variations in blued finishes

[Histprof]

Just thought I'd share some observations I've made on the variations in the "standard" blued finishes on post-war S&W revolvers based on a small number of examples I've examined. A 1948 vintage K-22 and a 1949 M&P have quite low polish finishes, while a 1954 Outdoorsman has a slightly higher polish. I attribute this to S&W's efforts to speed up production to satisfy pent-up World War II demand. Jumping ahead to 1966, a Model 15-2 has quite a nicely polished finish, but a 1968 28-2, with what is supposed to be a "satin" finish, is polished almost as well, with the exception of the sand-blasted frame edges. A 1978 vintage 28-2 has a considerably lower level of polish, but better (again, with the exception of the sand-blasted frame edges) than the 1948-49 "standard" blued finishes. My conclusion is that, for this period anyway, it's difficult to talk about any consistent level of polish given to blued S&W revolvers (I realize that, for a while, you could get the "high bright" finish for an extra ten dollars). What do you think?

 

[Histprof]

Just thought I'd share some observations I've made on the variations in the "standard" blued finishes on post-war S&W revolvers based on a small number of examples I've examined. A 1948 vintage K-22 and a 1949 M&P have quite low polish finishes, while a 1954 Outdoorsman has a slightly higher polish. I attribute this to S&W's efforts to speed up production to satisfy pent-up World War II demand. Jumping ahead to 1966, a Model 15-2 has quite a nicely polished finish, but a 1968 28-2, with what is supposed to be a "satin" finish, is polished almost as well, with the exception of the sand-blasted frame edges. A 1978 vintage 28-2 has a considerably lower level of polish, but better (again, with the exception of the sand-blasted frame edges) than the 1948-49 "standard" blued finishes. My conclusion is that, for this period anyway, it's difficult to talk about any consistent level of polish given to blued S&W revolvers (I realize that, for a while, you could get the "high bright" finish for an extra ten dollars). What do you think?

 

[Deek]

I am interested in seeing replies to this thread. I was just thinking to myself last night, while cleaning all the revolvers I had taken to the range yesterday, why is my 25-2 so much shinier and prettier than my 28-2. I like the finish on the 25-2 better, but they both shoot like a dream, so I won't complain.

 

[diamonback68]

Prof, you have pretty much hit the nail on the head. Not sure of exact dates, but from the late 40s to the late 50s the degree of polish was not as high or as good as pre-war and the 60s.
I understand it was beacuse Smith had lost a lot of higher trained polishers and finishers after the war or they had moved onto other endeavors and it took a while to develop skilled laborers. It's quite an art.
The K series seemed to get the least attention, while the "high ticket" Outdoorsmen, 27s and 29s still got a relatively good polish from the more skilled finishers
As you pointed out, the 28 was never supposed to be a highly polished firearm, but a more a lower priced utilitarian piece for the LE agencies.

 

[Doc44]

I bought a box for an M&P revolver that was shipped in 1947. Inside the box was a postcard addressed to S&W asking you to respond to the question about how you did you like their new satin blue finish. Maybe they started using this finish because of the reasons stated by Dick, but as least it appears to have been a planned event. Many models would be given a bright polish or nickel plated for an extra charge even though the catalog did not list these finishes as an option.

Bill

 

[BlackAgnes]

I actually prefer the more subdued finish that S&W used on early post-war guns. I always thought it looked "classier". If you examine one of these revolvers, you can see that the care taken in preserving sharp edges and stampings was equal to high-polished examples.

Tim