If in good shape, that’s a deal.

The 39 was the first American made double action semi auto. It’s a classic.

 

Design of the 39-2 was US’s first double action semi auto. Original model was the 39 and after some mods, the 39-2 came along. Except for a limited all steel version, the frame is aluminum. Excellent feel in the hand. I’ve owned a few over the years. Still have one circa mid 1980’s and is the occasional carry gun. $400 depending on condition and where you live sounds about right. Have seen them for less but also for more.

 

Big S&W gen 1, 2, and 3 guy here. Love those guns. Never had a 39, but i own or have owned several of other iterations. I want ANY gen 2 (as I've never had a gen 2), a 39, and one of the large bores (45 or 10mm). My favorite of the ones I've owned is my CS40.

You can't go wrong with these old tanks. Parts are a little difficult to find, but I've never had a long term issue. 400 is a decent price. They are starting to become popular in certain groups, so the price is probably only going up. If it were me, I'd do 400 for it.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

Unless your collecting old auto Smiths you probably could put that $400 towards a better, higher capacity modern 9mm that would not give you the same challenges in maintaining (parts).

The 39 was a solid gun, at some point almost got adopted by the US Army

 

There is a 70s era colt commander someone has for sale too

 

I do like the S&W autos, and have owned a few. For me, they suffer from the biggest drawback to my favorite semi-autos the 1911 and Hi-Power, in that like the Berretas, they have a slide mounted safety / decocker and it works backwards.
The 39s are a classic and I love their blue and wood design

 

I would not worry about parts. I have had many 39-2’s through the years all were reliable and accurate. Never had a need for parts.

 

To me and what I've owned, aside from a Belgian HP, the 39-2 is probably the best fitting semi-auto in my hand pistol..

 

If it's in decent shape $400 is a very good deal. Great feel and history with the 39.

 

I have seen the 39-2 go for more and some less. I've had mine for 35 plus years. The safety does take some getting used to. I liked the 39-2 so much I got it's little brother 3913 for EDC.
If it's in goid shape, I think you'll like it.

 

Good pistols, only really one downside is that they seem to multiply. Now the detrimental part is the wallet.

 

Buy. It.

 

Nice gun, bought mine new 40+ years ago. Don't shoot it much now but no worries if I choose too. Yup on it feels great in the hand. Never carried it but would. Don't think I'd shoot +P in it though.

Jim

 

They are "class" guns. The bluing if intact will be the very deep and confluent blue as on their revolvers and for the time, were far better looking than the same year 1911 from Colt.

 

I’m still looking for one

 

Me too!

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

I love those Smiths. I never had a 39 but I used to own it’s double stack brother. Had a nice one I bought from @bac1023 that I let go. Now my only one is a beast 10mm that I’ll be buried with. Used it to outdo the local kids on July 4th! LOL

 

Not to throw a wet blanket on the topic, but my recollection is that after IL State Police adopted M39s in the late 60s or early 70s, they had enough issues with them that it deterred some other agencies from going to autos earlier.

Of course, my memory is contrary to internet lore, that has the M39 as the pioneer of LE autos, so take it for what it is worth. Instead, as I recall my agency (LAPD) evaluated these and rejected them (that is based on hearsay as I was not involved in any firearms evals) and did not start transitioning to autos until around 83-84 when reliable DA autos (primarily Ber 92) came along.

Maybe M39s work better with modern ammo?

There is a 70s era colt commander someone has for sale too

I would definitely invest in an older Colt first, but that is me.

 

Not to throw a wet blanket on the topic, but my recollection is that after IL State Police adopted M39s in the late 60s or early 70s, they had enough issues with them that it deterred some other agencies from going to autos earlier.

Of course, my memory is contrary to internet lore, that has the M39 as the pioneer of LE autos, so take it for what it is worth. Instead, as I recall my agency (LAPD) evaluated these and rejected them (that is based on hearsay as I was not involved in any firearms evals) and did not start transitioning to autos until around 83-84 when reliable DA autos (primarily Ber 92) came along.

Maybe M39s work better with modern ammo?



I would definitely invest in an older Colt first, but that is me.

But was it the gun or was it people using it, armorer's supporting them? Lots of agencies report issues / don't issue autos / 1911's because many LEO are not gun guys and the guns require a little more maintenance than a wheelgun back in the day or a Glock today. One of the reasons so many departments went to Glock was simplicity, something goes wrong there is no gun smithing you just replace parts.........

 

Posting this one: #1 = to show it and #2 = to remind all (if they needed to be reminded) that KGB (Karl Beining) is just great to deal with;

 

Posting this one: #1 = to show it and #2 = to remind all (if they needed to be reminded) that KGB (Karl Beining) is just great to deal with;

She's a beauty! I have one it's a keeper, then you need a 59 and then the Gen 3 guns.

 

I want to say that the ISP was the first to use any auto and it was the 39.

 

I recall as a kid admiring the Berettas carried around here by the police. They seemed so big. A 39 is elegant by comparison.

 

Simon:

I think in that era, if any PD in the US was tactically minded and had a firearms unit that knew its stuff, it was LAPD and they would not have hesitated to adopt an auto that was solid. But my recollection is that the 39 rightly or wrongly had a bad rep in LE because of teething problems with ISP.

 

Here's my 39.