Why is demand so strong for excellent revolvers?


PDA






bushmaster1313
April 10, 2011, 12:19 AM
There are a lot of excellent Smith & Wesson and Colt revolvers out there, but the demand is strong so prices are high.

Any insight as to why demand is so strong?

In particular, the good condition Colts and Smiths from the 40's and 50's seem to go for more than the good Model 12, Model 27 and Model 31 shotguns from the same era.

How come?

P.S. I got an excellent condition High Standard 18-7 for $265. 27-2's are at least $500.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why is demand so strong for excellent revolvers?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
451 Detonics
April 10, 2011, 12:53 AM
Because revolvers work. What you are seeing is the baby boomers growing up and coming into more disposable income and they want the guns they couldn't afford when raising a family. The classic revolvers are the ones they saw when they were young and they are what those grown up kids want now.

SPW1
April 10, 2011, 01:09 AM
Yes, all those reasons + a lot of people don't care for the locks on new smiths driving up the prices on the older ones a bit. Old smiths are still generally less than new smiths though.

bushmaster1313
April 10, 2011, 01:15 AM
But why so much demand for nice revolvers compared to nice shotguns?

My guess is that it is easier to shoot a revolver, more places to shoot and less wear on the shoulder.

Of course, the fancy shotguns are through the roof.

shotgunjoel
April 10, 2011, 01:24 AM
But why so much demand for nice revolvers compared to nice shotguns?
Because revolvers are way cooler than some old shotgun. That, and the fact that the revolvers probably cost more originally to begin with.

CajunBass
April 10, 2011, 01:46 AM
Because people like you and I keep buying them.

22-rimfire
April 10, 2011, 02:00 AM
Demand is pretty steady for Smith & Wesson and Colt revolvers. Folks don't like the trigger locks and buy the pre-lock Smiths often at premium prices. Also, many feel the older revolvers are better made than the current manufacture. Folks are collecting the older revolvers. Hence prices keep going up. Ultimately, the moderating force on Smiths in general is the price on current manufactured revolvers. But you can't get that wonderful deep high polish blued guns these days as new guns. I have not looked at any of the Smith Classics however to compare the bluing.

As far as shotguns go, most people don't buy a lot of shotguns but they may buy more than a few handguns. Demand is less.

wideym
April 10, 2011, 02:01 AM
More people will want a revolver for self defence at home than an old shotgun.

toivo
April 10, 2011, 02:31 AM
I think another factor is that there are lots and lots of good new shotguns on the market, but you can't say the same for revolvers. For new revolvers, there's Ruger, S&W, and what else? Not a lot. With shotguns, you have Remington, Mossberg, Browning, Benelli, Beretta, Winchester, and that's just the big ones.

rondog
April 10, 2011, 03:30 AM
You just can't beat the coolness of high-quality wheelguns made by craftsmen in by-gone eras. Back when people cared about what they turned out. I wish I could buy my old Model 19's back, I still grieve over selling them.

Kendal Black
April 10, 2011, 04:00 AM
There are no more DA Colt revolvers, point one. That earns any of them a rarity point. When they were good, they were very very good, and when they were bad they were horrid. They were always interesting. They went out of business for a reason, but since it is past tense, let us say only that they were legendary, once.

The good Colts are the best sixguns ever made. They weren't all good.

As to Smiths, I don't need a keyhole in the side. I (many moons before the key thing) always traveled with a Smith revolver and a sturdy padlock. When I was away from the gun the lock went around the top strap. The average criminal will destroy the gun when he tries to break the padlock. That's two problems solved in one. 1. He can't sell it and 2. He can't hurt anyone with it.

Some guns were destroyed, some were used up and some are still in sock drawers, I suppose. "They don't make 'em like they used to" is a cliche', but did you ever pause to wonder about that? Isn't a cliche' when everyone says so?

wcavasos
April 10, 2011, 04:03 AM
You just can't beat the coolness of high-quality wheelguns made by craftsmen in by-gone eras. Back when people cared about what they turned out

Unfortunately I feel like there is alot of truth to this statement. However, If S&W wanted to hire me as an assembly line inspector I would make sure that everything that i had a chance to get my eye on would be something that I would be proud to own. If I worked for Ruger I would try my hand at haveing there board of directors or whatever you call their surpervision there remove the warning stamp they put on there barrels. Thats my personal take on this subject. But yes I would say older revolvers are more authentic and classy, maybe slightly better quality as well.

Kendal Black
April 10, 2011, 04:41 AM
[...] I would make sure that everything that i had a chance to get my eye on would be something that I would be proud to own. [...]

Odd how some old firearm makers are relocating out of trade union territory. Just sayin'.

CajunBass
April 10, 2011, 08:46 AM
I gave a short flip answer last night. It was late and I was tired, but now I'll comment on why people like me keep buying them, and no doubt driving up pricess. As least why I think so.

When I was a young man, with no money, and a copy of the Shooters Bible, I used to droll over that book. I mean every page of it. Especially the Smith & Wesson section. Those of black and white pictures were enough to make me wish I had one of everything.

"Combat Magnum", "Combat Masterpiece", "Highway Patrolman" "THE 357 Magnum", "Military and Police"...Let me tell you, Smith & Wesson knew how to name a gun Those names invoke an image that just sticks with you...or at least with me. Those were what handguns were supposed to look like.

Well, I came along about the time that revolvers were starting to fall out of favor. My first handgun was a Model 19 "Combat Magnum." But, IPSC was the big game in town, everyone HAD to have a "45 automatic"...and some kind of "wundter nine". So that old fashioned revolver went on the trade block. The race for the semi-auto was on.''

These days, if I'm not an old man, I'm getting close to being one. I'm too old and fat to run around climbing over walls, and throwing myself on the ground. I'm too old and lazy to chase brass all over hells half acre. While semi-auto's are useful, I've got a few myself, they just aren't revolvers. "G-19" just doesn't have the same ring to it, that "Combat Masterpiece" or "Highway Patrolman" does.

I don't really know how well new revolvers are made. I've never really looked at a new one. Not that I necessarly think there's anything wrong with them, I've never looked to see. The guns I want are the ones I used to see in that dog-eared old Shooters Bible. They're like old friends to me. I suspect they are to a lot of people. The fact that they are still perfectly acceptable as weapons is doesn't hurt either.

Probably one of these days, my boys will open my gun safe and think..."What in the world did he want with all these old guns?"

Flint Ridge
April 10, 2011, 09:32 AM
Cajun Bass is right on here, I think.

Folks could afford one back then, maybe. Now we afford several over time.

sixguns4fighting
April 10, 2011, 09:43 AM
But why so much demand for nice revolvers compared to nice shotguns?


Perhaps most gunowners these days are not hunters?

btg3
April 10, 2011, 09:55 AM
It's temporary. This generation's nostalgic inclinations are fueled not only by dad/grandad's revolvers, but also the old western TV shows that were prevalent at an impressionable age. Additionally, the jamamatic stigma associated with auto-loaders is being overcome by truly more reliable pistols, today's cops/robbers TV, and the trend toward more home invasions with multiple intruders that increasingly leave those with 6-shooters under-gunned.

sixguns4fighting
April 10, 2011, 10:01 AM
It's temporary. This generation's nostalgic inclinations are fueled not only by dad/grandad's revolvers, but also the old western TV shows that were prevalent at an impressionable age. Additionally, the jamamatic stigma associated with auto-loaders is being overcome by truly more reliable pistols, today's cops/robbers TV, and the trend toward more home invasions with multiple intruders that increasingly leave those with 6-shooters under-gunned.


Real world: If you must fight a gang, a shotgun is better than a Glock.

The revolver is adequate for civilian self defense needs. If you need more firepower, get a shotgun or carbine.

ritepath
April 10, 2011, 10:21 AM
Shotguns have a collectors market but nothing like the following revolvers have....12 & 31's are great guns to own and collect but they take up room where collecting revolvers is easy.

Stephen A. Camp
April 10, 2011, 10:24 AM
Hello. Speaking only for myself, I do not own and use handguns solely for self-defense. I enjoy shooting them because despite the concentration required, I find it relaxing. Having done this for over forty years, much has been with various autoloaders, but quite a lot has been with the double-action revolver (usually S&W) as well. Where it was no issue decades passed, I do find not having to retrieve fired cases a plus.

With respect to self-protection, I use both semiautomatics and DA-revolvers. My constant companion is an S&W Model 642. I tried other firearms and for me, this handgun genre just works best for near 24/7 carry. One firearm that is on constant "house duty" is an old pinned S&W Model 10. It is certainly not "tactical", has the usual 6-shot, low-capacity ammunition payload, and has been converted to DAO use. Can it keep up with the Hi Power, Glock 17, SIG-Sauer P226, et al, with respect to number of shots fired between loadings? The answer is obvious. At the same time, I believe that we "solve our problem(s)" with the first few shots or we run out of time to do so. If the revolver's relatively low number of available shots is an issue for you, there are many, many really fine semiautomatics available. Most quality DA-revolvers worked reliably as homemade sin, but "six for sure" just isn't and wasn't a "universal truth" of some sort. The DA-revolver could (and did malfuction)...just not often in my experience.

The older S&W's may indeed have a nostalgic appeal to many of us. Even though it is not nearly so durable, a polished blue revolver is just a handsome thing to my eyes and having been taught to shoot DA by some fine shots and competitors in my early years, the S&W continues to just feel "right" to me.

For me then, I reckon the answer(s) can be written in different way(s), but once the distilling is done on each, they boil down to, "I just like them."

Of course, my problem with handguns is that I like them all!

Best.

earlthegoat2
April 10, 2011, 10:24 AM
Because the savvy shooters out there want the revolvers that were built to win fights not avoid product liability lawsuits.

oldfool
April 10, 2011, 10:48 AM
amongst 'real serious' scattergun folk, old pricey models are oft sought after too
but for joe-average, a good, functional, reliable shotgun is pretty easy to come by at a modest price

there really are not a whole lot of "top tier" revolver makers competing out there anymore, like used to be (when Colt was Colt, when Dan Wesson was Dan Wesson, S&W was S&W, H&R, etc.) the market now consists of a number of low volume niche players, plus very few big volume players who mainly market by "price point"
S&W
Ruger
Taurus/Rossi
pretty much in that order, by price point

the MBAs-R-Us at most of the big name players all went after the military and LEO markets, and that is an autoloader market
and the average-joe civilian revolver market was left to "leftovers"


S&W prices are nothing to fall in love with these days, and their ILS and MIM features turn a lot of people off. So if you want yesteryear quality at a lower price point, and don't like features like lock & MIM, you look for old Colts, old S&Ws, old Dan Wessons, even older vintage select model Taurii.

Demand drives price.
Blame it on gunbroker (good deals getting harder to find because all the pawn shops check gunbroker and mark 'em up at "asking' prices so found)
That and the fact that the population has tripled in my own lifetime.

Simpler than all that for me... k-frames best fit my hand (that and the old Ruger "Sixes")
They don't make 'em anymore, and too many people have caught on to what great shooters those guns were. "Police trade-ins" used to be common, getting scarcer every year. The S&W New "Classic" may or may not be a great gun; I don't care, I ain't dropping a thousand bucks to find out for myself.

pity they don't make the '57 Chevy anymore either, but it is what it is

dickttx
April 10, 2011, 11:15 AM
I just looked in my 1973 Gun Digest to confirm this. Good shotgun has always been relatively higher than the price of a good handgun. S & W Highway Patrolman (Model 28) $118.00---Remington 870 Wingmaster $154.95. Colt Gov't Model, Mk IV, Series 70 $134.95---Remington 1100 $229.95. If you go to the double shotguns (SS or O/U) they are several times higher. These are Mfg Sug Retail prices.
After being away from guns for several years, the thing that impressed me most when I got interested again was the current price of handguns in relation to rifles and shotguns.

ColtPythonElite
April 10, 2011, 11:20 AM
I simply like revolvers. I bought my first revolver back when semi-autos were just becoming all the rage. Even though I have carried a semi as a work gun for nearly 2 decades, I still prefer a revolver for off-duty carry and just general shooting.....This old girl saw 200 rounds just last week. Even at 48 years old and starting to show her age, she's still a looker to me.:)

Guillermo
April 10, 2011, 11:46 AM
The reason for my demand of old revolvers is very simple.

New revolvers are getting worse every year.

Old Fuff
April 10, 2011, 11:48 AM
Recently there was an auction of classic and antique firearms that offered something like 600 to 700 firearms, ammunition and accessories. It lasted for two days...

And the take was over ten million dollars. :what:

Obviously the gun collecting business is doing well at a time of national economic distress.

Part of the attraction is that the firearms that were featured offered mechanical excellence and/or a piece of history. The arms that went on the block were made at a time when cost-cutting and manufacturing savings were not the driving force that it is in current production.

As for the issue of handguns vs. shotguns, there is without question a market for "the best," and it's a strong one. When it comes to field-grade guns there is less interest from a smaller market of buyers. While this may be the rule, there are of course exceptions to any rule.

bushmaster1313
April 10, 2011, 12:55 PM
Ithaca only made about 5,600 Knick SBT's and Coly made that many Python's in a year. I bought a nice 1927 4E for $1,000 but could not find a nice Python at that price. I guess there are just a lot more people collecting and shooting great classic revolvers than great classic trap guns.

Black Butte
April 10, 2011, 01:58 PM
... a lot of people don't care for the locks on new smiths driving up the prices on the older ones ...

What a poor business model. The marketing department should beat up the legal department and take back the reins to the company.

Guillermo
April 10, 2011, 02:08 PM
The marketing department should beat up the legal department and take back the reins to the company

Never happen.

Not as long as people purchase the sub-Taurus quality guns at premium prices they will continue to produce the merde that bears their name.

Loosedhorse
April 10, 2011, 02:13 PM
Why is demand so strong for excellent revolvers?
Because excellence never goes out of style.

buck460XVR
April 10, 2011, 02:23 PM
Why is demand so strong for excellent revolvers?



Because excellence never goes out of style.

+1......Quality revolvers are not only reliable and accurate, they are also a thing of beauty.

bushmaster1313
April 10, 2011, 02:44 PM
I admit I am guilty of supporting the market:

http://i700.photobucket.com/albums/ww6/bushmaster1313/DSC_0202.jpg

oldbear
April 10, 2011, 03:55 PM
These days, if I'm not an old man, I'm getting close to being one. I'm too old and fat to run around climbing over walls, and throwing myself on the ground. I'm too old and lazy to chase brass all over hells half acre. While semi-auto's are useful, I've got a few myself, they just aren't revolvers. "G-19" just doesn't have the same ring to it, that "Combat Masterpiece" or "Highway Patrolman" does.

Cajunbass, you summed most of my feelings very well. Yet I believe there is one reason no one has mentioned yet, they are not making the classic revolvers anymore. When the last P&R N or K frame is locked away in a collectorís safe, there will never again be another one. The top of the line Coltís and Smith and Wessonís were made by craftsmen who believed, correctly, that they were producing the greatest firearms ever built. The S&W products produced in the early to late 20th century were the hight of the metal workers art.

O C
April 10, 2011, 04:16 PM
The overriding fact is, the older revolvers, especially the Colts were hand fitted. So you got what would be a "Custom Fitted By A Master Gunsmith" revolver out of the box. Then came CNC machining, and all parts could be replaced without hand fitting. This was a monetary decision that saved some manufacturers, but craftsmanship suffered in the process. The old craftsmen are pretty much gone now, and won't be replaced. So, if you want a gun that was essentially "Hand Made" you'll have to invest in the older Colts and Smiths. If you took a Ruger Red Hawk (a mighty fine gun) and tried to get a gunsmith to make it as custom fitted as a Python was out of the box, you'd have more money invested. However every Red Hawk works out of the box, but lacks the elegance, deep bluing, and vault like lock-up that the older revolvers had. If you have a chance to get an older revolver, get it now, because "They Don't Make 'em Like They Used To".

bobbo
April 10, 2011, 05:21 PM
There are a lot of excellent Smith & Wesson and Colt revolvers out there, but the demand is strong so prices are high.

Any insight as to why demand is so strong?

Let me re-write your question for you:
Why are good guns that aren't made anymore so expensive?

Answer: Duh :neener:

Colt makes no DA revolvers. S&W uses MIM and locking systems on their new revolvers. Ergo, no new "classic" revolvers are being made.

Some people would rather have nice guns, rather than the Mossberg Plinksters and Pardner Pumps of the handgun world (Hi-Point, Phoenix Arms ... Glock :what:). The people who want good stuff (i.e.: they've been through the crappy stuff before) often have the means to buy what they want.

New guns aren't dramatically better than their predecessors. In fact, other than MIM or locks, the modern S&W operates just the same as an 1896 Hand Ejector. It's not like comparing a 0-60 of a 1967 GT390 to a 2011 Mustang GT (7.4 seconds vs. 4.4 seconds), or a Commodore 64 to an iMac. It's IS like comparing a spotless original 1885 Winchester to a Handi-Rifle.

bushmaster1313
April 10, 2011, 06:00 PM
The S&W products produced in the early to late 20th century were the hight of the metal workers art.

Do you mean "to mid" 20th Century?

Let me re-write your question for you:

Quote:
Why are good guns that aren't made anymore so expensive?

Answer: Duh



You miss my point.

Of course the great classic revolvers should command a high price.

What I want to know is why the great classic shotguns do not command prices as high as the great classic revolvers..

A 1950 Remington 31 is every bit a work of the highest craft, but they can be had for $300.
A 4E Knick is a work of art an it can be had for $1000.
A 1960 Python is a really nice revolver, but it costs more than the Remington and the Ithaca put together!

mmitch
April 10, 2011, 06:15 PM
Many older Smiths and Colts required hand fitting when their components were assembled. For actual collectors of these older examples, this is very important. The hand fitted pieces make each gun a true "one-of-a-kind".

Mike

H. Faversham
April 10, 2011, 06:35 PM
"Why is demand so strong for excellent revolvers?"

How many times have you seen Gene or Hopalong or Roy draw a shotgun or bottom feeder on a bad guy? We are all still boys when it comes to the good stuff in life: guns, cars, ice cream and five foot two blonds in blue jeans and pink sweaters.

BrocLuno
April 10, 2011, 07:10 PM
If you live in **********, you have a very finite market of used Colts. You can't legally bring in one from Nevada unless you already own it and are relocating. So all the $600 Pythons in the pawn shops in Reno stay there. The cool well made Colts are getting rarer by the minute here. Prices are $1200 for a 6" Python with minimum holster wear and perfect timing (ask me how I know :(). I saw a fine Python with box and papers last less than a week at $1800 in a shop a drop by now and then. Are these the prices the OP was referring to?

Guess what, I can sell it in a week too. That makes it a commodity investment. As the dollar sinks, the Colts go up. Sort of the same for Smiths (I own a few), but not at the same rate.

Rare is rare. You got a Purdy or Fox scatter gun - no problem - it'll sell too. I just always thought that shotguns were over priced to start with. Something I'm taking into a duck blind in the water with wet dogs and such, better not cost more than my drill press.

oldbear
April 10, 2011, 08:00 PM
Do you mean "to mid" 20th Century?

I had to think about my original statement, as to me the mid-century would fall sometime between 1950 – 1960 and S&W was still producing excellent revolvers at that time.
So let me say that between 1900 - 198? S&W produced the finest production revolvers in the world.

As for the price of classic shotguns, have you priced a used Holland & Holland, Purdey, or Parker lately?

gmh1013
April 10, 2011, 09:28 PM
IMHO there is Colt and then there is Colt.

bushmaster1313
April 10, 2011, 10:08 PM
I was not talking Holland and Holland, etc. Those were never accessible to the common man.

My wonder is why do Python's like this sell for $1500 and up:
http://i700.photobucket.com/albums/ww6/bushmaster1313/Python25.jpg

But this High Standard went for only $265:
http://i700.photobucket.com/albums/ww6/bushmaster1313/Flite%20King/flitekingauction1.jpg

Maia007
April 11, 2011, 12:11 AM
These guns were produced in the Golden Age of mechanical engineering by the best hand machinists that ever lived.

Ain't ever gonna happen again.

evan price
April 11, 2011, 04:13 AM
Ain't making them no more.
People appreciate the hand-fitted semi-custom nature of older guns versus the mass marketed plastic fantastic.

No matter how in the tank you are for HK, you going to look at a NIB Python in that old furnace Royal Blue and walnut grips and still think blackened stainless and Nylon 66 is sexy?

earlthegoat2
April 11, 2011, 07:09 AM
But this High Standard went for only $265:


As has been said none of those Colts are in production anymore and there is nothing mechanically like it made today. That High Standard shotgun is built on the same patents that the Mossberg 500 is built on today. It may not have quite the same class as the High Standard but it is mechanically similar.

PRM
April 11, 2011, 07:39 AM
S&W was one of the most revered and carried working guns of both military and police during the 20th century.

Colt ~ name sums it up. In the 80s, I worked for an old sheriff that used to say "I'd rather live next door to a man with a Colt, than own anything else!" Little extreme, but sums up what a lot of Colt owners feel.

I've carried and shot both brands since the mid-70s. When I entered law enforcement, during that era most departments didn't furnish officer weapons. We were given guidelines on what to buy and what we would be allowed to carry.

1. For Patrol it had to be either a Colt or S&W, four inch barrel, .38 or .357. Nothing else allowed.

2. Two inch models were coveted off duty guns, back up pieces and detectives always carried them.

Today there are more options, and revolvers still had a great following for a number of reasons. However, the older classics are just that "classics." Built to last a lifetime and beyond with some of the best fit and finish ever found on an American product.

popeye
April 11, 2011, 07:48 AM
It's almost impossible to find a decent Colt or Smith 2" (1 7/8") around here. I've settled on the DS or Cobra as my carry gun. I don't care what they look like anymore, just as long as they're mechanically O.K.. I got this one for $120 OTD a couple months ago. 1960 DS.

http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z49/bignugly77/ds4.jpg

BCRider
April 11, 2011, 07:52 AM
Discussions and factors of quality aside the reason for the cost difference is due to just one thing. The market itself. Used items are priced to sell. There are a lot of folks out there that want good used revolvers. There are not that many that want good used shotguns. So the old rules about supply and demand price the revolvers up like they are now and keep the old shotguns down where they are.

Some of this has to do with the price of new revolvers and shotguns as well. With Ruger revolvers up around $700'ish and S&W even higher the cost of the old used classics is going to be up there as well. Meanwhile you can buy decent pump shotguns for just $300'ish. The cost of these new options to some extent influences the upper limit for older guns that are not considered as collectables. The cost for the Colt revolvers isn't really valid because they DO have a status as collectable since Colt is no longer making them. And deserved or not (that's a whole other topic) they command a higher price from having this status.

DMZ
April 11, 2011, 10:30 AM
Because revolvers work. What you are seeing is the baby boomers growing up and coming into more disposable income and they want the guns they couldn't afford when raising a family. The classic revolvers are the ones they saw when they were young and they are what those grown up kids want now.
I think baby-boomer are becoming empty-nesters and are retiring. They are investing in a few things that they could not afford with kids in the house, and things they always wanted.

goon
April 11, 2011, 10:47 AM
Speaking for myself, I'd much rather have an old S&W revolver than a new one. If I buy any more new revolvers they will almost certainly be Rugers.

Thaddeus Jones
April 11, 2011, 11:01 AM
The current production expensive junk, is driving up the prices of the older well made revolvers. :)

easyg
April 11, 2011, 11:06 AM
Why are revolvers so expensive?

Lack of competition.


Relatively few companies make revolvers, and less competition means that those who do make them can charge a higher asking price.

Competition among makers is always a good thing for the consumer.

Also the baby boomers are all getting old and many can no longer easily rack the slide and clear a jam with an autoloader.
And some have lost hand strength and tend to limp wrist autoloaders moreso than younger folks.

Guillermo
April 11, 2011, 11:23 AM
The current production expensive junk, is driving up the prices of the older well made revolvers.

Well said

MtnSpur
April 11, 2011, 11:32 AM
Demand is pretty steady for Smith & Wesson and Colt revolvers. Folks don't like the trigger locks and buy the pre-lock Smiths often at premium prices. Also, many feel the older revolvers are better made than the current manufacture. Folks are collecting the older revolvers. Hence prices keep going up. Ultimately, the moderating force on Smiths in general is the price on current manufactured revolvers. But you can't get that wonderful deep high polish blued guns these days as new guns. I have not looked at any of the Smith Classics however to compare the bluing.

As far as shotguns go, most people don't buy a lot of shotguns but they may buy more than a few handguns. Demand is less.

I agree that demand has pushed the pricing of the older Smiths (I've always been a S&W man). Sometimes one has to have patience (something I can be short on) when looking for a decent revolver at a decent price.
After having some hand surgery (left thumb joint deal) that went south fast and took it's toll on strength I refocused on revolvers. Traded off a Springfield XD, (not because it didn't shoot to point of aim but because that dual spring racking was incredibly more difficult to achieve comfortably) for a S&W 686 and even though it has the dreaded internal lock I do like the gun, a lot.
That said I live outside a small town in West Texas and had become friends with a fella that teaches CHL and also started his own business complete with FFL :D . I put out the word that if he comes across any older S&W revolvers in very good condition to keep me in the loop. Lo and behold he accepts a police stamped 66-1 in exceptional condition with the original grips, Hogue rubber grips and a service paddle holster that I got for a song.
Lucky? Absolutely !! :cool:

BrocLuno
April 11, 2011, 01:26 PM
Speaking for myself, I'd much rather have an old S&W revolver than a new one. If I buy any more new revolvers they will almost certainly be Rugers.
Sort of in the same boat, but I buy Taurus to mess with. I am not taking my Python out on a fishing boat, no way, ain't goina happen. I'll take my Rossi or a Taurus any day of the week. They are not investments. They are tools.

Once upon a time, my little S&W Kit Gun was the go to for fishing and hiking. Not any more. It's also gotten to valuable. It's OK to go camping, but if it could go overboard, no way.

george30
April 11, 2011, 03:39 PM
OLD FLUFF hit the nail on the head here.
"Part of the attraction is that the firearms that were featured offered mechanical excellence and/or a piece of history. The arms that went on the block were made at a time when cost-cutting and manufacturing savings were not the driving force that it is in current production."

The newer revolvers are decent but I carry a well worn Python for backpacking, hiking, and on the farm because it is still perfection. The newer S&W's you have to pay an extra $500+ for a performance center gun to get the quality of a normal gun that they produced in the 70's.

Lucky Derby
April 11, 2011, 08:42 PM
As I type this there is a 42 year old Colt on my hip.

There are expensive shotguns, old and new.

There are inexpensive shotguns, old and new.

There are expensive revolvers, old and new.

There are no inexpensive revolvers, old (good condition) or new.

Today I can buy a new Mossberg 500 around $300 (or less). I can buy a new single shot for about $100.

I can buy a new Taurus revolver for around $450.

The only new DA revolver (IMHO) that even comes close to the quality of the older ones is Ruger. Those start around $500 new.

Phydeaux642
April 11, 2011, 09:32 PM
When I walk into the Fine Gun Room at Bass Pro I tend to ask "why in the world are these shotguns so darned expensive?" By comparison the old revolvers seem cheap to me. I've never been particularly interested in shotguns because I really don't have a place to shoot them and I don't hunt. So, I am much more willing to pay for an old wheelgun that I can shoot. I think there are a lot of people out there like me that just don't have as much use for a shotgun.

I can certainly appreciate the beauty of a well made shotgun, though. Just like I appreciate a nice shiny blue S&W revolver with wood grips.They are truly things of beauty.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why is demand so strong for excellent revolvers?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!