S&W Revolvers

[DARE]

I'm a Hand Ejector 1896 to 1961 guy. Have no interest in anything newer than a 4-Screw.
Probably will own an Antique or two eventually.
Took a look today at the number of threads and posts in the four revolver forums.

Antiques: 7,295 threads and 74,814 posts

Hand Ejectors 1896 to 1961: 39,059 threads and 537,660 posts

Revolvers 1961 to 1980: 40,347 threads and 516,710 posts

Revolvers 1980 to Present: 60,306 threads and 755,708 posts

I'm surprised that there are as many threads as there are in Revolvers 1961 to 1980.

A 65 year period and a 19 year period have about the same number of threads.

I would be interested in knowing how many guns were produced in each of the four eras.

 

[s&wchad]

No idea on numbers...

I buy guns I wanted when I was young. I suspect I'm not alone. I do have a number of prewar guns, but most of mine were made after WWII. Anything up to 2000 can get my attention.

 

[hkcavalier]

I may be crazy, but I think the time is coming to break out another era, a 2002-Present forum to capture all the IL/CNC guns. From what I understand, the IL came sometime in 2001 to just about every model. 1980-2001 would capture the pinless barrel but pre-IL guns.

It would be herculean for the mods to move the appropriate threads over a la carte, so maybe just those with recent activity.

 

[C3Ranger]

I'm a Hand Ejector 1896 to 1961 guy. Have no interest in anything newer than a 4-Screw.
Probably will own an Antique or two eventually.
Took a look today at the number of threads and posts in the four revolver forums.

Antiques: 7,295 threads and 74,814 posts

Hand Ejectors 1896 to 1961: 39,059 threads and 537,660 posts

Revolvers 1961 to 1980: 40,347 threads and 516,710 posts

Revolvers 1980 to Present: 60,306 threads and 755,708 posts

I'm surprised that there are as many threads as there are in Revolvers 1961 to 1980.

A 65 year period and a 19 year period have about the same number of threads.

I would be interested in knowing how many guns were produced in each of the four eras.

My thoughts are that the number of threads in the 1961-1980 period has more to do with how many active forum members began their experience with firearms during that time frame, rather than how many firearms were being produced. Many of us began our careers then (law enforcement or otherwise) and have now retired and are revisiting the firearms we learned with, especially those we wish we had never sold or traded away.

 

[LostintheOzone]

I'm surprised that there are as many threads as there are in Revolvers 1961 to 1980.

That's the sweet spot for me. I have several out of that range but since I've educated myself about S&W revolvers, that time frame is my focus. I'm just not interested in anything after 1980. Seems the market moved away from revolvers for LE about that time and the quality went south.

Personally, I don't think there is a lot of interest for anything post 1980, but I could be wrong. There are people here with a better handle on that than me.

 

[paplinker]

That's the sweet spot for me. I have several out of that range but since I've educated myself about S&W revolvers, that time frame is my focus. I'm just not interested in anything after that.

Personally, I don't think there is a lot of interest for anything post 1980, but I could be wrong. There are people here with a better handle on that than me.

I in general do not get excited about the newer stuff but I will say it's pretty interesting what they are doing with 9mm in revolvers.

I used to own a three inch 547 and it was a really nice gun.

 

[two-bit cowboy]

I would be interested in knowing how many guns were produced in each of the four eras.

Production numbers, alone, would be a poor indicator.

If there were a category split at World War II you would see
a large number of new models introduced in the 20 to 30 years
afterward. This is aside from the company adding model numbers
in 1957.

Names such as Chiefs Special, Highway Patrolman, Masterpiece,
Centennial, Combat Masterpiece, Combat Magnum, Bodyguard
and .44 Magnum come to mind.

Also add the postwar metallurgy technologies: aluminum alloy and
later, beginning in 1965, stainless steel.

 

[Well Armed]

I'd reckon that there are millions more 1980s present revolvers. There are more post 1980 S&W revolvers in circulation and more S&W revolvers sold annually vs. pre 1980. There are probably almost just as many post between the eras because of the older democratic of revolver owners on this forum. I fully expect the 1980 to Present forum to start to increase rapidly in popularity and the older forums to slowly decrease as the older generation passes away.

I personally only own S&W revolvers that were manufactured in the last decade, and I have no issues with them. If S&W does away with the lock in the future, the overwhelming majority of gun owners who buy revolvers will not care one way or another about which era S&W they purchase. Those who grew up on pre 1980 S&W and, as a result, have a strong basis for Smiths manufactured during those eras are starting to die off. As they do, so will the huge deal people make about which era Smith they own. Again, the major reason why when gun owners born in the 80 on up predominantly seek out older Smith revolvers is because of their distaste for the lock. Other than that, they could not care any less.

There are only a finite number of old pre 1980 S&Ws in circulation, all the while S&W are manufacturing approximately 800,000 new revolvers annually, which is a LOT more than they were doing back in the day.

 

[CH4]

I always thought a new category for 2001 to present would be appropriate, 81 to present is way too broad. Other than a few Centennials sans lock, my interests are mainly between 1961-1998, when S&W changed the frame lug and went to MIM parts.

 

[two-bit cowboy]

I always thought a new category for 2001 to present would be appropriate, 81 to present is way too broad. Other than a few Centennials sans lock, my interests are mainly between 1961-1998, when S&W changed the frame lug and went to MIM parts.

S&W introduced the J-Magnum frame in 1996, not 1998.

 

[MelvinWalker]

That's the sweet spot for me. I have several out of that range but since I've educated myself about S&W revolvers, that time frame is my focus. I'm just not interested in anything after 1980. Seems the market moved away from revolvers for LE about that time and the quality went south.

Personally, I don't think there is a lot of interest for anything post 1980, but I could be wrong. There are people here with a better handle on that than me.

I would say the lock ended a main transition period and interest follows the pre-lock versus post.

I have several early and mid 1980's guns and the quality seems identical to prior eras.

 

[rct269]

I reckon I'm just weird!

I started off being interested in just the guns---just so long as they had target sights.

Time passed, and things changed----not with the guns right off; but with the folks who made them. It's very clear the folks who made them in the very beginning were bound and determined to make the best possible product for the price. They did just that, and they survived----and grew---and prospered. That went on for 100 years----give or take, and then it seems like the folks changed their minds.

It seems like they decided they could do better if they made their product at the lowest possible cost. The results of that change of mindset started off harmlessly enough, but then things got worse.

I reckon all this had an influence on me---and it was reflected in my collection of target guns. It started off with the first ones---the NM #3's---and it stopped at the end of those models we call the "5 screws".

I was happy with my guns and the folks who made them----kind'a sad about those that came along after.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[Well Armed]

Other than current QC issues that S&W has, I don't believe there's a huge difference between the older and properly QC'd modern S&W revolvers. The modern Smiths are just as durable IMHO and function just fine. Just because just about ALL firearm manufactures started to use new modern technology and processes that also saved money doesn't equate to a less durable product.

 

[Truckman]

I reckon I'm just weird!

This next statement should probably never be said on a public forum, but: I think I'll be weird with you, Ralph...

My interest in S&W revolvers began because it was rooted in the very beginnings of revolver history...Starting with my very first revolver, a Ruger Super Blackhawk about 1971, I've owned countless thousands including those bought and traded for in business...But S&W became my only sustaining interest when I moved from business to a retirement pastime...And now at this point in life I find myself with less faith in quality in the Smiths built after maybe 1960 than I do in those of the 20th Century up to about 1960...

Right now, the history and accompanying provenance I can gather for what I have is a focal point...Therefore I've begun to restrict my collection to that period, although I'll still add a later one if I think it will make a good bargaining chip against an older one......Ben

 

[paplinker]

Just because just about ALL firearm manufactures started to use new modern technology and processes that also saved money doesn't equate to a less durable product.

I guess it will take the next generation to find out.

I am regularly shooting guns that are easy 80+ years old and are functioning like the day they left the factory. I hope the newer stuff will be able to hold that standard.

 

[rct269]

Under the heading of different strokes for different folks, durability is all well and good. There are others for whom durability never entered their mind, and if it did, they would suppose it would be fine. This lack of interest in durability arises from the fact they don't shoot their guns---their satisfaction comes from simply having them, messing with them, and marveling at the minds of those who designed and made them----down through the ages. The guns in my latest collection, for example, spanned over 100 years. The advances exposed therein fair boggle the mind---as does the sustained quality. To learn of the decline of quality in more recent years is disheartening at best----and more like infuriating.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

Since 1980 IMHO the best thing S&W did was the L frame revolver. I prefer the 686 and 681 but 586 and 581 were popular too. Honorable Mention to the 625 Model of 1988.

I like the revolvers of the 1950s and 1960s.

 

[Well Armed]

What exactly do some believe may not be durable with more modern S&W revolvers? From what I seen, a lot of the older designs had durably issues especially with 357 loads. I'd reckon a modern K-frame is more durable than all older ones just for one example....

I can't imagine that there's an issue with S&W's metallurgy. Then there's complaints about MIM. Well Glocks, Ruger revolvers, many military grade rifles, and most of the small arms used and trusted by L.E. and militaries all over the world use MIM components. Automotive
MIM parts are used in engine, transmission, fuel injection, and steering systems, and include gears, brackets, connectors, and pulleys. MIM parts are ideal for the automotive industry because they are strong, corrosion resistant, and can withstand high temperatures. The Aerospace, automotive, and medical fields use and trust MIM components. What makes some believe that the S&W MIM specifically are lesser than and will degenerate over time?

Again, what would suggest that current S&W revolvers will not last a few lifetimes? The core design is basically the same with few mostly minor changes throughout the generations.

 

[Chris68]

My interest lies in Stainless Pre-Lock Revolvers, so my interest lies with the 1970's- Late 90's

 

[JSR III]

Alex, I'll take category number 2 for $1,000 please.......