What’s your favorite classic S&W wheel gun? Mine is the four-inch Model 19 my uncle willed to me. Now Smith’s announced that they’re bringing the K-frame revolver back as a catalog product.
The Model 19 Classic, with its walnut grips, is the spitting image of my gun (aside from that unsightly safety). And just about anyone would be proud carry the three-inch, PowerPorted Performance Center model, which wouldn’t make a bad barbecue gun, come to think of it.
Here’s their press release . . .
Model 19 Revolver Reintroduced to Classics, Performance Center® Lines
Model 19 Revolver Features Classic Lines, Upgraded Features
SPRINGFIELD, Mass., (May 4, 2018) – Smith & Wesson Corp. today announced that it has reintroduced two configurations of it’s Model 19 revolver, chambered in .38 S&W Special +P and .357 Magnum. For the first time in 20 years, the Model 19 will be available as a catalog item, in both a Classics and Performance Center version.
Tony Miele, General Manager of the Performance Center, said, “The Model 19 revolver was a popular choice for both law enforcement and civilian customers for nearly 40 years, and after many requests, we’ve decided to reintroduce it to the product line in both Classic and Performance Center models. The Model 19 Classic is designed to replicate the original, while the new Performance Center Model 19 Carry Comp features modern revolver innovation and design for today’s shooters.”
The Smith & Wesson Classics series of revolvers have been enhanced with modern internal components, but mimic the look and feel of classic models. The Model 19 Classic revolver features a handsome set of walnut grips, a 4.25″ barrel, a black adjustable rear sight, and red ramp front sight. The revolver dons a highly polished, blued finish and traditional thumb piece for a classic look.
The Performance Center Model 19 Carry Comp is designed for concealed carry and includes a tritium front night sight, custom wood and synthetic boot grips, and a 3″ PowerPort™ vented barrel for recoil management. The revolver features a trigger overtravel stop and Performance Center tuned action for a smooth double-action and light single action trigger pull.
Both the Model 19 Classic and the Performance Center Model 19 Carry Comp are both chambered in .38 S&W Special +P and .357 Magnum with a 6 round cylinder. The Model 19 Classic is available with an MSRP of $826, the Performance Center Model 19 Carry Comp with an MSRP of $1,092, and both come with the Smith & Wesson limited warranty and lifetime service policy.
To learn more about the new Model 19 revolvers and the complete line of Classics and Performance Center firearms, including spec sheets and images, please click here.
To stay up to date on all of the latest news and events, be sure to follow Performance Center on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
I do love my 19-3. Left to me by my dad. 4 inch barrel, nickel plated and looks brand new. Shoots like a dream too.
I will be curious to see how the new ones hold up. Might buy another.
I’m not a fan of the lock or the fit/finish of the new S&W’s but this will likely hold up better to a lot of magnum rounds, when compared with the older versions. It looks like these new 19s don’t have the forward lockup which means they are like the new 66s–ball detent lockup on the crane, which means a narrower ejector rod, which in turn means a full diameter forcing cone (without that flat cutout at 6:00 that was the Achilles’ heel of the older 19/66s).
I can live with the MIM parts. S&W has been using them for many years now and they seem to hold up well.
Do we know if they have the 2 piece barrels?
Looking at the large photograph zoomed in a bit, it appears that the barrel, at least on the 4″, is ‘real;’ I also see what looks like color case-hardening on the hammer and trigger, which may indicate a ‘real’ forged-steel part.
If the gun has the ‘new’ ball-lock at the front of the crane (first used on the Triple Lock in 1908, but modernized), that’s good; It also uses the sturdier forged and machined open-cylinder stop flange instead of the pressed-in lug of older guns.
Sadly, I also see a Hillary Hole, which makes everything else moot.
Sorry, S&W, but you don’t get my money.
. . . should’ve zoomed in further. The barrel does look like a ‘fake.’ Sorry.
The MIM parts look like color case hardened. The performance center guns tend to have real steel since you can’t do a trigger job on MIM.
Hmmm. What is a “2 piece barrel”? I’ve never had a S&W revolver.
OK, visualize a Daisy Official Red Ryder carbine action, 200-shot, range model air rifle, with a compass in the stock and this thing that tells time.
It has an outer ‘barrel’ tube that does nothing but look cool and provide some support, for the smaller, inner tube that is the actual ‘barrel.’
S&W just does it a little more technically; The outer ‘shroud’ LOOKS like a vintage S&W barrel (a single forged piece with an integral rifled bore) in shape, but is merely a hollow metal support housing for the ‘real barrel,’ a smaller rifled tube fitted into the outer shroud.
It’s a cheaper, flimsier way of making what LOOKS like a traditional revolver barrel.
Do you truly want to know God and know you are going to Heaven?
https://www.biblebelievers.com/SimpleSalvation.html
God is waiting to hear from you today!
Hmmm… Internal lock, two-piece barrel, mim-parts, current S&W quality control.
Hard Pass.
Came here to say the same thing. I bet a new one wouldn’t be able to hold a candle to my 60s model 19 (plus, mine doesn’t have that STUPID HILLARY HOLE!). HARD pass.
Sadly, agree. I’ll pass.
As a proud ammosexual, I have to say there is something sexy about that Performance Center model. Looks similar to the 3″ 586 L Comp that I have lusted over for awhile now.
That Carry Comp looks pretty sweet other than that stupid hole behind the cy linder release. Are these OK to shoot full .357 loads or are you still supposed to practice with .38 specials?
I have a 586 L-Comp and shoot 357 all the time. Man is that a sweet revolver and the trigger is outstanding right out of the box.
The 586 is an L frame, this 19 is a K frame. The old K frames had a reputation for not being able to stand up to a stead diet of .357magnum loads (even the neutered factory stuff) and S&W would tell people to do most of their practice with .38 specials. Then S,R&Co started making the Security Six which was similar in size and weight to the K frames and would take whatever you could throw into the cyl inder. Once S&W saw the sales of their K frames plummeting they invented the L frame. To my knowledge there has never been an issue with the L frames.
That’s what I do with my 66-4; .38’s for the range, but 158gr .357 for when it’s sitting at the ready. S&W had a great idea when they blended the best attributes of the K and N frames to create the L frame.
Yes indeed, S&W had a brilliant idea there. Unfortunately for them Bill Ru ger had that same idea 8 years earlier.
The new Model 66s they came out with a couple years ago are beefed up in critical areas so they won’t wear down like the old 66s did with steady .357 usage. I would assume these new 19s are the same way.
The model 19 was close to perfect for a citizens fighting handgun. I love the k frames.
But I’ll wait til I’m out of CA before buying another handgun.
Why the &#%(*ing Hillary holes? Seriously. I don’t mind the MIMed parts (thousands of rounds through my 66-5, no issues) like some here do, but that ship has set its course. Get rid of it.
I thought they were phasing that stupid lock out of production?
Seems like every manufacturer has some thorn in the customers side they simply refuse to remedy. Is that just to they can market the same thing sans thorn when sales slump?
I want a Smith but……that lock.
I want a Glock but……
finger groovesGlockknuckle.I want a Sig but……always hitting that slide lock.
I want a Beretta but……..slide mounted safety.
There’s always something to train around, get used to or just prevent a sale.
As long as it has an internal lock I will not buy a S&W product.
Oh, I’m sure S&W would be crying about it. Ha ha ha.
There have been (unsubstantiated) rumors over the years that S&W would phase out the lock. Hasn’t happened yet and I would be astonished if they did. Would create a huge liability issue. They do have production runs of some J-frame models without the lock.
They have two versions of the 642 one with a lock and one without.
Alright Paul, exactly why would it cause a huge liability issue to delete the internal lock? Every other revolver manufacturer seems to be able to peddle their wares without said lock, and I don’t see it causing any liability issues with for the other guys.
Can you imagine the outcry by the anti types. “OMG they are removing a safety feature and making their guns more dangerous!!” Not sure about liability issues but the crappy PR they would get would be a lot more than they are probably willing to tolerate. BTW I do wish the locks would go…..they are unsightly.
What Darkstar said–absence of a “safety” feature is different than removing that feature. Plaintiff’s attorney in any ND case, or case where a child found and shot the gun, can make a big deal about the “safety” feature being removed. Of course I don’t agree, but S&W clearly does not want to take that risk.
Personally I like the slide mounted saf ety. Although with a DA/SA pistol I’d just as soon have the decocker only mo del instead.
Give the Beretta APX a look. It may check all of your boxes.
The APX is outstanding and they’re coming out with the compact and the carry version too.
Get rid of the Hillary Hole, and you’ve got the perfect revolver. That said, I’ve already got a 66-4, so I probably wouldn’t be a buyer, anyways.
Pops has a 586 with a 6″ barrel; I think that might be the best shooting handgun I’ve ever experienced. That full-underlug barrel balances things out just perfectly.
I got a 686 with a 6 inch barrel and it is a great shooter. One of my favorite guns to shoot. I replaced the Hogue monogrip with an Altamont walnut grip and the thing looks good too.
One of the gun writers, I do not remember now who it was let the cat out of the bag when Smith first went to using junk two piece barrels with the cheap ass cheesy shroud over a round barrel. Now the problem was how do you screw in the barrel for a tight fit. Well some Genius Moron at Smith decided to make a tool that fits into the muzzle to match the rifling and then they crank in the barrel real tight. I can just imagine how much damage a minimum wage flunky they just hired off the street will do when he assembles the guns. Don’t expect stellar accuracy out of these turkey’s. God what a piece of shit the new Smiths are.
Lets face facts despite the increased heat treatment of the Model 19 the frame was just too light and thin to take the pounding of a .357 magnum cartridge. As Jeff Cooper once said it was the type of gun you carried much but shot seldom (actually he really said that about the aluminum framed Colt Commander which was another failure but that is another story.)
I actually bought one (yeah not one of my better moves) a couple of years ago but only because it was unfired and was an older pinned and recessed model. These in unfired condition are getting as scarce as hens teeth and I only had planned to shoot .38 specials out of it anyway and it should take even a hot .38 load which I will probably never use either. I guess I was just a sucker for the fine workmanship and accuracy of these old classic guns so I bought it. And of course its MIM cast free as well. Mostly it just sits in my safe to be looked at once in awhile with fond memories of the good old days when manufactures actually made affordable first class firearms. I did take it out and shoot it once and as to be expected it was very accurate and the gang at the range were all drooling over it. They do not even give the new garbage made MIM cast junker Smiths a second glance.
The failures of the older Model 19/66 were the forcing cone. It has a flat spot milled into it, which thinned the metal at that location. That’s where they would fail. Failures were more common in the 19, and by people shooting hot and fast 110-125 grain magnum loads, which generate a lot more heat than a 158 grain magnum. That being said, my Model 66-3 is going strong, and I have close to 1k magnums through it. But a lot more 38.
You should never use hot loaded 110gr. bullets in any .357 rev olver. If you look at the factory am mo specs you’ll see that they are all extremely li ght loads. The reason for this is that when you use such a short bullet the back of the bullet will exit the case before the front of the bullet will enter the forcing cone. This allows super heated gases to blast in front of the bullet into the forcing cone. Heating metal and letting it cool down slowly will make the metal brittle and this could cause any forcing cone to crack. On the old K frames that flattened bottom created a serious weakness.
Side note: I was getting 1900+ fps out of a 125 grain pill from my 20″ Rossi 92! Great ballistics, and nice recoil impulse. Probably could hit 2000 fps with a slower powder.
You can probably load it hotter if you want. Buffalo Bore claims (and yes I take such claims with a grain of salt) 2298fps from their 125gr. from a Marlin 1894C. Most factory loads are nowhere near full SAAMI spec loads and I believe most reloa ding manuals do the same. The 125s might become more or less frangible at those velocities though, so if you really want 1200+ft/lbs you might want to move up a bit in bullet weight. At least if you’re looking for a deer load as opposed to a plinking load. On the other hand it might be fun to see just how fast your 20″ Rossi can spit out one of those 110gr. pills.
S&W has been owned by a LOCK COMPANY since about when the lock holes appeared.
S&W is no longer a company that cares about those who used to buy their products when they were NOT a LOCK COMPANY. That simple.
Now, sell it in a cardboard box with a screwdriver, cleaning kit, and test target.
“The Model 19 Classic is designed to replicate the original…”
You keep using that word, “replicate.” I do not think this word means what you think it means.
This is a blued version of the new Model 66, and it doesn’t “replicate” the old 66 anymore than this “replicates” the old 19. That said, in blued finish it does look sleeker and less barrel heavy than the stainless version. In a few years ( or months) when I find one on the used market, I’ll definitely consider it.
My favorite Smith K frame is a 3″ model 65 round butt. Have two of them. Also have a pristine 6″ #19. All with pinned barrels and countersunk cylinders. Smith & Wessons are my favorite revolvers. Own eight, or nine of them. Hate the new ones. I’ll never buy one.
I agree. I’m fond of my J Frames and my 686.
But my 3″ HB M65 is Just Right.
I own both a pre-1982 vintage Smith and Wesson Model 19 and 66 of 1979 and 1980
vintage, respectively. This means they have pinned barrel and counter-shrunk chambers.
Both have 4″ barrel revolvers. The Model 19 is designated Mod.19-1 and the Model 66 is designated Model 66-1. Beautiful classic handguns indeed. I will be keeping them and
of course eventually passing them on to my two nephews. Meanwhile I’m working to
return my late great uncle’s Winchester Model 97 12 gauge “hammer” pump action
shotgun to my family. It’s a standard grade with 28″ modified choke barrel and was
probably manufactured during the 1930’s? I’m not certain. The Winchester Model 97
was produced for 60 years: 1897 to 1957 and of course was designed by John M.
Browning (1855-1926). An 87 year old widow living in Germany has the Model 97 and
has graciously offered it to me. Meanwhile while awaiting the 97’s serial number I
will later write to the Cody Firearms Center/Buffalo Bill Center of the West in Cody,
Wyoming for documented information. For a $70.00 fee this institution will determine
date of shipment, purchase date, original owner, etc. No doubt I will need this documentation to have this shotgun shipped back into the United States destined to an FFL licensed gun shop in Klamath Falls, Oregon (my birthplace). I have a historical, emotional, personal, nostaligic, and sentimental attachment to classic firearms which I cannot explain. But there is nothing wrong with this, despite what anti-gun socialist activists and gun haters say to the contrary! I love classic Smith and Wesson .357 Magnum revolvers: both the K-Frame Model 19 and 66 “stainless” .357 Combat Magnums, and the two heavy N-Frame .357’s: the Model 27 and 28 Highway Patrolman. Not to mention my late great uncle’s Winchester Model 97, my late dad’s Model 99-EG .300 Savage lever action rifle, and many other firearms. And no, I don’t apologize for this to anybody. And though I don’t choose to own a Colt AR-15 rifle at this time in my life, I will certainly defend the Second Amendment right of the law abiding who choose to do so.
James A. “Jim” Farmer
Merrill, Oregon (Klamath County)
Native Oregonian since November 1956
I love my Model 19-4. It wandered around a lot with me in a holster so it has a bit of wear on the blue. It adds character, though. I also have a Savage Model 99 take-down in .300 which was a hand-me-down from my great uncle, to my grandfather, to my dad and then to me. The model 19 I purchased on my own around 1981 (very slightly used) and the gunsmith I bought it from specialized in Smith & Wesson revolvers. He did an action job on it, very light single action trigger (almost scary light), and machined turned the target hammer and target trigger. It went on many a hunting trip with me as a backup. My dad recently passed and I now own more of the guns I remember from my childhood. Winchester model 70 in 30-06, Winchester model 62a, Browning Nomad .22, and a few that my dad got later on in life, too. Smith & Wesson model 60-7, Ruger Redhawk 7.5″ in 44mag, and a Enfield .38 S&W break-top from a ways back.
Correction: I meant to write 19-4, not 19-1.
replica? Not, It’s almost like, an exact clone, with improvements, identical to, with some modifications. Take away the S&W logo and you’ve got a $300 gun .
Hey, Smith & Wesson – LOSE THE HILLARY HOLE!!
The 19 is about the perfect revolver… EXCEPT for that damned key lock. Lose it.
Fortunately, I have two of the originals and don’t need a new one – and I WON’T get one with the Hillary Hole in it.
I will add one to my collection. I have a 66, 686 and a 27. Love them all. The 66 is used for teaching new shooters with 38 Special loads. It shoots very well with 158gr 357 mags. The 686 is a 6″ barrel with the powerport, the 27 is GREAT with whatever I feed it.
I have a brace of older S&W revolvers, including a nice M19, but I won’t buy ANY new S&W until they take the damn locks off of ALL their revolvers.
I like my Glock for IDPA competition and EDC, but only S&W revolvers like this 19 can make my heart skip a beat.
whats the problem with the hillary hole? can’t you just not use it? just asking, I have no idea.
ok, i’ve read about the hillary hole. warning: use strict search on google (eyebleach).
i’d probably do this: https://www.ingunowners.com/forums/gunsmithing/327405-hillary-hole-how-deal-stupid-lock.html
Being able to simply remove the internal bits for the Hillary Hole is not the point; In fact, there is at least one manufacturer that sells blackened or stainless-steel smooth fitted plugs to take the place of the keyhole insert.
The problem with the Hillary Hole is its mere presence; It’s a blatant indicator of S&W’s prostrating itself before the Clintons in exchange for disparate legal treatment, and the symbol of a huge American conglomerate, Saf-T–Hammer, buying into that abasement with glee.
The Hillary Hole remaining on the guns is a clear sign to prospective buyers that S&W is STILL debasing itself in front of Disarmists, although Saf-T-Hammer no longer owns the company and the Clintons no longer hold power. It is a useless affectation, as practical and as necessary as a padlock through the cylinder cut.
Granted, there would be Hell to pay for awhile if S&W removed the devices; Product-liability attorneys would have a field day lining up to file suit if someone was hurt by an S&W revolver model that used to have one but no longer did; Equally, they would line up to sue someone who has a gun that HAD such a device but removed it, and someone was later shot with it, particularly by ‘accident.’ However, S&W’s defense would be the literal millions of guns built on the same design for over a hundred years that got along just FINE without Hillary Holes, guns considered the safest revolvers ever made.
Say what you will about the thing being a ‘storage lock,’ to everyone else it’s a ‘safety’–because it prevents the gun, mechanically, from firing. Just because it takes a key to ‘switch the safety off,’ it’s still a ‘safety.’ And you don’t remove ‘safeties’ from firearms with impunity.
No professional smith concerned about his liability coverage would ever remove the device for a customer; The financial risk is just too great.
I bought my first S&W over half a century ago; I have owned hundreds of them, and still have ‘a few.’ NONE has a Hillary Hole, and none ever will.
Now, get off my lawn.
The point isn’t whether the new Smith Classics are as good as the originals, it’s are they worth the money in today’s market? I’ve handled a bunch, and they have nice finishes,nice grips and shoot pretty well overall. I’d prefer they didn’t have the HH,but it makes them cheaper on the secondary market. If you like blued/walnut traditional revolvers what else are you going to buy? Would you prefer they didn’t make them at all? “cause that’s the choice: buy a pretty nice gun at market price or pine for the days and end up with shelves full of tupperware and brushed SS.
To answer your question, today at Guns International there are 69 Model 10s, 31 Model 14s, 25 Model 15s, 57 Model 19s, 9 Model 24s, 53 Model 25s, 61 Model 27s. . .
Most of them are blued, most have walnut grips, and very few have Hillary Holes. None of the 19s do.
How about a 99% 19-3, 2.5″, blued, 1970s vintage pinned/recessed, in its original box, for $1350? Or, a 99% 4″ blued 19-4, original box with papers and tools, for $999?
Ask, and ye shall receive.
In the year 1970. When I was discharged from the Marines. My uncle told me to go to the sport shop in Cranston R.I. He stated that since I already had my Dirty Harry 44 Mag. I should take a look at the new .357 M-19.Saw it and bought it.Even to this day I still shoot both my 44&357.They both run like fine tuned clocks.
Two points: The actual barrel is made from stainless, while the encapsulating shroud is carbon steel (the blued part). A stainless barrel should hold up better than an equivalent carbon steel part.
Also, regarding the “Hilary hole”………. what harm does it do, really, other than being a psychological reminder of some bad, old days? Consider the howl the idiotic MSM and Brady-types would raise if S&W were to eliminate a “safety feature”, like the hole? Never forget the hole is “for the kids”. Ridiculous, obviously, but Smith has to cover its backside on this.
Just found out about the model 19-9 and I love gotta have one.jerry miculek said it’s the best one yet.already have a model 69. Also a model 29, and three model 10s. Actually 1 pre model ten. When I got it it had set for a long time and was completely dry of any lube. I disassembled it, cleaned and lubed it. All of the look as though they have no wear and it and all the others shoot great.