S&W 66 or 27: You have to choose...

But for day in-day out, night in-night out, canoeing, camping or back up for the big gun while in the high timber after elk, the M66 makes a strong case. Stainless construction with nearly the same action smoothness, lack of a full under barrel rib, grips that fit and reasonable weight make it my first choice .
Click to expand...

Very good point rodfac

Owning both the 66 and 27, if I had to choose one for daily carry, it would be the 66. It's what I used to often primarily cc before I went to the J-frame. But in every other aspect, it would be the 27.
 
Ok now to tell terrible secrets. This will probably get me kicked off of TFL but here goes.
In my earlier/stupid/dumb/nitwit/confused/lost/brainless days (26 at the time) I had a 5 inch 27.
A friend had a Luger, I traded for the luger.
The 27 was build in the 60’s and was excellent condition. The luger well to start off the bore was pitted and it got worse from there.
But by god I had to have that luger.
I will regret that day for the remainder of my life, buy the 27 or you will too.
 
Picture it; you come up to a table at the gun show and see two revolvers. One is a S&W 66-1 SS 4" in really clean and tight condition at $500. The other is a S&W 27-2 3" nicely blued and equally tight at $800. You only have $800 in the world and must choose. Which will it be???
Click to expand...

I wouldn't buy either one. If forced to get a K-frame Magnum it would be a M19. There's no way I would pay that much for a cut down M27-2. Why someone would take 1/2" off the barrel is beyond me but I wouldn't be interested in the reduced performance and muzzle flash from that short a magnum. Of course if it was the original 3-1/2" barrel that someone measured incorrectly and labeled wrong the 27-2 would be my choice of the two mentioned. (smile)

Dave

PS: The best choice for a 357 of that general size is the L-frame, of course.
 
There seems to be a lot of confusion about the problems experienced with early M66's. There were, in fact, three primary issues with early M66 revolvers that were not experienced with the M19 or any other carbon-steel S&W revolver. These issues were, however, entirely endemic to the M66 no-dash variant and were resolved with the 66-1 or later no-dash variants depending on the issue.

The first issue that comes to mind is that 66 no-dash revolvers were known to spontaneously seize up after firing several rounds of .357 Magnum ammunition. This is because the stainless steel gas ring would expand more than a carbon steel one when it got hot. This issue was corrected with the introduction of the 66-1 which had its gas ring relocated from the yoke to the cylinder.

The second issue was galling of the lockwork. This arose because S&W attempted to produce an all-stainless revolver and used the same alloys for internal parts like the hammer and trigger as they did for the frame, barrel, and cylinder. This issue was corrected by switching from stainless internals to flash chromed carbon steel internals either in 66-1 or later 66 no-dash revolvers depending on who you ask. As has been noted, later stainless S&W revolvers eliminated the flash chrome and switched to the same carbon steel parts as blue and nickel revolvers most likely as a measure to simplify production and cut costs.

The final issue was that along with internal parts, S&W also made early 66 no-dash revolvers with stainless steel sights which were prone to "wash out" and become difficult to see in bright light. Later 66 no-dash revolvers went back to black sights.

As to the original question, I would buy a 3 1/2" barrel Model 27 before a 4" Model 66. The reason is because I already own both a 4" Model 28-2 and a 2 1/2" Model 66-2 and I've always thought that the 3 1/2" barrel Model 27 was the most beautiful handgun ever produced.
 
Well I have a 66-1...

attachment.php


to be exact this one above so I'd the the 27! I presume you mean 3 1/2 barrel 27?

But if it's just a 3 incher I'd take it to.

Deaf
 
OK, for al you knowledgeable S&W folks, help me out...

I have a pre-27 Model 27 (if that makes sense!)

It is a five-screw, with a 5 inch barrel. It is NOT marked for the model number, but it does have the serial number, of course--V80XXX. (PM me for the rest of the number, if you have some research results.)

Here is my dilemma--it is about 80-85%, with a good amount of bluing wear. I want to send it back to Smith and Wesson for a good re-bluing. However, some of the people I have spoken to say that it's worth a LOT of money.

Can I send it back with a glad heart, or would doing so destroy the value of the revolver?
 
Refinishing a Pre-27 would almost certainly hurt its value especially if it's in 80+% condition. You have to understand, to a collector, an original finish with "honest" wear is far more desirable than a perfect refinish and a pre-27, particularly with the less common 5" barrel, has significant collector value. If you have no sentimental attachment to the gun, you could probably sell it to a collector for enough money to buy a later 5" M27 with a better finish and still have money left over.
 
It is a five-screw, with a 5 inch barrel. It is NOT marked for the model number, but it does have the serial number, of course--V80XXX. (PM me for the rest of the number, if you have some research results.)

Here is my dilemma--it is about 80-85%, with a good amount of bluing wear. I want to send it back to Smith and Wesson for a good re-bluing. However, some of the people I have spoken to say that it's worth a LOT of money.
Click to expand...

That SN is wrong for the said gun. If you are right in identification, it must have a "S" prefix. You need to check the butt for the SN, not the yoke in that era. If it has no letter prefix, than its either a registered magnum, or a pre war 357 magnum model.

Refinishing would be a bad idea. Its better to save your money towards a better one. If the gun has sentimental value, best to leave it alone IMO. You could put the money saved towards a clean one, which are nearly always over $800.
 
Brittle SS? Are you sure you're not talking about the chrome on the hammer and trigger?
Click to expand...

A 66-1 was my first Duty gun, I bought it new. The recoil shield cracked. found out from S&W later they had some bad stainless in the early 66's.
 
S&W advertised the Model 27 with 3 1/2" barrel as a concealed carry backup for detectives :D

Frankly, are you really going to "collect" this gun? Are you trying to invest or do you want a carry and range gun? If you want it to be a very nice gun, then get it refinished and shoot it.
 
I picked up a 3.5 inch pre-Model 27 a year or so ago. It had been reblued, and was out of time. Had the timing dealt with, and now it's ready for another 30 years or so of use.

I got it cheap because of the problems. I was pleased to get it, because I've always thought it was one of the most attractive S&W revolvers; also, i was interested in getting a shooter, not another safe queen.

The original grips do not make it pleasant to handle, at least for me; I'm going to get a T-grip adapter, and see if that helps. I'd rather preserve the original looks than put aftermarket grips on it.

I tend to agree with the poster who felt that it was too big for its cartridge; it would have worked nicely as a .44 or .45, I think; Smith never made a 3.5 inch barrel for either cartridge, which is a shame.
 
As a range / fun gun? The 27. For carry / use ? The 66.

In general if I am carrying an N frame it's going to have bigger holes in it.
 
I'm just going to pile on ......a Model 27 ...every time.

I have a mod 27-2 4" Nickel....and its one of the finest revolvers I own...( even over model 18's, 19's, 28's, 29's, 66's, 686's or 629's...)...even over a couple of blued model 27's I have in 4" and 6" ...

and I wouldn't refinish that pre-mod 27 either...
 
On one hand the M-66 is one of the finer K frame revolvers Smith and Wesson produced. Now the other hand the M-27 is the finest revolver Smith and Wesson ever had in production.

The M-27 every time...
 
I'd take the 66 in a new york minute. I consider the 27 excessively heavy and large for 36 calibre. The 66 on the other hand is almost the perfect balance of size and portability in the mid calibre.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top