I'm no economist, nor do I run S&W, but I think the "Classic" Model 27 would move a lot faster if it had the 3.5" and 5" options instead of the 4". Nickle or blued, there's just something about them - the subtle difference. Maybe make it a Performance Center gun in the $800-$1000 range, or am I completely off my rocker? Personally, I'd rather put 3,000-5,000 rounds a year through a new gun, rather than an beautiful antique, if only to preserve history.

-Nick

I would buy a 5" nickel 27 if it was in that price area. Both if they didnt have the lock hole!

I've been waiting for a stainless 627 that does NOT have the slab sided performance center barrel. I absolutely detest them. I've passed up a lot of S&W guns because of that. S&W seems to forget a lot of revolver fans are traditionalists. Ditto unfluted cylinders.

Anyway, I would like either a 5" or 6.5" stainless Model 27. I would like the 8-shot cylinder but that's not a deal killer, a 6 shot cylinder will work too. This would be my outdoor workhorse.

I'd love an 8-shot 27. 5" would be perfect. But I'd also have to buy a 3 1/2 and 8 3/8" tube if all three were offered.

Jerry Miculek started out with a stock 8 3/8" M-27. How bout a Model 27 JM?

If they came out with a 3.5" regular contour barrel 8 shot stainless model 27 with the checkering like the old days, I'd buy one even with the lock.

__________________
Forum consigliere

A 5" 357, a 5" 41mag, a 5" 44 special, a 5" 44mag, a 5" 45acp, a 5" 45long colt a set count me in all in nickel. Through in a 5" ten shot 22 cal with two cylinder 22s,l,22lr, and 22wmr. I'm in heaven.

A s&w credit card?????? Ill buy them all one shot.

One thing SW (and Ruger etc) should work on for their revolvers is getting together to set new industry standards for the DA mode of no more than 8-9 lbs (and 10 lbs in a j frame) trigger pull. When you could send a gun in to the Performance Center in the 80's, for example, and have it performance tuned (I have a 65-4 in 3" where they laser etched performance tuned on the barrel) the DA would be about 8 lbs.

Now we have simply outrageous 12 lbs DA PC guns from Smith and 10 lb factory minimums from Ruger....and it kills what could be great trigger pulls (and accuracy and fun).

Why do we have to put up with this artifical standard in the days of 4.5-6 lb striker pistols. Heck, I'd rather see a lemon squeezer and great actions from revolvers or some other bit of engineering than paying $1200 for PC revolvers that have 12lb double action pulls.

We all know that Smith gave us 8lbs pulls or so from the factory (or even 9-10lbs not being worked on). Then came with lawyers and NYC standards etc. But it is time for the gun industry to get back to glass pull 8-9 lb DA pulls and crisp 3.5lb pulls from the revolvers which cost about twice what their pistols cost. There are a lot of us that would buy them. I would. Also, put me down for a blue 27 in 3 1/2" or 5" pls.

If a JM model only had grips with JM on them, fine. I can change the grips out. But I don't want someone else's initials on my gun. I'm passing on the 625 JM because of that. The only initials should be S&W.

While we're at it, make 8 round cylinders a standard option. No reason it can't be offered since the tooling is already set up.

I have two a 27 w/6.5" & 27-2 w/3.5" ...for me that gun w/a 8"/10" snoot would be a great target/hunting gun and for sure one ANY pimp would be proud to carry!!

who loves ya baby...kojack!

LIKE. I'd buy 2 w/o the lock...LOL!

5 inch would be nice as it would be more symmetrical to me. No lock of course but.......we will never see that.

I love my Performance Center Model 27-8, eight shot (with or without moonclips), 5 inch. I really hesitated because of the lock, and am glad I bit the bullet and got the gun anyway. I shoot it regularly even though it's number 132 of only 258 ever made in blue. The first thing I did of course was change the stocks and the second thing I did was changed out the rear sight blade to a shorter one. I can't express how pleased I am with this great gun. One of the finest I have ever owned.

__________________
USAF AMMO

I didn't say it had to have a JM on it, that's just the concept.

I'd go for an 8 round 28 if they'd make it. We're just stuck with ugly guns for 8-round .357s right now.

Now if the initials helped me shoot like JM. So far having them on the grips hasn't helped.