Why? Cuz they never shot a colt.
Howdy
Well, I have a few Colts; two 2nd Gen Single Action Armies, a couple of Police Positive Specials, a Detective Special, and an Official Police.
But I have lost count of how many Smiths I own. Probably getting close to four dozen at this point.
The appeal of the modern S&W double action revolver to me has always been that I feel it is simply a better design than a Colt DA. Except for the Model 1899, all S&W double action revolvers with swing out cylinders latch the cylinder in two places, at the front of the ejector rod and at the rear of the cylinder. Of course there was the Triple Lock too, but that is a separate story. Colts only latch the cylinder at the rear, there is nothing latching the cylinder at the front of the ejector rod, to me that makes the S&W lock up a little bit more rigid.
The other thing I have always preferred about Smiths is that they are more ergonomically designed, long before the word ergonomic was coined. To open a S&W, you push the thumb latch forward. To open a Colt you pull it backwards. Pushing the thumb forward is a much more natural motion. I can easily open a Smith with one hand if I care too. Opening a Colt requires hooking the thumb around the latch and pulling backwards. Just not as natural a motion.
I also have always liked the way a Smith is designed so that when the cylinder is open you cannot pull the trigger or pull the hammer back. Easy to defeat by pulling the latch back, but it always seemed to me this was a good design from a basic safety standpoint.
I have never much liked the 'v' shaped mainsprings that Colts use, I much prefer the simple, straight forward shape of a S&W mainspring. Easier to grind down the Smith spring shape if you want to lighten it.
I have also always liked the fact that there is a strain screw for the S&W mainspring. If you want to lighten the hammer pull just a tad, back out the strain screw a half turn. No strain screw to adjust on a Colt.
And for some unknown reason, I have always preferred the appearance of the S&W frame, with its egg shaped trigger guard. Just always looked more elegant to me than the 'lumpy' shapes of the various Colt trigger guards. Yeah, I know it is just style, but I have just always thought the S&W design was more elegant.
When S&W came up with the K frame in 1899, I think they came up with the perfect size for a 38 caliber revolver. Whether it is an old M&P or the most modern version of the Model 10, the size is just right. The frame of the Colt Official Police is a bit bigger and heavier than is really needed for a six shot 38 Special revolver. The frame size of the Police Positive Special is smaller, but I really prefer a K frame Smith for a 38 Special. There were sure a lot of police departments that felt the same way for the majority of the 20th Century. Sales of S&W revolvers to police departments far outweighed Colt sales.
The one thing I will say that was superior about Colts is the shape of the hammer. With the old long throw S&W hammers it was easy for the thumb to slip off the hammer spur when cocking the hammer if the shooter was not careful. Colts always had a hammer spur with a deep recess in front of the spur, where the tip of the thumb nestles when pulling back on the hammer. This allows a rolling action that tends to keep the thumb on the hammer spur. When S&W adopted the short throw hammer, they completely redesigned the hammer spur, putting a deep recess in front of the spur and cutting deep knurling. My thumb never slips off the hammer spur of a short throw S&W.
All in all, I feel the S&W hand ejector design is simply better than the Colt DA design.
I may be prejudiced.
