at_liberty
Member
First thread I read after registering and then reading all the policies seems to be based on the classic "do not ask here" question. I'm confused.
S&W revolvers of today vs. yesteryear-which are better?
- Thread starter Whitens Moss
- Start date
Rebel Soul
Member
Post #38 in this thread quotes a bigwig from Smith addressing this directly. Pretty interesting and informative read.
I tend to agree...nothing in my personal experience has led me to believe MIM parts are anything but reliable.
Kilibreaux
Member
This is clearly intended as an inflammatory thread....
However, the ONLY truly "new" revolver S&W has put out over the years is the .500 Magnum. The .500 Mag from a 4" barrel S&W is the IDEAL man-portable stopper.
dlidster
Member
Happily, it didn't turn out that way. For the most part I have felt this a positive, objective discussion.
toyfarmerjj
Member
My general rule is not to purchase S&W revolvers and automatics that are older than 1985. I love the craftsmanship of the older guns. I have mixed feeling about the new S&Ws. I purchased a M&P Shield 40 caliber, love it, S&W Bodyguard 380, not so much. My favorite shooters are my 38/44 and yes my Model 39.
CatSnipah
Member
They all have a place in our hearts and safes. It all depends on what YOU personally like, and for your own reasons.
Nostalgia. Function. Fit. Form. Color. Material of construction. Collection-ism. Newness.
All of these reasons are valid. It all depends on what YOU like. I have a respect for the older models, but I'm not into them, personally. I enjoy reading about the history of how we got to today's firearms, and therefore, I have respect for the past.
You'll not catch me criticizing anyone for their choices, as both are GOOD choices. You simply can't go wrong if it is what YOU like.
And you may change your opinions over time, as well. Example - when I got my first AR early last year, I figured I'd always be a "modern sporting rifle" kind of guy. However, in the past 3 months, I've picked up a 1967 Norinco SKS and a 1926 Mosin Nagant 91. I never thought I'd get into the historical military surplus rifles. But I did. And I love them. I still love my original AR, and will likely add another one at some point, but I've gained a healthy respect and admiration for the "history" of these military rifles.
Just enjoy yourselves. Old or new - they are both excellent choices if it means something to you, personally.
Nostalgia. Function. Fit. Form. Color. Material of construction. Collection-ism. Newness.
All of these reasons are valid. It all depends on what YOU like. I have a respect for the older models, but I'm not into them, personally. I enjoy reading about the history of how we got to today's firearms, and therefore, I have respect for the past.
You'll not catch me criticizing anyone for their choices, as both are GOOD choices. You simply can't go wrong if it is what YOU like.
And you may change your opinions over time, as well. Example - when I got my first AR early last year, I figured I'd always be a "modern sporting rifle" kind of guy. However, in the past 3 months, I've picked up a 1967 Norinco SKS and a 1926 Mosin Nagant 91. I never thought I'd get into the historical military surplus rifles. But I did. And I love them. I still love my original AR, and will likely add another one at some point, but I've gained a healthy respect and admiration for the "history" of these military rifles.
Just enjoy yourselves. Old or new - they are both excellent choices if it means something to you, personally.
I agree with the 'Bangor Punta' comment above, complete junk. That being said in todays market, the question is, is it accurate and will it last. If it's accurate and lasts then the question comes down to ascetics. That is a whole personal issue. I couldn't get over the Glock when they first came out. Yuk… Now I own Glocks. Do I like the old Smiths? You bet because that is what I'm used to. The newer designs well I'm just going to have to warm up to them just like smart phones and iPads. I've not used the lock on the new guns I've purchased but for the most part it doesn't bother me. I liked the looks of the "old" style partly because that is what I got used to. If there were no innovations in the industry we'd all be shooting K38's, happy with our 38 special. Now we have the 460 and 500 not my cup of tea but WOW. We have 357 magnum in the J frame WOW. Way to go Smith & Wesson.
Wow! 19 +/- years of S&W firearms production... and all of it complete junk?
Hmmmm... guess I learned something today.
model70hunter
Member
model70hunter
Member
There are those who prefer the old but are anchronistic, out of place and out of time.
There are those who prefer only new believing superior metalurgy and precision parts are best.
I currently own 7 S&W revolvers, 5 are old, the newest of the 5 is a 27-2 in 3.5" or a 19-3, I'd have to double check.
I have 2 629's. One has the lock. The only difference between my 629 and 29 that I can see is the sound of the click when I cock the hammer.
I did drag my feet on the lock but was never able to find a Nickel 29 in 4". The price was so much better on the 629 in 4". I was apprehensive and now I am happy with the gun. It does what a S&W is supposed to do, work every time and accurately.
So I too am anchronistic for the nostalgia of hand made guns and in a minor way how collectible they are. Beats a 401 K.
I am modernistic for the great way the new ones perform.
Both have a place in my home and heart.
Each and every morning I am thankful I have 2 hands and 2 hips, one for the old 29 and one for the MIM momma that has become my numero uno hunting backup.
There are those who prefer only new believing superior metalurgy and precision parts are best.
I currently own 7 S&W revolvers, 5 are old, the newest of the 5 is a 27-2 in 3.5" or a 19-3, I'd have to double check.
I have 2 629's. One has the lock. The only difference between my 629 and 29 that I can see is the sound of the click when I cock the hammer.
I did drag my feet on the lock but was never able to find a Nickel 29 in 4". The price was so much better on the 629 in 4". I was apprehensive and now I am happy with the gun. It does what a S&W is supposed to do, work every time and accurately.
So I too am anchronistic for the nostalgia of hand made guns and in a minor way how collectible they are. Beats a 401 K.
I am modernistic for the great way the new ones perform.
Both have a place in my home and heart.
Each and every morning I am thankful I have 2 hands and 2 hips, one for the old 29 and one for the MIM momma that has become my numero uno hunting backup.
sac-gunslinger
Member
I have been thinking about this question for several days. I am old enough to be considered a mossback (and proud of it) so that part of me appreciates the fit and feel of the classic S&Ws.
But I am also an engineer and have worked in the mechanical part of engineering. As such, I appreciate the superior tolerances to which contemporary parts are manufactured. I am not bothered by MIM as we see critical aircraft/aerospace components manufactured using this methodology. MIM produces parts that are more consistent in tolerances (yes, they are ugly, but ugly is not something we can measure). And the proof is in the putting. Contemporary guns produce higher average velocities because the new parts are made to closer tolerances.
I am currently thinking about buying a Model 67. So which will I buy, the classic hand-fitted piece or the contemporary gun with the plastic-looking finish but superieor performance? My conclusion is leaning ever-so-slightly to the contemporary gun for performances' sake.
But my overall philosophy can be called "stumble onto." Whatever version I "stumble onto" when I finally decide to pull the trigger on the purchase (pun intended) will be what I buy. The Fates will be a factor in what I end up with. And I will be perfectly happy with whichever one it will be.
P.S. I have given up tilting at the windmill of the Internal Lock. It ain't that bad, does not seem to be seriously failure prone, but is butt-ugly. At my age I am not going to be interfering with the business of Bad Guys with any regularity so the chance of failure leaving me in dire straits disappears out in a limpid pool of low probabilities.
But I am also an engineer and have worked in the mechanical part of engineering. As such, I appreciate the superior tolerances to which contemporary parts are manufactured. I am not bothered by MIM as we see critical aircraft/aerospace components manufactured using this methodology. MIM produces parts that are more consistent in tolerances (yes, they are ugly, but ugly is not something we can measure). And the proof is in the putting. Contemporary guns produce higher average velocities because the new parts are made to closer tolerances.
I am currently thinking about buying a Model 67. So which will I buy, the classic hand-fitted piece or the contemporary gun with the plastic-looking finish but superieor performance? My conclusion is leaning ever-so-slightly to the contemporary gun for performances' sake.
But my overall philosophy can be called "stumble onto." Whatever version I "stumble onto" when I finally decide to pull the trigger on the purchase (pun intended) will be what I buy. The Fates will be a factor in what I end up with. And I will be perfectly happy with whichever one it will be.
P.S. I have given up tilting at the windmill of the Internal Lock. It ain't that bad, does not seem to be seriously failure prone, but is butt-ugly. At my age I am not going to be interfering with the business of Bad Guys with any regularity so the chance of failure leaving me in dire straits disappears out in a limpid pool of low probabilities.
Last edited:
BigBill
Absent Comrade
The craftsmanship looks the same to me fit n finish wise.
Again I could care less about the lock. It's still a great looking and feeling revolver in my hands. I'm willing to bet the metallurgy has changed for the better today in all these many years of improving metals.
My question is if dirty Harry's revolver his m29 had the loc back then do you think that would of hurt the sales of the m29?
I believe they would be flying out the dealers door just the same.
So why the hub-bub about the loc. I'll take 'll the new ones I can afford of the n frames. Even the brand new n frames rock.
Let's face it my s&w brothers all we have left manufacturing awesome revolvers is s&w so let's keep on supporting them. I don't want any other revolver. Since s&w is number one all the others are losers from second place on. I want the most bang for my hard earned dollar. The best quality my money can buy.
Again I could care less about the lock. It's still a great looking and feeling revolver in my hands. I'm willing to bet the metallurgy has changed for the better today in all these many years of improving metals.
My question is if dirty Harry's revolver his m29 had the loc back then do you think that would of hurt the sales of the m29?
I believe they would be flying out the dealers door just the same.
So why the hub-bub about the loc. I'll take 'll the new ones I can afford of the n frames. Even the brand new n frames rock.
Let's face it my s&w brothers all we have left manufacturing awesome revolvers is s&w so let's keep on supporting them. I don't want any other revolver. Since s&w is number one all the others are losers from second place on. I want the most bang for my hard earned dollar. The best quality my money can buy.
My bad "Ascetics and aesthetics are two completely different points of view..." I did mean aesthetic. I remember looking at some of the first Bangor Punta models that came into the gunshop in town. They were not of the quality earlier models had been. Jerry J.
.357 old or new
I think I like both but for different reasons. I like the old because I appreciate the workmanship that went in them. I like the wood stocks and blue finish. That being said, I was recently looking for a .357 and had decided to purchase a model 27 but before I completed the deal, I was in a shop that had a new 686 plus Pro Series (7 shot) reduced by $100 and it was already below MSRP before the extra $100 off. I couldn't refuse the deal. I don't think I could have found a gun more accurate than this one and it's got a great trigger. I think I will shoot this more than most of my other guns. For one, the finish is durable and I don't have to worry about babying the gun. If I had purchased a 27 or 19 in great shape, I probably wouldn't shoot the gun near as much as I wouldn't want to take a chance on messing up the finish or scratching the gun. Anyway, this is a great shooter and one that will get a lot of use shooting both 38s and 357s. I still other old guns I can sit around and admire.
I think I like both but for different reasons. I like the old because I appreciate the workmanship that went in them. I like the wood stocks and blue finish. That being said, I was recently looking for a .357 and had decided to purchase a model 27 but before I completed the deal, I was in a shop that had a new 686 plus Pro Series (7 shot) reduced by $100 and it was already below MSRP before the extra $100 off. I couldn't refuse the deal. I don't think I could have found a gun more accurate than this one and it's got a great trigger. I think I will shoot this more than most of my other guns. For one, the finish is durable and I don't have to worry about babying the gun. If I had purchased a 27 or 19 in great shape, I probably wouldn't shoot the gun near as much as I wouldn't want to take a chance on messing up the finish or scratching the gun. Anyway, this is a great shooter and one that will get a lot of use shooting both 38s and 357s. I still other old guns I can sit around and admire.
I only own three smiths right now
God knows how many I've owned, but I'm at a point where I don't have the space to be a collector, so I've sold my 10s, my 14, my 325NG, my old Js, etc, and the 28-2 is soon to be sold as I find a super heavy 357 N frame to be redundant to my 686SSR.
I'd love to own some more Pre-10s, a Pre-27, and a K22, but I find it hard to ignore improvements. My SSR handles full house loads, is aesthetically excellent, and thanks to the interchangeable sight system allows me to switch to my favorite Gold Dot front without damaging a collector's piece. The 638 is obviously nothing new, but it gave me the option to purchase a cheap knock around piece for less than collector pricing that I give no ****s about scratching or wearing down. As for the locks, I really don't care too much either way.
God knows how many I've owned, but I'm at a point where I don't have the space to be a collector, so I've sold my 10s, my 14, my 325NG, my old Js, etc, and the 28-2 is soon to be sold as I find a super heavy 357 N frame to be redundant to my 686SSR.
I'd love to own some more Pre-10s, a Pre-27, and a K22, but I find it hard to ignore improvements. My SSR handles full house loads, is aesthetically excellent, and thanks to the interchangeable sight system allows me to switch to my favorite Gold Dot front without damaging a collector's piece. The 638 is obviously nothing new, but it gave me the option to purchase a cheap knock around piece for less than collector pricing that I give no ****s about scratching or wearing down. As for the locks, I really don't care too much either way.
