Pinned Barrels on S&W

I may be mistaken about this, but I'm pretty sure that S&W stopped pinning the barrels BEFORE CNC machinery was rolled out to the company.

It was done, so I'm told, to make sure that their production techniques would accommodate dropping the pin.

For a number of years, given just how many guns came from the factory with misaligned barrels, I'd have to say that their automated processes took a long time for them to figure out.

We were still seeing more than an inconsequential number of guns with canted barrels up through 1997 or so.

It wasn't uncommon for us to have to send 1 in 20 to 1 in 30 revolvers back to the supplier.
 
I may be mistaken about this, but I'm pretty sure that S&W stopped pinning the barrels BEFORE CNC machinery was rolled out to the company.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree as the non-pinned came out in the early 1980s . I doubt CNC machining had anything to do with Smith eliminating the barrel pin. The elimination of the pin was simply a cost cutting measure.
 
CNC machines may be more efficient but they're not necessarily better unless production quotas are more important than quality fitting.
Click to expand...
CNC machining does allow for a greater level of consistency. As much as I love a nicely hand-fit gun, I've seen a few stinkers from the Hellstrom and Bangor Punta era.
 
It's all about cost cutting. I've only owned one that I finally had to get rid of, no good and no luck with S&W service. it was a Bangor Punta model 24. No pin. I finally traded it in on a Colt. I have 5 later model guns, took me 10 years to buy another new one tho. I would rather have a used gun with a pin. The 5 newer guns all would function and are accurate, sent 2 back to factory( one is still not right but it's no longer out of time) , I'm using one as is. Another I bought used and it's really a good shooter. Number 5 went to the local S&W repair center, they scratched it for me.
I guess we should be glad S&W still makes revolvers, I just can't love a Ruger D/A Revolver, Colt quit.
 
The pinned barrels were eliminated in 1982, prior to the CNC machines.

There were "transition" revolvers made subsequent to 1982. These had either a pinned barrel, or recessed cylinder. Usually one or the other but not both. These were done as S&W used up parts in inventory. The pinned barrel, in addition to helping visually date the revolver, is indicative of more hand fitting and quality control as well.

The crush fitting of the barrels evidently took S&W some time to master. Today they evidently can't even align the barrels properly, going by the amount of canted S&W barrel threads on the net.

Out of six brand new S&W revolvers at the LGS, four had varying degrees of canted barrels. Two had absolutley lousy crowns on their barrels.

They must have job corp graduates assembling their revolvers these days.

No matter, plenty of nice P&R examples still available for much less than the asking price of current production. :) Regards 18DAI
 
"...you almost never got an old one with a trigger pull that really needed any further 'enhancement' ".

Hmmm. Well, quite a few of us made some decent money doing "trigger jobs" on those guns whose pulls didn't need "ehnhancement." I think we often view the "good old days" with rose-colored glasses.

As to the barrel pinning, sorry, AKsRul.e. S&W made the cross cut in the barrel during barrel manufacture and before the barrel was installed. The frame hole was already drilled, also, so when the barrel was installed it was only a matter of driving in the pin. I know it is hard to believe, but precision manufacturing was being done many decades before CNC machines ever existed. In fact, guns don't even require much in the way of precision, compared to, say, a computer hard drive.

Jim
 
Yeah...

EVERY Smith & Wesson revovler I've ever purchased, ranging in production dates from about 1910 to the mid 1980s, has benefitted GREATLY from action work on my part.

My Regulation Police 4" .32 Long, made probably about 1922, had perhaps the heaviest trigger pull I've ever encounted on an S&W.

Due to its age and the fact that it's an I frame there wasn't a tremendous amount that I could do for it, but I did what I could.
 
The pinned barrels were eliminated in 1982... There were "transition" revolvers made subsequent to 1982. These had either a pinned barrel, or recessed cylinder. Usually one or the other but not both. These were done as S&W used up parts in inventory. The pinned barrel, in addition to helping visually date the revolver, is indicative of more hand fitting and quality control as well.
Click to expand...
This is mostly correct, but IMHO it's helpful to mention a couple of things.
  • Based on what I've seen in collector circles, a limited number of non-pinned S&Ws were sold going back to the early 70s. AFAIK these mostly consist of M60s with a few M67s thrown in. Collectors believe they are the result of some sort of limited factory test program.
  • The L frame M58x/68x models went into production in 1980 without barrel pins from the beginning- or recessed cylinders for that matter. AFAIK "P&R" L frames do not exist and the 1982 cutoff doesn't apply.
 
Last edited:
Fortunately, I don't recognize L frames as being handguns.

With that full underlug, they are obviously over/under shotguns with a pistol grip.

And ugly as a ball of snot, to boot.
 
Mike Irwin wrote:

Fortunately, I don't recognize L frames as being handguns.

With that full underlug, they are obviously over/under shotguns with a pistol grip.

And ugly as a ball of snot, to boot.
__________________
Click to expand...

Careful, you're on the verge of hurting my feelings!

Bob Wright
 
LOL Mike, I understand your sentiment, although I'm sure some L frame fans may be upset! :D

I used to own a 6" M586; it was crazy accurate, but it had some Bangor Punta QA/QC problems- the finish on the upper frame and one spot on the barrel looked like it had been polished with sandpaper- and the gun was an absolute boat anchor that was impossible for me to carry comfortably. I never really warmed up to it, realized I liked shooting my 4" K frames more, and sold it.
 
I have a 586 revolver that may be the best shooting revolver I own. It has had an action job because it's a range gun for IDPA. It's not as nicely made as an older gun but this one happens to work. I don't do any work on a carry gun other than shoot it. Most S&W guns, even,the ones they make now, smooth up nicely with use. I have a 625JM that I have lightened the pull on for IDPA, it's very smooth without any polishing. I couldn't get any Federal primers a couple years ago and I had to untune it to make it shoot every time with Winchester primers but it was still smooth even tho a little heavy for my taste. I never had done any tuning on S&W revolvers til I started shooting IDPA, I don't see the need of it for everyday use and I would never lighten the mainspring on a carry gun, it's asking for misfires.
 
What about an L frame without a full length underlug ? My 686+ Mountain Gun is my favorite S&W, just love the way it looks. Four inch tapered barrel, 7 shot.
 
Fortunately, I don't recognize L frames as being handguns.

With that full underlug, they are obviously over/under shotguns with a pistol grip.

And ugly as a ball of snot, to boot
Click to expand...
.

<LOL> Now that is FUNNY!

And IMHO, so true... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top