Ive got my mind on a k frame smith and wesson. And have decided on the model 66. I've done my research on it and it turns out that the old models are prone to forcing cone cracks. The new ones are designed to prevent this. I would prefer getting the new one but those damn key locks disgust me. Do you think the forcing cone problem is over exaggerated and would it be worth getting the older models?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
New S&W model 66 vs old model 66
- Thread starter Mattj4867
- Start date
Recoil spring
New member
Use .38 specials most of the time.
I have owned multiple .357 magnum revolvers and use .38 specials the vast majority of the time over .357 loads.
What happened years ago is that some people shot .357 magnum loads all the time in their Model 19/66 and it caused issues with the gun not being able to hold up over the long haul, Smith came out with the L frame to compensate for this. If you stick with .38 special standard loads and the gun is tight to begin with, I would lean toward an older one without the nasty hole in the frame.
I wonder when is Smith and Wesson going to wake up and get rid of that so-called trigger safety? I won't buy their revolvers until they do.
I have owned multiple .357 magnum revolvers and use .38 specials the vast majority of the time over .357 loads.
What happened years ago is that some people shot .357 magnum loads all the time in their Model 19/66 and it caused issues with the gun not being able to hold up over the long haul, Smith came out with the L frame to compensate for this. If you stick with .38 special standard loads and the gun is tight to begin with, I would lean toward an older one without the nasty hole in the frame.
I wonder when is Smith and Wesson going to wake up and get rid of that so-called trigger safety? I won't buy their revolvers until they do.
If the currently produced M-66s will stand up to a steady diet of Magnum ammunition, why did S&W bring out the L-frame? I really question the idea that current m-66s are any stronger than pre-lock versions.
Were it me making this decision I wouldn't consider anything but an older, pre-lock, pre-MIM, pre-floating firing pin M-66...or any other model for that matter.
YMMV,
Dave
Were it me making this decision I wouldn't consider anything but an older, pre-lock, pre-MIM, pre-floating firing pin M-66...or any other model for that matter.
YMMV,
Dave
Model12Win
Moderator
I would prefer getting the new one but those damn key locks disgust me.
Get over it.
Seriously, the key locks are not going anywhere yet they also are a total non issue.
The new K-frames are superb, and much more durable than the old models. Every review has praised the accuracy as excellent with the new sleeved barrel system as well. They are great guns, every bit as good and in some ways better than any K-frame from the past.
My older model 66's ( all dash 1's I think )....in a 2 1/2" and a pair of 4" ...have thousands of rounds thru them in .357 mag --- but all with 158gr bullets ( the traditional .357 mag round )... and none of them...or my model 19's, where I have a pair of 4" guns in Nickel finish ...have any forcing cone issues....( all K frames )...
The only internal lock guns i have are a pair of the new 8 shot, 627's ....perf center guns ...one in 2 5/8" and one in 5" ...( N frames, so they're much heavier )/ ..but my point is, yes they are chock full of MIM parts....but they both shoot very well - have very smooth actions with good triggers....so buy what you want ....just feed them a steady diet of 158gr ammo...
I will never give up my older K frames....or N frames..../ ...but I do enjoy shooting the 627's once in awhile....and i even carried the 2 5/8" a little, a few months ago...for the heck of it...
The only internal lock guns i have are a pair of the new 8 shot, 627's ....perf center guns ...one in 2 5/8" and one in 5" ...( N frames, so they're much heavier )/ ..but my point is, yes they are chock full of MIM parts....but they both shoot very well - have very smooth actions with good triggers....so buy what you want ....just feed them a steady diet of 158gr ammo...
I will never give up my older K frames....or N frames..../ ...but I do enjoy shooting the 627's once in awhile....and i even carried the 2 5/8" a little, a few months ago...for the heck of it...
I prefer the older ones and would suggest going that route if you can find a nice one for a decent price. The problem is everyone else has realized how good the old ones are and the prices have been creeping up to the point where an older one will easily cost as much or more than a new one.
The new 66 has several changes, including the 2.75 two-piece barrel, a different front cylinder lockup (new ball detent that replaces the older spring plunger), an altered gas ring, a slightly longer cylinder, and a slightly longer frame.
The sights are harder to see (darker orange front insert & no white-line rear), and there are reports of shrapnel blowback from the almost non-existent forcing cone.
The one here has the tightest cylinder lockup of any Smith revolver I've ever handled.
Denis
The sights are harder to see (darker orange front insert & no white-line rear), and there are reports of shrapnel blowback from the almost non-existent forcing cone.
The one here has the tightest cylinder lockup of any Smith revolver I've ever handled.
Denis
I've owned the older 66s and 19. The problem is real and caused by 125 gr .357 magnum loads. Don't shoot a lot of those and you'll be fine. To be honest I don't shoot that many magnum loads in my K frames.
I'm also not afraid of the newer S&W revolvers as I've owned 2. But I don't think I could warm up to the new model 66 as they've changed the frame.
I'm also not afraid of the newer S&W revolvers as I've owned 2. But I don't think I could warm up to the new model 66 as they've changed the frame.
Last edited:
BubbaBlades
New member
I carried a 4" Model 66 on duty from the time that they first came out in the early 70s. I didn't like the s/s rear sight and wanted a 6" barrel like I had my previous carry a 6" Colt Python. In 1978 I obtained a 6" Model 66 and it became my new carry gun.
More recently, I bought a S&W Model 66-7. It is not quite as smooth as the older 66s (yes same ones from the 70s) but those guns each have had thousands of rounds through them. I bought two other NIB 6" Model 66s over the years because I never wanted to be without one. I sold both of those guns to friends because it looks like my original Model 66s will outlast me.
The 66-7 is just as accurate as my older guns.
One final note concerning MIM and two-piece barrels: I have a Model 460 Magnum with a 2.75" barrel. 460 Magnum and full-power 454 Casull loads have not resulted in any problems with either of those two features.
Mark
More recently, I bought a S&W Model 66-7. It is not quite as smooth as the older 66s (yes same ones from the 70s) but those guns each have had thousands of rounds through them. I bought two other NIB 6" Model 66s over the years because I never wanted to be without one. I sold both of those guns to friends because it looks like my original Model 66s will outlast me.
The 66-7 is just as accurate as my older guns.
One final note concerning MIM and two-piece barrels: I have a Model 460 Magnum with a 2.75" barrel. 460 Magnum and full-power 454 Casull loads have not resulted in any problems with either of those two features.
Mark
I own a Model 66-2 (K Frame), 686-1 (L Frame), and a 27-2 (N Frame). All three are great revolvers. The one with the finest workmanship and quality of the three is hands down the Model 27.
I too concur with above comments about shooting .38 Special a majority of the time and keeping it loaded with .357 Magnum for serious business. The comment about steering away from high velocity light loads in .357 Magnums is what the experts advice. I have also read forcing cone cracks is not as common as it is discussed.
It is still relatively easy to acquired any of the above revolvers in the pre-lock vintage and usually for less money than a new revolvers of the Classic line-up. I am speaking of solid used handguns in very good condition. If you do your due vigilance, the used one will be worth more than the brand new one in short order.
P.S. - Let me clarify my last sentence. It is intended to say if you bought one of both, in one year the older one would be worth more than the newer one in my opinion.
I too concur with above comments about shooting .38 Special a majority of the time and keeping it loaded with .357 Magnum for serious business. The comment about steering away from high velocity light loads in .357 Magnums is what the experts advice. I have also read forcing cone cracks is not as common as it is discussed.
It is still relatively easy to acquired any of the above revolvers in the pre-lock vintage and usually for less money than a new revolvers of the Classic line-up. I am speaking of solid used handguns in very good condition. If you do your due vigilance, the used one will be worth more than the brand new one in short order.
P.S. - Let me clarify my last sentence. It is intended to say if you bought one of both, in one year the older one would be worth more than the newer one in my opinion.
Last edited:
Key locks are solutions to non-existing problems !
K -frame 357s were introduced when typical police use was to fire 90% 38 specials and 10% magnum loads . They were ok with that . When studies of shootouts showed the fallacy of training with 38s but using 357s they tried training and using all 357s the guns couldn't deal with it !! That's when they introduced the L frame !!
Use only what you have trained with !
K -frame 357s were introduced when typical police use was to fire 90% 38 specials and 10% magnum loads . They were ok with that . When studies of shootouts showed the fallacy of training with 38s but using 357s they tried training and using all 357s the guns couldn't deal with it !! That's when they introduced the L frame !!
Use only what you have trained with !
OldMarksman
Staff
The L-Frame was introduced before the current Model 66 came out.If the currently produced M-66s will stand up to a steady diet of Magnum ammunition, why did S&W bring out the L-frame?
The older model was subject to frame cracking with a diet of heavy loads, but it was not intended for use with the magnum loads at the time except on an occasional basis. The L-Frame was. And, of course, the L-Frame is much more comparable when fired wit heavy loads
Do you have a basis for your skepticism?I really question the idea that current m-66s are any stronger than pre-lock versions.
What does the lock have to do with it?
I’ve got an older M66 and it is one of my favorite guns. If I found a good deal on an older model and it appeared to be in good shape I would have no problem buying another. However, I also really like the looks of the new model and other than nostalgia I can’t see a reason not to buy one.
OldMarksman,
Yes, I know the L-frame came out before the new K-frames. My point was, if S&W knows how to build a stronger K-frame why didn't they do it back then?
The basis for my "skepticism" is many conversations I've had with a local gunsmith, partially retired, who is constantly being asked by ICOR competitors to "fix" their late model Smith revolvers. He has described numerous problems with the ball-detent lock up system causing yoke mis-alignment that allows the cylinder to hit the barrel stub every time it is closed. Straight from the factory end shake and excessive barrel cylinder gap. And of course endless problems getting a light trigger pull that will allow the floating firing pins to ignite any primer other than Federals. And this isn't always solved by installing an after market, extended firing pin.
And the problem with the floating firing pin is also a personal experience. I have two of these "late model" Smiths that were intended to be carry guns, not competition pieces. Months after getting them I am still trying to get reliable ignition with any ammo/primer (something I require from a defensive weapon) while not having a 16-18# DA pull. The quest goes on.
I've become something of a friendly ear for my friend to vent on so I have heard this chapter and verse, more than once. Hence my "skepticism".
Dave
Yes, I know the L-frame came out before the new K-frames. My point was, if S&W knows how to build a stronger K-frame why didn't they do it back then?
The basis for my "skepticism" is many conversations I've had with a local gunsmith, partially retired, who is constantly being asked by ICOR competitors to "fix" their late model Smith revolvers. He has described numerous problems with the ball-detent lock up system causing yoke mis-alignment that allows the cylinder to hit the barrel stub every time it is closed. Straight from the factory end shake and excessive barrel cylinder gap. And of course endless problems getting a light trigger pull that will allow the floating firing pins to ignite any primer other than Federals. And this isn't always solved by installing an after market, extended firing pin.
And the problem with the floating firing pin is also a personal experience. I have two of these "late model" Smiths that were intended to be carry guns, not competition pieces. Months after getting them I am still trying to get reliable ignition with any ammo/primer (something I require from a defensive weapon) while not having a 16-18# DA pull. The quest goes on.
I've become something of a friendly ear for my friend to vent on so I have heard this chapter and verse, more than once. Hence my "skepticism".
Dave
Dave T said:The basis for my "skepticism" is many conversations I've had with a local gunsmith, partially retired, who is constantly being asked by ICOR competitors to "fix" their late model Smith revolvers.
I wouldn't read too much into this (at least as new vs old), since 1) most serious competitive revolver shooters opt for a new-style S&W and 2) competition (and the practice for) is downright hard on revolvers. Much harder than normal range use.
IOW, your comparison is artificially biased against new revolvers, since old-style S&Ws aren't as represented in competition, and so aren't here not there to break in the first place.
OldMarksman
Staff
Their objective "then" was to sell a .357 Magnum version of the .38 Combat Masterpiece, intended as a service revolver that was light and easy to carry and that would be fired occasionally with Magnum loads.My point was, if S&W knows how to build a stronger K-frame why didn't they do it back then?
They did that.
It really wasn't a great revolver for shooting with a lot ofMagnum loads. The gun didn't hold up well enough, and most shooters did not like it much for that.
So, they discontinued it. They came out with the L-Frame, which is comparable to the Colt ".41 frame" revolvers.
New demand has resulted in the reincarnation of the old gun, modified slightly to eliminate problems of flame cutting and frame cracking.
MrBorland,
The problems my friend is talking about are not on well used competition guns but rather on new from the factory guns. The owners frequently send them to S&W first and frequently get them back with little or no improvement, often being told it is in "factory speck" and nothing is done. That's when they bring them to my friend in the hopes that he can make them shootable.
OldMarksman,
In you latest post you didn't tell me anything I haven't know for many years.
If you guys (and others) want to like the current production revolvers from S&W, more power to you. Just don't tell me I have to like them.
Dave
The problems my friend is talking about are not on well used competition guns but rather on new from the factory guns. The owners frequently send them to S&W first and frequently get them back with little or no improvement, often being told it is in "factory speck" and nothing is done. That's when they bring them to my friend in the hopes that he can make them shootable.
OldMarksman,
In you latest post you didn't tell me anything I haven't know for many years.
If you guys (and others) want to like the current production revolvers from S&W, more power to you. Just don't tell me I have to like them.
Dave
FWIW, the two smoothest DA triggers I have ever shot are both on older S&W revolvers. One is my K22 Masterpiece from 1951 (enough said). The other is my friend's Model 66. I don't know how old it is, but his dad had it for quite some time before he gave it to him, and my friend is about 50. He mostly shoots 38's through it. It still locks up very tight. I have never shot a newer Smith with as good a trigger as those two older ones.