Choice of S&W: 10-6 / 10-8 / 10-10 ?


PDA






il.bill
December 13, 2013, 01:42 PM
Presented with three used revolvlers in equal condition, with equal round counts and wear, all at the same price, would you choose a S&W Model 10 Heavy Barrel Revolver in 10-6, 10-8, or 10-10?

As I understand the model differences, the 10-6 (beginning in 1962) eliminated trigger-guard screw on frame; the 10-8 (1977) changed gas ring from yoke to cylinder; and the 10-10 (1988) featured a new yoke retention system, radius stud package, and floating hand hammer nose bushing.

I do not understand if any of these changes would be considered improvements for reliability or durability, or were they simply developed to cut costs, or both. I have a 10-6 and a 10-8, both blued square butt, with 4 inch barrels, and they both are nice shooting handguns - I can not tell a functional difference between them from my viewpoint. I plan to add to my meager collection, and just wondered what the better-informed folks at THR have to say, other than "you can't go wrong with any of them". Is one configuration considered 'better'?

Thanks for any input or knowledge you can share,

If you enjoyed reading about "Choice of S&W: 10-6 / 10-8 / 10-10 ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
VA27
December 13, 2013, 01:56 PM
Since you already have a -6 and a -8, it makes sense to to get the -10, condition being equal.

.455_Hunter
December 13, 2013, 01:58 PM
I would get the 10-6, then the 10-8 (if its still pinned)

In my opinion, the 10-10 is too far down the road of S&W cost-cutting and "modernization"

By far the most important is to pick the one with the best lock-up/endshake.

rcmodel
December 13, 2013, 02:01 PM
Personally, I would go with the 10-6, or the 10-8.
Last of the classics.

*I much prefer the older pinned-barrel models.
(4-Screw 10-6 is also a plus to me from a collector standpoint)

*I much prefer the old hand-fitted screw retained yoke to the new spring & plunger ones.

*And I much prefer the hammer mounted firing pin to the frame mounted one.

The radius stud package on the 10-10 is a durability improvement.
I guess?

But I have never in 50 years had one of the old non-radius ones break off, so that would not be enough advantage for me for the other three trade-offs.

rc

rswartsell
December 13, 2013, 09:00 PM
+1^

tomrkba
December 13, 2013, 09:47 PM
Choice of S&W: 10-6 / 10-8 / 10-10

I would buy all three.

sixgunner455
December 14, 2013, 12:21 AM
^ +1

Twiki357
December 14, 2013, 12:29 AM
The older (Lower dash number) the better, all being in equal condition.

Jim NE
December 14, 2013, 11:15 AM
I have couple later Smiths - with locks and all - and I personally have never experienced any glaring deficiencies when compared with my earlier Smiths. Maybe some urban mythology going on there. Still, when I see a barrel pin in a frame, my heart beats a little faster. The main reason I like owning older stuff is because it evokes a better time in America, and it tends to be more hand made. It isn't because I see the new stuff as being undesirable. Any of those guns would be fine.

GyMac
December 14, 2013, 06:21 PM
The older the better.

ZVP
December 15, 2013, 09:35 AM
My only complaint would be size. Hard to pack too long of a barrel!
Personally I prefer a HB 4". The weight is there for balance and the portability is great!
Long barrels can't be beat for long range accuracy! A good 8" would make a good Pot Meat gun. Bettrt than a .22RF.
Model 10's are getting to be old so have a competent gunsmith go over the revolver. just in case,
HTH.
BPDave

With the Black Powder. I have a lot of experience toting long barreled guns around!

kvtcomdo
December 15, 2013, 07:04 PM
The older (Lower dash number) the better, all being in equal condition.
Agree completely.

Jaymo
December 15, 2013, 07:38 PM
rcmodel hit the nail on the head.
It's hard to say the newer ones are just as good as the older ones, because they haven't been in service for 30,40,50,60+ years, like the old ones have.
Let's meet back in 40 years and discuss how all the cheapening of Smith revolvers has worked out.
Of course, by then, we'll be comparing them to revolvers that are 70 yrs old or older.
BTW, my 1969 10-6 has the gas ring on the front of the cylinder, not the crane, if I remember correctly.

Jim NE
December 16, 2013, 12:00 PM
One thing I didn't mention - the model 10 (and it's antecedents) is an archetype, like the model T ford or model A ford. Because there were so many model 10's made way back when, there's still a relatively plentiful supply of them out there. Which keeps the price down.

To me, it's a thrill to own a historically significant gun from an earlier era. Try buying an original Colt SAA or a 1930's Luger. The prices are way high. The model 10 is one of the rare exceptions to the rule that if a desirable item is old and collectable, it generally costs a lot more than the new version. Some M10's can cost a lot, but there are still lots of old original K frame .38's from the 1950's in the 300+ range. In that sense, a reasonably priced pinned barrel K frame is a good opportunity and more desirable.

rswartsell
December 17, 2013, 09:20 PM
I'm certainly with Jim NE here,

I recently (relatively) bought a pre-10 Model of 1905 M&P that was cosmetically ugly (holster wear, cheap faux pearls) that is a long action made in 1924 after the advent of S&W heat treated cylinders. Mechanically it is perfect. I bought it cheap ($250.00) and had it refinished by Ford's. Got it back yesterday with a Master Blue finish that is to die for and true case hardened hammer and trigger with spectacular color.

I think it is the "sweet spot", heat treated cylinder, still long action and from the days of Capone.

"Collectors" cringe due to the loss of originality, but in its condition there was really no loss. I now have a better than new 1924 M&P Long Action, and have if not preserved certainly venerated an industry standard world wide that held sway for decades.

I will use my 10-5 for range time and +P loading and will always be thrilled with this irreplaceable iconic .38 4". I'd give the Humphrey Bogart iconic 2" .38 award to the Colt Dick Special.

Lucky Derby
December 18, 2013, 08:11 AM
Condition being equal the -6.
Older is better to a point. With pre WWII guns, (none of these are) if you plan doing a lot of shooting the metalurgy was not as good as the later guns.

eeh
December 18, 2013, 05:26 PM
10-6 with heavy barrel,no question

Jim NE
December 18, 2013, 05:31 PM
I'm certainly with Jim NE here,

I recently (relatively) bought a pre-10 Model of 1905 M&P that was cosmetically ugly (holster wear, cheap faux pearls) that is a long action made in 1924 after the advent of S&W heat treated cylinders. Mechanically it is perfect. I bought it cheap ($250.00) and had it refinished by Ford's. Got it back yesterday with a Master Blue finish that is to die for and true case hardened hammer and trigger with spectacular color.

I think it is the "sweet spot", heat treated cylinder, still long action and from the days of Capone.

"Collectors" cringe due to the loss of originality, but in its condition there was really no loss. I now have a better than new 1924 M&P Long Action, and have if not preserved certainly venerated an industry standard world wide that held sway for decades.

I will use my 10-5 for range time and +P loading and will always be thrilled with this irreplaceable iconic .38 4". I'd give the Humphrey Bogart iconic 2" .38 award to the Colt Dick Special.
PICS, PLEASE! :) (If you haven't already posted some on another thread.)

rikman
December 19, 2013, 01:15 AM
I would buy all three.
Ditto

rswartsell
December 19, 2013, 07:55 PM
In the works Jim NE, by a better photographer than me. I will do a thread on the experience.

If you enjoyed reading about "Choice of S&W: 10-6 / 10-8 / 10-10 ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!