S&W 60-1

[Salamander]

After a little more research... the front sight is supposed to be higher, almost triangular. See the photo in post #2 at https://www.smithandwessonforums.com...le-sights.html and compare to the more rounded profile in my photo at the top of this thread.

Some idiot ground it down. They did a nice job of it and I had to put a magnifier on it to be sure... but the front transition is uneven, it's been ground.

Well, let's hope those 110's I loaded the other night, plus a bit of grit cleaned out from under the rear sight, get it closer. If not maybe it does get magnas and go in the safe to look pretty. That would be a shame, because other than POI it's accurate and fun to shoot.

[Trooper224]

Your gun was made at the begining of the S&W era where we called the company, "The gun of the week club". S&W was trying to dig themselves out of one of their periods of nonexistent QC. They were trying to get their mojo back, which they did for a while. As part of their strategy they started introducing almost endless variants of nearly every handgun in their line up. They put out a lot of really strange or really cool guns during that time, depending on your point of view.

[Salamander]

Your gun was made at the beginning of the S&W era where we called the company, "The gun of the week club". S&W was trying to dig themselves out of one of their periods of nonexistent QC. They were trying to get their mojo back, which they did for a while. As part of their strategy they started introducing almost endless variants of nearly every handgun in their line up. They put out a lot of really strange or really cool guns during that time, depending on your point of view.

They're still kind of doing that. Maybe it's because my focus in business school was management and I always hated marketing class, and those priorities have pretty much held through my work career... but I never understood the strategy of making so many variants that no one can keep them all straight. Trying to be all things to all people just results in higher production costs, higher marketing costs, and smaller production runs.

I realized earlier today that if absolutely necessary, I could get by with three revolvers. A big-bore N-frame (29 or similar) for bear country, a 4-inch K-frame 357 or 38 (19, 66, or similar), and an airweight J-frame for NPE's. Maybe after retirement I'll actually do something like that, because simple is good even if it's sometimes less fun. But then like most everyone else here I'm not the typical consumer. And I really should sell a few of the things I never shoot, I'm better with a pre-lock S&W than with a Ruger or a new Colt so why do I still have those other things?

Anyway... over lunch I drove out to the range, no one there on a rainy Tuesday when it's only open to RSO's, and ran a few 110-grain JHPs loaded to +p level. Not as bad as before, but still about 3-4 inches high.



The upper group is the Model 60. The lower group is centered on POA; I shot that group with my Model 19-5, a worn example which is about the same 1980s vintage as the 60. Just making sure it wasn't me, and it wasn't. The 19 hit exactly where I aimed it. Both were moderate cadence double-action, about one shot per second. The recoil of the 60 was not bad at all, until I shot the 19 and could barely feel the recoil with those light bullets in a 30-something oz gun.

Oh, and a cool thing about those approx 1,000 fps 110 gr handloads... put six out of the 19 at the 100-yard steel, and hit with all six.

So my best guess is that given the era, someone tried to regulate the sights of the 60 for treasury load and took off too much metal. It will look nice as a curiosity in the safe, and didn't cost very much.

It was a good reminder that I should really just use the Model 19, which feels like part of me and is just easy to shoot.