S&W 66 Ball Detent Crane Lockup System??

  • Thread starter Thread starter m3bullet
  • Start date Start date
M

m3bullet

Guest
My 1984-vintage S&W 66 police trade-in is in great shape except for one area: the lockup is not as tight as I would like. Several years ago I paid S&W's service center $29 to mate a new locking bolt in an attempt to reduce the looseness. Lockup was tighter, but there is still more play than I would like.

I know some of the late model Performance Center guns have factory-installed ball detent crane lockup (BDCL) systems. Several renowned gunsmiths offer retrofit installation of BDCL systems. Anyone have any experience with gunsmith installed systems? Are they of high quality and reliable?
 
S&W nixes BDCL system

I spoke with S&W's service department this morning. They said they can't install the ball detent system on the 66 because the space at the crane/frame interface is too tight [unlike my lockup ;( ]. The frame is very thin below the barrel, so much so that the bottom of the round barrel is flattened to provide clearance for the crane/yoke.

As the looseness results from locking bolt play in the underlug barrel cavity, I asked about a locking bolt with an oversize shaft or installing a bushing in the locking bolt barrel cavity. S&W doesn't offer or recommend either solution. The service rep had no other solutions, their bottom line: live with it.

Anyone have any other solutions for tightening side-to-side cylinder looseness which results from play at the locking bolt? New barrel?
 
Dennis,

I saw your message when you originally posted it, but didn't respond as I've NO experience with the ball detent lockup. It's an updated variation of the Triple Lock type lock, though.

First, let's categorize how much is too much.

How much does the cylinder move when it is in battery? More than your other S&Ws?

Does it cause problems while firing, such as lead spitting?

There's a couple of possible solutions, but none are really that cheap, and are probably more trouble and expense than is really warranted on a 66...

1. What is the condition of the ejector rod locking stud? It could be undersized or damaged, which would lead to extra flexing. What's the condition of the recess on the ejector rod?

That would be the first place that I would look to possibly cut down on play.

Another possibility would be to possibly replace the ejector rod cylinder guide bushing (probably not the right name for it, but I've not got my parts schematic here at the office) with one that provides more support farther into the cylinder axis.

More support there, though, means more friction and a heavier action.

Without inspecting the gun I wouldn't be able to tell you anything more.

All in all, though, you're probably into a situation of diminished returns for the money spent.
 
Looseness categorization

Mike, thanks for your response.

The 66's lockup looseness bugs me as I compare it to my Models 27, 586, and 686, albeit w/beefier frames in fairness to the 66. In battery, the gap between the frame and yoke opens up 0.015" max with side force applied to the cylinder. Am I asking too much from this model? No lead spitting, extractor and collar (guide bushing) are comparable to the other models, very little endshake, smooth trigger - just not the tightest lockup.

No indications that an excessive number, or that particularly hot, .357 rounds were shot during it's police duties. My hunch is that the locking bolt play in its underlug cavity may have resulted from the many, perhaps energetic, cylinder open/close cycles during its 15-year police duty. During cylinder close, the side load generated on the locking bolt shaft by the extractor slamming against it may have "opened things up".

Looks like I may as S&W suggests, "live with it". Perhaps I'm being too critical. OK, that's it ... I'm going shooting with it tomorrow.
 
Well, let me get out the "Ronco Mr. Micrometer" when I get home and check the spread on my S&Ws.

I'll also check Khunhausen to see what he says on the subject.
 
m3bullet,
check out weigand combat handguns, he does the ball lock on the crane to all models (J,K,L,N). Never used him but you could probally e-mail him and pick his brain about your lock up problem. Bob
 
Weigand Gunsmithing

retpo,

Weigand is one of the "renowned" gunsmiths I was referring to in my original post. Thanks for your vote of confidence.

Weigand lists "single (competition)" and "double" ball detent installations. Mmmmmm. I'll contact him for further info.
 
I think that the S&W "Service" tech was all wet...MANY gunsmiths have built PPC guns over the years using the "ball detent" lockup on various K-frame revos, INCLUDING 19's and 66's...NEVER have I seen it suggested that the ball-detent lockup somehow weakened them or made them unsuitable for firing with full-power Magnum loads...check w/Weigand or some of the other well-known revolversmiths...betcha you'll find SEVERAL willing to do the ball-detent lockup AND STAND BEHIND IT!!!....mikey357
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top