Newer generations vs older

[asmello44]

This may be a broad/dumb question. When guns come out with newer generations do you feel they are typically better or worth owning? Do you see any need to go out and upgrade your generation firearm to the next generation? Why or why not?

[RJJ 1971]

Felt that way bout glocks in late 90's to early 2000's. Wasted so much money on getting the newest thing. Changed my mind so many times about the caliber I wanted/had to carry. I started making excuses to myself. Lol.

15 years and 4 kids later. I appreciate what I have, settle on what I can afford, and have time to enjoy.

[mauser9]

Personally for me the answer is no. Why? Money don't grow on trees. Satisfied with what I got. Interest in other firearms which take up income. But thats just me. I respect others reasons for improving or upgrading. Like to add I am impressed with the S&W line but glad I bought what I have 15 years back.

[Pef]

Unless the new gen includes a design feature I want or is to improve reliability, no. In fact, I'm still searching for my elusive 60-7 (I have two Lady Smiths 60-7's, but no plain Jane 60-7).

Some changes are for cost savings, not improvements.

Some changes are for legal reasons, like The Lock.

Lots of reasons for changes - some are forward moving, some are sideways, and some are backwards.

[model70hunter]

I agree with Pef. I too also believe it it more to reduce manufacturing steps. Like the old 5 screw guns that became 3 screws with the mods. Some were for reliability like the 629 that would upon occasion rotate the cylinder backwards when fired. Or reducing the firing pin hole size on early 586's.

Just like autos or TV's new and improved is the hype to keep sales going.

I have a "pre" Model 27, I do not believe any mod has improved this model to make me want to upgrade.

I have some pre 64 Model 70 Winchesters, since 1964 the model 70 has incurred many mods and upgrades per Winchester. I have owned some newer ones, nice guns but I wouldn't trade any of mine for a newer one.

[Bullet Bob]

An old gun writer named Skeeter Skelton once wrote in the 60's or 70's that people usually thought that the guns made 20-30 years before whatever the current date was were better made than new guns.

I've lived long enough to see the truth in that statement about people and belief.

[BAM-BAM]

I searched and "upgraded" from about 1978 when I got my first 4" model 10 through the early 90s............ by then I'd gotten:

my first 4" 686-0 (1985)

3" Models 65 and 66 (86/87 and 89)

3913,3914 and 3913NL (1991-93)

PC Shorty 9 based on the 6906 (1995/6)



These have been my go to main stays for the past 20 years. I've bought others..... to collect, accumulate and save from LGS.

But more likely than not one of the above is what you will find on my hip. These work for me and I don't see the need to "upgrade" for something that is just "newer"

My Dad was a police officer from 1939 to 1978....... his primary carry guns were bought in 1939 (6" .357magnum) 1946 4" M&P and sometime in the early 50s (2" colt DS)

[Arik]

Generally no. The changes are often minor and cosmetic or the added option is one I can live without or don't need. There have been a few guns that were changed to be marketable to a broader range of customers but that's not too common. One example I can think of is the Walther PPQ. The original had an ambidextrous paddle mag release, like HK. Then Walther changed it to the standard push button, meaning the mags wouldn't interchange and then they announced that they would be dropping the old style. Meaning there would no longer be making the old mags. At this point you had 3 options. Drop Walther all together, buy as many of the old mags as possible or switch to the new style. Otherwise there really is not a lot of changes that warrant a new purchase.

[KSDeputy]

It depends on the gun, what the newer one had changed, etc. For instance, when stainless guns started appearing I did trade my blued guns for stainless.

[Wishoot]

In general, I would say no.

HOWEVER

After shooting my friends M&P 40 FS, I can honestly say that it's much more comfortable, accurate and fun to shoot than my 4006.

[gen3guy]

I just picked up a Model 36 no dash 95% that functions perfectly for $349. I have a Model 10-10 that I purchased new on 1992 for $275. MSRP on both of these "classics" is now north of $700. So...NO!

I fail to see how new revolvers can be so valuable when people are trading their old ones for fifty cents on the dollar credit toward the newest wonder pistol.

Auto pistols may be another story. I might lean towards new.

[Arik]

Originally Posted by Wishoot

In general, I would say no.

HOWEVER

After shooting my friends M&P 40 FS, I can honestly say that it's much more comfortable, accurate and fun to shoot than my 4006.

That's a different gun though not an updated model.

Updated would be the 4006 with a rail or different grip

[asmello44]

I'm just unsure for example jumping from a glock 19 gen 3 to a gen 4... Is something like that worth the jump

[Arik]

Originally Posted by asmello44

I'm just unsure for example jumping from a glock 19 gen 3 to a gen 4... Is something like that worth the jump

For me its not. One doesn't do anything better than the other

[unclebob]

I have a few classics that I bought new in the 70's, a model 27, 36 and 59,then family happened funds dried up for toys. now that I am retired I have been reading reviews and forums looking for new and I am seriously interested in a Walther PPQ.

[Bluecoat76]

These guys know of what they speak. Retired leo, been up and down the gun scale and have settled on s&w wheel guns that I've owned many moons ago. Tried the glocks and had a adc in the house. End of black guns. Cheap? It's not a question of cheap its a question of familiarity and trust. Stay within your generation and comfort zone.

[shouldazagged]

I sold my Glock 19 and 22 years ago. They were both second generation. If I could buy another second-gen 19 I'd jump on it. If fit my hand and just flat worked, as did the G22.

[BigBill]

I think my older N Frames and my NIB present day N Frames are pretty much equal. I'm happy to own both. Let's add the older guns are well used and worn in. There is a difference. I do not replace older guns with newer models.

[GatorFarmer]

My Model 1891 Mauser is good enough, I do not need to be lead astray by those newfangled '93, '96, and '98 models.

[Otreb]

I more a shooter than a collector, so some changes to the newer guns I see as beneficial. WRT S&W revolvers, 1911s and possibly even the Glock, I appreciate the better sights, I appreciate the 'endurance' features on the N frame, I like the 7 and eight shot cylinders, lightweight materials that enable some weight savings, better triggers, less wear on lockwork, etc. I like the changes to the gripframe on the large frame Glocks, the guns have gotten stronger,any they were never especially 'weak'.
The trade-off isn't always worth it of course, there will never be guns like the pre war Colt DAs or pre model S&Ws, the attention to detail or finish quality that went into such guns, but it was a different time when a gun might be several weeks pay, didn't see the kind of round count we take for granted today and routine tune-ups were actually considered normal vs the use and discard mentality we see more today.
I can appreciate both I guess. As long as they shoot.