S&W Model 39-2

[Green Frog]

In view of the comments I got about the “overstatement” of concerns with the hammer drop safety, I’ve updated my initial post here.

I've been discussing this project over on the S&W Forum for quite a while now, and since it's finally complete I thought I'd share. Back in 1978 I found a like-new Model 39-2 in box with 3 mags. The only fly in the ointment was that Dad left handed, very left handed... he couldn't blow his nose with his right hand! By about 1980 I had located and installed an ambidextrous safety... problem solved.

Dad passed away about 2 1/2 years ago, and before he did, he gifted the 39 to me, but with all the family considerations led to it being left in my safe until about last Fall. At that time, I decided that it needed the factory optional full adjustable lollipop style rear sight. I found that and took it as I went to visit a friend in Ohio. We took the whole thing to his gunsmith friend who put it in place while making it look easy. The next day I suffered a setback in the project when I discovered that the right side safety lever and screw had gone missing. This started a search that led to all sorts of blind leads, false starts, and the final revelation that the ambidextrous unit I installed 40 years ago was an aftermarket unit, long discontinued!

Over the past weekend the clouds parted and a parts vendor on GunBroker listed a Model 439 slide assembly at a very favorable price, and wonder of wonders it had the safety I needed... and it wasn't even mentioned although it showed up in the pictures. The nice man from FedEx showed up at my door with a package yesterday afternoon, and before the sun went down, the ambidextrous safety was retrofitted onto the 39-2. Everything was as it should be.

Today I was able to get out to the range for test firing. some people who have worked with the 1st and 2nd Generation S&W auto pistols have reported a concern for the safety, not only to provide the safety function, but to serve as a decocker, dropping the hammer toward a firing pin going toward a loaded chamber. Long story short, everything worked just like it was supposed to. Dad's Model 39-2 has learned to be all that it can be. I think he would approve.

That's my story... over 6 months to get it set up the way I wanted it, and the funny thing is, I'm actually more of a revolver guy. This gun may weaken my resolve though.

Froggie

[onelight]

That's a great story , glad you were able to get his gun back in running order.
That's a gun worth the time and work.

[cp1969]

Today I was able to get out to the range for test firing. Folks who have worked with the 1st and 2nd Generation S&W auto pistols know that there is a concern for the safety, not only to provide the safety function, but to serve as a decocker, dropping the hammer toward a firing pin going toward a loaded chamber. Long story short, everything worked just like it was supposed to. Dad's Model 39-2 has learned to be all that it can be. I think he would approve.

That's my story... over 6 months to get it set up the way I wanted it, and the funny thing is, I'm actually more of a revolver guy. This gun may weaken my resolve though.

Froggie

What's the concern over the first and second generation safety/decocker?

[ddixie884]

Yeah, cool story Froggie.............

[Bazoo]

Thanks for sharing Froggie. I am a revolver person myself. The 1911 and the hi power are exceptions to autos that I enjoy, and the smith autos. The single stackers look and feel right to me.

[buckwheatpaul]

Love the story.....would love to see some pictures.....

[Larry Gibson]

Back in the late sixties/early seventies I had a couple M39s and M59s. They were good serviceable 9mms. There should be no concern about the safety as a hammer drop. The firing pin is completely protected as the safety rotates to block the hammer. The hammer hits the safety when dropped. Numerous pistols use that same system goin back to pre-WWII [PP, PPK, P-38s, etc.]

[Green Frog]

What's the concern over the first and second generation safety/decocker?

This was about the only caution I got from the experts on the S& W Forum. It seems that with promiscuous mixing of parts from different guns from different generations, there is at least some possibility of attaining a hammer drop safety that allows a poorly fitted firing pin and safety body to let the firing pin hit the primer and set off the round in the chamber. This is not a common malady by any reports, but since I was assembling mixed parts from multiple generations and unknown sources, it was certainly worth considering... better safe than sorry. Keep in mind that I was also in unfamiliar territory with this platform; I’ll be more comfortable in the future working with this model.

Froggie

[Green Frog]

Love the story.....would love to see some pictures.....

Here ya go...

[GOPHER SLAYER]

Of all the semi auto pistols, the 39 S&W is my favorite. They fit my small hand very well. I have owned two but sadly or stupidly let them get away.

[Texas by God]

From back when pistols were mostly blued steel and walnut- one of the nicest ones is right there.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[HangFireW8]

Very nice gun, and great keepsake to remember your Dad!

[Mk42gunner]

I've wanted a first or second generation S&W 9mm for a long time, just never found one when I had the expendable cash that I liked.

I remember slicking up a confiscated Model 469 in my Armorer's class that seemed as smooth as a good K-frame. I would like to do that again, on gun that I can actually shoot.

Robert

[Bazoo]

I carried a 4006 a while and I really liked it. I learned how to detail strip it. And how to rivet that little stamped piece on the trigger or trigger bow (I can't remember now). It was stone reliable. I took it and a glock 22 and fired them under water, and after being buried and caked with sandy mud. They both worked with all that dirt caked on them and in them.

[Green Frog]

From back when pistols were mostly blued steel and walnut- one of the nicest ones is right there.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Of course the Model 39s mostly had anodized aluminum frames, as does mine. At least it’s not plastic!

Froggie

[rintinglen]

Gopher Slayer and I are in complete agreement on this one. I have had two, still have the second, and they fit my hand better than just about any thing. only the Browning Hi Power comes close for me.

[ReloaderFred]

This was about the only caution I got from the experts on the S& W Forum. It seems that with promiscuous mixing of parts from different guns from different generations, there is at least some possibility of attaining a hammer drop safety that allows a poorly fitted firing pin and safety body to let the firing pin hit the primer and set off the round in the chamber. This is not a common malady by any reports, but since I was assembling mixed parts from multiple generations and unknown sources, it was certainly worth considering... better safe than sorry. Keep in mind that I was also in unfamiliar territory with this platform; I’ll be more comfortable in the future working with this model.

Froggie

In the late 1970's, I was rangemaster for our department, and we had about 500 Model 59's in service. The largest PD in the county had another 200 Model 59's. Standard practice during qualifications was to shoot the string, operate the safety to drop the hammer, and then holster the pistol. In the literally thousands of these cycles, I never saw one fail to operate as designed, meaning the hammer never came into contact with the firing pin while operating the Safety/decocker, and neither did the PD's rangemaster. The Model 39, 52 and 59 were designed by Joe Foster. I worked across the bench from him for two days when we had to upgrade five parts in the Model 59's, and I asked him if he knew of any failures of the safety/decocker, and he said he didn't.

I'm not saying it couldn't happen, especially with mis-matched parts, but in my experience I don't know of it happening. I still own a Model 39-2, a Model 639 (Stainless Steel) and two Model 59's, and they all work as designed.

As a historical note, there were roughly 500 Model 39's made with steel frames, which are now collector items. The Model 39 was designed for an Air Force contract to replace the Model 15 revolvers, but it wasn't adopted by the Air Force, so it was released to the civilian market.

I can shoot my Model 39 better than my Model 639 and both of my Model 59's. The ergonomics of the single stack frame tend to fit shooters' hands better, and I know it does for me.

Hope this helps.

Fred

[Drm50]

I cracked the alloy frame on a 39 with French military ammo. Then bought another with steel frame and never had any further trouble. Now only have Brn Hp in 9mm, but have S&W m52, which is similar pistol in 38sp WC for Target purposes.
I bought m39, Brn HP and Colt 1911 9mm the same time in early 70s. The S&W would out preform the others because of adj sights. Of rest the Brn HP was accuracy winner. The Colt was the best for shooting any thing you put in it. The French ammo I had gotten was intended for SMG and was hot compared to commercial 9mm ammo. This ammo wrecked the alloy 39. The Brn HP would not fire this ammo because of hard primers. The Colt 1911 fired it no problem and no damage. Of course I wouldn’t have shot it at all if I had know what it was.

[MT Gianni]

Nice gun and an even better story. Thanks for sharing it.

[Green Frog]

Reloader Fred, thanks for the info on the safeties. Over on the S&W Forum, one of the regulars with far more experience than I have with Smith autos related a story of having a Model 59 go off when it was reassembled with mixed up parts. I always feel a little queasy watching that hammer drop towards a live round anyway, so I felt simple prudence would indicate that as I had just reassembled this gun from an unknown batch of parts, it would be wise to check for proper function. Maybe not absolutely necessary, but certainly not a bad thing.

I knew about the fairly small number of steel framed Model 39s, but the way I heard it, Smith first designed the 39 for the military trials to replace the Model 1911 with 9 mm NATO. Although they didn’t get the big military contract they had hoped for there, they sold some for Spec Ops (including the silenced “Hush Puppies”) but more successfully they sold a pile to the LEO market, such as the Illinois State Police.

A few changes led to the “Second Generation” autos which attract my attention because Smith offered such a wide range of options and finishes... aluminum, carbon or stainless steel, different sights, and standard vs ambi- safeties and of course all of this in single stack or high capacity double stack, and you could get the 9 mm of your dreams right off the shelf. BTW, RF, I’m curious as to why the 639 doesn’t do as well for you as the 39-2? I’ve been thinking of that as my next gun.

Drm50, I had heard about hotter than US standard 9 mm ammo from the Europe, especially for sub guns. Do you (or any of the rest of you, gentle readers) know of anyone having problems with NATO spec nines that were NOT designated for sub guns being a problem in the 39s with their alloy frames? I sure don’t want to beat up this gun I regard as an heirloom.

Regards,
Green Frog

PS interesting that the Model 52 came up in this thread. There was also a 52-2 in my inheritance, and from what I’ve been able to determine, it is mostly a steel framed Model 39, built precisely and reworked to fire 38 Spl as a SAO target gun. This may be a bit of an oversimplification, but that’s the way it looks to me!