What's the general consensus on the "Classics" models?

[ImDrRich]

I have a preference for guns as old as me but maybe I'm just plain wrong about these new "classics." How do they rate - shooting, fit, and finish wise?

 

[cowboy4evr]

I have bought several . No complaints on fit and finish . Very accurate. I have a 29-10 / 4” barrel . It gets a lot of use , hundreds of rounds every range session . I couldn’t be happier.

 

[Rpg]

There’s no reason to think that they aren’t good shooters: they work fine in most instances.

Those I’ve seen have comparable fit and finish to other contemporary Smiths, but aren’t equivalent to the older guns.

They aren’t the same as the older revolvers.

Rifling is produced using different methods than the older guns. Blued finishes are not created with the same process as the older guns. The IL frame isn’t the same as the older guns.

Ultimately, it’s a matter of personal taste.

 

[Macinaw]

This model 22-4 of 1917 is a good shooter.

 

[jcoers]

I'm super happy with my 29-10 6.5". Fit, finish and accuracy are second to none.

 

[Joed49]

The newest I have is a 29-8 MG. I wouldn't part with it willingly. The way things are made has changed. I don't care about the lock or MIM parts on the newer guns. What I care about is how the look, handle and shoot.

Never had a problem with the newer guns.

 

[American1776]

I'm seriously considering buying a Classic series.

I've examined two in person: a model 57 classic, and a model 586 classic, both have 6 inch barrels.

I was very surprised at how tight lockup is on these two examples. Bank vault lockup. I've owned pinned barrel Smiths, and none of them locked up this tightly.

In my opinion, they are very good.

 

[Tom S.]

I own a 29, and it's fit, finish and looks are as good as any 29 I've ever seen (click on picture for larger version):

 

[Mr.Harry]

I like mine, a lot. 629 Classic in 6 1/2. Bought it a couple years ago now. Might actually be going on 3 years in a couple months. Could have been ‘lucky’ or could be that the frequency of manufacturer defects are exaggerated. Don’t know. Mines awesome. I’d certainly recommend making any purchase ‘hands-on’ inspection first. I like buying off the shelf and would recommend same. Outside of that, do you like full-lug or not? I do, but it’s not for everyone.

 

[Vulcan Bob]

I snarfed up the 21-4 and then the 22-4 when they came out then added a nickeled 24 and blue 25 both in six inch, finished up with the new 40. All I can say they all are very serviceable and accurate revolvers. Although the nickel on the 24 was a bit "milky" it polished up nicely with Flitz.

 

[CH4]

They're pretty, but to my mind it's like buying a '63 Vette with '01 smog equipment.

 

[Mr.Harry]

They're pretty, but to my mind it's like buying a '63 Vette with '01 smog equipment.

I like this analogy, because in spirit, I can respect it. But in fact, the ‘01 emissions restrictions would INHIBIT the natural performance of the ‘63 engine. There is no such performance loss in the new vs. old ‘classic’ revolver. You might not WANT the IL or the MIM etc, but the fact is, the package PERFORMS as good or better and I would argue with tighter tolerances in machining.

 

[CajunBass]

I've owned several and never saw a thing wrong with them. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another.

 

[ggibson511960]

M-25 Comparison

I like this analogy, because in spirit, I can respect it. But in fact, the ‘01 emissions restrictions would INHIBIT the natural performance of the ‘63 engine. There is no such performance loss in the new vs. old ‘classic’ revolver. You might not WANT the IL or the MIM etc, but the fact is, the package PERFORMS as good or better and I would argue with tighter tolerances in machining.

I had a chance to shoot two .45 Colt M-25's side by side, my old one and a new classic model with all of the stuff purists hate. The new M-25 was better fitted, tighter, had a better trigger (amazing!), and generally shot better. All good. But the new M-25 had those Godawful laminated stocks, IL, and MIM parts. The performance of the new gun was surprising and pleasing, but I still prefer my old one.

 

[UncleEd]

Inspect, dry fire if allowed at the store, then buy with
confidence.

If something goes wrong, Smith will fix it.

My Classic 586 and 686 SSR are superb and I've owned/own
plenty of older Smiths to make a decent judgment.

As for the IL or MIM parts, I don't even give them a
thought. It's all in the shooting and that has been
excellent.

I do put on Hogue rubber grips but that's my
preference for the Smiths and the Ruger GP-100s.

 

[American1776]

I had a chance to shoot two .45 Colt M-25's side by side, my old one and a new classic model with all of the stuff purists hate. The new M-25 was better fitted, tighter, had a better trigger (amazing!), and generally shot better. All good. But the new M-25 had those Godawful laminated stocks, IL, and MIM parts. The performance of the new gun was surprising and pleasing, but I still prefer my old one.

I've owned plenty of the older guns (several model 58's, a few model 10's, old model 36, a five screw M&P, and a Combat Masterpiece). I've also handled the new classic revolvers, and my experience mirrors yours.

Most of my pinned barrel guns had some degree of endshake, some degree of rotational play in lock up. The bluing was great. The two new classics I handled were SUPER TIGHT guns. reminded me of the Colt Python lockup, with zero endshake.

I think I'm going to eventually get a new Classic

 

[Fishinfool]

My take on the "new" classics - The polish and blue is not as nice as the old P&R guns, but not bad. Never had or seen a problem with the lock, though I prefer not to have it. MIM parts are a non issue. Big plus with these guns is how tight and right they are. My 4 inch 629-6 locks up super tight, no play or end shake. .004 cylinder gap, and .4295 cylinder throats. It is one of the most accurate .44 mag revolvers I own, of any age or barrel length. Trigger pull is very good. Its a shooter.

Larry

 

[deanodog]

I have bought model 22-4s and 21-4s and would rate them as excellent in finish and shooting. I wish I still had them but that old buy,sell, trade routine I used to have got the best of me.

 

[American1776]

I have bought model 22-4s and 21-4s and would rate them as excellent in finish and shooting. I wish I still had them but that old buy,sell, trade routine I used to have got the best of me.

The buy/sell/trade routine has gotten us all at one point.

 

[Chubbo]

Tastes & Preforences

This thread proves that you cannot account for some peoples tastes, and preferences. On this thread, I'v seen modern Custom shop S&W revolvers compared to same model classic revolvers, and the modern revolver deemed, just as good, or better. Well, shouldn't it be, after being factory customized? I've been amazed to see people that were completely satisfied with extremely ugly plastic firearms, that I would't own, if offered one, free of charge. Those folks deem them very effective, and efficient. In the same token, if pride of ownership wasn't a consideration, a ball bat, pick handle, or pitch fork would also be an effective weapon. I have nothing against the newer firearms, and even own a 1990 S&W Magna Clasic 629-3 1 of 3000. I think everyone has opinions, likes, and choices, of their firearms, where I do disagree, is when the Classics are unjustly declared inferior to what some people, consider "new & better" offerings. Some people even use Automobile comparisons to illustrate their point, and I disagree with that also. A point to consider, I had a "bare bones" 1964 GTO, bought new, and driven, over 250,000 miles, that would out do the 2013 Chyrsler 300, that I currently drive, in every respect, other than pure unadulterated aggravation, and has nothing at all to do with classic revolvers. Forgive me for the rant.
Chubbo