Posted: 3/17/2015 7:17:33 PM EDT
|
What calibers can the 4506 handgun come in?
What is your reccomendation and why? Is looks like a very sturdy and accurate firearm. |
|
Quoted:
What calibers can the 4506 handgun come in? What is your reccomendation and why? Is looks like a very sturdy and accurate firearm. +100. This. Very accurate and reliable. Most of them you can shoot a mag of rounds through it. Then pic up the empty brass, load the mag with empties. You can the cycle the empties by hand. They will feed every time. That is reliable. |
|
4506 only comes in .45 ACP, at least from the factory. (I don't know if anyone has re-chambered one, I guess it's possible. )
S&W 3rd gens are sturdy, I'm sure the 4506 is fairly accurate for a duty/combat mass produced gun. But they did make some similar models of higher quality if you want more out it. Google S&W 745 and 845. The 845 is a performance center gun, very nice. What caliber do you prefer? There are other models that may be of more interest to you.... |
|
45-06 only came in .45acp.
Avoid them. I had three in a row of each iteration. None of them worked. The last version would not work clean. After firearms practice, you had to clean it and then shoot two magazines and leave it dirty. Reason: It unlocked too soon and the extractor tore a chunk out of the rim in a clean chamber while the pressure was up and tried to feed a second round. Nightmare. When clearing, the case was loose and fell out of the chamber. Ha Ha. Dirty, it unlocked slower, ejected, and was nice to shoot. $ refunded for gun as no way to make it work clean. |
| The third gen S&W's are widely known as being very well built and having excellent quality and reliability. The negative report above is actually the first one I've seen posted. I'd say, considering the one negative post and the countless positive posts, it's pretty fair to say they are a good choice. Their only downfall was being heavy and big but that was what made them so tough and well loved. They were extremely popular when I was a police officer, I'd own several right now if I could afford it. |
|
Sorry for the negative report. I had three of them that were personally owned approved for duty weapons.
The first was the original .45acp design. The second was the .45acp design built on the frame with the changes for 10mm Smith versions numbered in the 10XX series. The third was a redesign back to a pure .45acp design. The first two would not feed and eject and were replaced by S&W, each in turn. This was when they were having to modify magazine followers and feed lips and put in little dimples here and there to keep rounds from popping out. The third unlocked too early while the pressure was up, trapped the case against the chamber walls, tore hunks out of the rims of Federal 230 HydraShok as the slide opened, and then tried to double feed a new round. That is what it did clean and lubed. As soon as the chamber and internals were slightly dirty, it slowed opening and operated perfectly. This was in the middle of the 1076 debacle with endless function problems with the 10mms. My employer obviously did not tolerate carrying a dirty gun. The federal rep to the agency gave up apologizing for them. I liked the guns except for they did not work. They were easy to shoot well and accurate. The heavy slide just chugged back and forth over the heavy frame. They were flat enough, like a 1911, that even with adjustable sights, they were easy to hide under a suit. The P220 I bought with the full cash refund was a gem to carry, a beast to shoot as it rocked with a high bore line, broke its frame at the takedown notch, and got replaced also. It worked very well as long as Federal loaded the exact spec length of HydraShok. (For those with no knowledge of history, in the early and mid 1990's, .45acp P220 Americans, not the heel mag release guns, were fracturing frames radiating upwards from holes for the slidestop. SIG simply replaced a ton of the frames when they broke and changed the shape of the holes in new ones so they stopped stress fracturing.) New Paragraph: As to S&W, I have been told that our agency was hard on guns because we actually shot them a couple thousand or more rounds a year and they could not take it. This was compared to the average cop that fired 50 rounds a year or the homeowner who loaded them and put them in a drawer and never fired them. (As a Shield 9mm and M&P340 user, a believer that S&W made the finest revolvers ever seen, and a S&W AR shooter, the above is just the facts the same way the BG380 I had was a functional disaster.) |
|
Quoted:
Sorry for the negative report. I had three of them that were personally owned approved for duty weapons. The first was the original .45acp design. The second was the .45acp design built on the frame with the changes for 10mm Smith versions numbered in the 10XX series. The third was a redesign back to a pure .45acp design. The first two would not feed and eject and were replaced by S&W, each in turn. This was when they were having to modify magazine followers and feed lips and put in little dimples here and there to keep rounds from popping out. The third unlocked too early while the pressure was up, trapped the case against the chamber walls, tore hunks out of the rims of Federal 230 HydraShok as the slide opened, and then tried to double feed a new round. That is what it did clean and lubed. As soon as the chamber and internals were slightly dirty, it slowed opening and operated perfectly. This was in the middle of the 1076 debacle with endless function problems with the 10mms. My employer obviously did not tolerate carrying a dirty gun. The federal rep to the agency gave up apologizing for them. I liked the guns except for they did not work. They were easy to shoot well and accurate. The heavy slide just chugged back and forth over the heavy frame. They were flat enough, like a 1911, that even with adjustable sights, they were easy to hide under a suit. The P220 I bought with the full cash refund was a gem to carry, a beast to shoot as it rocked with a high bore line, broke its frame at the takedown notch, and got replaced also. It worked very well as long as Federal loaded the exact spec length of HydraShok. I have been told that our agency was hard on guns because we actually shot them a couple thousand or more rounds a year and they could not take it. This was compared to the average cop that fired 50 rounds a year or the homeowner who loaded them and put them in a drawer and never fired them. (As a Shield 9mm and M&P340 user, a believer that S&W made the finest revolvers ever seen, and a S&W AR shooter, the above is just the facts the same way the BG380 I had was a functional disaster.) Not going to believe any of that nonsense about P220s based on my own personal experience with P220s of which I own two. My daily carry pistol, a P220 Carry Equinox with 11,000 rounds through it and remains in excellent shape, and a P220 Super Match that is closing in on 20,000 rounds with lots of barrel hood wear but hardly any frame rail wear at all. Both pistol's feed any and all ammunition including 230 grain FMJ range crap and all sorts of duty ammunition including P45HST2, RA45B, Federal Hi-Shock, and Gold Dot, and have been extraordinarilly reliable. You assert that P220s work only for LEOs who shoot 50 rounds a year through them, or private citizens who never shoot them and lock them away in their nightstand drawers ? And that P220s can't hold up to a couple of thousand rounds a year? It's ridiculous. Sorry. |
|
Quoted:
The third gen S&W's are widely known as being very well built and having excellent quality and reliability. The negative report above is actually the first one I've seen posted. I'd say, considering the one negative post and the countless positive posts, it's pretty fair to say they are a good choice. Their only downfall was being heavy and big but that was what made them so tough and well loved. They were extremely popular when I was a police officer, I'd own several right now if I could afford it. I don't give any credence at all to that negative review. None, zero, nada, zip...... |
|
Missed editing in a paragraph break which I now put in above post to separate two different ideas.
The SIG issue was simple, but fatal to the guns. The S&W issues were endemic. -1-2-3, no difference. I assume some police departments are now dumping a bunch of 4506s into LEO sales outlets. The reason they look so nice is that they were so little used in the sense of firing in many cases. http://www.cabelas.com/product/Smith-Wesson-Special-Buy-Model-ACP/1210051.uts $440 for a 25 year old gun of dubious functionality and spotty repair parts. A way better buy is the older Glocks also being rotated through LEO sales these days. You can believe what ever you want. If you want nostalga, buy one. I used the damn things as they had issue after issue with the 4 digit Smiths. Try finding a berillyum copper trigger return spring for them after they break ever 1500-2000 rounds in the 6906 series. Keep in mind that it was once widely known that the Earth was flat and that all Glocks worked 100%. |
|
Quoted:
Not going to believe any of that nonsense about P220s based on my own personal experience with P220s of which I own two. My daily carry pistol, a P220 Carry Equinox with 11,000 rounds through it and remains in excellent shape, and a P220 Super Match that is closing in on 20,000 rounds with lots of barrel hood wear but hardly any frame rail wear at all. Both pistol's feed any and all ammunition including 230 grain FMJ range crap and all sorts of duty ammunition including P45HST2, RA45B, Federal Hi-Shock, and Gold Dot, and have been extraordinarilly reliable. You assert that P220s work only for LEOs who shoot 50 rounds a year through them, or private citizens who never shoot them and lock them away in their nightstand drawers ? And that P220s can't hold up to a couple of thousand rounds a year? It's ridiculous. Sorry. Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry for the negative report. I had three of them that were personally owned approved for duty weapons. The first was the original .45acp design. The second was the .45acp design built on the frame with the changes for 10mm Smith versions numbered in the 10XX series. The third was a redesign back to a pure .45acp design. The first two would not feed and eject and were replaced by S&W, each in turn. This was when they were having to modify magazine followers and feed lips and put in little dimples here and there to keep rounds from popping out. The third unlocked too early while the pressure was up, trapped the case against the chamber walls, tore hunks out of the rims of Federal 230 HydraShok as the slide opened, and then tried to double feed a new round. That is what it did clean and lubed. As soon as the chamber and internals were slightly dirty, it slowed opening and operated perfectly. This was in the middle of the 1076 debacle with endless function problems with the 10mms. My employer obviously did not tolerate carrying a dirty gun. The federal rep to the agency gave up apologizing for them. I liked the guns except for they did not work. They were easy to shoot well and accurate. The heavy slide just chugged back and forth over the heavy frame. They were flat enough, like a 1911, that even with adjustable sights, they were easy to hide under a suit. The P220 I bought with the full cash refund was a gem to carry, a beast to shoot as it rocked with a high bore line, broke its frame at the takedown notch, and got replaced also. It worked very well as long as Federal loaded the exact spec length of HydraShok. I have been told that our agency was hard on guns because we actually shot them a couple thousand or more rounds a year and they could not take it. This was compared to the average cop that fired 50 rounds a year or the homeowner who loaded them and put them in a drawer and never fired them. (As a Shield 9mm and M&P340 user, a believer that S&W made the finest revolvers ever seen, and a S&W AR shooter, the above is just the facts the same way the BG380 I had was a functional disaster.) Not going to believe any of that nonsense about P220s based on my own personal experience with P220s of which I own two. My daily carry pistol, a P220 Carry Equinox with 11,000 rounds through it and remains in excellent shape, and a P220 Super Match that is closing in on 20,000 rounds with lots of barrel hood wear but hardly any frame rail wear at all. Both pistol's feed any and all ammunition including 230 grain FMJ range crap and all sorts of duty ammunition including P45HST2, RA45B, Federal Hi-Shock, and Gold Dot, and have been extraordinarilly reliable. You assert that P220s work only for LEOs who shoot 50 rounds a year through them, or private citizens who never shoot them and lock them away in their nightstand drawers ? And that P220s can't hold up to a couple of thousand rounds a year? It's ridiculous. Sorry. He's referring to the first iterations of the American produced SIGs. There were a lot of cracked frames until SIG modified the design, and then the problem because the rails wearing. SIG made some additional modifications to the frames in the late 2000s to address the rails wearing. It was prone to happen in high round count guns that were not greased or oiled properly - one of the aftermarket guys (I think Bruce Gray maybe) even developed a method for fixxing frames that had too much wear. New 220s should not have any problems with rails cracking or wearing too fast (even older ones you wouldn't see problems until 10-15k rounds on a gun that wasn't oiled or greased properly). This was a verified problem that did exist, and SIG addressed. You need to take a step back with the whole "this is nonsense based on my sample size of two" stuff and research it, |
|
I owned a 4506 for a few years. It worked well enough for me but I didn't care for the sights, the weight, or the slide mounted safety. It was accurate but not Oh My God accurate. The DA trigger was pretty good.
The S&W 3rd gen guns are serviceable enough but have never kindled any sort of excitement for me. In the end I got rid of it and don't miss it. |
|
Major, thank you for the update. I am glad to know SIG fixed those things. Unraveling the issues at the time in the 1990s was no fun. As soon as you learned a gun, it got switched, replaced, broken, or junked on dependability issues.
But, also, keep in mind, that in that era, the 1990s, the FB1 said the heck with it and finally got something that worked: Gen2 Glock 22 and 23s in 1997. (They always ejected and never into your face.) |