What do the end numbers stand for in S&W Models 25-2, 25-5, 25-11 etc ?

Variations in the "build" of the revolver. Bear with me as handguns were banned here in UK ten years ago. So I haven't seen a "modern" S & W for a while!

Initially S & W revolvers didn't have model numbers but just model names. So the Model 27 originally was just called the "357 Magnum" and the Model 10 the "Military and Police".

All I can use as an illustration is to tell you what I knew here in UK.

Thus a Model 19-2 would have had a pinned barrel and recessed cylinder for the cartridge rims.

A Model 19-3 (and I'd be happy to be corrected) had a pinned barrel but a flat back cylinder without the recesses for the cartridge rims.

A later 19-? would have also omitted the pinned barrel.

So you can - and this is very very loose - think of the "2" as meaning "second change to the build specification", "3" as "third change to the build specification" and so on.

However it is not always as simple as being a progression 1 to 2 to 3 to 4.

As such as a Model 25-5 actually (and again I'll be happy to be put right) means a Model 25 in 45 Long Colt whereas a Model 25-2 was a Model 25 in 45 ACP.

And thus the Model 25-5 actually existed before any Model 25-3...just to keep it interesting!

Or not!

They designate a change in design, however slight.

Supica's "Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson is about the best reference for S&W. They have a complete listing of models and the engineering/design changes in each model.

According to Supica:

The 25-3 in fact predates the 25-5, (1977 vs 1978). The 25-3 is 45 ACP. The 25-5 is .45LC.

The 25 was discontinued in catelogs in 1991 then came back in 1993 with a 45 ACP 25-10 then was again discontinued in 1999, and was available as special production only until 2001.

The 25-11 is a reintroduction of the Model 25 (ca. 2001) It has the new frame design with a floating firing pin, internal changes.

There is also a 25-11 Heritage Edition that has a color cased, four screw frame, etc.

AZ Pete whats the book say about the 25-13?

Im shoppin for a 45 colt, probably 4" barrel S&W or Ruger redhawk 4"

25-13, ca.2004, Blue finish, 4" barrel, internal lock system; stocking dealer special in .45 Colt.

Keep an eye out for a 25-5, they were available in 4", pre 1982 will also have a pinned barrel. The 25-9 would also be one to look for.

Thanks Pete

S&W model changes...
http://www.handloads.com/misc/Smith.Model.Changes.asp

quote:

The 25-3 in fact predates the 25-5, (1977 vs 1978).

I think that you are right. I was wrong because, ironically, here in UK we saw the 25-5 before we ever saw the 25-3. I guess that there was a whole lot of unsold 25-2 revolvers at the importer and that is why they were "late" in importing the 25-2.

I do know that the arrival of the 25-5 (and "125 Anniversary") caused great excitement. Not to me though I preferred my Model 29-2 and pre-Model 57!

JD, you might also consider one of the 625's, if you don't have your heart set on blued steel.

The 625 Mountain Gun is a nice set up.

Pete, yea the SW Mountain Gun or Ruger redhawk 4" is what im considering, and searching for a deal, so I saw some farely good prices on older model 25s. Old is good.

Maybe you can advice me on the pros and cons between a Mtn Gun and the Ruger redhawk. Is the S&W a lot nicer, smoother action and trigger, but the Ruger is stronger for heavy loads but has a hard rough trigger? ? ?


.

If a Mountain Gun is what your after look for the 625-7. They are the first generation Mountain Gun in .45 Colt. Pre lock, pre MIM'd lockwork, and generally better fit and finished as issued. Though the pinned 25-5's (and 25-3's) are very nice .45 Colt revolvers. When Smith stopped pinning barrels and offering recessed cylinders for the magnums it was a milestone of the quality dropping off ever so slightly, though present smiths are still fine revolvers.

The Redhawk is in a different class as far as strength and durability is concerned and no N-Frame will long withstand the +P .45 Colt power level that the Ruger will. The Ruger will always bee a few ounces heavier too.

The Mountain Gun will have a better SA trigger pull and the Ruger will be hard pressed to ever match the DA pull of a Smith & Wesson. To me Redhawks to not have a progressive feel to the DA pull that smiths have. They are heavy and seem to load and unload through the trigger pull. I've shot a Bowen tuned Redhawk quite a bit and it was much better than standard issue but still not a Smith and Wesson. The SA pull was fine though.

JD, I think DavidReed pretty well summed it up. The Ruger is stronger, probably more reliable, but heavier. I think the Ruger also has a simpler, more rugged action. The Ruger can be tuned to have a very much improved trigger pull. I would think that if you get a Redhawk you might like to read the Rugerforum.com. Look for posts by a guy that calls himself "Iowegan" he posted a do-it-yourself guide to tuning a Ruger double action. It is worth reading, and doing.

I have a .44 Mag Mountain Gun, truly like it, (wish it was a .45 Colt). But, I don't shoot heavy loads through it on a daily basis. I have it to carry, I have other pistols (.44's and 45's) to "shoot a lot".

Good luck on your search. There would be nothing wrong with getting a .45 Mountain Gun to carry in the field and a .45 Redhawk to shoot a lot. Can't have too many toys.