S&W Model 52

[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/editor..._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...stol-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. "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...rge-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