S&W Two piece barrels

C

CarbineCaleb

New member
Does anyone know the geometry/materials of the new S&W "two piece barrels"? How are the two pieces arranged? What are they made of? What are the advantages and disadvantages?
 
Advantages to S&W are ease of manufacture and lower production costs without changing products consumer price there by increasing their profit.
 
Basically the new S&W barrel system is a non-customer removable version of the Dan Wesson barrel system.

Depending on the version of gun, the barrel is made of stainless steel, and the shroud is stainless.
I assume there are also versions made with a titanium or aluminum shroud, but the barrel will always be steel.

The actual design is a rifled, tube-like barrel with a smooth faced flange on the front.
The shroud has a "key" on it that slips upward into a key-way on the front of the frame.
This key system aligns the shroud with the front sight at 12:00, and prevents it from turning.

The barrel slides down the shroud and the flange butting against a shoulder in the shroud locks everything in place.
From the front you see a smooth barrel muzzle in the end of the shroud.

The advantages of the system are primarily:
S&W can hold the price of the gun down. Instead of making many different barrels from forgings, S&W can make shrouds from extrusions or castings for individual models, and make long sections of barrels for use on all models.

Accuracy will likely be enhanced due to the tensioned barrel mounting system, in much the same way that Dan Wesson's often shoot better.

To the owner, there is no real difference between the old and new barrel systems.

There is a strong possibility, if not probability S&W or an after-market maker will offer interchangeable barrels like that offered by Dan Wesson.
The potential is there, needing only some method of unscrewing the barrel.
A simple method would be to modify the stock barrel by cutting screw-like slots on the front of the shroud, and making up a simple wrench that would grip the slots.

The disadvantage:
The only real disadvantage is for a owner wanting a barrel change.
Until pistolsmiths get up to speed on the new system, it's going to be harder to find a 'smith who can do barrel work.

The new barrel system requires a special barrel wrench to remove the barrel.
The new system uses a barrel "wrench" that fits down the bore, and actually grips the rifling to allow unscrewing it or screwing it in.
There is a potential for damaging the barrel if an improper, or home-made wrench is used.

Until pistolsmith's can obtain a PROPER wrench for the new barrels, S&W is going to be the only source for barrel work.

Bottom line is, it ain't the old barrel system and some people don't like it for no other reason than that, but as far as I can see, it's going to be a "wash" as far as the owner is concerned, with the potential of possibly better accuracy.
 
Great Reply, Dfariswheel!!!

You certainly know your stuff!!!


"In a world devoid of semiautomatics, a properly set-up Webley is the ultimate full-size self-defense handgun."
 
Thanks a lot for the effort and the clear explanation, Dfariswheel - very interesting! :) You said "Accuracy will likely be enhanced due to the tensioned barrel mounting system"... is that because the barrel will flex less during the shot? Are you a pistolsmith or engineer, btw?

From what I gathered, these changes sound like a win for both S&W and the customer - very cool :D
 
The tensioned barrel system was proven by Dan Wesson. The harmonics created when the bullet passes thru the barrel is more consistent from end to end thus less barrel whip is created. This allows a more repeatable shot which shrinks groups.
It's a win situation for S&W right now, but untill gunsmiths get the tools needed for changing barrels it's not a complete win for those owners wishing to change barrels or shrouds.
 
Three problems already noted. First, some QC was not properly performed or not done at all, some revolvers were shipped that failed GO/NO GO gauges for alignment of barrel/chamber. These were improperly tensioned and a range rod would not pass through or were tightly arched enough to create tight spots in the barrel. The third problem is simple. The arching ruins accuracy. The bullet ignites, deforms on hitting the misaligned forcing cone, then it hits the tight arch and then it exits the barrel. I have seen only a few new 2-piece S&W barrel revolvers. All failed. Gauges/range rods say NO GO. S&W again has found a problem where there was none.
 
Since the barrel screws into the frame how does the forcing cone get misaligned? Also if the shroud seats square on the frame how does the barrel get arched if over tensioned. Shouldn't the threads stretch and strip out?
 
As far as I can tell, S&W is sold on their machinery. Final human QC seems to be non-existent at S&W. I believe that when I purchase a M10 38 Special and it is non-functional NIB, there are problems in Springfield. I have witnessed some oddities from S&W that a one-eyed, glaucomic and monocle wearing human would have failed on QC. These were delivered revolvers. The last I knew, S&W had robots firing revolvers before they were boxed. One cannot expect craftsmanship from robots. My own M10 experience would not be a shining example of S&W QC. Build it, ship it and repair it when the customer returns it.
 
I have a Model 66-7 with the 2-piece barrel. I'm not enamoured with it as I think it's pretty fugly compared to the lovely lines of a 1970's or earlier 2.5" model 66 or 19.

That said... I have had absolutely no problems with it at all. One doesn't expect a 2.5" gun to be a tack driver, but using 158gr .357 Federal AE ammo I could keep six shots in six seconds inside the 10 ring at 15 yards. Shooting for a tight group with WW-USA 125gr JHPs allowed me to get a 3" group at 15 yards (slightly high actually).

Thanks to Dfariswheel for the summation of the 2-piece construction. I'd read the same information.

Majic - the bore tube has external threads that fit to the frame's barrel opening. Excessively tightening the tube could cause the interior of the bore to distort slightly - either forming an arch or bow in the tube or causing the muzzle to not be in a straight line with the breech end. My guess is that the breech end of the barrel tube is threaded to engage both the frame and the new barrel shroud as I can't see any other fastening method for the shroud.
 
Sir William: While I don't like the longstanding trends towards automation in production in terms of the lost jobs - on your statement that one can't expect craftsmanship from robots, I would have to disagree. Robots are capable of much greater precision than humans are - it's just a fact. And they never tire, become inattentive, slack (or ask for a raise ;) ). Robots are used in some terribly exacting work, including, in research hospitals, brain surgery - just watch a CAM (Computer Aided Machining) robot get setup and craft a custom metal part and then tell me they can't do exacting work.
 
Carbine,

Robots are capable of repeating programmed machining task’s over and over and that’s it. CAD/CAM programs pumped into a CNC machine serve one purpose and one alone - making cookie cutter firearms and parts.

Craftsman - skill and experience

Robot - programming

The robot can't see that a certain part dosent fit quite right, and can't tell that the product dosent feel quite right.

Sir William is right on the money, a little human intervention would be nice down at Smith.
 
We all know automation is good for quality. I still recall how perfect my completely automated assembled and painted Renault Le Car was. I am not convinced of total automation.
 
While robots are most often used for repetitive work (and such robots have the greatest throughput), if you do a search in Google on: neurosurgery robot
.... you're going to get a lot of hits. And in neurosurgery, each patient is different (not grossly so, but different) - their skull size, brain size, even fine details of brain shape; and the shape and location of the pathology that is being addressed can vary dramatically. They are being considered there not to save cost, but to improve results, and neurosurgeons have a reputation for a pretty deft touch... the bottom line is, machines are capable of finer control.

I don't want to continue down this line too long - I think I'll depress people :o

At least at this point, I agree that humans are an essential part of the process - all processes.

But, for anyone who thinks that machines are "inherently flawed"... there is no theory to back that optimistic assumption up. And the more you probe what makes the machines work, and what their potential is, the more you will see that things are just openended there, at this point, completely. I was asked a similar question at my dissertation defense - the faculty (science professors) asked me if the computer can be smarter than the people who created it... I knew what they wanted me to say. But I answered 'yes', because its true (again, I think the explanation will just depress people).
 
Robots, automation, automated vehicles and fighters

Robots, of course, don't even have to have mobility, let alone a humanlike shape. But for those people that may like to see the most advanced robot with humanlike form and motion, check out Honda's ASIMO:

ASIMO site:
http://asimo.honda.com/inside_asimo.asp?bhcp=1

ASIMO movies
http://asimo.honda.com/inside_asimo_movies.asp

My favorite, a movie of ASIMO on stairs:
http://asimo.honda.com/movie/wm_stream/Stairs.wmv

(it turns out that many things that people do easily and without conscious thought (such as pattern recognition and motion) are actually very difficult to get computers to do).

If anyone is interested in unmanned aircraft, here is some information on Boeing's X45 program, with photos of the X45A and X45C - no pilots, no windows!
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/x-45.html

Related to that, they already have RUVs (Remotely operated Underwater Vehicles) and AUVs (Autonomous Underwater Vehicles) that are used operationally in the petroleum industry and under active improvement.

Military applications of artificial intelligence and robotics scare me the most - once we don't have people in harm's way, there will be little reluctance, I fear, to wage war - but people will still be the ones getting shot. :eek:
 
The changeover has absolutely NOTHING to do with reliability, durability, accuracy or anything of that matter.
Its just a shoddy way to make what was once a good gun more cheaply, period. As was said, the only advantage is that they can charge you the same price for a gun manufactured MUCH more cheaply than before and line their pockets at your expense.
My money is going to Taurus or Colt when it comes to wheelguns from now on out.
 
Another disadvantage, not yet mentioned, is the lack of ability to do aftermarket porting to the barrel. I imagine someone will make aftermarket barrels, or maybe S&W will offer a PowerPort option from the factory, but it does limit the owner's ability to customize his gun.

Thanks to Dfariswheel for an excellent (as usual) description of the situation.

-- Sam
 
The last taurus, ruger, and colts I have bought were NOT examples of craftsmanship.
Not even remotely so.
The last three rugers I purchased new all had defects that were either immediate, (So much crap in the lockwork that the hammer couldn't be pulled back!!) or they had problems that showed themselves later, fixed front sight just flew off, after 2 months of owning, or a gun so incredibly out of time that I won't fire it until it gets looked at...
Oh, and I sent back 3 guns to ruger in as many years, so I'm gonna give ruger 1 more chance, and that's it. (Because my 345 hasn't shown any problems yet.) All the problems except one of the colt's has been on wheelguns.
The last taurus I bought was horrible, I sold it after 2 months, the problems were just too numerous to ever see salvaging that piece of iron.
Colt, not even gonna bother.
EAA. Nope.
Smith and wesson is my last hope, I'm buying 6 a year until they can't keep me happy, or I don't need any more guns. While I'm buying new smiths, I'll still buy used smiths, and guns that I can test drive or already know their origins.
 
Don't forget how hard it will be to just shorten a barrell too.
Now a gunsmith will have to dissassemble this ABORTION, shorten the barrell and shorten the shroud and it will take twice as long to do as it does now.

All because some [one] in management at S&W decided to save a buck or two by making the guns CHEAPER and charging you the same money they would charge to DO IT THE RIGHT WAY!!!!

Looks like they have been hiring RETARDS from Colts management, boys...


>>>Another disadvantage, not yet mentioned, is the lack of ability to do aftermarket porting to the barrel. I imagine someone will make aftermarket barrels, or maybe S&W will offer a PowerPort option from the factory, but it does limit the owner's ability to customize his gun.

<<<

Edited by Tamara to remove blatant attempt at skirting the dirty-word filter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, to be exact, it's not possible to shorten one of these barrel units.

Barrels are shortened by cutting off the FRONT of the barrel.
Since that's where the barrel flange and the shroud's flange seat is, you CAN'T cut it off.

I suppose you could cut the barrel off at the rear and re-thread it, but you can't cut the shroud at the front OR the rear.

Bottom line on this new barrel system is: either get used to the changes, or don't buy new guns ever again.

Change happens in the gun industry, and people seldom like it.
In all honesty, new shooters in coming years will wonder what all the talk is about, since this will be the only way they've ever had a new S&W.

As changes go, and for the AVERAGE owner, the new S&W barrel is fairly inoffensive.

Not that many people make major changes to their revolver barrels, and if you don't, the new barrel is about a "wash" to the typical owner.

As far as "making the gun cheaper, and charging the same amount", that misses the point.
The point is, making the gun the old way is causing the price of the guns to rise to the point that they simply can't be sold at a competitive price.
The new barrel will allow S&W to hold the price line.

This is why the older Colt revolvers were discontinued in 1969, and why the sole survivor, the Python, costs almost TWICE what another revolver can be bought for.

Times change, and a manufacturer either keeps up, or goes bust.
No one is forcing us to buy their products.
Don't like S&W.....vote with your money.....buy a Ruger or a Taurus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top