I've got a rant!! You may not like it....

[TDC]

I agree with many of you guys on the pre-80's guns. My own collection is made up almost exclusively of earlier P&R guns and I have a bunch. I don't expect the following opinion is going to be very popular with some of you but that's OK.

My main concern is the constant hammering of S&W, even in subtle and passive ways, for issues that many of us have realized they will never be able to replicate again.

Do we really want to continually pound them for what we see as weakness that are probably the only economically feasible methods they can use to stay solvent?

Let's face it.... revolvers are "out of vogue" for most of the modern young purchasers. They are much more costly to produce than typical autos, even with the MIM and Goodyear type parts. Revolvers today typically don't receive the image of guns carried by the movie-land "super hero's" like they did in years gone by. I believe it's time to think seriously about the impact we're having on any future revolver sales when we turn off the new generations totally from considering buying them.

The concept of era comparison may sound good to enhance the value of our own collections, but when it becomes just a bunch of us older geezers chasing the older guns with no interest from new people I sincerely believe that will diminish the value of revolvers, including the older ones...

I think back to the mid 70's when 29-2's, 25-2's and 57's were retailing for $279. It was a time when many fully loaded cars were retailing for $4 to $5000. Today comparable cars are $40 to $50,000. If the same pass-through increases were made by S&W today, and if figuring the dollar is worth 10% of what it was, that would mean a new presentation cased, wood stocked N frame would cost us $2,729 today. All things being considered, that horrendous price would offer the old 1 year, pay shipping both ways chintzy warranty too, rather than the excellent lifetime warranty provided today....

That's about three times what a 629-6 costs new today. Is it any wonder why S&W has had to try to cut corners?

We are about to enter a huge new inflationary spiral that will dwarf anything we have seen to date. With all the political and economic pressures confronting all firearms manufacturers, I believe we should be helping all of them to survive, not tearing them down over issues that will never be the same again.... and never can be... JMHO and flame suit on...

What say you?

 

[MAG-NUM]

Terry, I'm on your side with this and you have stated your position very clearly. Chalk one up for the positive! Thanks, Bob

 

[michael thornton]

well after the old ones run out i guess we will all look harder at the new ones, maybe its my age i just like the looks of the older smiths?i cant realy say the new ones are bad never owned one, but if you think about it colt priced there way right out of the revolver line! i cut my teeth on wheel guns its in my blood i can see the younger generation is moving to the autos there may come a time when the demand for revolvers drops out of sight? our kids and grandkids way have little or no intrest in our old out of date smiths, and that is sad.

 

[Lobster Picnic]

What you say makes sense, but it does little to make me think I should run out and buy a current S&W revolver.

Instead, it makes me want to mortgage my house to buy all the classic LNIB S&Ws I can find. Those are the ones worth thousands in today's dollars because it would cost that much in labor and skill to replicate the old craftsmanship.

It will never cost $3000 to have a machine stuff MIM parts crookedly into an unpolished frame. Or if it does, I won't be paying it.

 

[Flint Ridge]

Personally I have swayed a handful of folks into revolver purchases in the past year, some of those new and mostly due to the problems associated with the pocket CCW's.

And I can't afford some of the new Smith's, but find older one's I want more, for less.

And yes there is less interest in the revolver overall. Some other lesser forums I look at easily have triple the viewers on the semi-auto page than the revolver side. The clock tickith away. Look at our own forums here... folks vote by where they are, so you may not lose all hope. Just go look at the current viewers on the various forums here.

The really old stuff - 97
This forum - 161
New Revolvers - 387
Semi's - 392

 

[dma1]

For me, it's the lock and the two piece barrels. I don't care about MIM. When any newbie asks, I steer them to a stainless S&W revolver, more often than not a .357, starting out with .38 special ammo. Autos can come later. As far as the younger generation, my 17 yr. old son badgered the you know what out of me until I bought him a Ruger New Vaquero since I wouldn't buy him a SAA, his first choice, which was too expensive for me. He has lots of choices in the safe; loves lever guns, revolvers, and semi-autos. Guess they're not all tacticool.... I have hope for the future.

 

[Ashlander]

Terry: You make some good points. In particular, you hit the nail of the head in terms of the coolness factor of revolvers among young shooters. A new shooter can buy some pretty good new semis for less than $600, but many new S&W revolvers are well over that. So not only is the revolver less cool -- it's a lot more expensive.

And though many of us could easily afford the new revolvers, the shooters among us often opt for used ones or old cop trade-ins -- why spend the extra bucks if we don't have to? But many young shooters shy away from "used" guns, just because they may not know how hardy these revolvers are. So, if they buy one, they buy new and shell out some big bucks (for young people).

That being the case, I suppose we should emphasize that even if there are some quality issues, that S&W will take care of them.

Young people will most likely be receptive to that message since a lot of companies have adopted the business model of putting much of their quality assurance dollars into their warranty programs. This is what they are used to (us old guys are from a different world).

 

[nawilson]

You bring up some good points. I went to the CPI inflation calculator. I used $279 in 1975 and converted it to 2012 dollars. It has the same buying power as $1175 does today. So, I think your numbers are a bit off, but your point is still valid. Smith handguns have gotten relatively less expensive in the last 37one years. Going back the other way, an $800 Smith today should have cost $190 in 1975.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

I agree with many of you guys on the pre-80's guns. My own collection is made up almost exclusively of earlier P&R guns and I have a bunch. I don't expect the following opinion is going to be very popular with some of you but that's OK.

My main concern is the constant hammering of S&W, even in subtle and passive ways, for issues that many of us have realized they will never be able to replicate again.

Do we really want to continually pound them for what we see as weakness that are probably the only economically feasible methods they can use to stay solvent?

Let's face it.... revolvers are "out of vogue" for most of the modern young purchasers. They are much more costly to produce than typical autos, even with the MIM and Goodyear type parts. Revolvers today typically don't receive the image of guns carried by the movie-land "super hero's" like they did in years gone by. I believe it's time to think seriously about the impact we're having on any future revolver sales when we turn off the new generations totally from considering buying them.

The concept of era comparison may sound good to enhance the value of our own collections, but when it becomes just a bunch of us older geezers chasing the older guns with no interest from new people I sincerely believe that will diminish the value of revolvers, including the older ones...

I think back to the mid 70's when 29-2's, 25-2's and 57's were retailing for $279. It was a time when many fully loaded cars were retailing for $4 to $5000. Today comparable cars are $40 to $50,000. If the same pass-through increases were made by S&W today, and if figuring the dollar is worth 10% of what it was, that would mean a new presentation cased, wood stocked N frame would cost us $2,729 today. All things being considered, that horrendous price would offer the old 1 year, pay shipping both ways chintzy warranty too, rather than the excellent lifetime warranty provided today....

That's about three times what a 629-6 costs new today. Is it any wonder why S&W has had to try to cut corners?

We are about to enter a huge new inflationary spiral that will dwarf anything we have seen to date. With all the political and economic pressures confronting all firearms manufacturers, I believe we should be helping all of them to survive, not tearing them down over issues that will never be the same again.... and never can be... JMHO and flame suit on...

What say you?

I agree 100%...........IF we or the new buyers don't buy their product they will eventually go out of business or mfg. other products that will sell.

 

[andyo5]

Terry, I'm on your side with this and you have stated your position very clearly. Chalk one up for the positive! Thanks, Bob

+1 here. I have no complaints with the latest S&W products, other than I wish they wouldn't have added the unneeded locks. But they still look good and shoot as well as the old ones.

 

[Nanook 450]

I don't buy them because of the locks, with the exception of the scandium offerings, which are my beaters, with the locks defeated.

 

[jbull380]

I agree and along the same lines I'll never understand why some have an absolute hatred of brand x because it isn't brand Y. I can understand having a preference but some don't seem to be content until brand x is out of business.

 

[StatesRightist]

S&W still makes good guns and it's amazing what opening your eyes and inspecting before buying will do for you. Crooked barrels, sights etc can be easily spotted and they are rare, despite what some insinuate.

I have both old and new S&W revolvers, the old ones are a little smoother, so is a original Cobra automobile, but you can't buy either one new anymore, period, end of story. The new ones are still good revolvers, I've bought 6-8 new ones in the last little while, had to send one back for a timing issue, it was back in a little over the week. I have had the good sense not to buy one or two that failed inspection, again, common sense.

It amazes me that people think everyone wants to pay 4-5k for a registered magnum or some other exorbitantly priced old Smith. Some buy guns to shoot, as well as make some safe queens. To each his own, but the continual bashing of the new ones gets old, new guns allow them to be carried and shot regularly, I can't imagine treating a rare classic Smith that way.

Most of the whining I've seen in here seemed to be from people who didn't bother to inspect before they bought, bought online and got a lump(not Smith's issue), or from guys talking about how great Glocks are in the same post. There are/were some issues that are legitimate, but I don't hear much about how it was resolved, just the complaint.....

Bottom line is, this is a Smith forum, if you don't like them, why are you here? (not pointed at anyone in particular).

 

[old bear]

Like it or not auto loaders have been and will continue to be the wave of the future in handguns. I like many S&W fan have the resources to own most but not all of the revolvers we want; for me the revolvers I wish to spend my money on are the classic Smith and Wesson versions, not that these are always better,they are though the revolvers many of us grew up with and have owned for years. If and only if I were in the market for a new revolver a Smith and Wesson product would be my first choice.
As it's been 30 + years since I have purchased a new Smith and Wesson product I will not make any comments good or bad about the quality of Smith and Wesson's current offerings.

 

[nipster]

This is a very flawed arguement, let me elaborate:

1. Comparing cars to guns. Cars need constant R&D. Revolvers need very little R&D. For all intents and purposes, the basic revolver designs of S&W which were developed in the 10's - 30's. Aside from a few minor things, the designs would be relevant and useful today. You cant say the same thing about a car.

2. S&W revolvers should be what the market calls a "cash cow". They should really cost much less to produce than something like a modern semiautomatic. Especially in the day of CNC milling.

3. Who cares about modern handgun trends, there will always be a market for quality made revolvers, at least unless S&W just starts pushing out complete trash. I see some basic things posted here all the time like canted barrels, locks that dont work, silly things like internal firing pin being introduced for nothing but to complicate design, inferior MIM parts, etc

 

[StatesRightist]

This is a very flawed arguement, let me elaborate:

1. Comparing cars to guns. Cars need constant R&D. Revolvers need very little R&D. For all intents and purposes, the basic revolver designs of S&W which were developed in the 10's - 30's. Aside from a few minor things, the designs would be relevant and useful today. You cant say the same thing about a car.

2. S&W revolvers should be what the market calls a "cash cow". They should really cost much less to produce than something like a modern semiautomatic. Especially in the day of CNC milling.

3. Who cares about modern handgun trends, there will always be a market for quality made revolvers, at least unless S&W just starts pushing out complete trash. I see some basic things posted here all the time like canted barrels, locks that dont work, silly things like internal firing pin being introduced for nothing but to complicate design, inferior MIM parts, etc

The point on the car was regarding attention to detail, more hands on work vs automation etc in the past, not innovation. You missed the point entirely.

 

[Avery11]

There are about a dozen people whose posts I always stop to read here. Allen-Frame, SmithNut, Doc44, Toroflow, Iggy, SebagoSon, 18DAI to name a few and I'm leaving out some because I'm tired. TDC, you are on that list. You always give good, honest opinions and take the time to help out the new guys. And your photos are fantastic.

No flames here - you make good points but enough kissing up.

Statistically, I think you will see about 1000 to 1 good comments to bad on the forum. Unfortunately, the negative comments attract attention and stay on top.

Some guys are constructive and seeking answers and some are just trying to ruffle feathers.

I will disagree a little on the possibility of revolvers fading away. I'm 35. I grew up with Miami Vice and Lethal Weapon. I lusted for Mel's Beretta, not Danny's revolver (not going to chance getting the model wrong). I recently sold my 92 and am getting ready to let go of my 92 compact. I average about 1 gun per month. The last 20 or so I've brought in have been wheel guns.

Revolvers will always be popular for their reliability and mechanical beauty - even for us "younger" buyers.

Let em talk and let em buy Glocks. Smith fans are killing my wallet

 

[Avery11]

The point on the car was regarding attention to detail, more hands on work vs automation etc in the past, not innovation. You missed the point entirely.

I agree SR. I think you made a good comparison.

 

[StatesRightist]

I agree SR. I think you made a good comparison.

Thank you Sir.

 

[mbliss57]

TDC,
Very well written. Thanks for the admonishment. Sometimes I need a little sense knocked into me