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

[ISCS Yoda]

A few years ago S&W offered a great deal to military folks so I took advantage of it to acquire a Classic Model 27. The doggone gun is gorgeous. The stocks are beautiful, too, except their northernmost, pointy end goes too far above the frame where they should be rounded. But that's not that big a deal. Great shooter, excellent gun that compares favorably with any other S&W wheelgun in my possession.

I don't take the best pictures but here's the Classic M27 next to an older Model 25-5 with its original stocks.

No real difference - both great shooters, both gorgeous, one has an IL, one does not, no big deal.

 

[American1776]

I just picked this 'Dirty Harry' special up today. Classic model 57 (I know it's not a .44, but I prefer the .41)

Fit and finish is perfect. I couldn't be happier with this gun (and I've owned plenty of the old ones).

 

[jeeps]

For the money I buy a nice old one,a real classic.

 

[Chubbo]

Opinions

Run both of those vehicles head on into a tree at 35 mph and tell us which one is better. Just make sure to do the 300 first so you'll still be alive to do the Goat. And before you try either one, tell us how they compare on: fuel mileage, tire wear, braking and steering, and tune up intervals, (bet you didn't drive 100,000 miles on a set of spark plugs). For the record, I had a 1966 GTO, also new from the factory, so I already know the answers to these comparisons.

I do agree that it has nothing to do with revolvers with one minor point: both the auto industry and the firearm industry had greatly benefited from modern machining processes.

I thank all you folks for your opinions. Opinions, like "bottoms", every one has one. Tom, I think you missed the point on a couple of your opinions, the point of buying the old performance cars in their day, was not the not to run them into trees, their first and foremost purpose, was to win races. The old 64 GTO did that very well. Another of your opinions was, that your owning a 66 GTO qualified you to know the answers to the "compairsons". Not quite! I raced many 66 GTOs with my old "stock" 64 GTO, and whooped every one of them! As to running 100,000 miles on a set of spark plugs. When I was racing Go Karts, capaple of speeds well over 150mph, we threw the $5.00 plugs away after each race, those plugs would be worth ten times that much today. I do wholeheartedly, agree with one of your opinions, that of the futility, of making non comparable, comparisons. 'Nuff Said.
Chubbo

 

[Mr.Harry]

What’s not to like about this one? Especially when it out-performs me

 

[Cardboard_killer]

What’s not to like about this one? Especially when it out-performs me

What grips are on that revolver? They are nice looking.

 

[Fuddster]

Aw nuts....

I saw the picture of the 1917 in post 4 and it looked really nice. I didn't think S&W still offered it but looked anyway. Saw the 686+ Performance Center though....Ordered one today. If not for reading this thread, I wouldn't have checked the catalog. That'll teach me.

 

[sw282]

lf you want a blued gun, the 'Classic' is about your ONLY choice...

When compared to the older blued, lts kinda like choosing Dorothy

or the 'Wicked Witch 0f The West'. They can both do the same job.

Dorothy just looks and feels better.. The Classic with her

extra warts, bumps, holes---not so much

 

[steelslaver]

Why buy a classic model when you can actually buy a classic often for close to the same money and sometimes even less????

 

[Mr.Harry]

What grips are on that revolver? They are nice looking.

Ahrend’s Conversion retro Targets. Black/silver stain maple, tung oil.

 

[500SNW]

Being a relative newbie to S&W revolvers, and of severely limited finances recently due to unemployment, the new "Classics" line is pretty much what I am limited to. Yes I must admit to being initially inspired by the S&W wheelguns my friends cop Dads carried back in the 70's...and films like Dirty Harry...but today all I own and can afford are the modern repros of those guns. Now, you may think I am biased, but I am perfectly fine with current production guns. I admit to being more than a little irked by those "they just don't make em like they used to" folks...but I'm often elated when they bring out the "proof" and it is a holster-worn rattle trap sans IL. I'm thinking "ohh that's real good". Question - how many NIB or LNIB S&W's are there out there and available at a price most of us would want to pay? Let's be fair here - the only fair method of comparison is to pit a brand new "Classics" against a LNIB vintage revolver. Assuming we could get our hands on one...why on Earth would we want to use the Hell out of it and trash the allegedly superior bluing? LIke the others have said, my new 586 especially has the tightest lockup of any wheelgun I've ever held. The finish may not be up to the standards of old, but I use and carry mine enough that traces of holster wear are already showing. Turnbull can do a fancy reblue for me in the future if I decide the revolver is accurate and reliable enough for the investment.

Sorry. Just venting. I could go on.

 

[jeeps]

Got a real classic 686 no dash ,no mods ,6" target options,grips like new in box,$550. That was a few hundred less than $750 for a new one. Shot it yesterday and it ate every kind of ammo. Not going to have S.W. change anything. Back in the 1980's federal ran some 125gr. High pressure rounds with soft primers that flowed back. Not a issue today and was not back then unless you ran that mistake Federal Load in some 686's ,but most were fine.

 

[CH4]

Just for clarification, my analogy was meant for the classics, not other current production Smith’s. It’s not that I don’t appreciate the advances in metalurgy and precision machining processes, it’s that “I” don’t care for the application of new technology to the classics. While I am not a fan of the two-piece barrels, IL or the frame mounted FP, if I like a particular model and there isn’t an earlier option, then I’ll bite. Perfect examples are my 4” 500 and 627 UDR.

 

[The Norseman]

The next wave of collecting S&W

My Local Revolver Shop (LRS) has "Classic's".

I have looked/inspected them from time to time.

All have been great. I know what the problem
is. It's all in the mind.

Like I always say "It's the next phase of Collecting
S&W's".

People get so worked up over nothing, that down
the road it doesn't matter. Watch out
for Fake News, don't be naïve.

 

[TTSH]

I should stay out of this thread because I'll buck the trend. I've tried very hard to warm up to the new "Classics", but in the end, I want the real thing. A few years ago, I found a "Classic" Model 18 at $895 and initially wanted it very badly, mainly because original Model 18's are so damn hard to find up my way. More recently, I found a brand new "Classic" Model 17 at Cabela's and thought I could live with that in lieu of a proper vintage pre-IL Model 17.

In both cases, I rethought it and decided to keep looking for the real deal. I am now the proud owner of both a vintage pre-IL Model 17 and a vintage pre-IL pre-Model 18. I couldn't be happier.

These are in addition to my Model 10-5 (a Christmas gift from my wife a couple years back), dear old Dad's early Model 28 and all the 1970's and early-1980's S&W revolvers I purchased during the first incarnation of my S&W collecting hobby.

Bottom line? I am spoiled. I don't see myself ever buying a newer, post-IL S&W revolver, "Classic" or otherwise. Someday, I may go for a (non-IL) Model 442-1 if I find a really, really good deal, but that would be about it.

 

[Bill Raby]

Here are pictures of last week's purchases. The little 32-1 is 38 S&W from 1970. Paid $250 for it. The Model 1902 in 38 Special dates around 1918. Paid $280 for it. Both are close to 95%. Since I am a collector, I gravitate toward the older Smiths. That doesn't mean I avoid the L and N frame guns. Can't begin to show pictures of all the guns I've picked up this past year. I did pay $450 for a beautiful 4 inch 686. Also, $300 for a really nice 1917 45. With the M19's in all barrel lengths in blue and nickel, I pay $360, and have so many I have cut back on buying them. Actually, I have recently paid $360 each for two really nice M28's. . .one in 4 inch and one in 6 inch. So, I don't keep all my purchases below $300. Pretty obvious why I am not in the market for Classics. Rule of thumb is if I can double my money (or come close to it) the next day, I buy. Too bad you all don't live in Georgia south of Atlanta. The further south you go, the cheaper the guns.

Last week I bought a S&W 29 that was made in 1914 and previously owned by Abraham Lincoln for only $11.64. The guy even through in a enough chow to feed my pet unicorn for a month.

 

[rickbaales]

Run both of those vehicles head on into a tree at 35 mph and tell us which one is better. Just make sure to do the 300 first so you'll still be alive to do the Goat. And before you try either one, tell us how they compare on: fuel mileage, tire wear, braking and steering, and tune up intervals, (bet you didn't drive 100,000 miles on a set of spark plugs). For the record, I had a 1966 GTO, also new from the factory, so I already know the answers to these comparisons.

I do agree that it has nothing to do with revolvers with one minor point: both the auto industry and the firearm industry had greatly benefited from modern machining processes.

I have both older smiths and modern smiths, and I'll say I prefer the older revolvers. This is from someone who owns "plastic" guns like Glock too. Modern machining may have improved and have streamlined mass production, but that doesn't mean it translates to better quality. I can tell you that some of the newer smiths I have handled don't have the same fit and finish as older smiths from 30 years ago. I've seen new production smiths that have barrels canted to one side, timing issues and lock issues. I sent my governer in because the timing was off. Also after my first range outing with my 500 Sw, the cylinder locked up so bad it had to be sent back to SW because the bushings were out of spec. I'm not saying new production SW revolvers are garbage with MIM parts and IL etc, in fact I like them very much despite that.. I just bought a new 686 and its great. But I definitely feel there was more care placed when producing the older smiths.

 

[PALADIN85020]

My take on the new "classic" series:

1. Generally, they are attractive firearms that only generally conform to the REAL classics made so many years ago. They are nowhere near the originals in desirability or collectibility, and yet many are put on the market with prices that actually exceed nice-condition originals. I think the whole series is a tacit acknowledgment by S&W that the public yearns for "the good old days" of great firearms, manufacturing skill and care.

2. Barrel configurations, cylinder release latches, finishes, sights, working components, stocks and other details often vary noticeably from the originals.

3. As for the lock on the sides of many, NO COMMENT.

4. So far, I've only seen fit to purchase one of the new classic series, and that was this 40-1, shipped on or about Nov. 1, 2007. It varies from the originals in the contour of the barrel, the quality of the plating, the cylinder release latch, the stocks, the markings, the style of the cylinder stop, and the fact that it does not have a grip safety lockout pin available in a hole under the stocks. I DO like the fact that it does have the grip safety, and if you will look above the cylinder release latch, you will find NO LOCK. Again, NO COMMENT.

John

P.S. What's not to like about a GTO?

 

[cowboy4evr]

A funny thing is that 30 yrs ago people was complaining that the “ new “ S&W’s didn’t have the quality of the older ones . Nothing has really changed I guess ,

 

[Electric Head]

My take is that they are modern Smiths that are blued with wood grips. They are made in an equivalent, modern way as the classics that they represent were when they were new, but they're not trying to be an "instant classic".

In my situation there isn't a whole lot of older revolvers around and their prices (for good classic guns) are going to be the same as a new one, or more. When combined with the fact that I want to shoot a lot (and am required to shoot regularly by law) then the new classic series makes sense.