S&w 5904

[Redneck]

A guy I did some work for wants to give me a S&W 5904. His total bill is 250.00 . What can someone tell me about this firearm. Its in good condition with holster wear and has fixed low profile factory sights with a square trigger guard. Any info appreciated. Thanks

[Bawanna]

Should be a decent and reliable gun. I've had a 59 and a 39, the earlier version of this and never had issues.

The ones on gunbroker right now are listed around the 400 dollar range so the value is apparently there.

[jocko]

u better jump on that. I haven't seen one of those in many of years. I think at one time the Illinois State boys went to the 5904. I think at first they carried the model 39 when it was first introdooshed...

[DeaconKC]

Yup, the ISP troopers nearly rioted when they switched from the S&W to Glocks. Excellent guns with great sights and utterly reliable. You ca swap the grip panels from a straight to a curved backstrap.

[kiki]

smith and wesson 5904 are very nice guns, they were premier weapons back in the 80s...tough and reliable...you can still get plenty of 15 rnd mags for them...and easy to strip and clean......$250 in good condition is a steal....

[berettabone]

It's a rugged, beefy, steel firearm that will take plenty of abuse.............not that that's what you'd want to do............well made, tough firearm. Good payment.

[CJB]

Its not steel. Its aluminum frame and backstrap, steel slide and barrel, with steel furniture and lockwork.

[berettabone]

It's a rugged, beefy, steel firearm that will take plenty of abuse.............not that that's what you'd want to do............well made, tough firearm. Good payment.
Like I said...............

[Redneck]

Picked up the 5904 the other night. Has a lot of finish wear and the barrel may need to be replaced. Gonna shoot it tomorrow before I make the barrel call. I'm gonna keep it in my truck so the finish is not that important. But the feel of it is really good. Let you all know later how it shoots. Later Redneck

[CJB]

Even without seeing it, you most likely do not need your barrel replaced. I spent more than ten years working on 39 and 59 series Smiths, and with the one or two exceptions due to some really questionable metallurgy, even the crappiest barrel didn't do worse than new pistols.

The 39 and 59, and to an extent the 45 were not noted for spectacular accuracy.... the common wear spot is the front upper section of the hood. Those can get mauled up pretty well, but still continue to shoot ok.

The real problem with that series of pistol is the double action notches on the hammer and trigger bar. Those parts are particularly convoluted in their operation, a sort of double set of notches. Those were plagued by soft metal (trigger bar) and poor hardening (hammer). Smith corrected the hammer issue while never admitting a problem (thank you Bangor Punta). I think, probably your ALUMINUM frame 5904 is past that debacle, unless its a very early one. The 4 digit pistols were better in that regard, but tended to have looser fit in the slide and barrel.

All that said - you'll probably find that the pistol shoots better than you can. Keep that in mind before shelling out for a new barrel. And.... DO NOT go with a used barrel, as they do need to be individually fit for vertical clearance..... which is another reason for mauled upper front chamber hoods.


Not to be contrary or for any reason other than clarity....

39/59 and all the dash variations are aluminum frames - except - a very few 39's that were steel framed and rare as hens teeth. The steel frame 39's were... very few, very early in production as a sort of experimental thing. I've never seen one. They maybe made less than 100. Maybe less than 50. All the rest, aluminum frame.

Three digit 39/59 were the 4x9, and 6x9 series. I'm not sure if they made a 5x9 series. The 4 denotes aluminum frame, the 5 would be steel, and 6 would be stainless. They also intrudced the 469/669 series short version of the basic model 59 (which had become the 459/659). The 645 was also brought out at this time.

Very soon thereafter, they went to a four digit number, which was 3904 and 5904 (or 3905/3906 and 5905/5906.

In all - the steel frame "5" designation pistols didn't sell very well, because of the vast track record of reliability of the aluminum frames and because if you were going to have the weight of steel, why not make it stainless? The steel frame versions were only slightly less than the stainless in cost.

Hope that helps to clarify.

[Longitude Zero]

My 659 has thousands of rounds thru it with no problems. S&W pistols are top notch, I won't say the same for their Sigma line as I have seen too many oops with them.

[CJB]

Their Smegma line was nearly a direct copy of Glock anyway.... for which they got taken to court, and for which they got their heads handed to them on a platter by Glocks lawyers... and the Federal Govt., and the City of Boston.

[Longitude Zero]

To me the M&P are just a double down on a bad design aka Sigma upgraded. When it comes to wheel guns S&W beats ALL COMERS IMHO!!!

[CJB]

unsure on total performance, but for looks.... Python 6", followed by almost any S&W, then the Ruger 5" Redhawk.

Smith makes good revolvers, and they mucked them up too with the keylock.

[O'Dell]

I love the old 3rd gen all metal S&W's. I do prefer the alloy frame models though. Currently, I only have one, a CS45, but I have had several over the years. I've found them to be 100% reliable and they will eat anything.

[Redneck]

Took her out and shot it today. Combat accuracy is OK but I'm not use to the trigger yet. I'm use to block and kahr pistols. Gonna put it on a bench just to see how it does. Like I said gonna be a truck gun. Unless someone tries to trade me a cw. That's very unlikely so I guess I'll buy another mag and shoot it.