Classic M19 review Gunblue490

Interesting video. I have to agree to the design improvement Smith has made.
What the presenter failed to address is the difference in quality control present at the factory today vs. the earlier guns.
This forum has plenty of threads with folks complaining about QC issues with their new guns. Not only fit and finish but functionality issues.
There is a ready supply of threads with folks sending new guns back, even examples of guns going back multiple times.
All the engineering improvements in the world will not overcome poor QC and a lack of a quality first mentality during production.
Even though the parts are CNC machined and precision molded, tools wear, tolerances slip and programmers can make mistakes during set up.
I cannot argue that the older guns are better designed, but IMO quality remains a viable issue for discussion.

Lifetime service policy and FedEx for when the tolerances stack against you.
My 66-8 had to take a 2 week vacation to Springfield to fix a problem. After a few thousand trigger pulls live and dry the parts have lapped in and it's action has the classic Smith feel.

Chukar60 said:

What the presenter failed to address is the difference in quality control present at the factory today vs. the earlier guns.
This forum has plenty of threads with folks complaining about QC issues with their new guns.

Click to expand...

I wonder if the difference is the existence lately of internet forums giving gripes worldwide exposure.

bigwheelzip said:

I wonder if the difference is the existence lately of internet forums giving gripes worldwide exposure.

Click to expand...

What is missing is quantitative facts. Like:
-How many newly delivered guns had to be fixed/returned right away?
-How many guns had to be fixed after XXX number of rounds?

I would love to see an armorer's logs from the 50 thru the 80s showing what needed to be done to service revolvers.

zogger52 said:

What is missing is quantitative facts. Like:
-How many newly delivered guns had to be fixed/returned right away?
-How many guns had to be fixed after XXX number of rounds?

I would love to see an armorer's logs from the 50 thru the 80s showing what needed to be done to service revolvers.

Click to expand...

Doubt you'll see compiled statistics, but at the 7 minute mark of the video that the OP references from Gunblue490, his S&W armorers book has a list of the 51 usual problems.

By comparison to other corporations
in the U.S., and indeed salaries collected
by various CEOs, the U.S. gun companies
are pygmies.

Their employment is tiny but luckily for us
technology has helped them survive.
With competent and sometimes not so
competent assemblers, the product has
been pretty admirable.

I believe the technology especially in the
production of revolvers has been most
beneficial for those of us who love the
wheel gun.

Where shortcomings show up, luckily these
small enterprises can employ just enough
technicians and expert engineers and "fixers,"
to keep most customers satisfied.

And then there are the various forum
critics who will never be satisfied in this,
the not so perfect 21st Century.

Long live S&W, Ruger, Colt and all the
other gun companies in the U.S.

Yes,long live our American firearm companies.

Lobster Picnic said:

My first thought was, why doesn't he just get an older M19 "with issues" - and FIX the issues? I get that the 19-9 is better for many people, but an expert S&W armourer can make anything work right, so why not get the older Model 19 he is actually nostalgic about?

My other thought is maybe the magnum revolvers from that era have more issues than the .38 Special and .22lr models I own and enjoy. Mine seem to work great, but I'm no expert.

Click to expand...

Said he'd been looking at used 19's for years, all had too many issues and wear. He should know.

I'll be on the lookout for a used newer model now

A very interesting video and well done by a very qualified gentleman who doesn't really have anything to gain or lose by offering his opinion on the revolvers we all care about very much..... I am still out on how I really feel about the new line. I said that I would never own one of the new guns with the lock but, I have wound up with a few. 2 642 .38 special 2", a 627 and recently a 22-4. All of these revolvers are wonderful. But, they are more conventional in manufacture than the 19-9 presented in the video. No barrel pins and several MIM parts but no barrel sleeves and other such changed parts. The 627 does have the locking lug in the frame and not in the pin in the shroud.

So, my point about the video conversation is centered around the longevity of the respective models mentioned..... what follows is some of the things that I have experienced in my law enforcement career as a Rangemaster who started my gun slinging career with a Model 15.

GunBlue 490 is an armorer and I am not. Aside from some very minor work on my guns to replace hammers and triggers, I do not play gunsmith. But my observations in nearly 50 years of handling guns, buying, selling and evaluating has taught me a few things.

1. Cops are notorious in their lack of care of their issue guns, personally owned guns etc. IF they are not "gun-guys." We all have known cops who are quite neglectful or have read outrageous stories and descriptions of seriously impaired revolvers that boggles the mind for persons serious about carrying a gun for personal and/or "public" protection....
2. Most people who are not "gun types" and get a gun for "protection are mostly (in my opinion), at best, marginally qualified to have a gun. Therefore, they may not be as particular about maintenance or careful handling as one who has more interest in their gun.
3. We all know that the "old" manufacturing methods were really not as bad as GunBlue490 may believe. Yes, the guns needed "hand fitting" and took time to assemble but, with reasonable care, were generally serviceable for many, many years never needing much, if any, care or work to fix minor problems. How many of us have an "old" Smith revolver that has been around 30, 40, 50, 60 years that is perfectly in time and tight and still shooting perfectly? I have a few.....
4. As noted above by a few posters, we have heard about quite a few of the "new" revolvers with the life-time guarantee that have had to be repaired, OR REPLACED, as the guarantee offers...

I think that GunBlue490 has a boatload of experience fixing cop guns because of poor maintenance attention and may be somewhat influenced by his opinion of the "old" revolvers because of that. I am not questioning his expertise or his very long experience. And I do agree with many of his conclusions. Yet I am still not convinced that the new guns will rival or ever be better than the old guns....

Proper care and attention to detail in use of the gun is the key to any firearm longevity. The new guns must be made in the new way because there are not many real gunsmiths left in this world and so old manufacturing methods had to change. Of course cost is always a factor and impacts much in manufacturing methods.

You can't fire your heavy handloads, neglect cleaning and careful handling, or throw your gun into the glove box or floorboard, or bed of the truck without expecting that the gun may not last long..... no manufacturing method with fix or allow thing like that. I have viewed a few of GunBlue490's videos and I will continue as I enjoy them very much as his delivery is factual and simply delivered with no serious effort for conversion to his opinion but just good, usable info....

stansdds said:

I've said it before, I'll say it again. Older S&W revolvers for light shooting and collecting, newer S&W revolvers for heavy shooting.

Click to expand...

I have to call foul on that. Lots of us shoot our older Smths a lot with ZERO issues.........They are the ones upon the legend was built.

YouTube
In this video he has a lot of nice things to say about the old revolvers.

stansdds said:

Did you watch the posted video? Plenty of details given as to why the Classic Model 19 is an improvement over the original design.

Click to expand...

Modern technology does make production more efficient, but that doesn't necessarily translate to better quality. The guns of today are just not as well made as the ones from 50 plus years ago. I own or have owned well over 300 S&W revolvers over the years. Most were or are over 60 years old. All have been fired by me and previous owners. None have broken. Things like springs have been replaced, but that's the extent of the maintenance. Compare the fit of the sideplate, the yoke to frame fit and the trigger pull of any new gun to any old one and the differences are very apparent. The whole factory was the "performance center." If you believe current production revolvers are superior, good for you.

Im a big fan of the Combat Magnum and own quite a few from different eras.
My favorite range gun currently is a 66-5 as I dont have to worry as much about breaking it since it has the lifetime warranty and uses current parts (It is Pre IL with MIM internal parts and frame mounted firing pin.....
BTW just wish S&W would offer a hole delete option to customers)

Hickock 45 posted a field test on a new Classic 19 Nov 2018 (about a year ago),
If you want to skip to the nitty gritty the gun starts to have problems at abt 24:00 and cuts his thumb, it totally locks up.
at abt 31:00 .
(BTW There was a follow up video with a new gun that ran fine).
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv9gkZsIvCo&t=1520s[/ame]


This video he compares a "Classic" 19-9 side by side with a 19-3
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOwX8hk8yHg[/ame]

My personal thoughts on the new Classic 19

Pros:
lifetime warranty
Nice blueing (are these blued in house ?)
Chamfered cylinder edges.
Pre war style thumb latch.
Ball detent system.
Stocks:
Nice they brought back the diamond shape around the grip screw, nice grain, nice oval heel shape.

Cons:
RB only grip frame ( prefer a SB grip frame in 4" and longer as the wood conversion grips tend to cut my palm with full magnums at the gap where the wood meets the RB backstrap).
Stocks:
Prefer smooth over crummy stamped checkering, also is it too much to ask for deep SS escutcheons and chrome or nickeled medallions ?
Smooth backstrap (vintage 19's all had grooves, smooth was for cheaper non target site guns).
No quick interchangeable front sight system.
Black (No white outline) rear site?
Non recessed chambers.
No IL hole delete option.
Lastly three minor cosmetic things
Not a fan of the "Combat Magnum" barrel rollstamp,
The small left side TM should be a large Right side TM.
Bring back the big butt Ampersands.

I just went through the same decision myself and that video informed me. I like GunBlue490 and watch most of his videos.

He's a knowledgeable guy and I'm glad he's putting his know-how into videos that will hopefully live on for a long time even after people like him are gone.

I just read "No second place winner" and of course I had to have a model 19 to go with my 14-1 and 29-2.

While I agree with a lot of Gunblue's assessment and have no doubt that the new 19 is "theoretically" better, I just couldn't get over the key lock or the sleeved barrel.

I ended up with a nice 19-3 from '72 in great shape.

I really think S&W are doing themselves a disservice with the keylock and sleeved barrel and even "younger" guys like me (Late Gen-x'er) are turned off by them.

I'm glad S&W and Colt are bringing back the old classics though....even with a keylock it's better than nothing.

I don't understand why the sleeved barrel is an negative. I think it is a positive step as the barrel can now be easily changed.

zogger52 said:

I don't understand why the sleeved barrel is an negative. I think it is a positive step as the barrel can now be easily changed.

Click to expand...

Quite simply: It's ugly and reeks of mass production.

I know these new ones ARE mass produced, but to me it's just a step too far.

smithra_66 said:

Quite simply: It's ugly and reeks of mass production.

I know these new ones ARE mass produced, but to me it's just a step too far.

Click to expand...

I was there when they weren't "mass produced" and plenty
of flaws existed.

Right now purists are already attacking the new Python
2020.

As a revolver lover, I'm glad the companies are doing
what needs to be done to keep this fine old system
(the revolver) relevant and even perhaps desirable
to a new generation of handgunners.

Judging by the glut of auto pistols, just about any
"idjit" can now design and produce one on the cheap.

By the way, "mass produced" firearms go back to
the 18th Century if not before.

UncleEd said:

I was there when they weren't "mass produced" and plenty
of flaws existed.

Right now purists are already attacking the new Python
2020.

As a revolver lover, I'm glad the companies are doing
what needs to be done to keep this fine old system
(the revolver) relevant and even perhaps desirable
to a new generation of handgunners.

Judging by the glut of auto pistols, just about any
"idjit" can now design and produce one on the cheap.

By the way, "mass produced" firearms go back to
the 18th Century if not before.

Click to expand...

I agree. But the Python does not have some silly sleeved barrel. Neither does any from Ruger. Dan Wesson is the only one I can think of and that's for the user functionality of changing barrels and anchoring the muzzle, not for cost savings. S&W didn't have to go that far.