My novice take on current production S&W revolvers

[StakeOut]

The best part about the "good old days" is that they are over.

There was no good old days,just a different era with problems related to that time in history.

In the 60s and 70s I thought the Model 19-2 was the cat's meow.

These days I'd prefer a 686-4

Loved my pre 25 1955 and pre 14 K38 revolvers back then but they would not be my top choices today.

The last engineer change before MIM is my #1 look fors.

 

[JH1951]

The best part about the "good old days" is that they are over.

Only in a sense.... Today will be 'the good old days' for the next generation..... The 1950's are my good old days.... what are yours? The young adults of today will look back on 2017 as a good old day, and I shudder to think what things will be like in 2055.....

 

[S&W Rover]

I recently bought a 586-5 and was immensely relieved when I found out it was pre-lock (I bought it from a friend who offered it to me a good price, sight unseen). This is an amazing revolver and the trigger is fantastic.

Well, contrary to my lucky experience in that case, I think it is absolutely necessary to really inspect any revolver before buying. Old or new. That's my take-away from this thread. There are different potential problems -- wear and damage in the older revolver, and fit and finish in the new revolver -- but if you check it out and it is in acceptable condition, you should have no reason to complain! The S&W revolvers I've purchased new in the past several years have all been wonderfully made -- so there is no reason to fear or avoid new ones -- just check them out first to make sure you didn't get some sloppy work that occasionally slips through in the modern era.

 

[Chipperxd]

I don't recall the OP saying anything about how the newer S&Ws are junk. I don't think he really said anything negative except he wasn't impressed.

This might be "another" of those threads, but your just "another" of those who prefer to defend it. Opinions differ, so keep enjoying you new revolvers. One less person to compete with.

He may not have typed out "they are junk" but when someone says "they don't make them like they used to" means that the newer production is junk and not worth the money. at least that is how I perceive it.

 

[olivehead1]

I almost forgot one other defect I saw in my looking over about 5 brand new 686s: The very first one I looked at that day, and the one with the best OTD price, was a 686 Plus with a very noticeable "dent" on the sideplate. The counter guy could see it from 6 feet away. It was as though, if this were possible, someone took a finger and pressed it into the steel of the sideplate and left this impression. No damage to the finish, just a smooth dent in the sideplate, like it was there before the final finishing was done. Don't really know how that might have gotten there.

 

[Old cop]

I've shot some of the newer S&W revolvers and have no beef w/their quality. I just cannot get past that ugly lock as it takes away from the pride of ownership I normally get w/a new gun.

 

[CH4]

A "huge dent" is far more obvious and unacceptable than the often minor blemishes that get complaints on this forum.

And.... with very modest cars starting at $16,000 and rapidly increasing, they're a far bigger investment. Don

It was merely an analogy about paying good money for aesthetically defective products irrespective of performance, not proportionality.

 

[StakeOut]

To me previously owned is the way to go but it does present more dangers than buying new.

Bad action jobs are often encountered and usually a stay away signal when found.

Worst was a revolver I bought with all the screws cemented in with JB Weld.A real tough job to free them up without damaging the gun.

Almost every used revolver pur4chased has had aftermarket reduced weight springs.Some are OK while a small amount are much too light for my liking.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

Hmmmmm.....well, I can only relate my own experiences....

A few years ago I bought a Model 27 Classic. Okay, it has an IL (yawn) and the internal firing pin (yawn) and maybe the bluing can't match a Model 27 from 30 years ago, I dunno, I don't have one of those! My other recently acquired, NEW, S&W guns were a 3" and 4" 686+ and they're not blue so that doesn't matter and they look great and shoot great - I'm sure someone else won't like them but, then again, someone else don' own'em!

Here's those three and two older guns - what am I missing here, why are the news ones so terrible?

 

[ladder13]

but I would rather have seen the return of a new Model 12, with a one-piece barrel and forged steel internals.

Me too, but skip the cracked frames of the ones made in " the good ol'days".

 

[Ron M.]

Being the cheap guy that I am, I have never bought a new S&W revolver. But I have purchased a Victory .38 (1942, lettered), a 1946 M&P pre model 10 .38, a K22 and K38 from the early 1950's, a 28-2 and 28-3 (28-3 being my newest S&W) since I got back into shooting/collecting. I go for the history of the piece, and am not so much into shooting these days. How the new guns stack up against their old counterparts, I haven't a clue, but I think there's room in everyone's safe for all of S&W's children. None of mine were (hate to say the cliches, already saw that thread posted) minty, new in the box, flawless, un-fired...etc..Anything as old as I am that still works is good enough for me! I even like my old Ruger single sixes and Security Six (will duck now).

 

[silversnake]

Me too, but skip the cracked frames of the ones made in " the good ol'days".

Yes, that's the kind of improvement you could have today (and we briefly did, with the NightGuard 315).

 

[white cloud]

Being the cheap guy that I am, I have never bought a new S&W revolver. But I have purchased a Victory .38 (1942, lettered), a 1946 M&P pre model 10 .38, a K22 and K38 from the early 1950's, a 28-2 and 28-3 (28-3 being my newest S&W) since I got back into shooting/collecting. I go for the history of the piece, and am not so much into shooting these days. How the new guns stack up against their old counterparts, I haven't a clue, but I think there's room in everyone's safe for all of S&W's children. None of mine were (hate to say the cliches, already saw that thread posted) minty, new in the box, flawless, un-fired...etc..Anything as old as I am that still works is good enough for me! I even like my old Ruger single sixes and Security Six (will duck now).

Those old Single Six and Security Six guns are excellent revolvers.

 

[silversnake]

Those old Single Six and Security Six guns are excellent revolvers.

The old Security Six was a great gun, although I like the K frame a bit more. At least Ruger still makes the Redhawk, which is kind of like a big Security Six in my opinion.

 

[oysterer]

Bangor Punta

"Bangor Punta"!

I own a dozen Bangor Puntas and counting. Compared to current production revolvers these are fine hand fitted revolvers. Tolerances are good and the fitting is apparent e.g. side plate fit, smoothness of the action, cylinder lockup etc. Some of the blue jobs are stunning. Strange enough the blue jobs are better on the 6.5'' presentation case guns than they are on the 6'' guns that come in the blue cartons. The quality of the blue also goes up again significantly after 1994 or so. The older pinned guns (357, 44, 45) all have large throats and will need a matched cast bullet but once that has been figured out they are really amazingly accurate. I like Bangor Punta guns, extremely affordable compared to pre 1964, very fine shooters, great candidates for handloaders and never a problem with any of mine...

 

[DonD]

I've shot some of the newer S&W revolvers and have no beef w/their quality. I just cannot get past that ugly lock as it takes away from the pride of ownership I normally get w/a new gun.

Disable the lock and fill it with a plug from one of the forum members, "problem" solved. Don

 

[comiskeybum]

Here we go again, the old "they don't make them like they used to" line.

I'm really glad they don't. The new guns are for the most part held to far tighter clearances and made with stronger metal. MIM, geeze, when will this butthurt go away? MIM is often aerospace material, it isn't some fragile, cheesy junk.

Canted barrels?? Wildly over hyped I think. Regular internet, one turkey gets out of the factory and you'd think 90% are flawed.

Do new guns have the highly polished blueing? No, labor costs are too high for that.

Don't like new, don't buy it but to say old is great and new is junk is total BS.

Ignore new and you also give up such awesome calibers as the 500 and 460 Mags. I've had several 500 Mags, all tight, well fitted guns with superb triggers and accuracy that 99.9% of shooters cannot exploit along with being the most powerful factory handgun in history. I have two now, both keepers.

This line is also applied to cars. Oh, my 1960 Chevy has tough sheet metal. Wow and you'll die in a crash with a new car. LOVE those bias ply tires, horrid drum brakes, lousy suspensions, obscene mileage and pollution. Yep, better than new. Sigh. Don

Big time thumbs up with me. I was between doctor's appointments today so I went into my local shop and was looking at the SW revolvers and talking them over with the guy. We talked about the canted barrel reports, locks, etc and came to the same conclusions. The reason you hear about more defects today is because we have the internet to report them on. The examples I saw in shop today were pristine and the only thing i found odd is how smith is intentionally making the triggers and hammers look worn with shadows or "burned" looks to them. He said that was intentional since all of his examples were this way.

 

[jban357]

I remember when in the 70' and 80's Smith didn't have such a good reputation. Everyone picks up an old Smith and says how great the triggers are or workmanship. What they forget to think of, is those triggers are worn in. Also look at the people who were buying the guns back then. Think about them. They were tight with their money. They just didn't run out and buy the first gun they saw. They would wait for the right one to come along. They bought fewer guns over a longer period of time. They would really check each gun over, and weren't afraid to put it back and wait for the next one if they saw something they didn't like. You don't see that now days.

 

[Chipperxd]

Big time thumbs up with me. I was between doctor's appointments today so I went into my local shop and was looking at the SW revolvers and talking them over with the guy. We talked about the canted barrel reports, locks, etc and came to the same conclusions. The reason you hear about more defects today is because we have the internet to report them on. The examples I saw in shop today were pristine and the only thing i found odd is how smith is intentionally making the triggers and hammers look worn with shadows or "burned" looks to them. He said that was intentional since all of his examples were this way.

This is what gets me too. A few examples of bad QC and it's "OH EM GEE! SWs are garbage now! Back in my day....!"

 

[ladder13]

This is what gets me too. A few examples of bad QC and it's "OH EM GEE! SWs are garbage now! Back in my day....!"

What I see is people admit to there being some issues with newer production guns, but others never admitting that there was ever any QC issues with older guns in spite of the examples.
Where I come from we call that dishonest.

 

[justintyme]

Nothing really wrong with current production, I'm fine with MIM, don't like the lock much, have at least 3 with it, and I would never part with the 610-3 for sure. But.....I Usually like prelock better, as another said they give me more of that warm fuzzy feeling, and prelock guns mosty only appreciate in Value, current production stuff really doesn't.

 

[Buzzsaw]

I will send my 66-8 in for action job and hard chrome finish, $300 add on, I'll never get back, then some custom grips, I can't leave any gun alone

 

[Kframerbluvr]

I have S&W revolvers from 1949 to 2013 and they are all special to me. My 2013 442-2 is exactly what I need for CC when a belt gun cannot be accommodated. It gets shot about once a month and carried frequently as a pocket primary or backup. I would prefer no lock but mine has had no issues with six hundred plus rounds downrange and a bit of orange fishing lure paint on the front sight to help my old eyes out.

 

[CH4]

Me too, but skip the cracked frames of the ones made in " the good ol'days".

I agree, but I am sure the gnomes in the basement at Smith still have more than enough new guns to keep them very busy. I had to send my 4" 500 back to the mothership when the hammer broke into 3 pieces after dry firing it a few times. For me it's not about current quality, but the aesthetics of the current guns with two-piece barrels turn me off. However, if Smith produces a gun I like and there's no "old" alternative, out comes my wallet.

 

[Arik]

Seen and owned a few old revolvers that needed work. Model 12 was sent to a gunsmith as it had issues rotating the cylinder.

Last month I looked at a model 27-2 that had a pinned and canted barrel

My model 13-2 broke the firing pin. I thought these were supposed to be far superior?

You'll never find a complaint from the 80s or later.....there was nowhere to complain on. No worldwide soapbox!

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[BE Mike]

Yes, I have seen a lot of problems with older Punta Gorda S&W revolvers. QC was pretty much non-existant. Lately though, it seems like a lot of companies have an "acceptable" level of flaws sent out the door, including S&W. I really am a big S&W fan, but I'm not blindly loyal, as are some. There are more and more cost cutting measures, like semi-auto barrel finishes, that are cosmetic only. As a purely business decision, it probably is more profitable to not deal with small flaws, as many consumers won't go through the hassle of sending a firearm back for corrections. Some of those flawed guns end up being passed on to unsuspecting used gun buyers. There are also a large percentage of handguns that are purchased, but never fired, and I'm sure that S&W is very aware of that. I've handled quite a few new S&W handguns at places like the NRA Annual Meetings and I have not been favorably impressed with the new offerings.

 

[ChiefTJS]

I have old and new, lock and no lock , MIM and no MIM and they're all just fine. Why is it everyone wants to find something to complain about? You can bet that in 1952 folks were whining that they weren't getting "pre war" quality anymore and in 1962 they were crying because they weren't 1952 quality and 1972 wasn't 1962 and it goes on forever.

 

[dwever]

I'm going to break a little decorum and just say that I'm so sick of these broken record threads I could puke.

Since 2007 I have purchased: 617, PC 627 2.625", 2nd PC 627 2.625", PC 627 5", PC 629 6.5", 586 L-Comp, PC 686+ 2.5", PC TRR8, PC M&P R8.

Not a single issue with any one of them. I guess I should go buy a lottery ticket according to this forum.

Pics - M&P, 627, 586, 686+, TRR8

 

[Sol-Invictus]

I can only report what I have personally experienced. Not sure how many smiths I have. Have only bought 2 new. My 66-8 which had to go back for the crown and the forcing cone, also had some scratches. A 640-1 that just locked up after 3 rounds. As a peruse LGSs and box stores searching for a couple of new guns in the last few years I have personally observed, many, many, many more canted barrels than straight, at times extremely canted. Many other fit and finish issues, primarily on the performance center guns, almost every single one. I have yet to find a PC gun that doesn't have 1, usually 2 cylinders that don't carry up. That is with dummy shells to set the star. I am sure if one searches enough they can find acceptable samples. Maybe I just exist in a random statistical anomaly. But that is my honest experience.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[rduke]

... it still makes me chuckle...

MIM, geeze, when will this butthurt go away?

Go back and see post #4