New Vs. Old S&W.

[mulehide9]

How can anyone prefere the new style S&W pistols over the old classical models.
S&W even sees this by making their new,"CLASSICS" available at "HUMONGUS" prices.

These ugly, new models are too expensive, and don't have the "PAZZAS" of the old Smiths. Those rubber grips and curved handles developed by some computer wizz,are ridiculous. OH YES, don't forget to pay $750 to $1,000 for one.

I'll stick with my Model 19's, 586,and 686's...Thank You very much!!!!!

 

[mulehide9]

How can anyone prefere the new style S&W pistols over the old classical models.
S&W even sees this by making their new,"CLASSICS" available at "HUMONGUS" prices.

These ugly, new models are too expensive, and don't have the "PAZZAS" of the old Smiths. Those rubber grips and curved handles developed by some computer wizz,are ridiculous. OH YES, don't forget to pay $750 to $1,000 for one.

I'll stick with my Model 19's, 586,and 686's...Thank You very much!!!!!

 

[VM]

How can anyone prefere the new style S&W pistols over the old classical models.

I am clueless myself - it's mind bogling

 

[redlevel]

Y'all must just be a couple of old pharts . . .


me, too.

 

[Dale53]

I am apparently going against the grain here. I have a number of Smith's both new and old.

My 625's are some of my most loved revolvers. However, I have few safe queens and bought my revolvers to shoot. That may give me a different perspective. If the world has better revolvers than the 625's they have hidden them from me.

Since I have developed vision problems, the Red Dot sights have been "life savers" for me. They have allowed me to shoot competitive scores - without them I would not be shooting these days. The relevance is that modern Smith's are drilled and tapped for a scope base. That sure makes things nice for me (I have Red Dot sights on nearly everything).

Dale53

 

[VM]

I am apparently going against the grain here. I have a number of Smith's both new and old.

It's all good Dale53.
I have some 600 series 1980-90's revolvers and shoot the snot out of them.
I just wouldn't buy anything <span class="ev_code_BLUE">brand</span> new. I enjoy "driven off the showroom floor" discount that the gunshows and other collectors provide.

 

[yugolovr]

I don't mind the new Smiths. The only problem I have with them is I keep looking for brand new K frame magnums, but can't find them.

 

[Guest]

The only real "issue" I have with the Smith & Wesson guns is the 'Infernal Lock' And if you think their prices are out of line then think back to 1935 when the Registered Magnum was introduced!!! Many average "Joe's" were making a buck a day - before taxes. Why do you think some many of these guns went to FBI Agents??? They were making a bunch more that this amount would only equate to a about a months pay and the RM was the TOP of the Smith line as far as cost was concerned!

If you're making $6.00 buck an hour you'd be making enough to pay for a $1,000.00 gun in a single month!!!

Just how many days would it take you to make a Grand???

 

[stevieboy]

I bring no prejudices to this discussion inasmuch as I couldn't care less about the lock (please spare me the stories about lock malfunctions, I am simply not in a mood to revisit that issue for the millionth time) nor am I upset by Smith's present use of MIM parts, frame mounted firing pins, two-piece barrels, barrels that aren't pinned, and cylinders that aren't recessed. All I care about is performance and, on that score, Smith is presently making a mighty fine product. I have two newer Smiths, a 686-6 and a 686SSR. Both of them have great triggers, are extraordinarily accurate, and tough. In less than two years I've put about 5,000 rounds through the 686-6 without so much as a hiccup. Both guns have handled the heaviest loads that I can stand without wincing. And, their stainless construction makes cleanup a snap.

I've got nothing against the older models and in fact I own a bunch of them, too. But, I've just not seen anything about the newer guns to suggest that Smith's products have deteriorated so much as an iota in quality. Indeed, they may be better now than ever.

 

[deanodog]

I have two of the classics. A model 21-4 and a model 22-4 and I cannot find any fault with either so I would have to agree with stevieboy. I am old and don't know much I guess.

 

[armybass]

It is not that I don't like the new Smith's because they are new, it is just that I prefer the older ones because they are old. I am a nostalgic nut. I like the things of yesterday.

 

[redlevel]

Originally posted by armybass:
It is not that I don't like the new Smith's because they are new, it is just that I prefer the older ones because they are old. I am a nostalgic nut. I like the things of yesterday.

Exactly. I like to think of myself as a traditionalist rather than a nostalgia nut, but I 'spect they are the same thing.

I am sure the new guns are high quality. I just don't want a new one. It is just a matter of personal preference with me.

 

[mike56]

Have been looking for a 29 4inch for some time. Most were all over 700, in various conditions.
Would have prefered a no-lock, but I put a deposit today on the "new" 29. Blue is not as nice, but the hammers and triggers were case and the action, single and double were good. Lock up was tight. Went for 770. and smith has the 50. rebate going. I reload and plan to shoot the heck out of it, so the lifetime warranty is a plus as well.
Will it be worth the 700. when I'm done with it like the older ones? Probably not, but it's a blue steel revolver from Smith, so had bad can it be?

 

[armybass]

I like to look at the holster wear on my 1967 M-10 and wonder if it got that way from riding shotgun with a lawman or who purchased my 1941 pre mod 10 .38 back in 41 and where it lived during the historic days of our nation since that time. I am sure some folks will feel the same way about the modern era Smiths some day.

 

[S42N8]

Put me down for the "old" category.

No offense to those who like the newer S&Ws (leaves more for the rest of us) but I cannot imagine that, in 30-some years, I'll go to a gun show and get the same irresistable urge to buy a PC 627 than I did this weekend to buy a 1970 Model 19... Bangor Punta be damned! (Did I mention the grips numbered to the gun? Ain't gonna see that on Model 627 Goodyears!

)

 

[Cartouche]

I have many old S&W's, and some not so old. Also a couple (2) with locks. I plan on getting a Classic Mod 24 in nickel, lock and all. Do I wish that the stupid lock was not on it, you bet. It is just a sign of the times. I guess in 25 yrs, it will be an old S&W to someone that is a lot younger than me. I like the 44spl, and I want the Classic NIB. I may one day find a Mod 24-3, with a 6" bbl, NIB, but I ain't holdin my breath. Now is my chance to and I am going to get one. I also have a Mod 21, NIB, well was when i bought it. I look at it as an opportunity to have a classic regardless of the lock or not. No its not the origional, but close enough. When my grandson picks it up in say 25 yrs, they will look at it like we do the old ones, and when my great, great grandson, holds it, if I get one and the guns are still around, they will have something to be proud of regardless of the lock or not. Just my take, I buy what appeals to me, and the Classic do. I also keep a eye out for no lock classics as well.

 

[MX-5]

This topic begs the question, "What is a classic"? Is it any gun that was made in the good old days? Is it a gun that was unique or special? Is it a modern reproduction of a Plain Jane gun that hasn't been manufactured for a number of years? Is it a gun that has wooden grips? Is it a gun that had a J or N frame, but not a K frame? Or is it a classic just because S&W says that it is? Why my ignorance?

I think that the Model 10 is about as classic an S&W revolver as there can be, and if I'm not mistaken, among the earlier models chambered for the .38 Special ammunition. But the Model 10 is not listed among the classics on S&W's web site. I'm not sure if this is because it has rubber grips, has been in continuous production, is just another gun, or maybe it's an oversight by S&W. I'm inclined to think that if S&W added some wood grips and listed it among the classics, sales of this carbon steel K frame revolver would pick up somewhat.

 

[jeffrey]

For what it's worth, some of the worst S&W revolvers that I've handled were ones that my father purchased new in the 70's. Uneven bluing and edges sharp enough to cut your hand. I still don't understand why he bought them. Then again, some of my nicest guns I bought used were also made in the 70's. I don't have a problem with any of the innovations of the past 10 years, except the IL. (Mostly because it's ugly.)

The only real problems that I've had with S&W revolvers have been with those very few guns that I've bought new. Like another poster said, it's best to let someone else take that initial hit out of the showroom.

 

[shawn mccarver]

Originally posted by mulehide9:
How can anyone prefere the new style S&W pistols over the old classical models.
S&W even sees this by making their new,"CLASSICS" available at "HUMONGUS" prices.

These ugly, new models are too expensive, and don't have the "PAZZAS" of the old Smiths. Those rubber grips and curved handles developed by some computer wizz,are ridiculous. OH YES, don't forget to pay $750 to $1,000 for one.

I'll stick with my Model 19's, 586,and 686's...Thank You very much!!!!!

Adjusted for inflation, the current prices are not out of line.

I am not sure what "PAZZAS" is, but I think being able to buy these models again is great even if the new models do not quite have the "Pizzazz" of the originals!

 

[Cartouche]

Good question MX-5, It makes me wonder how they determine what is a Classic. The Mod 10/ M&P, certainly should. Even though it is still in the line, like the Mod 29. Does customer demand? How sales were way back when? I do agree that the Mod 24, 25, 27,21,etc, were and are classics. I suppose for every S&W collector/ shooter you ask will have their own favorite/classic, or what should be included in the Classic section of the line.