Smith & Wesson Model 52 (target pistol)

S

Sevens

New member
Just seems like a subject that might have a more appropriate audience in the revolver area. :p Not because it shoots a revolver round, just because it's nothing at all like most of the discussion in this area. The S&W Model 52 is a semi-auto target pistol -- holds only FIVE rounds in the magazine and is chambered for the .38 Special!

In any case, I have always looked fondly at these classic pistols but decided some time ago that I would never own one. "Too much money, I'd have to make a very specific ammo for it, extra magazines would cost a damn fortune..."

Well, I'm knocking item after item off my "WANT" list as time progresses and recently I have been chasing Smith & Wesson metal, non-1911 and pre-polymer pistols. Basically, the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Gens. And the Model 52 is still there, looking at me. :cool:

I know the pistol was meant for use with the hollow-base swaged lead target wadcutter load, but does anyone have experience with cast bevel-base or double-ended wadcutter handloads?

There is really no reason that I can't simply work up a proper handload and perhaps buy one of these classic Model 52 pistols one day.

I would love to hear other folks' experiences with them.
 
They work just fine with the "oil barrel" (double end) wadcutter. Also, I use the kind with the small "tit" on the front in my revolvers and the Model 52 works fine with those also. My load is the same, 2.7 grains of Bullseye; the gun works perfectly and is very accurate with that load.

But be clear on one point. Those guns are made for one purpose - formal target shooting. Period. The 5-round magazine is OK for that game, as that is all that is loaded at a time for a centerfire match. It is not for self-defense, woods carry, shootouts with zombie, etc. It is made for one game and it is darned good at it.

Jim
 
I've found that any that will load into the Magazine work fine in mine.
 

Attachments

  • phpNaIYlwPM.jpg
    phpNaIYlwPM.jpg
    66.8 KB · Views: 100
Note that bullets have to be loaded flush with the mouth of the case; most folks loading for revolvers load so that the case mouth crimps into the crimp groove on the bullet, but rounds loaded that way won't fit the magazine. For the Model 52, crimp over the end of the bullet.

Jim
 
Ya we had one in a LGS that taunted me for months and months. Lucky someone else took it home, it had the box, wrench, extra mags, weights. It was the whole package. I'm just glad it left before I got the money together:o It sure was slick though.
 
Back in comp days, I shot one for several years. Retired it in favor of a AMU. It was a good center fire. Later started using 45 in both CF and NM.
Dan
:cool:
 
I have a 52 and a 952. Both are very accurate but the 52 is really unforgiving. It not only is very good match gun, it will make you a better shooter because it really punishes errors. One of the best triggers you will ever handle on a center fire pistol. I know I will NEVER sell mine.
 
But be clear on one point. Those guns are made for one purpose - formal target shooting. Period.
Click to expand...
While I do understand the idea you are trying to convey... I will have to vehemently disagree. IF, or shall I say WHEN a decent Model 52 comes home with me, it will be put on immediate duty to fill EXACTLY the same role as every handgun I own save for two of them:

I will slap steel plates with it on the outdoor range
I will punch small groups on paper at 7-10-12-15 yards with it on the indoor range
It will provide massive pride of ownership!
I will pull it out of the safe simply to marvel at it's fantastic curb appeal
I will revel in the history of the model and marvel at the craftsmanship

It will never find itself in any manner of a competition beyond friendly and fun, and if I can craft decent ammo that will reliably feed in it, I will bet cash money (probably a handful of it that it'll take me to get one...) that it does a phenomenal job at every thing I ask it to do! :D:cool:

And it will have a friend in the safe, a 1956 pre-Model 10 that some incredible craftsman did a whale of a PPC job upon and tragically, did NOT sign his name to the work. And for all that it can do, it will never find it's way in to a PPC event ever again, at least not in my lifetime.

The two of them may share ammo.
 
The Model 52 is one of the most accurate pistols ever made. I had one and shot it in competition for 40 years without any problems. The trigger is simply superb and it also does not eject the fired cases all over the place. They drop pretty close to where you are standing.

That's the good news. Now here is a warning for those planning to purchase one. The guide bushing part of the recoil spring guide assembly is supposed to engage in a small radius cut in the barrel lug. This notch is very tiny and can become worn over time. This happened with my pistol and made reassembly impossible after I had taken the gun apart for cleaning. I then sent the pistol to S&W for repair. Their gunsmith called me on the phone and said it could not be repaired. Neither did they have any replacement barrels available. Barrels from any other model of S&W will not work in this pistol. I searched everywhere and never found a replacement.

Therefore, if you are thinking of buying one, make sure that you first take it apart and then reassemble it. Check the notch in the barrel carefully and make certain that it is not showing any signs of wear.
 
My personal S&W M52, stolen at Camp Perry, was an exceedingly picky SOB that only shot very well indeed with Full Charge 38SPL handloads. No midrange load was worth a hoot in it, sometimes with groups at 25 yards a hand-span wide. It also preferred hardcast WC bullets to most any of the soft swaged HBWC projectiles. Crank some decent cast WC's [ DEWC ] with at least 3.4grs of BULLSEYE and it was a tackdriving sonofagun that could shoot under 1/2" at 25 yards. It also had a real yen for some cast WC's and 452AA propellent, the best all around cast bullet propellent I ever tested in cartridges from 32 to 45.
And so it goes...
 
Neighbor had one and I shot it a lot. That thing would shoot good. He used double end flat base wad cutters and about 3gr bulls eye. He sold most of his guns and I didn't buy the 52. Wish now I had.
 
Heck, Sevens, you can use it for a paperweight, a boat anchor, or even a carry gun if you have a big holster. But it was still made for target shooting. ;)

Jim
 
or even a carry gun if you have a big holster
Click to expand...
Haha, too close to the truth. It seems like so many folks that I hang out with simply want to get almost every single thing they own in to their "carry rotation" like it somehow justifies their purchases or something.

I can honestly say that my carry rotation guns make up a full 0.1667 % of the guns I own and I hope it always stays that way. The features on a gun I wish to use for concealed carry simply aren't the kind of things I look for in an enjoyable, lovable handgun that I purchase because I love handguns. The carry gun is a tool and I'm a guy that uses tools... and doesn't fall in love with tools.

I fall in love with handguns! :p
 
I'm crazy about my 952s. The 52 is a little bit further down the to-buy list than some other things, but I definitely plan to pick one up. I need to learn a bit more about them, though. I gather that the 52-2 is preferable as a shooter (and the most common), but I don't know whether or not there were any significant changes in materials or quality over the 23 years that the 52-2 was produced. Is a 1970s 52-2 a higher-quality gun on average than an early 1990s 52-2? I'll have to consult the hive mind on the S&W forum.

Anyway, I hope you get one! Please return with pics if you do. Maybe it'll force me to push it up the list a bit.

Sevens said:
It seems like so many folks that I hang out with simply want to get almost every single thing they own in to their "carry rotation" like it somehow justifies their purchases or something.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've never understood the imperative for some people that every handgun in their sizable collections either serve or be well-suited to serving as a carry gun. Why do all of your several dozen handguns have to be well-suited to concealed carry? What a way to consign yourself to never owning any number of exceptional handguns. Are you really going to spend all of your gun money on every permutation of Glock, M&P, and XD?

For that matter, the concept of a carry "rotation" of any significant size and diversity doesn't make much sense to me. I can understand carrying one of a small number of very similar pistols, depending upon activity, attire, weather, etc. But the rotations that consist of a G19, a TRP, a DAO J-frame, a 92FS, a P2000, a 686, a P938, etc., all just "rotated" purely for the purpose of rotating -- I'll never make any sense of that.

Diff'rent strokes, I guess.
 
I also have been waning a 52. Looks like would be a great pistol for range use.( I am not a good enough shot to enter a bulleye match with one) Maybe someday.
 
Hi, Sevens,

When I carried regularly as a LEO, my "rotation" was two guns, a Model 19 in uniform and a Model 36 3" in civvies. Same make, same design. I am not at all keen on a "rotation" if the guns differ very much. I have no desire to be shot while trying to figure out if the safety goes up or down, or wondering why the trigger won't move on my Glock when it is a cocked and locked 1911.

Jim
 
I bought my Model 52-2 new in 1982 and have used it in the Centerfire Stage of Fire (Bullseye competition-its intended role as James K noted) for these past several decades. No semi-auto pistol comes with a better trigger pull nor is there a more intrinsically accurate factory production pistol, imo. I do applaud Sevens' intentions of extending the Model 52's shooting applications (shooting is supposed to be fun, no matter how diverse the venue) but you will almost always find the Model 52 "on the line" in places like Camp Perry more than any place else.

Over the years, I have found the most accurate (and reliably functioning) load for my pistol to be 2.7 grains of Bullseye behind a 148 grain swaged Speer wadcutter bullet. I use CCI 500 primers and Federal brass (though the specificity of these last two components probably has little to do with achieving the best accuracy). I will add a cautionary note regarding the use of hollow base wadcutter bullets as it has been reported that the "center" can be shot out of these bullets, causing a bore obstruction. On the other hand, quoting from the No. 12 Speer reloading manual, "...for target semi-autos like the S&W Model 52, the hollow base version (of the 148 grain wadcutter bullet) is mandatory..." :confused:
 
nice gun for Bullseye shoots.I had one in the 80's.I wouldn't trust it for anything but punching holes in paper....why.?

...a rimmed case doesn't bode well for flawless operation & self defense,so I sold it.

I'm sure it's worth much more today...but that's the way it goes. :o
 
I found operation to be perfect with proper ammo. My load is the same as dgludwig's. I see no role for that pistol as a self defense gun except in an emergency. The only ammo it works with is very poorly suited to that purpose, and the gun itself is not at all suitable for carry.

Jim
 
Way back in the mid 80's I fiddled around with the 52 and its magazines to see if any of it would cross over to the Coonan workings.

Dan Coonan let me experiment with his.
I modified the mags to accept seven and go under a closed slide, giving a total of eight rounds available.
It worked better then it did with just five, though five, of course, could still be loaded for bullseye shooting.

When he showed it around to his pals that had 52's they wanted their pistols worked over so they could use them for home defense, as they were very good with them.
We did around a dozen and a half over the years, up here in the frozen Northland.

Most were the ones with steel followers. One or two later ones had plastic followers, which were easier to modify.

A note of caution...follower pins in various mags should be kept with it's original mag because S&W had different width pins so they could match the pin to the mag body width.

We couldn't get the various modifications to cross over to the Coonan mags due to the far longer length of the 357 cartridge.
That's life, as they say.:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top