An interesting batch of 2" 38 S&W SIXguns has turned up...

[Tom Servo]

1. Is a 64-2 suitable for that type of work, meaning they lend themselves to trigger smoothing and such? Parts and grips generally available, etc?

It's a round-butt K-Frame. There's a wealth of aftermarket grip options. In terms of parts, there are quite a few floating around. Except for barrels. S&W is out of K-Frame barrels, so avoid blowing them up. Don't ask how I know that.

In terms of working on the trigger, shoot the gun first and see what you think. K-Frames always had exemplary triggers, and they only get better with use.

2. I assume that as these are stamped CDC I wouldn't be wrecking any future collectible or rarity? Are 64-2's common so my grandkids won't curse the day I took polishing compound to it?

I wouldn't worry. Collectibility is based in large part on scarcity, and it's going to be a long time before these dry up. In any case, polishing stainless isn't like refinishing.

It's a great shooter and carry gun. By all means spruce it up, but I wouldn't consider it a safe queen.

3. Does the price ($389-$399) look fair? I'd rather pay, of course, but a fair amount of my attraction to this is the SS so I can polish it up.

A few years ago, I would've said it was high, but people seem to be holding on to their Smiths. In today's landscape, that's a pretty good price.

[Jim March]

I've seen some 64-2 and 64-4 variants in this pile. I did a bit of digging on this at one point for a friend's 66, and if I recall right, the -4 is better than a -2.

Lesse...this page says there was an improvement for the 2" -2:

http://www.handloads.com/misc/Smith.Model.Changes.asp

...but doesn't list the -4. Drat. OK, engage google-fu...

http://thefiringline.com/forums/show....php?p=3430379

Post three has what looks like a credible report that the -4 has a "New yoke retention" as of 1988. -5 just means the same for heavy barrel, not applicable for this 2" critter. And then -6 they jump the shark in '98, add MIM, etc.

OK...

I also know that "early S&W stainless metallurgy was suspect". Dunno what the cutoff was though, or if it actually matters in 38 as opposed to 357. The 64 first appears in 1970 so that tells us what "early" means, more or less.

Huh.

If it was me, I think I'd go with a -4 if I could. There's some there - look at the ones with "Reagan Era" in the title.

Either way, tuning the internals will be the same. It's not until you hit the MIM parts that things get squirrelly.

What else...ah. S&W parts of that era were surface-hardened. Make significant changes to the action parts and break through that surface layer and you might as well toss 'em. None of these will have that issue now! It's just something to watch if you mod 'em - hammer, trigger, sear surfaces, etc. A homebrewer shouldn't be touching that stuff anyhow. We can change springs, we can hand-polish the sides of hammers and triggers with a crocus cloth to reduce friction, we can use better oil . That's all I'd do and they likely won't need any of that. These are all from a top era of S&W goodness, from a source that probably babied them other than scratches or the like.

[hhb]

This isn't the first time these have been dumped on the market. I bought one two or three years ago. Like New. The 64 2" models were carried by California State Parole Officers who supervise felons. Misdemeanor violators are handled at the County level.

[old bear]

'm thinking of getting one to scratch the itch and I'm also thinking of using it for a project gun. I'm thinking of taking a buffing wheel to the SS to make it shine, and then maybe some fluff & buff of the internals, perhaps grips, etc. Questions:

Unless you have some metal polishing experience I would stay away from the buffing wheel, try Mothers mag polish and an old T-shirt to began with.

These are marked C.D.C. and more and more folks are staring to collect police issued weapons, as there are lots of them on the market, most have been carried a lot and shot a little, and these are in the price range most can afford.

Personally I think one of these polished up, with stag grips and perhaps a T-grip would make a "working mans" dress up revolver.

As for the Aussie M-66 returns I'm still hoping that S&W will put them on the market. I only hope I will be able to locate one when/if they go on sale.

[Deaf Smith]

If you get one of those snubs get Secret Service grips!

Like MINE!



Deaf

[alienbogey]

Okay, I'm real close to succumbing to the urge to get one of these for a project, and have some follow up anal-retentive questions. Keep in mind that I'm a Smith newbie; I've never owned one before.

The choices come down to picking one from the earlier, 1973 production pile or the later, circa 1988 group. Here are the differences:

• 1973's are listed with a .265 serrated 'service' trigger and the 1988's as a .312 smooth 'combat' trigger. I'd prefer wider & serrated but it's an either/or choice.

• 1973's have a pinned barrel and the 1988's do not. I have no idea which is better or more desirable.

• Jim March's post states that the 1988 '-4' has a "New Yoke Retention". I don't know what that is, which is preferable and, besides, the listing for the circa 1988 group states that they are 64-2's.

Thoughts?

[Jim March]

At least some of the listings for the 88 era are -4.

"New yoke retention" might be the removal of the pinned barrel, which would be a very slightly bad thing, come to think.

Hrm.

The wider smooth trigger is better, in my opinion.

<scratches head>

You know what I just don't know? When did S&W fix the stainless metallurgy issues?

The 1960s-era stainless guns had issues. That's pretty much certain. And they had it completely fixed by '88. You can take that to the bank too.

But what about '72-'73 era? I just don't know! I *suspect* they were doing OK by then.

Sigh.

If it was me pulling the trigger on this deal, I'd be over at the S&W forums asking more questions, I guess, regarding the differences between the -2 and the -4 and at what point S&W figured out how to make stainless guns right.

Failing that, I'd go with the '88 or so era and look for a -4 in there. There's a lot of listings, I only sampled a few.

The S&Ws made before the lock came out are very highly regarded overall - that was good times for S&W QC.

[MLeake]

Deaf Smith, is that a Speed Six, or a fixed-sight Security Six?

[carguychris]

• 1973's are listed with a .265 serrated 'service' trigger and the 1988's as a .312 smooth 'combat' trigger. I'd prefer wider & serrated but it's an either/or choice.

Wider serrated triggers were available on other guns, and S&Ws will often- albeit not always!- function properly with a parts-bin trigger from another K frame. That said, gunsmith fitment might be required.

• 1973's have a pinned barrel and the 1988's do not. I have no idea which is better or more desirable.

Some collectors like pinned barrels but it really makes no difference in how the gun shoots or how long it lasts.

• Jim March's post states that the 1988 '-4' has a "New Yoke Retention". I don't know what that is, which is preferable and, besides, the listing for the circa 1988 group states that they are 64-2's.

IIRC the front sideplate screw was changed from a traditional one-piece small-diameter screw to a bigger screw with a tiny built-in spring-loaded plunger. The reason for the change was that the length of the old-style screw had to be hand-fitted to the individual gun; too long and the yoke will seize up, too short and the yoke will rattle around with the cylinder open. The new-style screw is One Size Fits All. Regarding advantages and disadvantages, you're unlikely to ever need to replace the yoke retention screw if it's not damaged and you use proper screwdrivers; OTOH this is a used gun that may be damaged already, and S&W is going to run out of SS replacement screws someday, if it hasn't already happened. (They're already out of nickel K frame screws, something I unfortunately learned when I bought a used M15 with a pre-buggered screw. )

[mnero]

Deaf Smith, that is a beautiful set of revolvers; I love the grips!

[Whirlwind06]

Why do these sales happen when I don't have the spare funds??
Anybody want to buy a 3 inch model 64 with the a lock?

[alienbogey]

Well, I did it, clicked the button and one of the pinned barrel 1973 vintage Model 64's is mine.



Thanks for the replies.

[Deaf Smith]

It's a Speed Six MLeake.

Now THIS is a Security Six I turned into a round butt.



And they ALL have Secret Service grips mnero! Both the .38s in the other post and these two .357 Magnums.

Deaf

[Technosavant]

I picked mine up today at the LGS. It's in great shape. Very little wear, it's obviously not been shot much at all. Locks up very nicely. While it's likely to annoy the purists, I threw on some Hogue Bantam grips (the wood ones look nice, but rubber just tends to fit my hand better), and I'm really looking forward to shooting the thing.

One item of interest- while the listing said I had ordered a 64-2 (think I got one made in 1988 or so), the stamping says this is a 64-4. So keep in mind that the listings are not necessarily correct when they refer to a gun as a -2.

[Jim March]

Aha, first feedback from a buyer .

Yeah, I figured these would be in good shape. Interesting that they got the numbers mixed up but I think that's no biggie.

[Technosavant]

Interesting that they got the numbers mixed up but I think that's no biggie.

I thought that was strange from the get-go, seeing as how the 64-2 was not in production in the claimed year of production, but the -4 is probably a better gun due to the improvements, so no harm no foul.

This thing fits the hand really well and feels very good- I don't know when I'll get it to the range (hopefully within a week or two), but I expect good things from it.

[Webleymkv]

With regards to questions about metallurgy and S&W stainless guns, the problems mainly had to do with the M66. Apparently, the extra heat generated by .357 Magnum ammo caused stainless to expand more than carbon steel. This would cause the gas ring to swell enough to bind the action and tie up the gun when lots of .357 ammo was shot over a short period of time. S&W fixed the issue in 1977 with the introduction of the 66-1 which moved the gas ring from the yoke to the cylinder. All stainless S&W's made after 1977 have this improvement although I wouldn't worry much about a pre-1977 stainless gun unless it was in .357 Magnum (I've never heard of problems with the .38's).

[Technosavant]

I managed to get out to the range this afternoon; the 64-4 shoots great. It's such a pleasant little K-frame.