S&W's Revolvers going forward

[S&W Rover]

CNC machining and the ability to monitor the demands of the market together should allow S&W to economically produce many different models in smaller quantities. If a counter to the Cobra and the K6 is required, S&W should generate a better response and get it on the market quickly. Is the answer to the K6 a slimmed down K frame snubbie? Or to bring back the 6 shot J frame 632 .327 Fed Mag? Or is it a new frame size altogether, allowing a six shot .38 Special cylinder slightly wider than a J frame's?

Quality control? At $700 or more, a S&W revolver should meet the standards expected of a high-end product. It should be perfect. My wife has a modern sewing machine that cost about $700 and has a heck of a lot more machining, intricate parts, screws, springs, detailed assembly, etc., than any handgun at any price today -- not to mention a motor and a computer. I've been told the modern practice is that the CNC machine with its sensors is inherently providing the QC - there is no separate QC inspector. But there should be. Pay him or her $100 an hour, let them inspect five guns an hour, and I'd gladly pay $20 extra for the assurance that every S&W revolver I care to order is perfect right out of the box. (It would save S&W a lot of money all of the returns must cost them, too).

Back to the OP's point, S&W should tweak their line of revolvers to bring us something that responds directly to the challenge posed by the Cobra and the K6. S&W has introduced some interesting revolver designs recently - the 5 shot .44 Special L frame, the Model 66 with a two-piece 2.75 inch barrel, etc., indicating they are aware of the need to keep customers interested and happy. A well-thought out response to the Cobra and the K6 -- something that has six charge holes and is still svelte -- would be worth owning.

 

[Wise_A]

What exactly do the K6 and Cobra do that every other revolver on the market doesn't?

The K6 goes for ~$750 on Bud's, and a grand retail everywhere I've seen one. It's got some little sights on it...and that's about it. Compare to the 640 Pro for a couple hundred less, which gets you the sights and a cylinder cut for moonclips.

The Cobra is...okay, the only people excited about the Cobra, it seems, are S&W guys. It's a pig. The bobbed hammer is lipstick to try and move a mediocre gun that isn't selling. Even the examples they brought to SHOT were poorly-finished.

S&W's biggest problem is that the limited revolver market is saturated by the sheer volume of SKUs that S&W puts out, along with the competition from all the used Smiths that are indistinguishable from the brand-new ones. They've made a product that's too durable.

If anything, S&W needs to figure out the niches that are in-demand on the used market, and focus on getting some of those to market, along with the popular new guns (686, 625, hammerless Js, etc). Although their new .380 with the grip and thumb safety is baller--they're gonna sell extremely well.

Hey Smith, wanna sell a truckload of new revolvers? Make an L-frame 10mm. We're averaging a new 10mm automatic a month, and ya'll can't take $1200-$1400 610s as a hint that a new version would sell well.

And I kinda want a new K-frame .327 Fed Mag, but there are limited numbers of freaks like me.

PS, dudes -- $700 for a new steel-framed gun is a steal. That's about what Springfield's midrange Range Officer goes for if you get a good deal. Arguing that every new $700 S&W should be perfect and flawless is borderline fantasy. Manufacturing guns costs way more money than you dudes presume it does.

 

[Ashlander]

What exactly do the K6 and Cobra do that every other revolver on the market doesn't?

The K6 goes for ~$750 on Bud's, and a grand retail everywhere I've seen one. It's got some little sights on it...and that's about it. Compare to the 640 Pro for a couple hundred less, which gets you the sights and a cylinder cut for moonclips.

The Cobra is...okay, the only people excited about the Cobra, it seems, are S&W guys. It's a pig. The bobbed hammer is lipstick to try and move a mediocre gun that isn't selling. Even the examples they brought to SHOT were poorly-finished.

Kimber and Taurus are making 6 shot revolvers the same size as K-frames. The Colt Cobra is only a bit larger. I have a 7 shot Taurus 617 that weighs 28 ounces. It has an excellent trigger. It has replaced my 3" 686 Plus in my carry rotation. If the Taurus Model 856 has the same trigger as the Taurus 85, then it will have a better trigger than all of my J-frames.

While my S&W revolvers are beautiful, I am not carrying any of them. I am carrying a Kimber and a Taurus. And anybody who says S&W has better quality, they need to read the dozens of threads posted by very unhappy S&W owners posted in just the last several months.

Think of it -- S&W developed the J-frames and the K-frames a million years ago (I exaggerate). Now, apparently, they are carved in stone. S&W seems incapable of exploring fundamental change. To their credit many years ago they tried to produce a small 6 shot C-frame but they abandoned it. Now Kimber and Taurus have picked up the ball.

S&W needs to rethink revolvers or they are going to lose a significant chunk of the concealed carry market.

 

[diggler1833]

What will S&W do going forward to combat the Kimber K6s and even the new Cobra with the bobbed hammer? Maybe nothing, but I wonder if they are working on something? I personally would like to see a Performance Center model 66 that has a bobbed hammer or even a version of a 6 shot J frame of some sort. I have to imagine that they are working on something. If anyone knows of any news, please share.

Not over-clocking the barrels would be a good start...

 

[Muss Muggins]

What will S&W do going forward to combat the Kimber K6s and even the new Cobra with the bobbed hammer?

I've held a K6. No reason for S&W to be worried . . .

 

[slabside2]

Going forward...S+W should be going backwards when they still produced a decent quality gun and didn't have to be shipped back to the factory cabillion times.

 

[Walkingwolf]

I have not had to send my Smiths back even one time. As much as people complain about Taurus I find it humorous that taurus quality is being lauded over Smith. But with that said I just picked up a new old stock Taurus 82 yesterday. I am thrilled with the gun so far, perfect finish, tight lockup, and three inch offhand 10 yard groups with no break in.

Any gun can have complaints, good Lord I have heard plenty about Kimbers micro compact 1911's. The truth is that people tend to complain more than they praise.

I have had to send one gun back, a Charter Arms Pitbull. I got it back repaired in less than 2 weeks, for me no big deal. Now if it was my only gun then it might be. But how many of us here have only one gun for carry?

 

[Telecaster]

Ruger is finding ways to stuff more rounds in their revolvers.

S&W changed the M&P 9C to apparently compete with the Glock 19.

Ya never know...

 

[Green Frog]

I've got a bunch of great ideas for "new" revolvers and was thinking about describing a couple of them on this thread, but then I had an epiphany... I'm like a guy in the 1920s with a bunch of great ideas for improved buggy whips, sealing wax, and celluloid shirt collars. Great ideas whose time unfortunately has passed. No, I won't give up my own revolvers, but I won't be looking to any of the current companies for revolver innovations. Sad but true.

Froggie

 

[Protocall_Design]

You might try putting some of your ideas in the Wish List forum. Who knows, maybe someone at S&W or an aftermarket company might just act on one or two. Revolvers are still relevant to quite a few people.

 

[Wise_A]

Kimber and Taurus are making 6 shot revolvers the same size as K-frames. The Colt Cobra is only a bit larger.

The size differential between the K6 and a J-frame is...well, not significant, but it's there when you start looking at it. First you notice the rear is a bit further out there, then the trigger sits a bit lower, and the ejector-shroud area...and before you know it you realize the K6 is bigger in every dimension. It's closer to a Ruger in size.

As to the Cobra, I'm not saying it's big, I'm saying it's a bad gun, and a bobbed hammer isn't worthy of jazz hands. Notice how the Cobra only got a couple quick rounds of "release" articles in the gun media? When gun'riters don't write about new guns or gear, it means that they don't have anything nice to say. And as a side note, why you don't read negative reviews. They're not glowingly positive about everything that people show them, they just don't publish the bad stuff, or ask the manufacturer if they can review a different product.

While my S&W revolvers are beautiful, I am not carrying any of them. I am carrying a Kimber and a Taurus.

I'm carrying a Glock 26, which leads me to chuckle heartily at 5-v-6 arguments.

Taurus is interesting. They're willing to do a lot more experimentation with cartridge/frame combos than anybody else (Raging Hornet, anyone?) but it doesn't pay off very often, and they're never going to shake their potmetal reputation. Still, they manage to sell a lot of guns.

And anybody who says S&W has better quality, they need to read the dozens of threads posted by very unhappy S&W owners posted in just the last several months.

S&W turned out bad guns back in the day, too, the difference is that now everybody has the Internet to piss and moan on. Every company out there churns out a **** every now and then, it's the nature of production. I know a lot of guys that had to return guns in the 50s-80s, the difference is that back then it was between them and their dealer.

The fact that people think that this is a new phenomena is absolutely hilarious.

Think of it -- S&W developed the J-frames and the K-frames a million years ago (I exaggerate). Now, apparently, they are carved in stone. S&W seems incapable of exploring fundamental change. To their credit many years ago they tried to produce a small 6 shot C-frame but they abandoned it. Now Kimber and Taurus have picked up the ball.

More like, Kimber and Colt are trying to differentiate themselves from an established brand (and failing). Seriously, what's "fundamental change"? Cramming +1 in the cylinder?

PS--S&W's releasing a hammer-fired .380 Shield with a grip safety and optional thumb safety, complete with handy-dandy racking grip on the back of the slide, and pitching the itty-bitty .380 trend in favor a gun that people can actually use. Probably the last thing I'm going to buy (I fancy myself an "advanced user"), but when it comes to the big-money new gun owner/carrier market, ease of use and manual safeties are probably the two most requested features.

S&W needs to rethink revolvers or they are going to lose a significant chunk of the concealed carry market.

They already have. You're behind the curve.

New small-frame revolvers are not the predominant "CCW market". In fact, I don't even think that real CCW is a significant portion of gun sales. It's not end use that defines market segments, it's the profile of the user. And they're frankly just not that interested in new revolvers. Remember, they can't conceive of just how unreliable automatics used to be. All they know is what the situation is today, where people can reasonably expect to literally buy any 9mm ammo off the shelf and have it function reliably--which strikes even me as insane (I'm not as old as you guys).