New S&W for 2010

Status
Not open for further replies.
I didn't miss it, I just don't think its "the" zit. See above.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, you could be right. It did look like the lock at first, but now I'm not certain. It is missing the small pin in the center.

Judging from the cylinder lock cuts this is correct; the cylinder does rotate clockwise.

I think Hell just froze over...
Click to expand...

I'll second that.

Anyone notice how much the Taurus weighs? Over 18 oz! Good grief, that's not too much less than a steel 640!

http://www.taurususa.com/2010newcatalog/?catalog_page=11

Guess it is only a matter of time before someone starts a "which is ugliest of the 3" poll! My money is on the Taurus ... I like wood stocks, but "wood colored grips made from durable polymer"? Yikes.
 
I agree that the slippery fake wood grips on the Taurus are hideous. If it's going to be a polymer gun then don't pretend there's something natural on the gun. I do like that it's a semi-shrouded hammer so you can still cock it for SA. Why it's so darn heavy, I have no idea!

I think the LCR looks the best and if/when it comes out in .357mag I may have to get one.
 
I could take or leave the "Bodyguard". Not too thrilled with the notion of a revolver that requires batteries.

However, S&W has introduced three new rimfire revolvers, a 3" M63 and Centennials in .22lr and .22 mag. Good news for .22 lovers like me.

Also, a bushel of snubbies with full-length extractor rods as well as several cut for moonclips(!) Glad to see S&W is expanding their revolver line.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson/upload/popups/BGWeb/2010_NewProducts_rev4.pdf
 
I would think that moving the cylinder release to the top would make using speed loaders easier as well as dumping empty cases. I always seem to get one hung up on the release. It does look really weird though.
 
I think the new Taurus one looks cooler. I bet this one will not do as well as the Ruger LCR due to price. Ill pass. Now the new 442 with no lock, thats sexy.
 
You can count me intrigued by the new ambi release. This is one left hander who despises the standard Smith cylinder release--which is shaped for the contours of the right thumb--and that dated style could stand some dragging into the current century.
 
I'd be more interested in these things if one of the companies would make a new 2.5".

The rush is towards smaller, but a 2" barrel it still marginal to get even carefully selected rounds to expand, and they're making them smaller! How about a frame slightly shorter than the J (which is two and a half fingers, and often has two-finger grips) but a slightly longer barrel? 5 rounds just isn't enough that barrel might limit expansion and penetration.

There's a reason I still haven't traded my Taurus M85 to a Ruger or S&W--3" is a little too big for a pocket, but the 2.5" fits and still gives reasonable velocity.
 
Oh, hey, look at that.

Saw that the new Taurus polymer had it, too. I still prefer a metal frame on a small revolver. Can only imagine that polymer is punishing. Would want to wait to see how the plastic Taurus holds up, too.

Just wish that the S&W full-shroud barrels didn't look like they were built from two pieces. Props to the other big manufacturers for that 'Ruger profile'.

Still might have to look into it, especially if it has a full-length ejector rod. Function before form.
 
I'd be more interested in these things if one of the companies would make a new 2.5".
Click to expand...
Take a look at the S&W catalogue that Shear Stress linked to. now you can get the 637, 638, and 642 with 2.5"bbl.
 
I am interested in the new Bodyguard revolver IF it will be available without the laser. While I see the advantages of a laser, I wonder how well it will perform or even last after five years of pocket carry in a Kramer or Sparks holster.

It is nice to see S&W try to advance revolver design.
 
I'm interested in the ambi cylinder release, I shoot thumbs high with my other auto's and revo's but my 637 is so small I have to fight my self to keep my thumb down so I don't smack the cylinder release under recoil and possibly unlock the cylinder. I just might pick one up. I do need/want another J frame anyway.
 
I own and shoot the LCR about 50rds a week or more. Even with +P loads it isn't "punishing", but it's pretty hot. The Hogue grips help some.

I too long for a 2.5" bbl .38+P, as 2" is a tad too short and 3" too long. My LCR bbl is less than the stated 1.88", and measures closer to 1.75"

I'll bet you will be able to buy two LCR's for what that Smith will cost. I will guess upwards of $750-$800 for the non-laser model and well over $1000 for the lasered one. The Airweight pictured above has an MSRP of $616 and the lasergrips are a $280 option, AND the dealers in my area are charging a premium on the newer non-lock S&W's, as they are not easy to get. Plus, I here the new Bodyguard is supposed to come in a locking plastic hardcase like the "Alaskan" .500 did, which will probably add $100 to the price.
 
I'll have to see the .38 Bodyguard in the flesh before I can say for sure, but provided it meets my needs I am interested. I don't expect it to be cheap, but I don't intend to be a beta tester for it or any other gun. Once it has been around a year or two, and the "new price" has worn off, I'll take a serious look, provided it really doesn't have an IL, and especially if it will fit in my various J-frame holsters and use existing J-frame grips (hard to say from the pictures).

I was never much of a fan of lasers until I started carrying a Taser X26 on-duty. I've yet to miss using the laser as an aiming device, and I can see its application on small revolvers also. So much so that I purchased some CT405s for my on-duty BUG.

We will see.
 
Not too thrilled with the notion of a revolver that requires batteries.
Click to expand...
Ditto that.

Like knives, they're meant for up close and personal.

No batteries in my knives. Why would I want one in a snub?

attachment.php
 
Do someone has an info on how the cylinder release operate - push forward or push back? I see no front locking on the cylinder, clockwise rotation of the same... This is Colt & Wesson...:D I'm happy!!!
 
I will stick with my 442. It is meant to be used up close. It does not need a lock or a release on top of it or a LASER sight. Come on. I pop it in an Uncle Mike's pocket holster & slide it in my front pocket. Speed loader in the other pocket. Done...
 
Not impressed.

Revolvers should be capable of being shot, and not just pieces of metal and plastic snapped together as a last ditch effort. It's even worse when the things sell for $800 or more...it's a joke.

These small guns recoil excessively, are not really durable, are overpriced, ugly and lack the craftsmanship of larger guns. In short, they seem to be guns made for people who don't like carrying guns. These small, lightweight guns make good backups, but are poor primary guns, mediocre home defense pieces and would be one of my last choices for a bugout bag.

I'd like to see them available for $250, but at going prices are ridiculous.

Just my own views....
 
I don't get why they would call it the "Bodyguard" when they already have a snubby by that name. Unless they are going to discontinue making the old bodyguard. This new one is more like the Centennial than the bodyguard anyway. I really like that SS/alloy 2.5" centennial too, if I can get it without the lock.
 
I’m sorry but that is just repulsive. . . in more than one way. Whats wrong with these manufactures!? And more over what wrong with the people that buy these abominations. I’m not going to bend to the will and even refer to that as a firearm. S&W you need to get back to your roots!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
New Colt Python for 2010 ???
2 3
Replies
68
Views
7K
mordechaianiliewicz
M
J
  • Locked
New 329PD
Replies
4
Views
709
JMVH
J
R
  • Locked
Weekend Gun Show Booty:
Replies
15
Views
1K
oweno
O
U
Book for S&W revolver fans
Replies
5
Views
545
P89DCSS
P89DCSS
W
  • Locked
Colt SAA disassembly.
Replies
8
Views
1K
WarlockFirearms
W
Back
Top