Why were diamond grips discontinued??

C&R Bill · Mar 15, 2012

After several days of lusting over old threads here, I am starting to discern the subtle differences in certain models (and developing an appreciation for older model 10s and M&Ps that I did NOT have before, especially the snubs & long thin barrels).

This got me to thinking.....Was there any real "reason" that the "diamond" grips were discontinued in 1968?? Or just changing styles? Just curious, Thanks,Bill

TAROMAN · Mar 15, 2012

Like most changes on S&W revolvers over the past 50 years, I'd expect that this one too was cost-driven.

kennyb · Mar 15, 2012

S&W are currently making them

CAJUNLAWYER · Mar 15, 2012

C&R Bill said:
After several days of lusting over old threads here, I am starting to discern the subtle differences in certain models (and developing an appreciation for older model 10s and M&Ps that I did NOT have before, especially the snubs & long thin barrels).

This got me to thinking.....Was there any real "reason" that the "diamond" grips were discontinued in 1968?? Or just changing styles? Just curious, Thanks,Bill

The 1968 Gun Control Act-there was a special provision regarding deletion of non purpose driven ornamentals on guns and the ATF ruled that the diamond on the grips fit the definition and they had to go. Silly-you betcha but try teiling that to the government.

chief38 · Mar 15, 2012

I always thought it was a cost cutting measure by the Company to save money by cutting out a step or two.

Smith & Wesson CURRENTLY makes NO GRIPS. They are made by outside vendors and sold by S&W.

Chief38

stantheman86 · Mar 15, 2012

Altamont makes a nice Dymondwood representation of the diamond grip.......although IMO they don't look right on anything but the new gen S&W revolvers.

Is the ATF thing a joke? Non purpose driven ornamentals?

Dragon88 · Mar 15, 2012

Altamont stocks are nice, but I agree they don't look good on anything but new production guns. Too glossy.

I don't know if that ATF thing is true, but it sure made for a good laugh.

Doc44 · Mar 16, 2012

I believe it was cost reduction as the directive to delete the diamond on all styles and sizes of stocks except target stocks was issued in January 1966. NT and KT stocks were delayed until the end of 1967.

Bill

OldBlood · Mar 16, 2012

Altamont grips are laminated thin layers of wood (plywood) old Smith grips were solid wood. Not historical or proper, but I like them.

C&R Bill · Mar 16, 2012

CAJUNLAWYER said:
The 1968 Gun Control Act-there was a special provision regarding deletion of non purpose driven ornamentals on guns and the ATF ruled that the diamond on the grips fit the definition and they had to go. Silly-you betcha but try teiling that to the government.

You have GOT to be ______ing me!!!

tedog · Mar 16, 2012

I have never known the man of wealth and taste to lie.

OldBlood · Mar 16, 2012

Smith factory grips from the 70s, top two are Altamont

sophie · Mar 16, 2012

I have always wondered the same thing about the dropping of the diamond on the grip.
Thats what I like about this forum, lots of different opinions are given on any subject.
Cajunlawyer makes a good case on the subject and so do several others.
Sounds reasonable to me.

_______
James

NFrameFred · Mar 16, 2012

You guys are just supplying Caj with a list of suckers, er, I mean potential customers for his next gun sale.

tripledipper · Mar 16, 2012

I know who will represent me if I ever get jammed up in the state of LA. True or not, the man has a way of making a convincing argument.

steveno · Mar 16, 2012

I assume that all grips are made on some kind of profiling machining I don't see how removing the diamond is going to save any money. it is still going to the same size piece of wood. now days a CNC machine is probably used and in any case the machine isn't going to know if the diamond is there or not. to me there has to be another reason whether it is logical or not.

My reasoning would apply to "coke" grips as well

C&R Bill · Mar 16, 2012

steveno said:
I assume that all grips are made on some kind of profiling machining I don't see how removing the diamond is going to save any money. it is still going to the same size piece of wood. now days a CNC machine is probably used and in any case the machine isn't going to know if the diamond is there or not. to me there has to be another reason whether it is logical or not.

My reasoning would apply to "coke" grips as well

When I first heard the "cost-saving measure" expanation in another thread (after I posted this thread!!) I thought the same thing - even given the scale of S&W production, that couldn't save THAT much $$. Of course, wasn't it a one dollar savings that doomed the triplelock!!

VM · Mar 16, 2012

The old machines that made the stocks were nothing like modern CNC machines.
There was a CONSIDERABLE amount of manual labor involved in finishing grip panels after they came out of machine including work to the top of the diamond and escutcheon.
As time progressed, machines got better but cuts were made to save any labor.
Why do you suppose S&W completely shut down the wood dept. in 90's and started buying grips elsewhere? Because it was CHEAPER!
Here are early I and K frame stocks that have never had any of the excess wood removed by manual labor.
Note how tall and sloppy the top surface of the diamonds. If this one process was eliminated on hundreds of thousands of panels, it would save thousand and thousands and..... of dollars

JUST MY TWO CENTS

Doc44 · Mar 16, 2012

VM...My thoughts are like yours and your examples are super!!!

Bill

GLL · Mar 16, 2012

VM:

I always figured there was hand-work to finish up older style grips but I had never seen partially completed examples before ! Thank you for the photos !

Jerry

Why were diamond grips discontinued??

Member

US Veteran

SWCA Member

Member

Member

US Veteran

Member

US Veteran

Member

Attachments

Member

Member

Member

Attachments

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

US Veteran

Member

Similar threads