Smith and Wesson 27 and 27-2

[Huntolive]

What are the practical differences between original 27 and 27-2? Especially in terms of accuracy, build quality and durability, and value.

Also was there a previous version to the 27, that was just called the 357?

 

[earlthegoat2]

Also was there a previous version to the 27, that was just called the 357?

I think it was just called the “357 Magnum”. Before that it was the Registered Magnum.

 

[fxvr5]

The first guns S&W made in 1935 were called the Registered Magnum.

Wikipedia has a page on the Model 27: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_&_Wesson_Model_27

 

[Jim Watson]

I doubt there is an operational difference between M27 and M27-2.
In equal condition, a M27 would likely have a higher dollar value than M27-2.

Yes, there were several predecessor variants. In reverse order.
M27-2 Last of the "pinned and recessed" guns. Three screw frame.
M27-1 First with left hand thread extractor rod. Four screw frame. One year.
M27 Model number assigned 1957.
.357 Magnum. "Pre 27." Same gun before model numbers. 5 then 4 screw.
.357 Magnum. "Transitional Postwar." Old long action made 1948-1950. Very rare.
.357 Magnum. "non-registered." Late pre-war.
.357 Magnum. The "Registered Magnum"

Quotation marks around collectors' terms made up to distinguish variants, not S&W nomenclature.

 

[cfullgraf]

S&W first started producing the N frame 357 Magnum in the mid-1930's. The "Registered Magnum" moniker was used for a while when the 357 magnum N-frames were first produced.

They started putting model numbers on the guns in the late 1950s. The dash number reflects some engineering changes that were made to the guns. This is for all S&W models, not just the N-frame 357 Magnum models.

The Model 27-2's were made from the early 1960's until the late 1970's to early 1980's. I'm not sure what changes were made before and after the -2 production runs. although the Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson guns details the engineering changes for the differ models.

In the early 1980's is when S&W went away from pinned barrels and recessed cylinders so that may be when the Model 27-2 became the Model 27-3.

If you are into Smith and Wesson guns, the "Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson" by Jim Supica and Richard Nahas is an excellent resource to have on hand.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Form the S&W forum for what it's worth:
Engineering and Production Changes Before 1957, produced as The 357 Magnum (see previous section).
• 27 (1957): Stamping of model number continued as the Model 27.
• 27-1 (1960): Change extractor rod, right hand to left hand thread.
• 27-2 (1961): Cylinder stop changed, eliminate trigger guard screw.
• 1967: 6 1/ 2" barrel discontinued.
• 1968: Delete diamond grip.
• 1969: Change to “N” serial prefix.
• 1975: Target trigger, target hammer, Patridge front sight on 6" and 8-3/ 8" barrels, introduced with Goncalo Alves target stocks and case.
• 1979: 3-1/ 2" and 5" barrel discontinued, 4" introduced with red ramp and white outline rear sight.
• 1980: Target stocks standard.
• 27-3 (1982): Eliminate cylinder counterbore and pinned barrel (27-3 made 1982 - 1988 plus 14 guns in 1999). Small change in cylinder length to 1.57"
• 1986: Discontinue nickel finish.
• 27-4 (1988): New yoke retention system/ radius stud package/ floating hand.
• 27-5 (1990): Longer stop notch in cylinder (27-5 reported made 1989 - 1992, plus 110 guns in 1997).
• 1992: Discontinue 4" and 8-3/ 8" barrel.
• 27-6 (1993): Hogue grips, drill and tap frame, change rear sight leaf, change extractor.
• 1994: Model 27 discontinued.
• 27-7 (2000): Performance Center version/ 8-shot, built on the new N frame, with floating firing pin and extended frame lug– Special.

Todd.

 

[Rock185]

I had a 4 screw, and two 27-2s. Older guns, pre War, pre 27,etc., tend to be more highly valued. But any difference in build quality, accuracy, and durability of my 27-2s and older 4 screw .357 was not apparent to me. Wish I'd kept all three, but the quality, accuracy and durability of the 27-2 I purchased new back in the '70s seems to be holding up just fine.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Also was there a previous version to the 27, that was just called the 357?

In 1930 Smith and Wesson offered a new 38 Special revolver built on the N frame, larger than the standard K frame. It was designed to fire the high powered 38 Super Police cartridge. Because these revolvers were built on the N frame, often reserved for 44 calibers, but because they were chambered for 38 Special, they were called the 38/44 revolvers. There were two versions, one with fixed sights called the 38/44 Heavy Duty, and one with adjustable sights called the 38/44 Outdoorsman. This 38/44 Heavy Duty left the factory in 1932.






This 38/44 Outdoorsman left the factory in 1933.






This view of the cylinder of the Heavy Duty shows how much steel surrounded the chambers in these revolvers. It was felt the steel in use at the time was not strong enough to chamber the 38 Super Police in the smaller cylinder of a K frame.






The problem was that the 38 Super Police cartridge could be chambered in a standard K frame 38, possibly with disastrous effects. So in 1935 S&W in in partnership with the Winchester ammunition division produced a new revolver for the new 357 Magnum cartridge. This cartridge was roughly 1/8" longer than a standard 38 Special, so it could not be chambered in a standard K frame 38 Special revolver. The new revolver was simply called The 357 Magnum. It was built on the same N frame as the 38/44 revolvers, except the chambers were bored for the longer cartridge. Smith and Wesson started a marketing campaign with the new revolver. Each revolver was custom built to the specifications of the owner. Barrels were available from 3 1/2" long to 8 3/4" long. There were seven different front sights available and matching adjustable rear sights. Various grips were available, with or without grip adapters. Owners got a certificate of Registration with a registration number matching a registration number stamped on the frame under the yoke. Because of this these first 357 Magnum revolvers were called the Registered Magnums. The price was $60, a very hefty sum in the 1930s, $15 more than any other revolvers produced by S&W at the time. Despite the fact that it was the height of The Great Depression, S&W was overwhelmed with orders, and by 1938 The Registered Magnum program ended. After that, these revolvers were simply called The 357 Magnum.

Sorry, I do not have a photo of a Registered Magnum. Yet.

In 1957 Smith and Wesson changed over to a Model Name system. At this time The 357 Magnum became the Model 27.

This Model 27 No Dash left the factory in 1959. Interestingly enough it came with a The 357 Magnum box with a sticker added to the end that says Model 27. S& W never throws anything away.






The Model 27 is/was the only revolver made by S&W to retain the chekered top strap, rear sight tang, and barrel rib of the old Registered Magnum






As you can see, from the earlier posting, over the years S&W continued to discontinue features.

Other than that, the Standard Catalog of S&W says that there is a 25% premium for original nickel finishes.

 

[Jim Watson]

I've always wondered about the "recessed cylinder" of S&W Magnums, 1935-1982.
It served no purpose, I assume they just did it because they could on their top of the line revolvers.

 

[mcb]

The recessed cylinders aways seemed like a bad idea to me. One more place to trap gunk and cause headspace issues and potential more drag on the recoil shield.

 

[fxvr5]

I've always wondered about the "recessed cylinder" of S&W Magnums, 1935-1982.
It served no purpose, I assume they just did it because they could on their top of the line revolvers.

Elmer Keith mentions it in his 1935 article, " . . . it absolutely precludes the risk of injury to the shooter or a bystander from particles of flying brass in case the head of a shell cracks off or burst."

 

[mcb]

I had a sever over pressure event in an N-frame that was not recessed and had no issues. The liability of crud build up versus the very low rate of case head rupture makes it not seem worth it IMHO.

 

[murf]

I've always wondered about the "recessed cylinder" of S&W Magnums, 1935-1982.
It served no purpose, I assume they just did it because they could on their top of the line revolvers.

weak case bases on the old balloon-head cases (still done on all 22lr revolvers). reload a 38, or 44, special case to magnum pressures and the case will blow out without the extra rim support.

my opinion on the subject,

murf

 

[Huntolive]

Dan Wesson revolvers like the 15-2 and the 715 have recessed cylinders and I greatly appreciate that they do as I never have issues with the rims rising up and rubbing or catching on anything.
I definitely think the recess cylinders are an advantage and that it's only due to a lack of attention to detail or willingness and production not to have that feature.

By the way sincere thanks to all of your detailed and extremely helpful answers!

 

[mcb]

I don't believe 357 mag or 44 Mag was ever made using balloon case head manufacturing.

 

[peacemaker45]

Elmer Keith mentions it in his 1935 article, " . . . it absolutely precludes the risk of injury to the shooter or a bystander from particles of flying brass in case the head of a shell cracks off or burst."

That's a feature that would be important to Elmer Keith...

 

[Jim Watson]

Although not as high pressure as a Magnum, a .38-44 load in balloon head brass would still be a risk, and they didn't recess those rims.
Any road, by the time the .44 Magnum came out, the risk was negligible - I have seen one semi-balloon .44,Special ever, and even Elmer dealt with those - and just doesn't exist for the .41 Magnum.
Salesmanship.

 

[Huntolive]

Recessed cylinders just hold the bullets in place better and that's the Future I like in my guns that have. Anything without recessed cylinders ends up seeming sloppy in comparison.
Recessing keeps the bullets from moving around after you load them which is a really irritating phenomenon in revolvers that are not recessed.

Now listen I have plenty of revolvers that are not recessed and many of them shoot just fine and I'm happy to have them

 

[Huntolive]

But back to the actual topic of this thread what makes the model 27 and the model 27 - 2 so special and particularly how are they as shooters? cuz I plan to put it to work not just keep it as a safe Queen

 

[Jim Watson]

The Model 27 and 27-2 are Special because they are discontinued variants readily identifiable as having been made in a bygone era of craftsmanship.
They are fine shooters as I am sure you will find out when you "put it to work."

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Recessed cylinders just hold the bullets in place better and that's the Future I like in my guns that have. Anything without recessed cylinders ends up seeming sloppy in comparison.
Recessing keeps the bullets from moving around after you load them which is a really irritating phenomenon in revolvers that are not recessed.

That is incorrect.

First of all, let's get our terms correct. It is the Cartridge that you load into the chambers of a revolver, not bullets. Bullets are the projectile that a revolver launches, it is the complete cartridge that is contained and aligned by the chamber of any firearm. At least cartridge firearms, Cap & Ball revolvers are a different story.

Next time you load a revolver with counterbored (recessed) chambers, take a close look. The rims do not actually contact the circumference of the counterbore at all.

It may not be obvious in this photo of my Model 27, but the rims are not actually contacting the circumference of the counterbores at all. There is a space of a few thousandths all around the rims. So how can the counterbores be keeping the cartridges from moving, if they do not contact the counterbores? It is the main portion of the chamber itself, which keeps the cartridges aligned.

Frankly, I have dozens of revolvers without recessed chambers. I fail to see how it can be annoying to have cartridges seated 'sloppily' in a non-recessed chamber. All that is really necessary is that the chamber keeps the cartridge in alignment so that the firing pin will strike the center of the primer. All my non-recessed revolvers do an excellent job of that.





Regarding your earlier comment about Safe Queens, frankly I find that offensive. The implication is that it is somehow wrong to own a firearm and not shoot it. Yes, my Model 27 is a Safe Queen, I freely admit it. Have I fired it? Yes, and the carbon rings are still on the surface of the cylinder to prove it. However it is my Safe Queen, I paid for it and it is mine to do with as I please. I don't take it out to shoot it because the finish is almost perfect and I want it to remain so. I don't keep it locked in the safe to enhance it's value, I just don't want to mar its beautiful finish. I take my Model 28s to the range and shoot them, they are not Safe Queens.

Someday I will start a post with photos of a few other Safe Queens.

 

[Jim Watson]

I consider the recessed chamber rim as seen on S&W Magnums up through -2 to be a disadvantage. It is just another nook to collect fouling and is a ledge to snag a semiwadcutter on the reload.

If you are still using balloon or worse, folded head brass for your heavy reloads, you need the recess.

 

[Huntolive]

Wow Driftwood, let's not get as thin-skinned as Trump

No need to take offense from simple comments.
Sure it makes sense to keep nice gun safe as an investment.
All I was saying is I intend to shoot this gun and perhaps hunt with it so I am interested in functional information on the gun.

Well some people like recessed some people don't I like it and I like the way the rounds are better seated in the chamber and many people seek this feature and are willing to pay a premium for it.
The better shooting revolvers I have tend to be recessed. But I don't really care about that debate at all just looking for info on the heritage of the model 27 and what the guns can Do.

 

[Huntolive]

My new 27-2 it's a complete set not an official Smith & Wesson set but a hog hunting oriented collector set with stag handles on both the revolver and the knives.

Trigger is amazing

 

[Pat Riot]

Wow Driftwood, let's not get as thin-skinned as Trump

Keep your snippy political comments to yourself.




Personally, I like recessed cylinders. I have revolvers with and without them. I see no difference in how they shoot. The recessed cylinder guns look neater. I appreciate the workmanship on them. Sure, it takes an extra step to clean them but I don’t care. I like ‘em.