New S&W model 66 vs old model 66

Hi, Stargazer,

FWIW, I spent a lot of time (which could probably have been better spent) trying to work over Ruger DA revolvers to have as good a DA trigger as the S&W's. I came pretty close, but never got there, nor do I think it is possible short of actually making a new hammer and trigger of a different design. The genius of the S&W mechanism makes it what it is, and the camming system simply has not, I believe, been duplicated in any other make. (Ruger has now almost matched the S&W system, but in the LCR, not in their service type revolvers.)

Jim
 
You are correct, James, but there's a point of diminishing marginal return and I seem to have hit mine with my Ruger. Having said that, the 66 is a gun I always wanted but never had a shot at. In fact, all things being equal -- if someone offered me a perfect, minty 66-no dash with a nice trigger job with a stamped sideplate and a Colt Python, I'd take a 66 any day, well, except Tuesdays and Thursdays.
 
Star,
If you're going to be here for a few minutes, can you please answer my two questions above, and I'll also ask what you mean by a stamped sideplate?
Denis
 
DPris, I am only speaking for myself here, but I will do my best to answer your questions about how the new model 66 is two tone.

On the new model 66 revolvers, the hammer, trigger and cylinder release (thumbpiece) are black. Some people have complained about this appearance. In particular, thumbpiece is very black and slightly shiny, and I don't love the appearance of it, though I would consider it acceptable on a working gun. I assume that the thumbpiece and the nut that retains it could be replaced with stainless steel parts.

The hammer and trigger have a black finish, but they have a more dark flat grey appearance. The look of these parts does not bother me since on most revolvers the hammer and trigger don't match the finish of the rest of the gun.

I have read on another forum that the hammers from a new model 66 are not interchangeable with any other revolver. Reportedly, the hammer stud in the new model 66 is thicker than in previous K-frames. I have not confirmed this fact myself, but I would not count on being able to swap the hammer in a new model 66 for one that had a different finish. If other people have more information about this issue, I would be happy to hear it.
 
If he's referring to those darker small parts, I guess you could call it "two-tone", although they're just darker than the older versions & they make up a small percentage of the overall gun.

I'm not aware of any stainless replacements for the hammer & trigger, a standard stainless thumbpiece could probably be substituted.

What's the stamped sideplate?
Denis
 
Back in the day, S&W used to stamp their brand in the side plate. It became too expensive. I got one of the first S&W 686s and it has a stamped side plate. If you ever buy a used S&W, try to get one like that.



This is a 686 with a side plate.
 
Last edited:
Ah.
They just moved the logo to the other side.

Same on my older 66, an older 686, the new 66, and several other Smiths I own.
Never mattered to me which side that logo's on.
Really couldn't care less & wouldn't bother to look for a Smith with a right-side logo.
Denis
 
I own 2 of the snub 2 1/2" barrel S&Ws, a 1981 66-1 and a 2002 66-6. Both have digested many, many rounds of .357 and both are still tight, no erosion and both are pretty darned accurate, especially since I use CT grips on them to help my older eyesight. My vote would go to buy an older one, but I am also not afraid of the new one with a lock. I have not ever talked with anyone that had a problem with the lock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top