There is a fellow on Youtube...GUNBLUE490...that did a review of the reissued Model 19. He was enthused, to say the least. He was a Smith trained armorer for a police department. He had his official Smith &
Wesson armorer's binder of the 50(?) things that needed to be fixed on the "old style" 19s. Good review. He was most complimentary. I would like another 19. I wonder if the same "fixes" are included in the reissued model 66?

Yes, the current production Model 66 has the same redesigned features of the current production Model 19.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Got a link to the video? I'd love to see what the 49 other things to be fixed on the older M19's are (other than the forcing cone). My M19-3, which is now 47 years old, runs like a Swiss watch, with an action as smooth as glass. I had no idea there were 50 things needed fixing, I better tear it down now and get cracking, before it falls apart.

A good number of S&W enthusiasts don't want to hear this, but aside from collect ability and some aesthetics, the new S&W revolvers are superior to the old ones in almost every way. Of course the finishes were better back in the day. And yes if you compare the action of a gun that's been fired thousands of times over decades it will be smoother than a new gun, or even an unfired example from the same era. Nostalgia usually overrides facts.

It's a good video and worth watching -- been discussed on the forum many times and the discussions merit a search.

GUNBLUE490 has quality knowledge and observations, and makes a reasonable case -- not made often enough among us fuddy-duddies here -- for why current S&W revolvers are better than usually given credit for, and in certain ways equal or superior to their predecessors.

It's not a complete case and hardly the final word on the issue, but a useful addition.

It does, however, contain one major logical flaw: he uses decades spent in the job of only seeing the problem examples versus one good current example as proof of his essential assertion -- that the current S&Ws are better than old.

I'm quite sure a current revolversmith who only sees problem revolvers from the current S&W crop and then was handed one good example from an earlier era would come to the opposite conclusion.

Point being, representative sampling is a two-way street, and if it was once your job to only encounter the problem examples but hasn't been since before the new ones came along, you're going to have a skewed perspective.

__________________
Pickpocket

The new S&W Model 19 Classic ~ A S&W Armorer's Review - YouTube

Yep, interesting video with plenty of food for thought. I especially found his reasoning about MIM manufacturing, frame vs hammer mounted firing pins and sleeved barrels enlightening. Sometimes we tend to stick with a long-held belief system for so long that we fail to give progress proper credit. Don't know about you all, but I also fall into the "I heard it on the internet, so it must be true" trap. I recommend the Gunblue490 video.

__________________
ol' country Jim

I've watched a smidgin' or two of that fellas efforts. He is
extremely thorough and knowledgeable for sure.

Any idea whether our friends in Springfield are going to similar "fixes" to other K-frames -- like Models 13 and 65, esp. in 3-inch variants? (S&W, are you listening?)

__________________
-----
FiveG

I’m a regular on his YouTube channel and always look forward to his videos. I will usually put him on the background when I’m cleaning my guns.

He is a former NH police captain, competitive target shooter, and instructor for law enforcement....now retired. You can see he’s a no-nonsense individual who speaks from years of experience.

The first of his videos I came across on YouTube a few years back was invaluable in teaching me how to properly disassemble a S&W revolver.

I particularly liked his detailed presentation on how to disassemble and clean the S&W revolver and the little tricks the gunsmiths at S&W taught him to avoid damaging the revolver’s finishing. Little things like how to use your opposite hand’s thumb to cradle a screwdriver and all the “hand gymnastics” used to remove the hammer and cylinder.

Here is that video:

Disassembly and Care of the S&W Revolver ~ Learn how to from a Factory Trained Armorer! - YouTube

Cheers,
686PC

I remember that video now, I have seen it. He does seem very knowledgeable, and he has another video titled "Disassembly and Care of S&W revolvers" that I found very well done.

He still doesn't convince me that the new production guns are better than those made earlier. He even mentions, at 7:55 into the linked video above, "a lot of these problems....someone who owned them created." As an armorer, he sees the problem children, so he knows what can go wrong with one, either from poor design or mishandling or abuse. But that doesn't necessarily mean that what he sees wrong with those guns applies to all others as well. How many M19's, for instance, has he worked on, compared to how many M19's that are out there and have worked flawlessly since Day One?

I see this on car forums all the time. There may be several people who have a particular car write in and say "such-and-such keeps breaking/burning up/falling off my car". It would seem to imply that these problems are endemic to that model, while they are issues that may come from causes not related to the quality of the car, but from abnormal use, abuse, lack of maintenance, etc. Of the 3 or 4, or 10 or 20 , people who write in to agree or complain about such a problem, how many are out there who've never experienced it. Are they going to write in and say, such-and-such has never broke, burned up, or fell off my car? Probably not.

Time will surely tell. 50 or 60 years from now, let's see how these new-built MIM/CAD-CAM, two-piece barrel, CNC guns stack up against what S&W has built the old-fashioned way for 150+ years. Maybe they will be better, maybe they won't. Even if they do, they'll never develop the character of the older hand-fitted ones, IMO.

I dont care for the looks of the 2pc barrel but would like some more fixed sight 3" L and K frames.

After reading waffles thread about the poor customer/warranty service he received with his 340SC, that would give me pause to buy a "new" Model 19 or any other new Smith.

BTW, the night table gun I trust my life to is a 19-5.

JMHO YMMV

__________________
BTDT, Got The T-Shirt

__________________
Sure you did

After years with my 66-1, i honestly coudlnt even recognize the current 66 on the shelf. I thought it was a Taurus at first glance. No offense but the old ones are very different.

Folks, I have 6 "old" S&W revolvers and 6 "New" ones. In my experience the new guns are no where as good as the old ones. All of the new guns have defects, 2 have gone back on warranty repair and were partially repaired. One has a burr in the forcing cone, it doesn't seem to affect shooting. One spits a little from the left side, one has a hard catch when you start pulling the trigger, The 6th one had a super heavy trigger pull due to a super heavy main spring. This is 6 out of six with defects. They are all accurate once you straighten them out but they are NOT better guns than the old ones. If it was just one of the six that was defective that would be one thing but none of the 6 is without defects.

I closely examined lots of new ones and was never able to comfortably pull the trigger - pun intended.

Always something obvious and visibly wrong, nicks or machine smears on the crown...seriously...

GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER S&W. We all want to love the new guns but you make it difficult.

Remove that crazy lock and put in another station for final inspection at the end. Others can do, you can do it too...

Sadly, I do not think we can expect the same level of quality fit and finish with modern revolvers that we saw with revolvers of 50 years ago. Gone are the highly skilled, life-time craftsmen who were allowed to take the time to properly polish, blue, and fit those finely crafted firearms. Today, the parts are MIM or CNC machined so that there is little or no need for fitting. The blueing process is far more environmentally friendly and meets EPA regulations, but is thin, black, and not as durable as the blue of 50 years ago. The parts are assembled by people who are trained in assembly, not skilled craftsmen. The new designs are a definite improvement, but there is no longer the high standard of fit and finish that made companies like Colt and S&W world famous.
As Bruce Hornsby sang, "that's just the way it is."

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

I recently purchased a new Model 19 Classic. It is my first revolver purchase. After shooting it for the first time yesterday, I am very satisfied. I can understand people who prefer out of production, historic models, but I am truly happy they released this excellent firearm.

Welcome to the S&W Forums. I am glad that you are pleased with your new Model 19.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Welcome to the dark side. Things aren't what they used to be, but then they never were.

I keep saying I'm going to buy one of these "newer" S&Ws, but each time I see that idiotic lock I get dry heaves.

I own a ton of old pinned pre-1981s and love them all. I do see a few new features on the modern guns that I'm sure solved some problems of the old, but so far I just can't do it.

I did buy a new Python and I was happy to see it's actually better than the old in most ways....but I'm sure if they put a key lock on it I wouldn't have been able to do that one either.

I have been very happy with my new production models 66 and 69. As previously mentioned, I would prefer a brushed stainless rather than a bead blast finish but they have been fine functionally. I did put a spring kit in the 69 which greatly improved the trigger and action.

Regarding quality and appeal of new vs. older S&Ws in general...almost all of my S&Ws are more than twenty-five years old, some much older, some I bought new more than forty year ago. They've all been fired considerably with cast bullets. All have held up well.

I only have two "new era" revolvers, a 638-3 and a 22-4. Both these were new when I got them about twelve to fifteen years ago. I have a number of j-frame snub nose .38s that I shoot regularly. These are all "no dash" guns (I realize dashes or lack of dashes are important to some). Surprisingly, the 638 is consistently the most accurate shooter of the bunch. I shoot at 25 yards, Bullseye style. A 36 square butt snub nose is the closest contender.

Granted, the 638 doesn't have the eye appeal of the older guns, but I can overlook that small shortcoming in exchange for the accuracy, something that's important to some and very secondary to others. Granted, results based on one gun don't tell much and/or I may have the only good, accurate 638 ever produced. It's easy for me to simply ignore the lock, but I realize this is an impossibility for the "intolerant and proud of it" segment.

I think the people who are complaining about quality are too young to have purchased a Bangor-Punta or a Lear-Siegler gun. Some of the stuff they put out was pure junk.

Old guns are like old cars or girlfriends. Nostalgia (sentimental longing or wistful affection for the past, typically for a period or place with happy personal associations).Who would not trade a 30 year old "normal used car" for a new one unless you want to live in the past. Older is not better and memories can be molded to ones own use. Also you may not want to admit you are/were wrong.

The struggle with this argument is that a whole slew of people who are firmly in both sides willfully ignore the largest pro of the other side and the largest con of their side.

If you are part of team "old S&W" then more often than not, you ignore the fact that so many of the parts are made to exacting standards these days, and this is a very good thing. You also ignore the new barrel design which is proving again and again to be a fantastic thing. (in fact, Dan Wesson proved this decades ago.) And there is often very little factory support for you if you need it, especially if something catastrophic happens.

If you are part of team "new S&W" then you have either had incredible luck or you are basing your opinion on a very small sample size, because S&W apparently has no QC department in Springfield, it has been wholly outsourced to the consumer. The mothership has sent more failures out in the last 3 years than in the first 150 before it. And this has shown no sign of improvement. And if you can't see how the older revolvers have a better double action pull, weight and smoothness, then there is a chance you never will. (which is fine, but folks who do know and can tell are not making it up)

At the end of the day, the folks who can't stand the new ones should be thrilled that some folks really like them, because that takes at least one segment of the buying population out of the market for older guns. And the guys who love the new ones and think the other group are just cranky old dudes should be happy that their walkers and canes aren't blocking the gun case at the LGS.

In the news..."(S&W delivered) over 1.8 million units in the first three quarters of our fiscal year alone"

So we get a handful of posts a week complaining about quality. I mean we should be getting like a ten thousand a week if S&W is as bad as some here think.

And since they were "fixed," nobody is the
wiser how bad they started out.

The trouble with gun forums is that too many
older members have faulty memories and too
many younger members have no memories at
all.

__________________
Ubi Est Mea

That doesn't necessarily mean the parts wouldn't benefit from some hand-fitting. A good revolver is more like a high-end pocket watch than an engine. Even MIM and CNC parts will vary in fine dimension from one lot to another. They might be a drop-in fit, but they never feel as smooth as one of the older guns.

If you are happy with it, good on you, shoot it until they quit making ammo for it. Just don't ruin yourself and shoot a well-kept older one to compare.

All the S&W's I own were made in the Bangor Punta era, and they are still of the older, hand-fitted, high quality finish era. Some of the most desirable S&W models come from those years, the culmination of the "pre-model number" guns from before BP bought controlling interest in the company in 1965.

I think Tompkins plc and Saf-T-Hammer did more to change the spirit and quality of S&W than anything else has.

yyyyyeah but.....guns don't wear as fast as cars and gun technology certainly isn't as rapidly-changing as car technology.

case in point: would you trade your modern model 29 "Classic" for a mint condition S prefix model 29?

I'm going to bet the answer is yes!

Nope. It wouldn't be mint condition after I shot it a bunch.
Saying gun technology hasn't changed is like saying cars haven't changed because they still have four wheels.

So you would not trade a new 29 Classic for a vintage S- prefix 29 in good condition?

Huh? There's a reason they are worth 2 to 3x more money today!

I didn't say it hasn't changed at all, I said it's nowhere near as fast as car technology.

There's nothing materially different about new revolvers that is better "tech wise" than a revolver made, say, in the 1960s. Often the only difference is in quality of fit and finish which was almost always better back then.

Thanks sniper! You're initial question and suggestion was spot-on. Been a gunblue490 fan for a few years. My quest for an original model 19 and extensive research on the 19-X versions was challenging. Choices, choices and then how much coin. Eventually bought a new "Classic Model 19" (9/2018) and though I love the model, I started experiencing "particle spray-back" after a few range visits (approx 200 rounds). Long to short, contacted S&W, they sent the RMA and after a few weeks (maybe a month), sent it back. Works fine now, but gave me the willies that a new, classic-reintroduced would have manufacturing quality issues.

Almost all my wheelguns are BP or LS. I never had a problem with any of them.

__________________
BTDT, Got The T-Shirt

Maybe......I just don't like that "zerk fitting" on the front end of the 2 pc barrels. Or the fatter shrouds covering the spooled barrel.

__________________
S&W Accumulator

The tired old adage that is; "They sure don't make 'em like they used to..." Will prevail indefinitely thanks to a potent combination of nostalgia and ignorance. From older folks waxing poetic about how everything was better back in the day despite any number of wars, socio-political issues, and disasters which may have been going on in the faded background of an otherwise treasured memory, to the younger generation who doesn't know any better and is basing their opinion of superiority purely on the aesthetics, which was frankly the only legitimate part which was actually indisputably better in the past.
Ignorance is the larger problem though, because anyone can buy an old gun that has been broken in or otherwise been tuned by a gunsmith somewhere down the line, then assume none the wiser that they were all just like that out of the box.

That being said, they are the minority, otherwise I wouldn't be having so much trouble finding a Smith & Wesson 629 for a decent price because everyone would shun modern examples over "That dern hillary hole" or "Dem Goodyear grips" or because "They ain't got no pinned barrel n' recessed cylinders on 'em, dagnabbit!"

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

I have some older S&W revolvers, I had many more prior to my 2018 fire, a couple of REALLY old ones, and a number of "new" ones, and by new I mean since the advent of the IL. Must I be embarrassed to note that I've never had a problem with any of them?

__________________
Come and take it!!

Gun blue is a pretty good old guy. I certainly don't agree with everything he has to say but he is a veritable goldmine of knowledge and I have learned a thing or two from him, alotbof good reloading tips and techniques that can only come from a lifetime of reloading and shooting.
I saw that video and I believe he was talking about 50 possible "conditions" that can arise from use/misuse/ abuse of the old model 19s and not 50 things that were inherently wrong with that model. He seems to love the newer Smith's, I prefer the older ones.

I'm sure I will be perceived as an old curmudgeon when discussing the old Smith revolvers vs. the new ones. That old-time religion is certainly good enough for me.

THIS is a Model 19:



And THIS is a Model 66:



Never a hint of a problem with either from the get-go. Smooth. Functional. Classy. Accurate. Easy on the eyes. Hand-fitted to perfection.

They ought to have new names for the current iterations. Doing otherwise has been an insult to some really fine old guns.

John

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

Early BP, yes, they continued the post war quality. As time went by, they went down hill fast. Just before LS acquired them, quality was non existent. I think LS was more interested in S&W for their metallurgy abilities than as a gun manufacturer. Tompkins almost ended S&W as a viable business. CS not withstanding, had it not been for Saf-T-Hammer, the S&W we know would not exist today.

Sure, I'd trade, sell it, buy a new one, and have money to spend on other stuff.
Actually I'd get a 629 because I like stainless.

I watched the gentleman's video. He is obviously knowledgeable as an armorer of S&W revolvers.
However, in regards to modern manufacturing, I've heard these same arguments countless times and I think they are misleading.
I have been a machinist in a manufacturing environment for 33 years, starting with old manual machines and transitioning to the most cutting edge equipment in existence. Not for firearm manufacturing, but steam and gas turbines. Something that certainly requires quality of raw materials and manufacturing.

I can tell you with complete confidence that no company paid for this kind of equipment for quality increases in their product. They did it for cost. Period. Just because an NC machining center is capable of holding .0002 consistent accuracy, does NOT mean that is how it is utilized. If they can speed up a process 25% and keep the margin of error and stacking tolerance where it was, while touting the equipments mean accuracy, profits just grew.
The state of profitability of manufacturing in this country depends on speed and cost.

Example?
The Marlin Firearms Co made their leverguns for generations in the same way. I personally knew the gentleman that calibrated the surface plates for Marlin, Colt, and Winchester. He said walking into the Marlin factory was like going back in time. Old, worn out bed mills and racks upon racks of jigs and fixtures that were who knows how old.
Remington bought them, immediately closed this facility, and made Marlins in a "state of the art" facility on modern NC equipment.
How'd that work out?
It guarantees nothing, and from a business standpoint product quality is only important as an image.
I also work in inspection, and see this every day.
A manufacturing process is a living thing. Quality products do not necessarily depend solely on equipment. Quality comes from human skill and knowledge, combined with repetition, sometimes for generations.
And most importantly, pride in work and company.

I will stick with the old ones.

Here's my report on the new revolvers.

Last Fall I bought a new 19-9 "Classic". It's beautiful. It also had these problems right out of the box:
DA and SA trigger pulls were slightly rough and MUCH heavier than any S&W I've ever handled.
Rear sight windage screw would make the sight blade tilt (!) but didn't change windage.
Flash gap was over .010" and the gun would spit so badly even with jacketed bullets that .38 loads were uncomfortable with glasses and Magnums were downright dangerous.
Blueing on the right side of frame above the trigger is slightly "off", like that area didn't get polished properly, but not readily noticeable.
Side plate screws screws must have been installed with an impact wrench- I broke two Chapman bits and twisted one Brownell's bit just getting them out.

To say that I was p!ssed with these problems would be an understatement.

After two months back at the factory, I now have:
DA and SA trigger pulls came back definitely smoother but not much lighter. I then installed a Wolf spring kit with the "Type I - Full Power" hammer spring and 15 lb rebound. Had a 50% misfire rate. Noticed that the stock strain screw was slightly shorter than old ones in my collection, so I installed an old K-frame strain screw that's maybe 1/16" longer, no more misfires and DA pull is now reasonable.
SA pull is still about twice as heavy as any other S&W SA I've fired.
Flash gap is now .007, forcing cone also recut. No spitting with .38 loads but didn't get to try Magnums yet.

Rear sight windage seems to work ok but was properly adjusted so I didn't mess with it much.
The side plate screws now came out with normal force.

All in all, the machining is nicely done, the finish is outstanding even with that one area by the trigger. But the poor functioning and awful trigger pulls, suggest that the target audience for these guns is people who look at them but don't shoot them.
Me, I'll try to wear mine out over my remaining years.

I'm not gonna knock the new stuff. Everybody I know that has purchased one loves them. I'm happy they're happy. I won't buy one of the new ones (except the M&P and Shield series) simply because I don't need one. I've got one or more of just about every caliber S&W has made. Most of my older revolvers have a pinned barrel. The K 22's and the magnums also have recessed cylinders. I bought most of them for far lower prices than what is being sold now. It's hard for me to go to a show or shop and find something I want because I usually already have it and it's usually in better shape than the one being sold. The last S&W I bought I found in a pawn shop. I got it to replace one I shouldn't have sold. I paid $250.00 NIB for the one I sold for $500.00. I paid $600.00 for this one because I shouldn't have sold the first one. The latest is really nice. It's a "S" serial number 28 no dash four screw that was sent back to S&W in 1974 for a white front sight insert, .400 smooth trigger, and an action job. Whoever sent it back was obviously a gun guy and tricked it out old school exactly like I did several of mine. I get questions from non gun ladies frequently asking what they should get for a purse or home protection. I usually recommend a S&W revolver unless they know how to shoot and break down an auto.

I’m curious about the new Model 19s and would like to try one but everything Charlie Sherrill has said seems to apply to me. I’m not going to bad-mouth the new guns, but I’m also perfectly happy with my old ones. Maybe someday I’ll see one at a price I can’t refuse.

I've handled the new ones and will say that they FEEL like a Taurus revolver. I will never buy a new S&W. Sorry, but you wax silly all you want and you'll never convince me that the new ones are built better. All these new "improvements " were not done to enhance reliability or accuracy. They were done to save money. Not your money, the stockholder's money.

I completely disagree with this post. I'm only 52 and didn't get into the revolver scene until about 10 years ago. Before that it was, and still is, military autos.
I can see and feel the difference in quality between the old and new revolvers. Anyone who can't is either too young, hasn't handled or shot an older Smith, or is blinded by purchase fever.

The only major thing that has changed in firearms tech is the ability to make them cheaper, not better.

You're having trouble finding a new gun because our hobby is growing every day. Thousands of young shooters are buying their first guns.
What a young, inexperienced Facebook, twitter, tic-toc user is going to think is this: "Well, like, I can buy this new S&W or glock for much less than these older guns! <insert Beavis laugh> And they're, like, better because they're newer! Huh-huh-huh, huh-huh-huh!
THAT'S why you can't find a new revolver.