S&w Recessed cylinders, Wich models were.

[wjham77]

Trying to remember Wich models we're Recessed, pretty much a 357- 44 magnum thing, right?

[mattw]

If I am not mistaken, all of them in the 50's/80's were pinned and recessed. My collection is mainly pre-lock stainless Smiths and most of them were not recessed. I know the J frame 22 kit gun was recessed and I have a beautiful blued 57 that is recessed. I do own a couple of old 38's that are recessed as well. I like the idea, in practice they do have to be kept more clean than the non-recessed counter part.

Here is a good article discussing pinned and recessed. I agree that while nice features, safety and strength seem to not have suffered by not being P&R.
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/10/28/pinned-and-recessed-smith-wessons/

[Burnt Fingers]

My model 35 is recessed. .22 LR

[Guesser]

My S&W Model 10 in 357 Magnum is recessed. It was part of a 1200 gun production run in the early 70's before the Model 13 was introduced. I have several other S&W from the 20's to the early 80's that are not recessed.

[Ozark mike]

I had a 22 that was recessed

[RJM52]

Pre-1982 guns... .357-.41-.44 Magnums only
13
19
27
28
65
66
57
58
29
629 (no-)
53 .22 Jet

Not sure about some of the very old guns made before the numbering system.... In looking at some pictures of older .38s and .32-20s it looks like they have recessed case heads also... All rimfires do including those presently made...

Bob

[USSR]

Only the magnum cartridge and .22 rimfire cartridge revolvers were recessed, at least for post-war models.

Don

[wjham77]

Rjm52, thanks
hopefully we can figure out Wich/if any of the 38 special only were Recessed. I don't think the model 20/23 or pre 1957 versions were.. and the 32-20 was a k frame only so probably not....

[Tim357]

Have a go at smith-wessonforum.com. Wealth of info there

[Iron Whittler]

I have 2 of the 629 in 44 Mag. with pinned barrels and recessed cylinders.

[Green Frog]

I can say with a fair level of certainty that pre-War the 22 RF cylinders after about 1935 were recessed to support the higher pressure of "High Speed" ammunition. The only other pre-War cylinders with recessed chambers were those for the 357 Magnum. Post-War, the 22 RF and 22 MRF cylinders continue to have recessed chambers to the present. The 357 Magnum chambers continued to have and other Magnum calibers began with recessed chambers as they were introduced. Recessed chambers were discontinued about the same time the cross pins retaining the barrel were discontinued in the early '80s, so now only RF chambers are recessed. AFAIK, there were no recessed chambers in non-Magnum CF chambers, but of course with S&W, "Never say never." Of course collectors seem to value "pinned and recessed" examples highly.

Froggie

[5Shot]

I can say with a fair level of certainty that pre-War the 22 RF cylinders after about 1935 were recessed to support the higher pressure of "High Speed" ammunition. The only other pre-War cylinders with recessed chambers were those for the 357 Magnum. Post-War, the 22 RF and 22 MRF cylinders continue to have recessed chambers to the present. The 357 Magnum chambers continued to have and other Magnum calibers began with recessed chambers as they were introduced. Recessed chambers were discontinued about the same time the cross pins retaining the barrel were discontinued in the early '80s, so now only RF chambers are recessed. AFAIK, there were no recessed chambers in non-Magnum CF chambers, but of course with S&W, "Never say never." Of course collectors seem to value "pinned and recessed" examples highly.

Froggie

I think the reason they are prized is that the quality was so much better. The bluing, metal finish and fit of those early Smiths was amazing.

[RJM52]

"I think the reason they are prized is that the quality was so much better. The bluing, metal finish and fit of those early Smiths was amazing"

....yes they are...especially the 1955-68 models...polish and bluing was just ahead of any other period in S&W history... Their blue guns now look like it was done with a can of Krylon...and will come off with Hoppe's #9!

[Burnt Fingers]

"I think the reason they are prized is that the quality was so much better. The bluing, metal finish and fit of those early Smiths was amazing"

....yes they are...especially the 1955-68 models...polish and bluing was just ahead of any other period in S&W history... Their blue guns now look like it was done with a can of Krylon...and will come off with Hoppe's #9!

A good bluing job needs good polishing. Good polishing takes years of experience and takes time to do. If you wanted that kind of bluing on a new Smith & Wesson you could expect the price to double at a minimum.

I'm not aware of any production revolvers or pistols, under $2k, that have that level of bluing.

Firearms today are less expensive than any time in history. People pay $300 for a rifle and can expect MOA or better. Back in the '80's, when I was selling firearms, a factory MOA rifle was a Unicorn. Weatherby claimed 1 MOA with factory ammo, but in practice this was rarely possible. Most factory rifles of the time were 2 MOA rifles. They had decent wood and decent bluing, nothing like they had 20 years earlier. Those factory rifles, Ruger M77, Remington 700, S&W 1500, Weatherby Vanguard, and others, were $300-$400 rifles. In today's dollars that's a $900+ rifle.

How many people are spending $900+ on a hunting rifle today? The $300 rifle today would have been a $97 rifle in 1980. Those didn't exist. That was about what a Ruger 10/22 cost. Now the Ruger is $210.

Sure, if you want the spit and polish you can get it. But you better be prepared to pay for it.

[Jtarm]

A good bluing job needs good polishing. Good polishing takes years of experience and takes time to do. If you wanted that kind of bluing on a new Smith & Wesson you could expect the price to double at a minimum.

I'm not aware of any production revolvers or pistols, under $2k, that have that level of bluing.

Firearms today are less expensive than any time in history. People pay $300 for a rifle and can expect MOA or better. Back in the '80's, when I was selling firearms, a factory MOA rifle was a Unicorn. Weatherby claimed 1 MOA with factory ammo, but in practice this was rarely possible. Most factory rifles of the time were 2 MOA rifles. They had decent wood and decent bluing, nothing like they had 20 years earlier. Those factory rifles, Ruger M77, Remington 700, S&W 1500, Weatherby Vanguard, and others, were $300-$400 rifles. In today's dollars that's a $900+ rifle.

How many people are spending $900+ on a hunting rifle today? The $300 rifle today would have been a $97 rifle in 1980. Those didn't exist. That was about what a Ruger 10/22 cost. Now the Ruger is $210.

Sure, if you want the spit and polish you can get it. But you better be prepared to pay for it.

Thank for reinforcing what I’ve been saying for years.

The S&W .357 magnum debuted in 1930 for the princely sum of $60.

Built the same way in 2019, they’d run about $3,000.

I get annoyed when I hear complaints of “they don’t make em like they used to.” No, a lot of guns are a whole lot better.

Today you can walk in a gun store and walk out with a rifle & ammo capable of MOA groups.

The vaunted pre-64 Model 70 and its contemporaries required considerable work and load development to accomplish that.

[Papercidal]

Thank for reinforcing what I’ve been saying for years.

The S&W .357 magnum debuted in 1930 for the princely sum of $60.

Built the same way in 2019, they’d run about $3,000.

I get annoyed when I hear complaints of “they don’t make em like they used to.” No, a lot of guns are a whole lot better.

Today you can walk in a gun store and walk out with a rifle & ammo capable of MOA groups.

The vaunted pre-64 Model 70 and its contemporaries required considerable work and load development to accomplish that.

I’ve only shot one model 70 but the 1938 vintage one I inherited from my grandpa will shoot about a .65 5 shot group with factory ammo.