[saemetric]

Is it just me or are most new revolvers, esp. S&W, just plain ugly? With their locking devices, slab side barrels, barrel shrouds, stupid hi-vis sights, rubberistic grips, two tone finishes, and scandalous finishes. I buy a revolver mainly if it looks good(quality also is a must), but thank God I bought most of mine back in the 70's when they were beautiful to look at. Nothing is more appealing than my nickled 4 " Model 15 or my blue Colt Detective Special, 8 3/8" Model 29, and Python. Ahh, those were the days. Look at some of the S&W products and well, you get the picture, IMHO. Yes, I'm venting.
Bruce

[Standing Wolf]

Is it just me or are most new revolvers, esp. S&W, just plain ugly?

Nope. It's not you.

I think manufacturers have proceeded miles down a primrose path in pursuit of a.) newness, and b.) something to compete visually with semi-automatic pistols.

[Rule556]

With their locking devices

Yeah, that's annoying.

slab side barrels

Doesn't bother me.

barrel shrouds

Neither does that.

stupid hi-vis sights

Those "stupid hi-vis sights" allow me to acquire a better sight picture and acquire it faster, so you won't see me complaining about them. And they're much better for shooting in low-light conditions.

rubberistic grips

I've found that rubber grips allow me to get a better hold on my revolver and make recoil easier to handle, so you won't hear me complaining about those, either.

two tone finishes

I don't think I've ever seen a two-tone sixgun, unless you count stainless steel pistols with black rubber grips. That's kind of two-tone...

scandalous finishes

What exactly is a "scandalous" finish?

I buy a revolver mainly if it looks good

I appreciate your candor, it's really quite refreshing. A lot of people are unwilling to admit how much of a role aesthetics play in their choice of firearms.

[The_Shootist]

I just think the world needs more blued , lockless revolvers. I dream about one in a snubnose .44 spl. I bet I'll just have to keep dreaming :uhoh:

[SGW42]

I just wished they had blue like they used to. I was pretty amazed when I looked at my 19-3 the first time in the shop. I have a few "nice" blued guns but none of them has a finish like that one does. And it's nearly 30 years old and has probably had thousands of rounds through it. Really incredible.

[jameslovesjammie]

+1 on Rule556

However, I also do miss a deep, rich blued finish. The finish on the new "classics" aren't as deep as the older bluings.

And wood grips. I wish S&W would offer a set of top notch quality grips, like Nill, on their revolvers.

[Elvishead]

It's you.

http://www.youtube.com/v/N-RIsh9fsWY&rel=1

[SwampWolf]

It is not just you. And the lack of traditional aesthetics is not limited to revolvers. When I see the latest crop of futuristic-looking semi-autos pistols, "tactical" rifles and modernistic shotguns with their goofy-looking trigger guards and Frank Lloyd Wright-like sculptured receivers, I can't help but be reminded just how far the firearm industry has departed from the classic lines and finishes that some of us grew up with in an effort to cater to contemporary whimsicalness. And though I'd be the first to concede that the subject of appearance is wholly subjective and that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", symmetry of lines and the simplicity of purpose is a little more definitive and identifiable. If you can't tell the difference between, say a Smith&Wesson Model 19 and a Smith Model 386 or between a Colt Woodsman and a Beretta Neo, well, I can't help you- and you can't help me. :)

[cornman]

Locks are good. I dont get what is up with all the anger about anything that keeps a gun safer.

[Bendutro]

If you make your decisions based purely on aesthetics, you're no better than the people who pick up the items that have the word "tactical" printed on them.

If you're an elder more accustomed to blue and walnut, or perhaps born post Carter and grew up in the stainless and Hogue era it doesn't matter, form still follows function and whatever gets the job done for you is what you should pick.

IMHO, aesthetics are for people without enough real world experience to base their decisions on.

[Markbo]

cornman - because many are fraught with problems! I am aware of only a few manufacturers that have NOT had reports of guns locking up during shooting because the lock mechanism failed in some way.

S&W in particular has lost a substantial following because their revolovers cannot be trusted to work when needed for fear the locks will do just that... lock up the gun during firing! Not exactly a warm and fuzzy when you are talking about a gun you are depending your life to.

I'm all for gun safety, but ignoring the entire argument about the only safety worthy of having is between your ears (and this includes storage) the way some of the manufacturers have chosen to address the issue has caused as many problems as it has solved.

[SigP232]

No Lock Problems here , I have a lot rounds through not one problem from the lock

Smith&Wesson sure sells a lot of there wheelguns to have so many problem that you read about on forums.. I think if they had that many problems no one would be buying so many of there wheelguns, i know a lot of people that shoot new smith's they are all happy with there wheelguns. I like mine a lot carry one or more everday trust my life to them 100% .

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v392/sphillips45/Picture-045.jpg

http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj212/glockshooter34/6421.jpg

Just bought 2 of these, shot 400 rounds through this one today , guess what no lock problems
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj212/glockshooter34/6861.jpg

[RustyHammer]

It's not just you and it's not just revolvers .... :cool:

[Grey54956]

Locks may seize up at inopportune moments. However, the chance of it happening is very, very small. The odds that you need to fire gun in self-defense, also small. Small odds, multiplied by even smaller odds equals statistically insignificant chance that gun will fail when needed. The odds are far better that you will simply miss your target rather than gun failing to fire. Besides, lock failures, as far as I am aware, appear to happen at the range after firing the gun several times.

If you do find yourself in a self-defense situation, and your gun does encounter a lock failure, it would be reasonable to assume that some higher power simply has it in for you rather than you are simply the victim of random chance.

[TimM]

It's not just you and it's not just revolvers ....
Agreed!