S&W 66 which is better?

[tazman]

I ran across a S&W model 66 4inch at a local gun shop a few days ago for what seems like a good price. Condition appears to be very good to excellent.
This one has a "lawyer hole"(lock) in the side of it.
All my other S&W revolvers are pre lock except one which is from the pro shop. I don't really have any experience with the "lawyer hole" revolvers from a standard production run.
My question is which ones are better, the pre lock version or the ones with the lock on the side? Does it matter at all?

[RKJ]

I've got 4 (3 of them w/o the lock, 4" 28, 6" 629, 4" 66) & 4" 25-7 (45 Colt) with the lock. I can't tell any difference in them. I found I like the 625 best of all of them though as it is a very good shooter. It makes me look like a a good shooter. :) I'd get it if it were me, obviously I believe you can never have too many S&W's. I don't think you'll be disappointed in it. The fit & finish on that 25 is as good as any I've seen.

[Mytmousemalibu]

Pre lock is always preferred and pinned and recessed is the cream of the crop! Now there are current production Smith's that don't have frame locks, my little 442 I carry everyday is this way but most have the Hillary hole. That said, I have new production guns that are sugsr sweet shooters.

[gnostic]

The lawyer locks not the only difference. The barrel and shroud are made in two pieces on the lawyer lock models. The bottom line is, it's still an amazing K frame S&W handgun, that's good as it gets.

[Hickory]

You have to view the hole in it's proper prospective.
It's like air conditioning in a pickup truck you don't need or use it 3 out of 4 seasons and when it does gets hot, you just roll down the window.

[Gus Youmans]

Tazman,

I have one with the lock and two-piece barrel and it has become my favorite revolver - and I have 8 to 10 older Smiths that don't have the lock and two-piece barrel. A couple of the old 586's shoot a little more accurately out of a machine rest but not enough to matter.

I bought mine new at near full price and would do so again if I had to.

Gus Youmans

[tazman]

Thanks guys. I feel better about it now.
Hickory-- that is an interesting perspective.

[dubber123]

Hmm. For the most part, it doesn't matter. I have a fair pile of S&W's, and all but one are pre lock. The one that does have a lock, a 625 4", has been a very good gun for about 30,000 hard rounds, mostly in competition. I dislike the reason for, and the look of the lock in general, others could care less. The MIM hammer and triggers are well made, and quite hard. They also frequently have casting lines and injection circles visible that remind me of the bottom of my Matchbox cars I had as a kid. Not a fan of that. While I may generally prefer the older guns, they weren't immune to letting junk slip through back in the "good old days", so each example needs to be examined carefully before buying if possible.

[Mytmousemalibu]

The lawyer locks not the only difference. The barrel and shroud are made in two pieces on the lawyer lock models.

Not entirely true, not all of newer guns with frame locks have the 2 piece barrels. My 686, 929PC are both only a couple years-old but still retain barrels made the way S&W has for a long time, one piece. If you look in a display case of new Smith revolvers you will see that same pattern repeated. Only select models have 2 piece barrels as far as I know.

[Thin Man]

I am trying to recall that some years ago there was conversation that on occasion the frame mounted lock would disassemble itself and parts would wander around inside the frame. It was reported that this had actually happened. When this occurred the firearm would tie up and not function when the owner tried to fire it. As I said this was years ago and I have not heard any more about it since that time. Either S&W re-engineered those parts to prevent such events or these stories may have been nothing more than urban legend created by dissatisfied buyers at the presence and appearance of the lock. Gee, maybe we were among the first to create fake news!?!

[Hickory]

Hickory-- that is an interesting perspective.

What I am saying is, It's there, ignore it, forget about it and pretend its not there.
But, if you need to use it, it's there.

[Drm50]

I have got many S&W revolvers. As a rule I only am interested in older models, blue/ P&R. If
you are buying the revolver for use and not collecting, I would not hesitate to buy a model with
the lock. I don't know why guys that are buying guns to " use" get so bent out of shape over
the lock. If it bothers you it can be plugged. I have a cut off point of interest on all S&W revolvers.
Based on the dash number that signifies a change in the model. All of these are pre lock and some
models such as 586 don't interest me because they werent made until after this period. This has
nothing to do with use, only collecting. The 586 / 686 are find revolvers, I just happen to be a
Gun Snob.

[tazman]

What I am saying is, It's there, ignore it, forget about it and pretend its not there.
But, if you need to use it, it's there.

I understood your reference. I just thought the way you said it was interesting.

Drm50---I understand your point of view. I am not a collector.

I read a year ago or so, that the extra parts in the lock caused the trigger to be considerably less smooth. Apparently this is not the case.

[Mytmousemalibu]

I can say with absolute certainty that the frame lock assembly cannot effect the trigger feel. It will trap the hammer from drawing back, thats it. I don't care for it in any manner. There's a gentleman that makes nice little plugs to go in the hole if you gut the lock out of the gun. I have done this to mine. The presence of the lock won't dissuade me from buying a newer S&W.

[Walkingwolf]

I own two with the IL, one without, all three are fine guns. The lock does not bother me at all, I just don't use it. Both my 625 PC, and my model 21-4 are dead on accurate, both IL. My model 64-5 is DAO, but all three have great smooth trigger pulls.

The old pre model Smiths had a visable hammer pin under the latch, they also had a top side plate screw. Neither of these have affected the value of the older guns. On the ruger forum this discussion came up about the IL when comparing the GP to the 686, yet the same people bothered by the IL seem unaffected by the ugly read the manual warning on the side of the Ruger barrel. I remember when that was a big deal in the gun rags when Ruger first started doing it.

[gwpercle]

If I came across a good deal on a model 66 , lock isn't an issue in 66's, I would jump on it with both feet.
Modern K frame , 357 magnum , 4 inch barrel, fully adjustable sights , stainless steel construction ....I can't think of a better all around revolver to own.
Night stand or belt holster. Handles light 38 special target loads to heavy 357 magnum deer hunting loads . It doesn't get much better for versitility than a model 66.
My newest S&W has a lock and an excellent trigger pull.
Gary

[rintinglen]

I will go the distance and say the lock version is the better gun. The slight increase in the depth of the frame eliminates the need to shave the bottom of the forcing cone and makes the gun less likely to crack the forcing cone. My personal older 66 only gets 38's and +P's as a consequence. The newer guns are more robust and not prone to this ailment.

[FergusonTO35]

If you like the revolver I say buy it. You can permanently deactivate the lock by removing the "flag" which pops up beside the hammer and grinding off the little nub on the inside which locks the hammer. I did this on my 637, I also took a whetstone and polished off the word "LOCKED" on it so there would be no indication that it was functional.

[tazman]

I will go the distance and say the lock version is the better gun. The slight increase in the depth of the frame eliminates the need to shave the bottom of the forcing cone and makes the gun less likely to crack the forcing cone. My personal older 66 only gets 38's and +P's as a consequence. The newer guns are more robust and not prone to this ailment.

That is very good to know. I had a model 19 many years ago that blew out the bottom of the forcing cone. I didn't want a repeat of that for sure.

[Chill Wills]

I have a cut off point of interest on all S&W revolvers.
Based on the dash number that signifies a change in the model. All of these are pre lock and some
models such as 586 don't interest me because they werent made until after this period. This has
nothing to do with use, only collecting. The 586 / 686 are find revolvers, I just happen to be a
Gun Snob.

The 586 and 686 were only made with locks?

[M-Tecs]

The 586 and 686 were only made with locks?

My 586 doesn't have a lock. It's a mid 80's production.

The locks started in 1998. The 586 came out in 1981.

[three50seven]

I have the model 69 with the lawyer lock. I just choose to ignore it and have had exactly ZERO issues with it. If it does bother you, there is a company that's making plugs to replace the locks. Don't recall their name though. Since the model 66 has been around for quite awhile, I would probably look around for an older used one, just because. But, if you prefer brand new guns, I'm sure you won't be disappointed with the one you looked at.

[Walkingwolf]

I have the model 69 with the lawyer lock. I just choose to ignore it and have had exactly ZERO issues with it. If it does bother you, there is a company that's making plugs to replace the locks. Don't recall their name though. Since the model 66 has been around for quite awhile, I would probably look around for an older used one, just because. But, if you prefer brand new guns, I'm sure you won't be disappointed with the one you looked at.

The new 66 has been updated to make the forcing cone, and lockup tighter. The previous models faced forcing cone damage from constant full power mag loads.

[three50seven]

The new 66 has been updated to make the forcing cone, and lockup tighter. The previous models faced forcing cone damage from constant full power mag loads.I'm aware of the forcing cone/flame cutting issues that the K-frame .357's gained a reputation for. A quick inspection of a used gun, especially a stainless one, will tell if it has seen extensive magnum use. I'd still take an older used 66 in good condition over a new one. The originals just have more class [emoji41]

Sent from my LGLS775 using Tapatalk

[tazman]

I am not concerned about getting a "classic" gun. I have no use for safe queens as they will not stay that way for long. I buy guns to shoot, use, and enjoy.
If a gun is in pristine condition, great. If it is an older gun with well worn bluing from being carried, maybe even a little rust in the bluing, as long as the working parts function as they should and the gun is accurate, I am happy.
I'll probably put a few more scratches and dings into it before I am done.
My guns are my companions and they get used. You walk through the woods with a handgun in an open holster on your hip and sooner or later it will get scratched up.
For me, they are not an investment. They are a good tool to have and use. I hope I get to wear out every gun I own before I die.
I have a lot of shooting to do.

[Petrol & Powder]

Taz, I too hope to wear out my guns before I die but I'm not progressing well in that endeavor.

I don't have any S&W's with the internal lock [AKA Hillary Hole, Lawyer Lock] but I don't think that would be a deal breaker for me. Frankly, I rarely buy new guns.

The 66 is a fine .357 mag capable K-frame but I see the K-frames as 38 Special guns. You commented that you've had forcing cone problems with a old model 19, so you know the issue first hand. If I intended to shoot a lot of .357 mag loads, I would be looking for a L-frame, N-frame or a Ruger GP-100.
If you just want a K-frame that can chamber .357 mags occasionally, the model 66 will fill that need.

There is no more useful all-around handgun than a 4" DA revolver chambered in 38 Special, IMHO.
My only problem with a used .357 K-frame is you have little idea how many magnum rounds have been fired in the gun. I'm always a bit nervous about buying used .357 K-frames (models 13, 19, 65, 66) because I don't know their history with magnum loads. I have no such concerns about the K-frames chambered in 38 Special and simply examine those carefully and make my decision on what I can actually observe.

Some people claim the forcing cone issues with the magnum K-frames are exaggerated. I disagree. The magnum K-frames are not fragile or weak but the K-frame is just not a good platform for long term use of magnum loads. The problem with a used magnum K-frame is you never know just how used it is.

[tazman]

I agree. I wasn't thinking in terms of a lot of magnum usage. I have a 686 for that.
I was thinking of 38 special(lots) with the option of magnum if needed.
I really like the K frame revolvers and don't currently own a stainless one. I have a couple of blued ones in 38 special.
My 686 is a 8 3/8" barrel and doesn't carry well for most uses. That was why I was looking at a 66.

[Walkingwolf]

I agree. I wasn't thinking in terms of a lot of magnum usage. I have a 686 for that.
I was thinking of 38 special(lots) with the option of magnum if needed.
I really like the K frame revolvers and don't currently own a stainless one. I have a couple of blued ones in 38 special.
My 686 is a 8 3/8" barrel and doesn't carry well for most uses. That was why I was looking at a 66.

For what you describe a model 66 would be great, but like P&P stated I would be somewhat leery of a well used one. Plus current prices of used magnums are almost that of a new one.

As for GP I have two, a 38 spl fixed sight 4 inch police trade in that I love. It is only 36 ounces, and a great carry piece, and eats up 38-44 loads which what most of my loads are. Even in the 6 inch GP with full lug chambered for 357 I shoot 38-44. The problem I have with the standard GP, and the 686 is the extra weight from the full lug, and in the GP case the heavy rib on the barrel. It puts that weight all in front of the cylinder which makes it feel like twice as much(fulcrum) when shooting. If Smith ever comes out with a six inch 66 again I am getting one, If Ruger comes out with a 6 inch Match Champion I will probably get one.

If you handload and do not intend to use the gun for hunting, I would suggest a police trade in K frame in 38 spl. They will handle occasional 38-44 occasionally, 38-44 is 10K less than 357 magnum, and the performance is about perfect for a carry gun. My GP, and model 64 are loaded with +P+ handloads for carry. A Bayou 138 grain full wadcutter pushed by longshot powder traveling at 1200 fps, and the cases show much less pressure signs than 357. They drop free, and do not flatten the primer completely, I would guess they are between 20K, and 25K somewhere. My plinking loads are a PC 160 grain RNFP at only 750 fps, which should keep my guns running forever.

I got my police trade 64 for a little over 300 dollars last year in almost new condition. I paid a tad more about 5 years ago for the half lug GP 100 police trade in, which seems to be sought after gun like the Security Six. The Ruger SS is also a good option if you can find one for a decent price. If you are willing to pay IIRC around 800 dollars the Match Champion would probably make a great carry piece. I have not seen a whole lot of used ones on the shelves so the owners must be happy.

Hillary hole does not even give me a second thought on buying Smiths.

[tazman]

I have a model 15 which I have been carrying in the woods and occasionally carrying a 1911. I was wanting the 66 to carry with 357 loads. Where I hunt, we have a few packs of wild dogs and many coyotes. I have had close encounters with both.
The dogs were the worst. They really didn't respect me until I killed one of them. I was carrying a 12 gauge shotgun at the time with no sidearm.
The coyotes ran when they found out I had a gun(fired a shot in the ground).
One particular farm has the occasional cougar as well. I have yet to meet one of those but have seen the carcass of a couple that a neighbor shot.
I usually hunt the woods there with a 22lr rifle. I am starting to feel a little inadequately armed with just the 22.
Even in Illinois the woods can be a dangerous place.

[Petrol & Powder]

If you think the woods in Illinois are dangerous you should try the Southside of Chicago

[tazman]

I won't go anywhere near Chicago, thank you very much. I am not experienced enough with urban "civilization" to know how to stay out of trouble there.
I have a stepdaughter that lives in Beach Park north of Chicago. That's as close as I want to get.

[Walkingwolf]

I have a model 15 which I have been carrying in the woods and occasionally carrying a 1911. I was wanting the 66 to carry with 357 loads. Where I hunt, we have a few packs of wild dogs and many coyotes. I have had close encounters with both.
The dogs were the worst. They really didn't respect me until I killed one of them. I was carrying a 12 gauge shotgun at the time with no sidearm.
The coyotes ran when they found out I had a gun(fired a shot in the ground).
One particular farm has the occasional cougar as well. I have yet to meet one of those but have seen the carcass of a couple that a neighbor shot.
I usually hunt the woods there with a 22lr rifle. I am starting to feel a little inadequately armed with just the 22.
Even in Illinois the woods can be a dangerous place.

+P heavy duty should handle any animal you mentioned.

[M-Tecs]

This is for the current production verse old.

https://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2018/01/sw-model-66-combat-magnum-revolver/

[Murphy]

The current production S&W's are fitted extremely well, much more than I knew until a few months back when a friends needed a total disassembly. I can live with the lock, but I would love to see S&W do away with it as well. Just something to go wrong that never needed to be there to begin with. If it's a good price, go for it.

Murphy

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

.....

[Walkingwolf]

The current production S&W's are fitted extremely well, much more than I knew until a few months back when a friends needed a total disassembly. I can live with the lock, but I would love to see S&W do away with it as well. Just something to go wrong that never needed to be there to begin with. If it's a good price, go for it.

Murphy

It's there for the same reason there is no 38-44 factory ammo anymore. To avoid liability lawsuits. Ruger went about it in a different way long before S&W did. They put a ugly warning stamped in the side of the barrel of their guns. The gun public at the time hated it, but they got used to it. Ruger could easily stop with the warning, but Smith would have to completely change manufacturing to do away with the lock. It is not going to happen, eventually the public will accept the lock, just like the Ruger warning.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

e ...

[Walkingwolf]

Ruger got rid of the "billboard" ... atleast on the SP, GP & LCR (not sure if LCR ever had it)

The SP & GP have a tiny lazer etching on the bottom that says "read manual" the LCR says the same in small print on the side, but it has the "coating" put on afterwards, so hard to see ...

Both my GP's have the billboard, one is fairly recent. IIRC it is on my Mark III also.

The Mark III is on the bottom, and my newest GP is 2009 so they may have moved it at some point of time. But it is still on the guns, just moved. I doubt smith will ever take the lock off their guns, it makes no sense to change their tooling. Actually I like it, if it keeps others from buying them that keeps the price down for me.

Found an image of the very recent GP 44 special, sure enough the warning on the barrel is still there, though shortened.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170108/eab6474ea2187fe8fef56256f494c287.jpg

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

.....

[Rodfac]

Three of the 13 Smith's in my safe have the lock and it's been no problem whatsoever...I no longer notice it to be honest. In one case, my M69 Smith in .44 Magnum, I've found that it's the most accurate Smith I own, and that includes some that have the pinned and recessed features. Do I wish those three did not have the lock? Of course. It's a reminder that Smith once succumbed to blackmail from the anti-gun crowd..but in reality, it's a non-issue in the examples that I own. You're going to love that Smith...that's my guess. Best Regards, Rod

[tazman]

Thank you all for your replies. I will keep this information in mind.
For the time being this is all moot now. I finally got a chance to return to the gun shop and the model 66 was gone. Someone else thought it was a good deal also.

[silhouette_shooter]

I grabbed one of the new model 66's when they hit the street a few years back. Whoever set up the production for that gun was on top of their game. After a new trigger return spring and a new hammer spring, wow, it's a shooter, drops RCBS 180 gr gas checked semi wadcutters in a six inch bullseye in nice round groups. No fliers. Out shoots my 686 Plus by a little. Holds nicer too.