Significantly better? Let me suggest that all depends on the nature of your yardstick. Aesthetics? Forget about it---RM wins hands down. Same goes for historical significance. Yeah, but it's a gun. Okay---good point.

Does one shoot better than the other? I don't know---seems unlikely----and what does that mean anyway----"shoot better"? Well how about the sights----let's start there: The RM sights are vastly superior because they are infinitely adjustable---the "Micrometer" sight isn't. This is of the utmost importance when trying to light matches and drive nails. Yeah, but the RM sights are a (comparative) pain in the butt to adjust and lock; and if you don't do it right, they'll shoot loose pretty much right now. Accuracy?----don't know---never tested it---figures to be a toss-up with the edge going to the newer gun.

I can keep this up for a long time----and end up right where we started. Where we started was trying to compare a couple of guns with a lot in common---aside from the fact they're from different eras. If the topic was automobiles or airplanes, the question never would have come up----simply because of our expectations.

One thing we can all agree on is they're pretty much exactly the same---but different.

Ralph Tremaine