Are new guns better than old ones?
- Thread starter Cal44
- Start date
iskra
Member
The propositions that I suggest here:
1. Wheelguns of the last century or thereabouts remain objectively adequate for most purposes today. There are of course special purposes, such as ultra concealment. ultra heavy chamberings, ultra long range, etc. Those pushing the boundaries and perhaps where technology in terms of design and materials shine. There are also the range of categorically unique desires/whims, often relating to the utmost something or other.
2. Yet all said... The real techno-constraints aren't in our stars. They're in ourselves. Generalized human factors and individualized requirements. For instance, I'd assume we could have huge cartridge weapons of titanium, carbon fiber and the like. But who'd want to shoot them? As it is, human frailties among the most fit of us largely mediate the tech end of designs. Market factors drive the actual 'production meets the road syndrome' of what we're presented.
3. As a gross cookie cutter generalization, there are two extremes of us. Those who are mired in the 'era' guns of yore and the opposite extreme of those who are 'tech driven'. These 'predilections', drive and prejudice our viewpoints and I'm not inferring anything bad in that. Just a statement of fact. Perhaps termed "Where we're coming from."
4. That where we're coming from has far more to do with predilections and human factors than the actual or even theoretical capabilities of the gun we admire. own and shoot.
And if you've even followed this far... Congratulations!
All here...
Just my take.
1. Wheelguns of the last century or thereabouts remain objectively adequate for most purposes today. There are of course special purposes, such as ultra concealment. ultra heavy chamberings, ultra long range, etc. Those pushing the boundaries and perhaps where technology in terms of design and materials shine. There are also the range of categorically unique desires/whims, often relating to the utmost something or other.
2. Yet all said... The real techno-constraints aren't in our stars. They're in ourselves. Generalized human factors and individualized requirements. For instance, I'd assume we could have huge cartridge weapons of titanium, carbon fiber and the like. But who'd want to shoot them? As it is, human frailties among the most fit of us largely mediate the tech end of designs. Market factors drive the actual 'production meets the road syndrome' of what we're presented.
3. As a gross cookie cutter generalization, there are two extremes of us. Those who are mired in the 'era' guns of yore and the opposite extreme of those who are 'tech driven'. These 'predilections', drive and prejudice our viewpoints and I'm not inferring anything bad in that. Just a statement of fact. Perhaps termed "Where we're coming from."
4. That where we're coming from has far more to do with predilections and human factors than the actual or even theoretical capabilities of the gun we admire. own and shoot.
And if you've even followed this far... Congratulations!
All here...
Just my take.
New is much better than old.
You get a lifetime warranty that many will use several times early in your firearms acquisition.
Oh wait.. that doesn't quite answer the question does it..?
From the problems I read about on here, you'll need it.
It would seem that there is no definitive answer to the "old vs new" question. Owning both I can say that my 686-6 and my 60-14 have been flawless and seem to be built and finished as well as my 629-3 & 617 no dash. I cannot find tool mark 1 on the newer models, even under the grip where there are obvious markings on the older models. Does that matter? I doubt it. Older models generally seem to have better triggers at least mine do, but most older models especially the early no dash guns will command a premium price. Bottom line, if you find an older model you like and can live with the price buy it, if not get a new one and the comfort of knowing you can send it back for service if a problem arises. In this world of mass produced China made products I doubt you will go wrong with either S&W!
I've passed over many "lemons" S&W-wise ever since I started buying them about 1980. New and used. "Young and old". A pre-purchase inspection is required no matter the vintage! And I've found that the new S&Ws that do pass are as good or better as any they've ever made, except perhaps cosmetically. As for a working pieces, I'm competing with several new revolvers and have had good results. And do carry at least one new type J frame. (340 M&P)
I don't know if they're "better" or not. I like the older ones, because I like the older ones. I don't know about MIM or any of that stuff. I know the few newer guns I've owned, I haven't been able to find anything wrong with. They worked and looked just fine.
I had a Thunder Ranch 44 special that had a lock, and a 25-13, I think it was, Mountain gun, with the lock. The finish on them was different. Not better or worse, just different. Same for a 442/642. I can't really find much wrong with them, other than they're different.
I've been looking at a new Model 27. I can't find a thing I don't like about that gun, other than it's expensive. I can probably find a older one for about the same price, maybe a little less. I am thinking about maybe getting one though. It's been a long time since I bought a brand new gun.
I wonder if we don't look back at the old ones and forget that the stinkers that got out, got sent back and got fixed a long time ago.
I had a Thunder Ranch 44 special that had a lock, and a 25-13, I think it was, Mountain gun, with the lock. The finish on them was different. Not better or worse, just different. Same for a 442/642. I can't really find much wrong with them, other than they're different.
I've been looking at a new Model 27. I can't find a thing I don't like about that gun, other than it's expensive. I can probably find a older one for about the same price, maybe a little less. I am thinking about maybe getting one though. It's been a long time since I bought a brand new gun.
I wonder if we don't look back at the old ones and forget that the stinkers that got out, got sent back and got fixed a long time ago.
Rick_A
Member
Somewhere between the professional writers claiming everything is awesome and giving everything glowing five star reviews and the neophytes claiming everything is broken and there's "cracks" all over their guns...well none of that is good information. Find out for yourself.
If you base your own judgment on what you hear and see on the internet you are living in a box...an internet box of fail.
Every manufacturer specific forum is littered with problem posts. They are not all bad. There's some bad owners and every now and then a bad gun. Fix it or get it fixed. Life goes on. Nothing is perfect.
After over a decade of riding and owning an American made motorcycle and being ridiculed by other riders I get an import bike. Right off parts fall off and it has an oil leak. The gearbox is as refined as a tractors. Well, so much for those stereotypes...
Folks like to perpetuate whatever suits their opinion. Those opinions aren't always based on fact but often on pre perceptions.
On the action "smoothness," how many folks remember how their vintage gun worked out of the box decades ago? Give a current gun fifty years of use and it'll get plenty smooth, too. Mine have smoothed considerably in just a few hundred rounds, and none started out bad.
Not all old guns are great, and very few new guns are junk. Though I'm no collector I have an equal amount of both use them for what they are meant to do...shoot and carry. None disappoint.
I am liking the new 67 and do "need" one.
If you base your own judgment on what you hear and see on the internet you are living in a box...an internet box of fail.
Every manufacturer specific forum is littered with problem posts. They are not all bad. There's some bad owners and every now and then a bad gun. Fix it or get it fixed. Life goes on. Nothing is perfect.
After over a decade of riding and owning an American made motorcycle and being ridiculed by other riders I get an import bike. Right off parts fall off and it has an oil leak. The gearbox is as refined as a tractors. Well, so much for those stereotypes...
Folks like to perpetuate whatever suits their opinion. Those opinions aren't always based on fact but often on pre perceptions.
On the action "smoothness," how many folks remember how their vintage gun worked out of the box decades ago? Give a current gun fifty years of use and it'll get plenty smooth, too. Mine have smoothed considerably in just a few hundred rounds, and none started out bad.
Not all old guns are great, and very few new guns are junk. Though I'm no collector I have an equal amount of both use them for what they are meant to do...shoot and carry. None disappoint.
I was, too but found a nickel five screw pre model 3.5" for the same price. That was an easy decision! The only things I dislike on the new version are the laminate grips, lock, and the topstrap is etched vs checkered. It's almost like a 27-1/2...not quite a 27 and not as plain as a 28.
I am liking the new 67 and do "need" one.
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
- Messages
- 19,627
- Reaction score
- 31,146
No need for the nastiness!
No I don't think old cars are safer or better - never even came close to saying that so I'd appreciate it if no words were put in my mouth.
I do think that the new guns with their MIM cast parts, multi part barrels, laminated and synthetic grips, misaligned barrels, new bluing methods, rough triggers, etc. are inferior to the older forged guns. I do think that the older generations work ethics and pride are way better than todays. I also believe that the "Gun-writers" (Taffin included) are mostly selling magazines and looking so sell new product so they can keep the Gun Companies and Magazine Companies in business and keep their jobs. I have never taken what these so called experts have to say as Gospel and I'd bet they know very little about metallurgy or production methods. Remember...... if all the gun writers were focused on having us buy older used guns, Gun Companies would not be happy, would pull their money making ads, and gun writers would be looking for jobs! Smith & Wesson Engineers get their paychecks from S&W and will ultimately pull their party line - or they too will be unemployed!
Like I stated in my above reply, a buyer needs to be satisfied with their purchases and they should spend their hard earned money where they think it is best served.
YMMV
Last edited:
"Are new guns better than old ones?"
Is this a serious question?
Is this a serious question?
Well, sure. That would be an easy decision for me too. That's why when I found a near pristine 28-2 with the box and some of the papers, last week, I didn't hesitate. I bought it.
But if I'm in the shop one day, before too long, one of those 4", "27-1/2's", might find it's way into that layaway bin that seems to have my name on it. I DO like those new grips.
I love the old guns. But that doesn't mean I don't like the new ones automatically.
Last edited:
Similar threads
