OP
Darkenfast
Member
Just jumping back into the conversation I started with an observation about what I'll sum up as the "you get what you pay for" argument, i.e. paying much more for an S&W is worth it because it's better built. I wish that were true, and maybe it was. But when $1500 Performance Center revolvers are showing up too often with obvious defects that never should have been allowed out of the factory, then I have to wonder.
It's not just S&W. I am seeing a disconnect between what legacy names are charging, and how well their products actually work.
Regarding the cost of ammunition: this is a good point. 9mm is the only center-fire I own, and it is the cheapest, in the way that .38 Special once was. I suspect that .38 Special is in 2nd place. .357 Magnum is obviously more expensive, especially if you feel the need to go for the latest super-duper buzz-saw bullet that the magazines are touting (same thing happens in 9mm as well). That's where I believe the six-inch .357 has an advantage, as it can get a lot out of more affordable standbys (Federal 158 gr. JSPs or Remington 125 gr. JHPs, for example).
I think the working-class guy who buys a working-class revolver is not going to be able to afford to blow through hundreds of rounds a month. Hopefully, he'll practice less, but better.
The Taurus Model 66 is second on my list of interesting working-class revolvers. Seven-shots, 40 oz. (vs 6/34.4 for the Rossi and 7/44.3 for the 686+).
Yeah, we all know the reputation of Taurus is and that they now own Rossi. Aside from the format of a lighter six-inch wheelgun, my interest here is: What kind of revolvers are those two brands turning out NOW, and how much more likely is it that they will not work from the factory vs. that 50% more expensive S&W or Colt?
Maybe I'm just not a good consumerist, these days.
It's not just S&W. I am seeing a disconnect between what legacy names are charging, and how well their products actually work.
Regarding the cost of ammunition: this is a good point. 9mm is the only center-fire I own, and it is the cheapest, in the way that .38 Special once was. I suspect that .38 Special is in 2nd place. .357 Magnum is obviously more expensive, especially if you feel the need to go for the latest super-duper buzz-saw bullet that the magazines are touting (same thing happens in 9mm as well). That's where I believe the six-inch .357 has an advantage, as it can get a lot out of more affordable standbys (Federal 158 gr. JSPs or Remington 125 gr. JHPs, for example).
I think the working-class guy who buys a working-class revolver is not going to be able to afford to blow through hundreds of rounds a month. Hopefully, he'll practice less, but better.
The Taurus Model 66 is second on my list of interesting working-class revolvers. Seven-shots, 40 oz. (vs 6/34.4 for the Rossi and 7/44.3 for the 686+).
Yeah, we all know the reputation of Taurus is and that they now own Rossi. Aside from the format of a lighter six-inch wheelgun, my interest here is: What kind of revolvers are those two brands turning out NOW, and how much more likely is it that they will not work from the factory vs. that 50% more expensive S&W or Colt?
Maybe I'm just not a good consumerist, these days.