Smith & Wesson SW-99 compact - Cover Story

Guns Magazine, April, 2004 by Charles E. Petty

There is an undeniable truth in the hand-gun business. First you come up with a gun and then, as sure as God made little green apples, Jr will be stretched, or strunk or both. Compact is in and even if it does nothing but make the gun harder to shoot that's okay with lots of consumers. The latest example of this truth is the SW-99 Compact.

I have frequently said that I like the original Walther P-99 and its offspring the SW-99 in 9mmm .40 S&W and .45 ACP. It is only logical that flier would shrink an ahead, reasonable, compact pistol to meet the demands of a consumer who has bought into the idea that small and light is the way to go when you want to carry a gun. Whether or not it is the best plan if you ever have to shoot it is another issue.

The new compact SW-99 Compact doesn't fall into the "dread to shoot it" category at all but it is rather more rambunctions than the full size versions. We tested one in .40 S&W although a 9mm. Luger chambering is also available.

The differences are few but obvious. There wasn't anything wrong with the middle portion of the pistol so all the lockwork, trigger, takedown and other mechanical stuff the same as the full size pistol. The barrel shrank from 4.1 to 3.4 inches. These dimensions are based on measuring test guns (don't be surprised if the book says 4.0 and 3.5 inches). The magazine capacity fell from 10 to eight and the weight declined from 25.1 to 22.4 ounces. Gone is the light rail ... yee hah.

User Selectable

Other good features are retained. One of the most appealing things about the original P-99 and subsequent S&W versions were the interchangeable backstraps which really made it possible for the pistol to be adapted to fit almost any shooter.

The compact version comes with an extra backstrap so the smaller shooter's hand should be accommodated. There isn't larger one since "hand-filling" and "compact" are kinda' mutually exclusive terms.

S&W also continues to provide a couple of extra front sights to permit the adjustment of elevation should variations in ammo velocity cause the point of impact to be unsatisfactory.

I have never found it necessary to change a front sight on any SW-99 pistol when using standard 180- or 165-grain loads, but ammo with lighter bullets or higher velocities might tend t shoot a bit low necessitating a front sight change. As with the other models the compact's rear sight is adjustable for windage. This one shot right to the sights and needed no adjustments at all.

Novel Trigger Function

The thing that sets the SW-99 pistols apart front other polymer frame guns is the trigger mechanism. While we call get into arguments over what to call the triggers on some, this one comfortable fits the accepted definition of double-action with decocker. Even though it is striker fired, the SW-99 behaves just like other S&W autopistols with one small twist.

When you load the pistol the striker is cocked as indicted by a small red button visible on the rear of the slide. To decock you simply mash the button located on the left side of the slide just forward of the front sight. There is no dual function level like we're used to on most S&W pistols. The double-action pull weighs about 11 pounds with stone spring stacking near the end, but is easily as manageable as any other DA trigger of similar weight. Single-action is 5.5 to 6 pounds and surprisingly crisp.

There's one other element to trigger operation that is a bit different. When the striker is cocked the trigger is in a rearward position just like we'd expect for a single-action, but if you pull the slide back about 0.4" the trigger will reset to a forward position. The gun is still cocked though and it only takes light pressure to move the trigger back to the typical position. Mechanics of the mechanism dictate this behavior. The drill here should be the same as any other DA auto. That is decock if you're not going to fire again immediately.

Even though the compact model is only 2.7 ounces lighter than the full-size pistol I mentioned that the recoil was different. It is much more "twisty" to me. But this raises an interesting observation on the perception of recoil.

Surprising Result

Immutable science tells us that if--everything else being equal--we reduce the weight of a gun we will increase the recoil. But here everything else is not equal because the shorter barrel reduces velocity. This prompted one of those what if experiments on the computer and since I had data for the same ammo fired through both full size and compact SW-99s it was simple to calculate free recoil energy.

Using a Speer factory loaded 180-grain Gold Dot .40 S&W cartridge as the standard, here's the comparison:

                     SW-99    SW-99 Compact

Weights lbs.           1.57        1.40
Velocity fps         992         928
Free recoil ft/lb      8.0         7.9

Yes folks I was surprised too. This opens up the subject of felt recoil, which is an entirely different critter. After I performed this calculation I went back and shot both guns again and the compact gun still was much less comfortable to shoot. "Twisty" is the word I first used and it still applies for me although maybe the somewhat shorter grip alters the way I hold the gun enough to make it feel different.