New vs. old S&Ws

[Telecaster]

Brownell's Smyth Busters talks about old vs MIM.

Smyth Busters: Are Old Smith & Wessons Better Than New Ones? - YouTube

 

[Browns fan]

If i found 1000 dollars on the ground and had to choose between buying a new s&w or turning the money in..... The money gets turned in ,

 

[UncleEd]

If i found 1000 dollars on the ground and had to choose between buying a new s&w or turning the money in..... The money gets turned in ,

If you do find $1,000 on the ground, it's mine.
Thank you very much.

 

[Dan Christopher]

The new guns are better overall, and more consistent. My only problem with S&W as it operates today is that they no longer do QC. Every revolver should be checked for timing and B/C gap before it leaves the factory. Any idiot can be trained to do those checks.

 

[HughD1]

Have both. Love both. Fully expect to buy more of both in the future. Each has it's place. All of my blued guns are pre-lock. They are beautiful! The new guns shoot very well and I shoot them without as much concern for wear and tear as the old ones. Buy what makes you happy!
Hugh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[series guy]

Spot on! I have some modern S&Ws that are amazing shooters.

 

[PALADIN85020]

Yeah, I know the newer guns are stronger, most are reliable and probably safer.

BUT the old production guns were made differently. No MIM parts. Hand fitted. Smooth in operation. Meticulously made to lock up perfectly. Finely finished, either blued or nickeled. A joy to see and handle. Old-time craftsmanship was evident from stocks to muzzle. Careful quality control, also.

Here are two examples from the past. An M&P blued example from 1923, and a nickeled M&P from 1939. Feast your eyes, because you will not find sucn beautiful and smooth-operating guns made today. The current guns seem to be slap-dash "just put-the-parts-together and get 'em out the door" sloppy QC firearms.

John

 

[shocker]

Mythbuster
The new S&W Model 19 Classic ~ A S&W Armorer's Review - YouTube
Fast forward to 6:00 but the whole 50 minutes is worth watching.

 

[Breakaway500]

The "new" ultra-light revolvers are a joy to own. I have a 43C that is now the wifes. I let her shoot it once...mistake..

 

[sodacan]

Personally, I reject all post-1997 S&W revolvers. If you like them, that's your choice. A large segment of my collection is postwar, pre-1957 guns, and in comparing the fit, finish and mechanics to new guns, the new stuff leaves me cold. Here are a couple of my favorites. The one on the left is a Model of 1950 (45acp) and a first year Highway Patrolman.

 

[Beauetienne]

I expect my kids or grand kids, to get a better return on my 'pre' revolvers when I'm gone.
The only ones I own are pre-lock. They have a better trade/sale value in my neighborhood. That's important to a small time collector like myself.
Not saying I will never own one with a hole in it, but I have no plans to.

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

Someone needs to tell the youngster that pomade and long sideburns went out a long time ago

 

[Telecaster]

Someone needs to tell the youngster that pomade and long sideburns went out a long time ago

Along with hand-fitted firearm parts.

 

[message_board_expert]

PALADINsaid:

[/The current guns seem to be slap-dash "just put-the-parts-together and get 'em out the door" sloppy QC firearms.QUOTE]

Might as well buy a Charter Arms gun.

 

[Rpg]

The newer Smiths are functional guns, they just don't have the aesthetic appeal of the older Smiths. The newer guns lack the elegance of the older Smiths.

A Mossberg pump shotgun functions fine as does a Ruger red label shotgun, but no one would mistake them for older M12's or Parkers in terms of fit, finish, function or elegance.

 

[Telecaster]

PALADINsaid:

[/The current guns seem to be slap-dash "just put-the-parts-together and get 'em out the door" sloppy QC firearms.QUOTE]

Might as well buy a Charter Arms gun.

Nope. Not even close. I've found Charter Arms' current offerings to be mediocre. S&W at its worst is a hundred times better.

 

[NY-1]

If it weren't for the lock and the recontouring of some frames to accommodate it, all of the money I've spent tracking down older S&Ws would've happily been put toward purchasing new models. I don't mind the MIM parts, CNC machining, or two-piece barrels. They probably help quite a bit as far as consistency and ease of installation and overall repairability are concerned.

 

[BigBill]

Fact, my two new s&w m58 and m57 had two different feeling triggers. One was smoother than the other, even the let off was different. I opened up the rougher one and lubed it with moly. Now both revolvers actions are pretty much the same now. I like my revolvers to have the same feel trigger wise. I have both new and old revolvers. Enjoy them.

Hint, most manufacturers don't have a QC department. It's up to the machine operator to check his first part then run them. Colt made this change in the late 70's to early 80's. That's when they were lacking in quality control.

Two piece barrels? No talent is needed in fitting a two piece barrel, the one piece barrel takes a craftsman. Cost reduction savings.done in Less time.

 

[BigBill]

Someone needs to tell the youngster that pomade and long sideburns went out a long time ago

The mullet is dead,,,,,lol,,,,Elvis has left the building.

Today snap them together like legos and hope we get a good one so far I'm at 4 for 4 good ones that's 100% so far. Do I feel lucky?

 

[HorizontalMike]

If it weren't for the lock and the recontouring of some frames to accommodate it, all of the money I've spent tracking down older S&Ws would've happily been put toward purchasing new models. I don't mind the MIM parts, CNC machining, or two-piece barrels. They probably help quite a bit as far as consistency and ease of installation and overall repairability are concerned.

I have just one MIM revolver, a 627PC 2.625" 8-shot. The MIM stuff does show, however, one can always buff it out. But then one would complain, "...it dun't match!..."

Pick your poison...