I'll take any Bangor-Punta era S&W over a new one every time.
As long as polish is more important than function, I agree with this. There's a reason that the Bangor-Punta period is known as the "bad old days" of S&W production. There was a very steady decline in quality from the late '60s onward, with an upturn in the early '80s. The upturn started before Lear-Siegler bought them; Bangor-Punta realized how badly they had done and started re-investing.
Frankly, I've owned far too many Bangor-Punta S&Ws to blindly say I'd take one over a new one when it came to fit/function. Finish, yes. You have to inspect them carefully to insure you don't have a lemon. Right down to the sqaureness of the cylinder face; they didn't particularly care about getting that right before shipping in those days. Even on a 27 (ask me how I know this ).
"Those days", to be clear, started in the late 1960s. Don't just take an S&W as well-built because it is pre-lock. I do pine for Old Fuff's days of quality building, but they are older than the conventional talk on gun forums would lead you to believe. Just because it's "pre-lock" does not make it a better functioning gun than a current model. Better finished on average, yes. Better functioning - maybe.
Personally, my latest S&W is 1985 - and that because it was 1st year they made a new configuration (3" N frames). But I put a lot into evaluating post-'68 guns before buying. If you have those skills, do it. If you don't have those skills or want to learn them, don't fear the new guns.
Last edited: