S&W Model 52

[DeadWoodDan]

This has always intrigued me. Other than liking to play with the various 38spl / 357 molds I've always wanted a M52. With the price they bring just can't help but wonder why? I get it if they are no longer mfg. And can only assume they are accurate. Just wanted to get those who have owned and shot.

[DukeSoprano]

The most amazing trigger and accurate gun I have ever shot
325382

[Tall]

I need one. Their reputation is stellar as seen above. They have not been made in decades.

[Texas by God]

The only bullet for the m52 is the 148 gr wadcutter if I’m not mistaken.
All other .38 Special ammunition will not fit in the magazine- it is a bullseye pistol.
And a great one considering its reputation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[M-Tecs]

I love mine but not many games require it. It's wadcutter only so compared to todays competition race guns it has limited applications that it's the best at.

[Winger Ed.]

I really, really like mine.
Yeah, a WC flush with the case mouth is all its strict diet will eat.
Even those are mid range. All its built to do is punch a hole in a piece of paper.

I fell into a unfired 52-2 awhile back.
It's as close to a hand built, custom, race gun as I'll ever get.
At the range, when ya check targets---- it will make Stevie Wonder look good.

[dverna]

I had one. Amazing accuracy. 3” groups for 50 shots at 50 yards. I had a 1-10 twist Douglas barrel in it. About 4” groups with the factory barrel. IIRC, the factory barrel was 1-18.

[Bmi48219]

My 52-2 was built right before they shut down the line. I’m told the employees in that department went over to the performance shop afterwards.
The LGF connected to the indoor range I frequent recently had a really clean 52-2 on consignment, asking $1,049.00. I’m sure they would have taken $975.00. Sometimes their consignment prices are really good.
Sadly magazines are going for $200, if you can find them.
I know several guys that own 52’s in one iteration or another. A couple of them also own 952’s. Always wanted one but having shot theirs, I’m happy with a 52.

[Bmi48219]

I had one…..I had a 1-10 twist Douglas barrel in it. About 4” groups with the factory barrel. IIRC, the factory barrel was 1-18.

Several years ago Clark ran off a batch of model 52, 1-10 twist barrels. They were sold out before Clark started making them.

[22cf45]

you will find out how good your follow-thru is when you shoot the S&W 52 :)
Phil

[murf205]

"I fell into a unfired 52-2 awhile back." Ed, you should have bought a lottery ticket while that spell was on you.

[45DUDE]

Plated wadcutters are not recommended and you can shoot a flush 148 dewc for practice. Bullseye--231--and 700x are recommended powders.

[DukeSoprano]

I bought a Pachmayr Shooting box at an estate sale for $20..............when I got home and started sorting all the contents, there were 3, model 52 magazines in it!

[JRD]

Model 52's are a delight on the range. I enjoy the heck out of casually ringing steel with them. If you want hot rounds and love to do mag dumps... get another pistol. If you are happy with five wonderfully accurate mid-range wadcutters, excellent iron sights, a superbly crisp trigger, and mags that are hard to find, then a Model 52 is for you.

Also don't laugh at 38 Wadcutters on game. A friend of my dad's who was one of my shooting mentors swore by a 52 as a critter gun in the yard. Those flat faced lead bullets will put a smack on a raccoon.

[Winger Ed.]

"I fell into a unfired 52-2 awhile back." Ed, you should have bought a lottery ticket while that spell was on you.

I often tell people I might be the luckiest human you'll ever meet.
And like catching a chimney sweep on the sidewalk--- you'll have good luck if you shake hands with me.

Years ago, a fella bought this one, but never fired it because he couldn't find ammo for it.
Then he sold it to a life long friend of mine,,, who also couldn't find ammo for it.
Then he needed money for something, and sold it to me.
I loaded for it and shot it a little.
Then I needed money and sold it back to him.... And he never fired it.
Then the stars came together, and I bought it back a couple years ago.
A new spare magazine & the 1200 rounds I'd loaded for it for $900. I don't think it'll be back on the market anytime soon.

[gunther]

How close are M52 magazines to M39 magazines? There's got to be a block to shorten the front to back dimension for the 9mm in the M39, but that might be removable...This bubbled up when I remembered seeing a Colt 38 wadcutter gun work with stock 38 Super magazines.

[Winger Ed.]

How close are M52 magazines to M39 magazines?

What I've found out-- Not quite close enough to work.
If it was practical to convert model 59 mags:
Model 52 mags. wouldn't cost over $200. each, if you can even find one.

Not to gloat,,,, I got my 2nd one from a local gun store back around 2010.
It was hanging on a display rack, dusty, the package yellowed from old age, with a price tag of $35.oo.
Even as lucky as I am, I don't think I can repeat that deal.

[Green Frog]

Triple K recently made a run of repro mags for the Model 52, but so far range reports have been mixed to poor. I have one I bought for Dad because he thought he needed one. It’s been in the safe since he passed away about 7 years ago. I really should sell it. :???:
Froggie

[HWooldridge]

I'm sure the M52 would work fine for self defense work - just shoot the bad guy in the left eye tear duct...:kidding:

[Electrod47]

I bought a Pachmayr Shooting box at an estate sale for $20..............when I got home and started sorting all the contents, there were 3, model 52 magazines in it!

Good Lord!!!!

[Bmi48219]

Plated wadcutters are not recommended…..

Why or by whom?

[nuclearcricket]

I am also curious as I got a good deal on a bunch of them
Sam

[Kai]

This has always intrigued me. Other than liking to play with the various 38spl / 357 molds I've always wanted a M52. With the price they bring just can't help but wonder why? I get it if they are no longer mfg. And can only assume they are accurate. Just wanted to get those who have owned and shot.

My 52 is the most accurate handgun in the safe and there are quite a few. Being a Smith it's obvious the trigger is fantastic. Using mid range (low power) wadcutter ammo, the action is very smooth with the slide spring being very "soft". A child could rack the slide. Being intriqued as you are I would highly recommend you get yourself a 52. You certainly won't regret it. No they are not cheap in price but they are not cheaply made either.

[DeadWoodDan]

I have a wish list and every time one of these gets in front of my eyes I just can't help but want it...of course that list is long.

[dverna]

When the 952 was introduced I came close to getting one. I had always regretted selling the 52-2.

At about the same time, I found a used Clark .38 at a good price. The Clark is a better gun.

The M52 may have been the most accurate factory semiautomatic CF of its time. It was displaced in Bullseye by Clark’s and then the .32 S&W in the Walther GSP. We never Ransom rested a GSP, so it’s 50 yards accuracy is unknown to me.

[rintinglen]

I knew a fellow who kept his loaded as his home defense gun. He said he figured a 38 wadcutter in the eye ought to stop any trouble maker in his home

[Bmi48219]

Plated wadcutters are not recommended and you can shoot a flush 148 dewc for practice. Bullseye--231--and 700x are recommended powders.

Again, what’s wrong with ‘plated wadcutters’ in a 52?

[garandsrus]

I bought a 52 several months ago and really enjoy shooting it. I have a second magazine and the barrel weight. It was a grail gun for me for quite a while.

[rockrat]

Guy came in our local gun show with a 52 but with only one mag. Probably 99% if not for missing the factory grips. Had a set of RH thumb rest grips on it. He was asking $1000 for it. If he had two or three mags and the factory grips, it probably would have followed me home.

[Ia.redneck]

I heartily agree with 22cf45, it is unforgiving of poor follow through. Great gun tho!

[Green Frog]

Guy came in our local gun show with a 52 but with only one mag. Probably 99% if not for missing the factory grips. Had a set of RH thumb rest grips on it. He was asking $1000 for it. If he had two or three mags and the factory grips, it probably would have followed me home.

rockrat,
If it had included the factory grips and two or more mags you could have just about doubled the price, give or take. Then again, factory grips can be had for about $100 plus or minus, and each original mag will set you back another $200. so you could have been into the "package" you describe for about $500 more and still been a few hundred below market. That might not have been such a bad deal if you would be willing to do a little searching.
Froggie

[Bmi48219]

rockrat,
If it had included the factory grips and two or more mags you could have just about doubled the price, give or take. Then again, factory grips can be had for about $100 plus or minus, and each original mag will set you back another $200. so you could have been into the "package" you describe for about $500 more and still been a few hundred below market. That might not have been such a bad deal if you would be willing to do a little searching.
Froggie

I’m of similar mind about the 52-2 mentioned in post# 8. I took a closer look at it last week. It’s not ANIB, having a few minor scratches. Only has one magazine. And it has been there for 8 months.
In this age of polymer, high capacities, strikers, rails and optics ready slides, a single stack model 52 (or any other bullseye pistol) doesn’t appeal to a large segment of the buying public, especially when the price approaches four digits.

[Winger Ed.]

Being what it is, in addition to its shortcomings, nobody but a caster and/or re-loader would buy it
for anything close to its value.

But if its been in the case that long, a bargain my be there to be had.
Nobody at the retail level likes dead inventory.

[gunther]

Ed: Colt wad gun magazines are in the same ballpark, price-wise, and the feed lips are fragile. The owner was happily surprised when the Mec gar magazine worked un-modified.

[rintinglen]

@ BMI The rumor that I heard was that there was a concern that the plating would flake off in the bore and become copper fouling. I stress that this was a rumor, that I heard from a fellow who didn't own a 52. I personally put this one just about next to the Bigfoot sightings as far as how much credence I give it. That said, mine has seen nothing but lead, Remington HBWC, when I could get them, cast when I couldn't. I have never owned a centerfire autoloader that would out shoot it when I had Remington factory WC ammo in it. I know people who swear by the Clark conversions, but my observation is that the Colt's are more finicky. And more costly.

325594

[nuclearcricket]

I don't know about some plated bullets but I do know that Berry's bullets have about .003" of plating on them per side. I would think it would take a lot to make that flake off and for all the faster wbwc's are pushed I don't think that will happen. Even if it does, a good cleaning should solve the problem.
I guess I will just have to haul mine our and run a box full through it and see what turns up on the patches
Sam

[Rockindaddy]

After trying out a S&W Mosel 52 try a SIG P210 Target. The SIG is a great piece of workmanship!

[6string]

When the 952 was introduced I came close to getting one. I had always regretted selling the 52-2.

At about the same time, I found a used Clark .38 at a good price. The Clark is a better gun.

The M52 may have been the most accurate factory semiautomatic CF of its time. It was displaced in Bullseye by Clark’s and then the .32 S&W in the Walther GSP. We never Ransom rested a GSP, so it’s 50 yards accuracy is unknown to me.

I agree with Don here, and his earlier post. A lot of folks look at the M52 through rose-colored glasses, or they’ve never shot Bullseye or Int’l (ISSF) Centerfire competitively.
Gil Hebard did a test (perhaps better called a research paper) on the Model 52. He systematically tested an exhaustive list of loads, plus match grade factory HBWC ammo, properly using a Ransom Rest (something often overlooked). Through the course of firing literally thousands of rounds using four different documented guns, he produced literally one single group that was comparable to the best work using a 38 1911 conversion by the likes of Clark, Giles, Dinan, etc. (That group is often shown out of context and is highly misleading!)

His conclusions were pretty much as follows:
-The model 52 is a “10 ring” gun, meaning with preferred loads it is reliable for 3”-3.25” groups at 50 yds. Better groups are flukes that cannot be repeated through further testing.
-The model 52 is not a reloader’s friend. It is super finnicky. Bullet choices are strictly flush nose wadcutters. Button nose wadcutters, that often shoot very well in conversions, can’t be loaded in a model 52 mag.
-The model 52 trigger uses a hinged trigger and transfer bar that precludes a crisp, two stage trigger (with the wonderful “straight through” feel) that can be acheived with a top drawer 38 wadcutter conversion. And, yes, anything less than perfect follow-through will decimate your scores badly! But, if you like a roll trigger and practice your dry firing, though, you might really like it!
-One very good thing was, he showed how specific guns shot, in a statistical manner, over the course of being fired thousands of times. One big plus of the model 52 is that it’s accuracy did indeed stand up over time!
Admittedly, many of the 1911 wadcutter conversions do need regular tune-ups to shoot their best. (And, by best, I mean about half what a model 52 can do!) But, it’s a LOT easier to get the needed parts!
Gil Hebard published his work in Gun Digest in the early 60s, then reprinted in his later Pistol Shooters Treasury.
If your serious about the model 52, and can accept the unvarnished truth, get a copy! Gil was a good writer and he objectively puts forth the pros and cons.

Here’s one more observation. The model 52 occasionally appears in the hands of competitive shooters in some rather far-away countries. Despite my comments that might sound a bit derogatory, it was a good effort for an “out of the box” target grade centerfire semi-auto pistol from a major manufacturer. I never saw a .38 wadcutter 1911 built by anyone outside of the USA! So, a model 52 makes sense in that context. But, especially if you shoot the International discipline, the .32 wadcutter guns like Walther GSP or Pardini HP32 are much better.
My choice for a European made centerfire wadcutter target pistol? Either of these all steel classics: Sako Triace (.32 cal only) or the SIG-Hämmerli P240 (.32 or .38 cal).

[georgerkahn]

I am privileged to own a no-dash Model 52. It is a joy to load and shoot. My mould is the one designed and marketed by Hensley & Gibbs specifically for this pistol -- their #527, listed as a ".38 S&W Special 4-Cavity .358 148 grain WC mould for the S&W 52". I've had my 52 since the mid-1970s, and it truly was my best friend for many years of Bullseye competitive shooting. I exclusively used Bullseye powder, with a specific amount (I choose to not divulge any precise loads) significantly less than 3 grains. All cases need be trimmed to precise length, and the bullets need be seated (wad-cutter shape) so their tip is precisely in line with the case's edge.
No more than an added comment here, but I'd shoot the rim-fire leg with my S&W Model 41, and on a few occasions, believe it or not ;) -- my total score for the evening was HIGHER from the 52 .38! Not by much -- but, imho, this attests to the beauty of this arm. Mine is an early model -- serial number lower than 55,000!
"YES" -- quite a few gunmakers sought to "make a better mousetrap", and yes -- I sent my Model 41 to Clark Custom for enhancement (worth the money!!!).
BUT -- for ME -- the out of box, but with Herrett grips as only mod -- to say that I've been happy with my 52 would definitely be an understatement!
A "last" added note is I have several magazines for mine, all made by S&W. Years back, for "kicks & giggles" I used a toothpick to apply drops of (yellow) paint to the bottom of each mag -- e.g., one dot on 1st mag, two dots on 2nd, and so on. It very well might be "me" -- but I queued my mags after that, and to my shooting -- same ammo and same everything else -- I noted a consistent, albeit wee bit of target performance -- dependent upon which mag I used. Again, maybe just me, but after I noted this I tried "queuing" mags in my 41 and other semi-autos -- with ZERO performance change; this phenomena JUST with my 52 :).
geo

[catmandu]

I am privileged to own a no-dash Model 52. My mould is the one designed and marketed by Hensley & Gibbs specifically for this pistol -- their #527, listed as a ".38 S&W Special 4-Cavity .358 148 grain WC mould for the S&W 52".
geo

George,
If you don’t mind it would be terrific if I could get an answer or two from you.
1) I was told the early Mod 52 (no dash) were converted 9mm barrels so their groove diameter was .355 to .356. And that was why the H&G specific mold was made at a smaller diameter than the H&G 50.
2) I thought the H&G Mod 52 mold was the 251.

I have a Mod52-1 and I am very fond of it. It likes REM 148 HBWCs or Zero/Rose Dist. Anything else is a step down in accuracy. I also have numbered my mags and there is a difference. Could you please tell me more about the dimensions of your bore and the HG 527?
Thanks in advance.

Paul

[M-Tecs]

1) I was told the early Mod 52 (no dash) were converted 9mm barrels so their groove diameter was .355 to .356. And that was why the H&G specific mold was made at a smaller diameter than the H&G 50.
2) I thought the H&G Mod 52 mold was the 251.


Here is the history of the 52's https://www.shootingtimes.com/editorial/handgun_reviews_st_swmodel5238_200906/100100

Yes the 251 was H&G 52 mold and it listed as 0.356"
https://www.hensleygibbs.com/molds/251.jpg

I personally own a 52-2 and the State National Guard team had both 52-1's and 38 Special Colts with the fluted chambers. Bores on Colt Gold Cup National Match .38 Special were small but they didn't shoot well so the 24 we had were like new and never signed out. The 52-1's were very well used but they still shot well. They would still hold 2" to 2 1/2" at 50 yards with factory Winchester or Federal WC out of a machine rest. Mine will do better.

The factory verse reloads in the 38 WC is the only time I've never been able to get my reloads to equal or exceed factory. That being sad having a good supply of issued factory limited the effort I put in it.

[catmandu]

It’s interesting that in the Shooting Times article link you provided they production limit 2 inch groups at 50.
I’ve seen the fluted brass before, joked if H&K made a 38 Spl.

Paul

[M-Tecs]

When the bullseye teams went away, I had to turn in the 24 Colt Gold Cup National Match .38 Special's in like new condition. We only had 6 of the 52's and 24 S&W model 46's. I really wanted a Gold Cup National Match .38 Special for a collector item but as a shooter not so much.

https://www.coltforum.com/showcase/a-look-back-at-the-colt-gold-cup-national-match-38-special-mid-range-semi-automatic-pistol-part-1.5/

[catmandu]

The one Gold Cup 38 Spl I was able to inspect had a sleeved 38 Super barrel. It shot good, but not as good as the Jim Clark long slide conversions.
Paul

[georgerkahn]

George,
If you don’t mind it would be terrific if I could get an answer or two from you.
1) I was told the early Mod 52 (no dash) were converted 9mm barrels so their groove diameter was .355 to .356. And that was why the H&G specific mold was made at a smaller diameter than the H&G 50.
2) I thought the H&G Mod 52 mold was the 251.

I have a Mod52-1 and I am very fond of it. It likes REM 148 HBWCs or Zero/Rose Dist. Anything else is a step down in accuracy. I also have numbered my mags and there is a difference. Could you please tell me more about the dimensions of your bore and the HG 527?
Thanks in advance.

Paul

Paul (catmandu) -- Perhaps the only thing I profess to be a master of is ignorance on too any things to list :) -- so you piqued my interest re "what I have". Hence, I went to an H&G Web-Site -- imho a great one, incidentally ;) -- https://www.hensleygibbs.com/casting/hgmoldchart.htm -- and checked out my mould. 325814 "PHEW! For once I was correct!" Bion, my first H&G mould for my 52 was their Model 50 which always cast bullets a few ten-thousandths less in diameter than I had desired. Using a Lyman 45 with same brand's black lub, my bullets would just about drop through! A semi-pro shooter in club, also having a Model 52, suggested the H&G Model 527; I ordered one -- and, if I might suggest, "it's awesome!" Mine drops bullets consistently at 0.3575" to 0.3580". (I use well-fluxed wheel weights to which is added a bit of tin -- no "magic" alloy.) The 527 bullets do not have a crimp groove -- unnecessary as bullets are seated flush to case mouth -- but other than dropping bullets a hair or two fatter than my Model 50 mould -- this is the only difference between the two that I can see.

I have never actually measured my bore's diameter, BUT, my criteria -- I hate to admit -- is a "who care's" one. To wit, I try a cast and lub'd bullet, and from chamber push it through the barrel with a piece of 5/16" birch dowel. When I get a quite snug fit, and with equal, uniform pressure (I hold a quarter against "my" end of dowel so I don't deform my palm ;) ) I'm almost happy. Then, when I examine bullet under a magnifier glass and it is equally (all around -- e.g., no shiny side at a spot or similar deformity) now imprinted from passing through the barrel -- I'm delighted. I typed, above, my bullet diameters, so my guess is the barrel bore diameter is a couple of blonde hairs less.

Yours is the first I have ever heard of any barrel for 9mm. Once -- years back at a gun show in Syracuse, New York, a Specialty Shop had a Model 52 which, if I correctly recall (?) was set up for ".38 Super" or sum'thin like that -- ~40 years back, Paul, all I recall it being a calibre ending in "-Super" and not being ".38 S&W Mid-range".

Thank you re your also numbering your magazines info -- here, for years, I thought I was a tad crazy... But, by golly, I can -- time after time -- do better on targets with the mag I have with three dots on its base. :) :) :)

geo

[Tatume]

I was told the early Mod 52 (no dash) were converted 9mm barrels so their groove diameter was .355 to .356. And that was why the H&G specific mold was made at a smaller diameter than the H&G 50.

The Model 52 no dash was made by modifying Model 39 frames with the inclusion of a "lock out" screw to disable double-action fire. There is no information of which I am aware that indicates S&W used 9mm barrels.

In 1963 the action was purpose built as a true single action only, and became the Model 52-1.

In 1971 the much-improved Model 52-2 was introduced, and built until the model was discontinued in 1994. Most 38 Master pistols are of the -2 type.

I like mine, but don't shoot it much. The grip is so much different from the 1911 that I feel more consistent shooting the 1911 in the Precision Pistol center-fire and 45 stages.

[catmandu]

I found another article on 38 Spl wadcutters.
https://www.grantcunningham.com/2011/11/ed-harris-revisiting-the-full-charge-wadcutter/

Paul

[tomd999]

Hiya,
I have had several 52-2's over the last 40 years, currently I have an early '71 with the frame weight and a very late '91 3 letter serial. I used the early one for PPC matches in the 80's when it was like cheating against the revolver "pipe guns". (The mags are easy to modify for 6 rounds if you want to know how, IM me.) I've likened the 52 to a Swiss watch compared to the 1911 as a Timex, just like the watches, the 52 is a fine example of precision engineering and fit, whereas the 1911 will take a licking and keep on ticking.

Idiosyncrasies of the 52 series:
"Tipping or skidding" bullet impacts. The 1-18" twist rate in the factory barrels is too slow for the HBWC loads, even the factory Federal Gold Medal (148g HBWC @ 711fps) Most bullseye shooters try to emulate this load with their loads and are frustrated with elongated or sideways bullet holes at 50 yards. The answer for this is simple, you have get the FPS up into the 800fps range to get good stabilization all the way out to 50 yards. The HBWC are known to have separations at those speeds so you have to switch to a solid cast bullet. I have a 148 BNFB that cuts nice square holes at 50 yards running 3.1g WST with the bullet shoulder flush with the case mouth and a good taper crimp. (2.8 for the 25 yard line) I have run the Lee 105g SWC seated down in the case so it was flush with 3.4g Bsy for the 25 yard line timed and rapid fire, it held the 10 ring and ran the gun well but there was a touch of lead in the barrel so my mix must have been a little off.

Powders: The 52 has a preference for faster powders and it's not as forgiving as other pistols to unburnt residue from slower powders. In my experience, powders AA #2 and slower are an invitation for malfunctions because at the load level they need to be at to work with the 52, they will have unburnt granules/flakes, because the 52 is fit so precise, these will get in the lockwork and prevent the trigger from resetting during strings of fire. I have used Bullseye, 700X, Red Dot, Clays, Titegroup, American Select and WST with good results. (WST is my current favorite for 148g BNFB)

Follow through and trigger management. I call my 52's my "X or 8 guns" as if you do everything correctly, you get rewarded with plenty of "X's", if you do anything wrong, don't follow through or have the slightest lapse of attention during the shot event, you get an 8 and likely worse. The trigger is 2-1/2 Lbs exactly out of the box, the minimum for Center Fire pistols under NRA or CMP rules. They will hold this poundage forever it seems, my 1971 still has the same weight after tens of thousands of rounds. The wonderful trigger does tend to cause "chicken finger" in shooters below master ranking so be aware of it and you may be able to avoid that issue. (chicken finger comes from a trigger so light and crisp the shooter is afraid to make the gun go off prematurely so they freeze and can't fire the shot, if you ask them what happened they will tell you it felt like the trigger weighed 10 lbs when they tried to pull it)

Sights: The 52, like the 41 has very little "white" on the sides of the front blade when sighting, I opened the rear notch slightly using a carbide end mill with a 10 degree offset so the notch retained the factory angle to avoid the prism effect of parallel surfaces.

Magazines: The Achilles heal of the 52. There are 3 versions of S&W factory mags, likely made by Metalform or Mec-Gar for S&W. The original steel follower with 1 hole at the top rear of the follower pin slot. These are the holy grail of 52 mags, they just work. The second type with the steel follower but with no additional hole at the top rear of the pin slot, these are almost as good but I have seen more alibis on the line with these than the original version. The third type is the ones with plastic followers, these were the last that S&W offered, they aren't as reliable or desirable. The recent Triple-K mags, well, lets say they really aren't ready for prime time, I have 3+ hours into one of them and it's about 80% functional, when it came out of the box it was less that 5% functional.

Care and cleaning. The 52 was designed in the 60's, when guns were made with full contact sliding surfaces unlike the reduced contact area polymer designs of today. The 52 NEEDS to be "wet" that means that there has to be plenty of oil on the frame, barrel and slide mating surfaces for it to run reliable. If you let a 52 "dry out", you won't get through many strings. I like Amsoil synthetic gun oil, it stays light and doesn't thicken like Break Free CLP does after a day or 2.

I hope I haven't scared anyone away from the 52 series, they are every bit a world class pistol, equaling or surpassing the quality of Swiss made SIG, Walther, Pardini or custom made 1911's. Just like the other super accurate target pistols, they are temperamental and unforgiving of mistakes but when you figure them out, they are a joy to shoot with very little recoil, a great trigger and they attract a good deal of attention when they show up on the line at the range.

Tom