Smith & Wesson Model 66-5: review, shooting & frame type overview

[@karlheidenreich15]

That is not a frame reinforcement on the older handgun. That is what is known as the cylinder stop stud. If your handgun did not have a cylinder stop stud, the cylinder would fall off the gun when you ejected the empties. The stud required drilling a hole and filing the stud down to spec. On the Dash 5, they incorporated a bit of reinforcement in the new design and eliminated a step in the manufacturing process. Also not mentioned is the use of MiM parts, specifically the trigger and hammer. The use of these parts was taken very negatively at first, but took a back seat to all the hate directed at the dreaded Hole. I am the proud owner of a 66-5 with a 2.5 inch barrel, I carry it as a part time cop now that I am in my late 50s, I have no interest in carrying Ghetto Tupperware like most of my younger colleagues do. However, keep in mind that by the time Smith entered the 21st Century, the old classics like the 66-5 were not put together by gunsmiths as much as they were assembled from very precisely made parts by assemblers. On my older Smiths, you can see the work that went into them, on the newer guns, they are mechanically perfect (hopefully) but they lack the charm of the older.

[@drdrake63]

Karl Heidenreich I don’t have the concern about metal injection molding on certain parts that some others do. I suppose if I ever have a MIM part fail me on a firearm, I’ll change my tune - but in all my years of shooting and hundreds of thousands of rounds: not a single instance. Go figure. I HAVE had out of spec forged parts cause me issues! I’m a guy that conceal carries a ‘Tupperware’ Glock 19 daily. If I was open carry I’d put a .357 revolver 4” or greater on my hip in a heartbeat. Thanks for watching. Appreciate your comments

[@CF-rx7hx]

Ghetto Tupperware... that’s hilarious. I am a Glock fan, and a wheel gun fan.

[@kylewood8327]

Ghetto Tupperware 😂 Well said my man!

[@Desperado3248]

Very nice. Very similar to my 19-5. A great revolver. I have a 4 inch 66-3 I bought years ago as nib , fantastic revolver. I am a Colt fan but still appreciate the classic S&W revolvers. You won’t see the likes of these again. Enjoy.

[@blakesmith2594]

I traded a colt diamondback 38 special 2 1/2 in for a 66-5 with a 6 in barrel

[@russelder9743]

David--you did well . She is a beauty......looks a little like my 620. I am with you Ruger is quality however I think S&W is a little finer machine

[@calvinhandley2373]

The reason for the recessed chambers on Magnum caliber revolvers dated back to the 1935 introduction of the .357 Magnum. The reason was to enclose the case head of the cartridge. Cartridge cases back in 1935 were often of “balloon head” construction. The ammunition industry moved to “solid head” cartridge construction. By 1980 the balloon head cartridge case was long in the past. When S&W introduced the L-Series revolvers in 1980, it was a purpose built revolver, designed for the .357 Magnum. S&W introduced the L-frame without the pinned barrel and recessed chambers, after having determined it was no longer needed. It eliminated a number machining steps in the production process. It had nothing to do with “safety”, since the visible gap between the cylinder and recoil shield was no different than all non-magnum S&W revolvers dating back to the 1890’s.

[@nicholasdonvito1703]

I carried my Mod 19 4” for many years. I’m so sorry I sold my last one. But I also have my beloved Mod 66 2.5” stainless. I love this weapon and will never sell it or any more of my firearms…EVER AGAIN!!!

[@nicholasdonvito1703]

Which numbers off my serial number do you need to know what year my handgun is? I also have my Mod 36 that I bought in 1976, all the girls in my family love this little devil. Another great gun is my 681 4” L Frame, very reliable. My old N Frame in .357 and in .44 Mag were great guns. I sold my last N Frame .44 mag 4” for only $300. I owed this friend favors and he drove me nuts, but to do all over again, I WOULDN’T!!!

[@dewell1993]

You sir make me want to get a model 66 with a 6 inch barrel. The way you shoot and handle the model 66 its a hell of a gun. Plus the 6 inch is pretty hard to find so hang on to it.

[@nivek5031]

I have a 1972 S/S, S&W Mod 66 no-dash, with a 4" barrel, stainless front & rear sights and recessed cylinder. Serial No. 4K66687. Not fired in the last 30 years and before that only fired a few .38SP rounds. Perhaps someone is looking for one of these. 🙂

[@regsparkes6507]

Nice review David,..well done. I'm still crying over having traded in my 686,.....why did I do that?

[@drdrake63]

Reg Sparkes I don’t know LOL. I let go of a Dan Wesson several years ago and I’m kicking myself over that. One of the bad side effects of this disease I suppose?

[@casualobserver3145]

Lol! I did the same thing. I sold my M586 in 1986. Should’ve kept it. In 1994 I did find a M66-2 in 4 inch which was a police force “exile” when that dept. transitioned to Glocks. It’s still in pristine condition. I got it for $150!!

[@MAG-li5jo]

That is a BEAUTIFUL 66, But the close up looks like the forcing cone is cracked?

[@casualobserver3145]

The M66 is a beauty!

[@shikat2371]

Why is the internal hammer safety found in newer S&W revolvers "The Hillary Hole"?

[@calvinhandley2373]

Hillary hole is a misnomer. The lock really had nothing to do with the Clintons. The kick was introduced after George W Bush was in the White House. S&W was under new ownership when the lock was introduced. Prior to that S&W, under the ownership of Tompkins, a British plumbing conglomerate, had made a deal with the Clinton administration’s Justice Department to phase out civilian sales of S&W revolvers. It was a quid pro quo deal to avoid civil litigation over product liability. When word got out their was a huge consumer backlash that negatively impacted S&W sales before Tompkins was expecting it. They sold S&W to a company called Saf-T-Hammer. This company was headed by a couple of S&W’s former executives who had left due to Tompkins politics and policies. Saf-T-Hammer was only able to secure financing for the purchase (their total available cash was less than a million dollars) because of their proprietary locking mechanism, which they called the Saf-T-Lock. Once S&W was under the new ownership they immediately broke the deal with the Justice Department. This was in 2001 after Bush had taken office. In mid-late 2001 S&W introduced a Performance Shop model with the Saf-T-Lock mechanism. It was phased in to nearly all S&W production revolvers in 2002. Saf-T-Hammer renamed themselves Smith & Wesson with the Saf-T-Hammer name being retired, since the new company’s focus was on building firearms. The lock’s main purpose was to reduce the possibility of S&W losing a frivolous lawsuit going forward. Effectively the lock saved the company. Without it S&W probably wouldn’t be around today.

[@davidbliss3220]

Mr Drake I like your taste in firearms. Your collection is similar to mine. Your videos are all on the revolvers I love. I have subscribed. I own every revolver you have done in different vintages, for the exception of your single action stuff.

[@jamesmoore9511]

Somebodies brain was not being working when they decided to trim the barrel instead of the crane. The crane doesn't cary any load to speak of but the barrel sure does. I love my 665 looks beautiful and drops each round where I point it.

[@solodad001]

Not all -5's have the frame mounted firing pin. I have a -5 pre-transition version.

[@calvinhandley2373]

Is it a 66-5? The dash numbers are specific to different models. All 66-5 revolvers have the CNC machined frame and frame-mounted (floating) firing pin. The OP made some incorrect statements regarding firing pins. The hammer mounted firing pin is NOT a floating firing pin. Also S&W never made K-frame revolvers with the firing pin as a part of the hammer. The hammer nose has always been a seperate piece, that was pinned in place. Most of them exhibit the slight movement shown in the video, to allow them to fall in to correct position within the hammer nose bushing. Some later versions had the hammer nose spring-loaded. This seems to have first appeared on L-frame revolvers. Getting back to the -5 thing. On a Model 19, the dash-5 indicates that the cylinder was no longer recessed. This change occurred in 1982, around the same time that the pinned barrel was eliminated across the board on all S&W revolvers. On a Model 10-5 the -5 indicates an increase of width of the front sight from 1/10” to 1/8th inch. This change took place in 1962 on standard weight barrel models. The same change on heavy barrel models was the 10-6.

[@SureIamLucky]

Thanks, Great Video.

[@donventura3844]

Last iteration before the internal lock

[@Zaku2077]

Looks nice.

[@sonnygunz9207]

I’ll take any vintage S&W over any other revolver. The new ones are well made but don’t have the look of the older ones.

[@johnqpublic2718]

I'll take my modern 66-8 with the improved metallurgy and reinforced forcing cone.

[@kevinthegreat7627]

that forcing cone is a huge turn off to me:(

[@raletky]

"Always support the NRA." That didn't age well.