Pre-27 Versus 27-9

[rom141]

Ok, so I need some opinion / advice from those of you far more experienced and knowledgeable about such things than myself.

I recently acquired a beautiful specimen of a circa 1954 pre-27 that I thought would just be another classic shooter for me, but it captured me right out of the box and now I cant shoot it because, well, its just too pristine.

So to assuage my need I immediately went out and bought a "Classic" 27-9 (circa 2020) so that I could get my fix. Problem is that I was disappointed from the minute I laid eyes on the re-make. Shooting it didn't make it any better. I happen to have a new Python with me at the same time at the range and I ended up spending all my time/ammo with the enemy.

From the flat black / lack of luster in the bluing, the stiff and non-fluid mechanics of the action, and even the over sized and fake looking grips, I was not impressed with the re-make.

Don't get me wrong, I love almost all S&W revolvers by genetics, but I have never been more disappointed in an S&W until now. Maybe because I am comparing to something that is no longer achievable?

Anyway, I am considering getting rid of the 27-9 after less than 100 rounds as it really doesn't do it for me. I don't get the "tingle" when I handle it etc.

The original pre-27 is so sweet, that I don't think I even need to shoot it if that makes sense. But the new one is flat and un-thrilling, shooting or otherwise. Am I being too harsh or does anyone else agree that this "classic" falls a bit short?

 

[GerSan69]

I get it. You are absolutely correct, IMHO. Really can't add more, I think you covered it.

 

[sheppard]

You need to accept the 27-9 for what it is, a 2020 revolver that is not attractive to you. But before you discard it, dry fire the snot out of it as well as fire it as much as possible. You will be surprised how much the action will improve. Accept it for what it is, a functional revolver not a beauty queen like your 27.

 

[lestert357]

Ditch the 27-9 and look for a nice 27-2 to shoot; maybe not quite as sweet as the Pre-27 but close enough to get your fix.

 

[blakesum]

I agree! The new ones just lack a certain soul that the older ones have. Almost like an original painting vs a good copy of the same painting. That being said, before you dump it, you should through on a set of vintage stocks and shoot it some more. Maybe it will get better?

 

[series guy]

You have to consider that the .357 Magnum has had 67 years of use to attain it's smooth feel. You could send the new gun to the factory or a competent gunsmith for some action work and have an excellent shooter that would most likely put a smile on your face. You are in no way comparing apples to apples here.

 

[stansdds]

There are definitely differences between the old revolvers and the new revolvers made by S&W. Most obvious is the finish. Pre-1980 revolvers received the S&W Carbonia blue finish. This produced a beautiful, true blue carbon steel finish. In 1980, S&W switched to black oxide, which could still produce a deep finish, but it was darker than the Carbonia finish. Then around 2000, S&W switched to an EPA friendly black oxide finish. This produces a very black, but very thin looking finish and S&W warns to not use solvents that contain ammonia or ammoniated compounds on this finish as damage is likely.

Then there is the metal prep. Those older revolvers received a lot of attention from skilled craftsmen. Modern revolvers are put together by assemblers. There is a definite difference in appearance.

The same goes for the trigger action. The old ones were hand fitted and the pull ranged from good to outstanding. Modern MIM components are remarkable identical in finish and dimensions from one part to another, so they require little to no fitting and the pull is typically ok, but nothing stellar.

 

[22hipower]

But the new one is flat and un-thrilling, shooting or otherwise. Am I being too harsh or does anyone else agree that this "classic" falls a bit short?

Agree, and I feel the same way about the new Colt revolvers; wouldn't buy any of them.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[psquarejr]

IMHO....you have to break the 27-9 in, it will get much better, it still won't compare to the pre-27 unless you get an action job performed on it, then the 27-9 will be better than the pre-27 in function only. The older Smiths are just much more cosmeticly appealing to the eye in color, form, lines and coolness!!

 

[lrrifleman]

OP,

I have 2 Smiths of recent manufacture, but they are Stainless Steel handguns. Fortunately, neither of these revolvers have older siblings to be compared to. My L (686+) and my N (629) are both 3" models, and have surprisingly good actions, out of the box.

Fortunately, any future S&W revolvers will be of older manufacture, and blued carbon steel. For me, the new blued Smiths just don't call to me.

If I were in your shoes, and a current 27-9 doesn't inspire me, I'd replace the 27-9 with a 27-2 that called to me.

 

[44wheelman]

Just keep shopping for another 27- that floats your boat. Then sell the -9 and forget about it.

There is no enemy firearms; just competing companies, and one scratched your itch better than the other…….this time.

I bought a brand new bright stainless Python back in the early 90's….it didn't shoot too accurately; so down the road it went. I only lament it would be worth 5x what I paid for it; had I kept it.

 

[rbmac52]

Cut your losses and sell off the 27-9.

 

[Nightowl]

For what it's worth, I like Smith N frames made in the 50s and the early 90s. That being said, every gun is different! I have had some stinkers from all eras, I am currently fighting with the action on a 3 1/2 made in the somewhere around 1954.
The new guns that I have seen are made with better steel, the MIM parts are smoother and have tighter tolerances than the old guns. But, Smith does not know how to or does not want to put a decent double action on them. Almost all I have handled have hand/ratchet bind at the back of the double action pull that makes accuracy difficult. For double action follow through after lock up, the old guns can't be beat.

That being said, each gun is an entity into itself, some are better than others. I don't think you can grab a gun of a specific time, say a 27-2, and think it will be perfect!! You have to do the standard checks for timing, consistently carrying up, etc. to make a good selection.

If you want your 27-9 to have a good action, I would suggest some of the better know revolver smiths to do it. I have not had any luck with the factory fixing the actions on my guns that I have sent back. They come back with the hand/ratchet bind, not withstanding my instructions to make it smooth. I don't think they know how!!
Unless your pre 27 is like unfired in the box, I would shoot it. You can put a lot of rounds down the barrel without more than a turn line to indicate that it was shot, if you are careful and clean after shooting.
Welcome to the world or revolvers!

 

[Shark Bait]

Shoot the pre 27 and enjoy it. That's what it was made for. Take proper care of it and all is good.

 

[Marshal Tom]

All of us know what you mean. It is sad but true. I have a 4" pre 27 shooter but recently traded for a NIB 5" 27-2. The previous owner asked me not to shoot it because he wants to get it back! Probably not going to happen but it is the only unfired handgun I own. I am wrestling with that one. If I were you I would find a high condition used 27 to shoot and sell the 27-9 if it just doesn't do it for you. Life is too short to own ugly guns!

 

[RKmesa]

I think there is a place for both the modern and the vintage... and this thread needs some photos.

The pre-27s are beautiful (they make up the bulk of my .357 Magnum collection) and this 6.5" is a nice example...



...however, this 6.5" 27-7 is also very nicely put together with a beautiful finish AND it is an 8-shooter.

.

I have never shot either of the above, but I have shot, and enjoy shooting a bunch of well-used pre-27s, 27s and 27-2s including, the following:



I also enjoy shooting this "modern" 627-5 (shown below with a comparable pre-27 for fun)







I think there is a place for all things S&W - especially when calibered in .357 Magnum.

 

[rom141]

@RKmesa Thank you for the beautiful pics! Also to you and everyone else, I am grateful for your wisdom and opinions. You have all given me great food for thought, and I am feeling better about my options in the light of a new day after my range experience yesterday.

 

[clang444]

You know, if you start shooting your pre-27 now, and use it hard, it might be wore out in 4-5 generations.

: )

 

[Muley Gil]

All of us know what you mean. It is sad but true. I have a 4" pre 27 shooter but recently traded for a NIB 5" 27-2. The previous owner asked me not to shoot it because he wants to get it back! Probably not going to happen but it is the only unfired handgun I own. I am wrestling with that one. If I were you I would find a high condition used 27 to shoot and sell the 27-9 if it just doesn't do it for you. Life is too short to own ugly guns!

Go ahead and shoot it, then he won't want it back!

 

[GSP Fan]

It's the same feeling I get when I look at a new M70 Winchester VS a nice pre64 there is just no soul to the current production of firearms.
I had the same delima with a M48-7. I just couldn't warm up to it. I don't shoot one that much but it was what it was. I found myself leaving it in the safe and taking the K22's to the range. I sold it and spent twice as much almost on a nice older M48 that puts a smile on my face every time I take it out to the range.

 

[damienph]

My model 27 is a newer 27-9. As with most others, I do prefer the pre-lock guns however, mine is nicely finished and a very accurate shooter. I would trade it for good condition 27-2 but not much else.

The only change that I made to mine was swap the new grips for a pair of older factory targets.

 

[lrb1200]

New guy here OP

"From the flat black / lack of luster in the bluing, the stiff and non-fluid mechanics of the action, and even the over sized and fake looking grips"

You "get it", and summed it.

Dump the new one, you're never going to warm up to it.

Find a shooter grade 27-2, it'll grab you, and you'll
shoot it with no regrets.

 

[mikeruns]

Ok, so I need some opinion / advice from those of you far more experienced and knowledgeable about such things than myself.

I recently acquired a beautiful specimen of a circa 1954 pre-27 that I thought would just be another classic shooter for me, but it captured me right out of the box and now I cant shoot it because, well, its just too pristine.

So to assuage my need I immediately went out and bought a "Classic" 27-9 (circa 2020) so that I could get my fix. Problem is that I was disappointed from the minute I laid eyes on the re-make. Shooting it didn't make it any better. I happen to have a new Python with me at the same time at the range and I ended up spending all my time/ammo with the enemy.

From the flat black / lack of luster in the bluing, the stiff and non-fluid mechanics of the action, and even the over sized and fake looking grips, I was not impressed with the re-make.

Don't get me wrong, I love almost all S&W revolvers by genetics, but I have never been more disappointed in an S&W until now. Maybe because I am comparing to something that is no longer achievable?

Anyway, I am considering getting rid of the 27-9 after less than 100 rounds as it really doesn't do it for me. I don't get the "tingle" when I handle it etc.

The original pre-27 is so sweet, that I don't think I even need to shoot it if that makes sense. But the new one is flat and un-thrilling, shooting or otherwise. Am I being too harsh or does anyone else agree that this "classic" falls a bit short?

I am surprised that one of the classics is sounding crappy for you…
My good friend bought a classic model 29 years back and it is a gem even with the unsightly lock….true, there are visual details that we are biased to from the earlier 27-2's and similar…my friend's has a marvelous action. I too purchased one model 29 mtn gun with the lock and I can't recall what dash but about maybe 2010-2011 vintage which is currently in storage in safe, and it is maybe my tightest, lockingest, accurate with amazing double and single actions like all my pre 80's revolvers….I've heard they are sometimes slipping on qc or lack of qc at the factory these days…I have one other recent s&w which is about 4 years old and it is a model 642 air weight without a lock(it's also a trouble free fine shooter)….I'm not sure how they get around manufacturing some models without the lock but, I would like to see them stop soon-maybe once they start good production in Tennesse lol….won't get my hopes up!
For the record, there are some newer revolvers coming out that are still fantastic!

 

[6GUNSONLY]

Shoot the pre 27. I have one exactly like yours, from 1954. I WILL make you smile. Sell the new one and buy ammo or components to feed the pre 27. Life is too short not to shoot classic guns.

 

[BigChief52]

Except for, maybe, the case hardened finish on the hammer and trigger, it is possible to make a much improved copy of the vintage revolvers with modern manufacturing techniques. Since the internal locks are nowhere near as secure as traditional trigger locks, claims of liability concerns are dubious at best. I wouldn't be surprised to see the classic series go lockless with a finish upgrade in the future.

 

[GerSan69]

Even if I don't particularly like the direction the company has gone in the revolver end of things, I am really glad many others don't have the same opinion. We don't all have the same ideas about these things, and that's what makes this hobby so interesting - always something to learn from someone around here. I know for a fact that this place, and others I've discovered as a result of other forum members' posts, have taught me more about S&W history and minutiae than I ever knew before joining.
On thing I did learn is you don't have to settle for something you don't like because the Smith & Wesson line has had so many variations over the years, there is almost always exactly what you will like right around the corner. I'm with the "sell the -9" opinion - get another earlier 27 and see if that is "the one."
This all made me realize that I don't have a single N Frame of any caliber in my "Gaggle O' Guns." A nice 27 or 28 might be the cure for that!
Thanks, all, and OP for the original thoughts. My wallet will hate us both, but once you get the hankerin', you may as well dive in. Like we used to say in olden days, "Old enough to know better, too young to resist."

 

[luvsmiths]

Dump the dash nine, since you don't like it, and look for a shooter 27 in the oder age group.... I'm in the same camp as you as far as feelings on those things go. The calls series guns never took off. For a reason.

There is no comparison to the aged revolvers, whether mint, or A little worn.

My opinion, a WORN 27 is nicer than a New one.

Same with Pythons.

These new guns are in name only. They have none of the character that the old guns have.
It's all about the money.

 

[bushmaster1313]

Ditch to 27-9 and look for a nice 27-2 to shoot; maybe not quite as sweet as the Pre-27 but close enough to get your fix.

Or a well used but not abused pre-27
This is one of my favorite guns to shoot.
Lots of holster wear on the muzzle and cylinder
Well defined turn line
Grips not numbered to gun (not even close)
Shoots like a dream with an action like butter

 

[Todd1917]

I can't speak to your finances but perhaps, you keep the bird in hand and send it off to someone like Cylinder & Slide or Magnaport to really make it your own?