Your least favorite S&W revolver

[Hawg Rider]

ANYTHING in 41 magnum, not because there is anything intrinsically wrong with the caliber or the guns chambered for it, but because of the folks that own and worship them.

Ouch! That's a bit harsh, and you don't even know me! The first ever S&W revolver that I purchased was a brand spankin' new blued 4" Model 57 when I got my first real job in 1977. I was looking for a "Dirty Harry" Model 29, but they were unobtainium at the time. So I picked up the 57, and really liked it. It was more powerful than a .357 Magnum, and had less felt recoil that either the .357 or .44 Magnum. I can't say that I worship them, but I do really like them. Just for discussion, here's a nickel 4" Model 57. To each their own, brother!

 

[roysha]

Ouch! That's a bit harsh, and you don't even know me! The first ever S&W revolver that I purchased was a brand spankin' new blued 4" Model 57 when I got my first real job in 1977. I was looking for a "Dirty Harry" Model 29, but they were unobtainium at the time. So I picked up the 57, and really liked it. It was more powerful than a .357 Magnum, and had less felt recoil that either the .357 or .44 Magnum. I can't say that I worship them, but I do really like them. Just for discussion, here's a nickel 4" Model 57. To each their own, brother!
View attachment 782040

I have so much to say about that, but I'm going to leave it lay before I get dinged by a MOD and my blood pressure gets high enough to be unmeasurable.

 

[Plinkasaurusrex]

38/44 Heavy duty 5"

 

[fosterlj4684]

Curious if you feel the same way about guns chambered in 44 Magnum and 357 magnum. Then there's the problem with the 22 long rifle and high velocity vs 1930 velocities in 22 lr. Even the 32 long is a make over from 32 S&W.

Isn't it funny how our likes and dislikes don't have to follow logic.

As I remember the 357 Magnum and 44 Magnum were both developed on the request of S&W, but the .32 H&R Magnum was developed outside of S&W. The original .32 S&W made way to the .32 S&W Long, also a S&W development. Also, the 16-4 had the barrel under lug, which added weight to the gun, so it did not meet the original requirements for the Masterpiece so that they would feel the same, when you picked up any of them loaded.

 

[Model29-26.5]

Anything without a hammer nose unless it is a 22 LR.
It's really purely aesthetic and nostalgic.
Technology is certainly better and they can make them a lot cheaper, probably longer lasting and more accurate even.
I appreciate the technology, just as I do with digital recording technology.
But there is something about the old machinery that is super cool.
Pinned and recessed guns are to 2 inch 24 track machines and Neve consoles what frame mounted firing pins are to digital converters and PC based editing software.
I speak as a musician who uses the new technology for convenience but really appreciates the old stuff for its old school craftsmanship and skilled manufacturing.

This could be said of manufacturing just about anything today, but still, we appreciate great art.

Pre 1982 S&W revolvers are to the Capitol building what the current S&W bodyguard is to a newly constructed office building.

It is all technology and economy driven.

The handmade buggy whip, to the Chevy spark…

Part of me wants to stay in the past, but the smart money is on the future…
So that we can spend money on things from the past…

I'm trying to be eloquent and failing miserably

 

[mc1911]

Model 22 Combat Masterpiece. Empties were hard to eject and always shot to the left. A LGS owner wanted it really bad, so I sold it to him. I was honest about its issues. He was a gunsmith and said that he would fix it. The dang thing would shoot into about 1 inch at 25 yards with young eyes.