I have been reading the action of the new trigger/hammer system, cannot not be made as smooth as the old. I guess some parts also have to be changed out which are the MIM(MIME) production parts, but even if they are changed, that the new action still will not be as smooth as my old 27. Something also about the hammer spring must always be at a higher pressure ?

Can anyone straighten me out a little on this, before I make some call to Weigand or some others ?
 
Well first of all it is NOT a new "trigger system". The frame mounted firing pin resulted in a change to the hammer nose (obviously) but the rest of the action is identical to the older versions. The frame mounted firing pin supposedly takes a full power mainspring for reliability (not in my experience - but that is what some people say). As for smoothness, I have two with the frame mounted pin, both are smooth as you could ever want (one is a PC gun, the other isn't - 627 and 696). Smith is starting to use MIM (metal injection molding) parts rather than forged parts. These may not lend themselves to fine polishing quite as well, but lots of companies (GOOD companies) are using them now for production cost reasons. (Kimber, Ruger, Smith and Wesson for samples) Since I've only seen one Smith revolver that really needed any work done on the actual engagement surfaces (factory fixed it, admitted it slipped through QC) I wouldn't worry that much about it. If you are looking at DA weight, the rebound system is the same, and lightening THAT spring has nothing to do with the primer strike weight. To lighten the SA one normally goes to lighter mainsprings. Supposedly this is a problem, but neither the 696 or 627 have had any problem with the Wolff reduced power mainspring installed (and I use CCI primers in my reloads).
 
Look down the page a few more inches(:))for the thread on 'frame-mounted firing pin...'. FWIW, I don't find my MIM gun to be any less 'smooth'; however, the trigger pull weight is certainly heavier than the older K and L frame.
 
625 45acp Mountain gun/new Trigger system

Well I finally talked to the local gunsmith, who has been around along time, in age and in working on S&W revolvers. His feelings are the new MIM parts are fine, and finds no reason to replace them with forged parts. He finds they are generally require less polishing in his experience. He understands that people are paranoid over the what he calls skeletonzied MIM parts, but feels they will last just fine, and in many cases make a smoother action than the old parts. But the pull is a little different, but not really that much more noticeable when he is done with it.
 
wayne,

I own a regular 625 with the hammer mounted firing pin, and a 625 MG and a 625 PC V-comp that both have MIM parts and frame mounted pins.

I've done my own "tigger jobs" on all of them, and there is a difference between them.

The MIM parts seem to be much more square deminsionally and have less surface imperfections to stone out. A bit of a time saver.

The frame mounted firing pins do seem to need a sharper hit to get consistent igintion. Reduced power mainsprings are a bit iffy in any revolver using full moon clips due to the variance in clip deminsions and sprinyness.

A wonderfully smooth trigger pull is easily had in any S&W revolver, but the frame mounted pins and MIM models do seem to need to be a bit heavier. I say around 20% heavier.

Good Luck...

Joe
 
I had Steve Houseal at Huron Shooting Sports work over my 625 MG. He said it was the worst NIB he'd ever seen. Smooth as silk now.

Noted gunsmith Jack Weigand says that new production S&W revolvers with frame mounted firing pins require approximately 25% more hammer spring tension for reliable ignition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top