Interesting rant, but some of the points you bring up can be discussed -- I think a lot of what you've said here varies greatly on
perspective.
It's natural to compare the 52 and the 952 because the 952 is pretty much the modern evolution of the 52. That's how it was conceived, by request from Bangers Distributors. "So you don't make the Model 52 anymore... and very few folks would buy a 5-shot .38 Special that only runs one very specific load. Okay then... why don't you build for us a gun that looks very nearly the same, with the kind of precise fitment that the 52 had, but chamber it for 9mm?" And Smith & Wesson's answer to that was the Performance Center's Model 952 no-dash. One of the PC's earliest jobs (as per a Roy Jinks letter) was to finish up the very last production, three-alpha prefix Model 52-2 pistols, and they used that experience when they created the very first Model 952 pistols.
So, regardless of how different the .38 Wadcutter at 14,000 PSI and the 9mm Luger at 35,000 PSI are as cartridges (I agree BTW, and said so above), at their heart, the Models 52 and 952 are very similar and share obvious lineage.
I would disagree about 52 being a one-trick pony and the 952 somehow being different. If anything, both of these pistols are seriously one-trick ponies. The 952 can run a few different bullet weights and shapes, the 52 is more limited, but neither pistol has a wide array of use -- they are very specifically target guns. The 952 is a full steel, full size, target sighted, mere 9-round capacity single stack target gun with a light trigger. It's "bang" is louder and more substantial than a 52, but they are both game guns that are at home punching paper. Yes, you can make them do other things, just like you can take a lawn mower and drive it across the county because it has an engine and a steering wheel, but it's still a lawn mower. (And I take a Model 52 on an annual prairie dog hunt out west!
)
The .32 ACP in a target gun is a recent development as easier brass to work with than the original .32cal target round, the .32 S&W Long. The Pardini is a desgin you'd recognize, these kinds of guns have been competing in the Olympics and World Championships for decades. I have a similar Walther GSP in .32 S&W Long (wadcutters only, just like a Model 52) and it's ability is awe inspiring.
I don't think it's entirely accurate or fair to the discussion to default to the old gun forum stand-by "well they all shoot more accurately than I do, so...." (fill in the next sentence that somehow makes the point.)
I have NEVER found solace in that argument. Fact is, I can pick up my Model 52 and punch a tighter group absolutely
every single time on paper than I can manage with either of my 39-2's, my 639, my 3906's
AND my 952-1.
To say that all of these guns are more accurate than I am simply does not explain why every single time I shoot paper with my 52-2, 845, Walther GSP... I can print tighter groups, every single time... than I can with my 952-1.
For sure, the 952-1 "is more accurate than I am, guess I just need to practice..." but on the same day, before and after and twice, three or four times back to back, I'm going to take the 845 and out shoot the 952-1.
This doesn't make me want to practice and blame myself for not being a better shooter. This makes me want to figure out what I can do to make the 952-1 shoot much more like the $2,070 MSRP gun that it was in 2007. This makes me want to figure out better ammo for it that the pistol can send more consistently. This makes me want to explore why 60-100 years of centerfire classic Bullseye competitors, the best that have ever lived, have done everything they can to avoid the 9mm and embrace the .38 Special and the .45 ACP when taking titles, setting records and winning competitions.
