Are the new Smith Classics better made?

[Jesse Heywood]

I bought a Classic model 25 in 45 Colt as soon as they were available. I had wanted one for 25 years and never had the money to buy one. They rarely show up at shows around here, and the ones that do are used up. I ignore Hilary's hole. Manufacturing quality is good, far better than the Bangor days. Finish is a solid blue. Not bright & shiny, but better than most of the newer guns on the market. And the trigger feels like it has been through the performance center, far better than my 686 was out of the box. Lockup is tight and solid. My only complaint was the grip shape and sharp checkering, fixed by Pachmyar. The price was high, but the value is good. I paid about $700 shipped to my ffl. I would like to have been able to buy a mate in nickel finish, but live on a fixed income.

 

[HankB]

I've been looking for a good .22 Combat Masterpiece for a while, and when I saw S&W had re-introduced it as one of their "Classics" - with a Patridge sight! - I just had to go on down to the local dealer to check it out.

The blue wasn't up to par, and when taking a close look at the front sight, a very noticeable gap was seen between the bottom of the Patridge blade (both fore and aft) and the top of the barrel rib.

That doesn't signify good workmanship or quality control to me - not for nearly $800.

 

[Taffnevy]

I picked up a model 17 Masterpiece. Looks as good as any, perhaps better, save the internal lock.

Very nice trigger too.

 

[CraigC]

Newsflash, Colt used carbona bluing on all SAA's until WWII. Unless I'm mistaken, it was also present on all blued double actions. It was never exclusive to S&W. I have never seen a post-war S&W with carbona bluing. USFA is the only source of new revolvers with a carbona blue finish.

 

[Old Fuff]

Newsflash, Colt used carbona bluing on all SAA's until WWII. Unless I'm mistaken, it was also present on all blued double actions. It was never exclusive to S&W.

Nope, not so.

During it's entire history, Colt used several different methods of bluing, but at any given time all models were blued using the method that was current for the time period, although some were more highly polished then others, and the degree of polish determined what the color would look like.

The earlist method was called Charcoal Blue, which dated from the early precussion period to about 1919. Carbona Blue was a similar process used by Smith & Wesson, as well as others, up through about 1940 or '41. Collt also used an alternative process called Fire Blue to blue small parts, such as hammers, triggers, pins, screws, etc.

In or about 1919, Colt changed to a new finish, which was called Gas Oven Blue, that continued until about 1941 when the factory was referbished for expected war production.

During the war, Colt switched to a bluing system that was, and still is, sold by the DuLite company. I believe they still use it today, although it may have been discontinued due to environmental issues. Colt's so called "Royal Blue" is based on this system. Post-World War Two SAA revolvers had (and I presume still do) have barrels, cylinders, back straps, trigger guards, and other small parts blued using the DuLite process.

Most of the pre-war Single Action's made between 1920 and 1941 (and a handful thereafter) had Charcoal Blued or Fire Blued parts made during earlier years, because by 1920 the demand for this model had substantually decreased.

 

[CraigC]

Seems we have some common names and proper names doing a little mingling. I use "carbona" as Turnbull and Bowen do, as a generic term for charcoal bluing. Whereas Carbonia is S&W's proprietary name for what is basically the same process. The fact remains that charcoal, carbona and Carbonia bluing are one and the same. Perhaps with minor variations between manufacturers but both manufacturers used the process, among others. Winchester also used it up until the WWII era. Carbonia being S&W's proprietary finish, yet the process is for all intents and purposes, the same as Colt's charcoal bluing, whether done in a coal or gas furnace. Close enough to get lumped together. The source of the heat is irrelevant.

So yes, Colt used charcoal bluing until the time of WWII.

I would love to see some documentation that S&W actually used Carbonia bluing, rather than hot salt-bluing like DuLite, up through the Bangor-Punta era.

The fact also remains that we can't blame the EPA for S&W's current finishes because obviously, other manufacturers are doing what they do not. The blame lies with all those shooters who'd rather have stainless steel and rubber grips, who simply don't understand or appreciate the difference.

 

[buck460XVR]

The blame lies with all those shooters who'd rather have stainless steel and rubber grips, who simply don't understand or appreciate the difference.

...........oh, so now it's MY fault? That's funny.

Yep, I prefer stainless and synthetic to blue and wood, and for good reason. Stainless is much more maintenance free, and corrosion resistant, thus it works better in the harsh conditions I hunt in. Same goes for synthetic/rubber stocks/grips as compared to organics. No swelling or shrinking due to temps and humidity that affect accuracy, no cracking and splitting, and again, basically maintenance free. But that don't mean I don't understand the difference, it means just the opposite, because I understand the differences, I prefer what I do. I use my guns and they sometimes spends days on end in the rain/ice/snow. Blued guns and fragile wood stocks don't like this. Maybe it's you that doesn't understand this. I do appreciate deeply blued guns and beautiful wood, but it doesn't work for me. Again, I believe it is you that doesn't understand or maybe appreciate that different folks have different needs. If companies do not do the bluing process to your satisfaction because of the intensive labor and the high cost associated with them and/or because the chemicals used in the good old days were killing people and polluting our ground water, you may need to understand and appreciate that fact....not blame others that prefer something different.

 

[CraigC]

Technically, yes, it is your fault. It's purely market-driven. No right or wrong, it is what it is. What you also have to keep in mind is that not everybody who prefers stainless steel does so because they hunt in the snow and rain. Look at the hunting vs. shooting thread. Apparently, most shooters don't even hunt so fewer still care about the weatherproof qualities of stainless steel. They've just heard that blued finishes are fragile, will rust overnight without prayers spoken and some pixie dust sprinkled on them and if they get wet, they turn into gremlins. Not unlike all the weird notions folks get about cast bullets.

Same thing can be said for anything else. Most people want what they want and they want it now but they don't want to pay too much for it and they don't want to pay more for better because cheap and "good enough" is well, good enough.

I believe it is you that doesn't understand or maybe appreciate that different folks have different needs. If companies do not do the bluing process to your satisfaction because of the intensive labor and the high cost associated with them and/or because the chemicals used in the good old days were killing people and polluting our ground water, you may need to understand and appreciate that fact....not blame others that prefer something different.

I understand all that and accept that reality. If you want things the way they used to be, I understand that I have to pay for it and I am fully willing to. I'm just not willing to pay S&W's asking price for new junk masquerading as "Classics". Although I disagree on some of it, as I've said in this thread, it has more to do with labor costs than anything to do with the chemicals.

 

[Old Fuff]

So yes, Colt used charcoal bluing until the time of WWII.

Again you're wrong.

When the piece is highly polished, and you wouldn't believe the number of steps that Colt went through when they used the Charcoal Blue process, results are a very deep blue/black color, which was once described as looking into a deep pool of India ink.

Gas Oven Blue was an entirely different process, and as far as I can determine was unique to Colt between about 1920 to 1940. It resulted a satin (not highly polished) blue that was almost turquoise in color.

Knowing the difference in these colors and processes is critical when you make appraisals of some very expensive pieces, and have to be able to detect between original and refinishes - both aftermarket and by the original manufacturer.

As an aside: One time I returned a revolver to its manufacturer to have the barrel cut and front sight relocated. The barrel was removed, cut, resighted and refinished before being reinstalled. There was a very marked difference between the blue on the barrel, and that which was original on the rest of the gun. Clearly sometime within a 10 year period they'd made a substantial change in they're bluing procedures.

Last but not least, the exact color of the blue - regardless of the process used - is largely determined by how the parts were polished. The only difference between Colt's post war "standard blue," v. "royal blue" was the way the parts were polished, and they were sometimes blued at the same time in the same tanks, using the same chemicals - but if you look at the results you will see a clear difference.

 

[CraigC]

Then explain in technical detail the difference between charcoal bluing and the gas oven process. I'm dying to hear it.

 

[Guillermo]

If you want things the way they used to be, I understand that I have to pay for it and I am fully willing to.

applauding

I'm just not willing to pay S&W's asking price for new junk masquerading as "Classics".

Standing ovation

it has more to do with labor costs than anything to do with the chemicals.

CRAIG C FOR SMITH & WESSON PRESIDENT!!!!

 

[Old Fuff]

Then explain in technical detail the difference between charcoal bluing and the gas oven process. I'm dying to hear it.

I can, and have done so in the past, but its long and laborious task, and I got paid for doing it.

I suggest that you need to get a life.

This winter when the weather in January or February is ugly where you live, fly out to Las Vegas and attend one of Wallace Beinfeld's, Winter Antique & Classic Gun Show's. This you understand in not an ordinary show, but one where the big boys play, and where one table can easily hold over a million dollars worth of pieces.

What would (I hope) make this three-day affair interesting for you is the opportunity to examine literally hundreds of 18th, 19th, and early 20th century guns that are still in like new condition, or close to it. Maybe without too much time passing, you’re eyeballs should be able to detect the difference between various finishes done at different times, and by different companies, using different methods. While you were at it you might learn a whole lot more. They don’t let just anyone through the door, as most attendees are invited. But if you behave I think you might get in.

Besides the obvious attractions, the gentlemen behind those tables are usually world-class authorities on the particular subject their exhibits represent. If not otherwise occupied, they will usually answer intelligent questions, and sometimes even allow very careful handling of pieces they are showing.

If you are under the impression that these different finishing procedures resulted in anything close to identical appearance, you will soon find out otherwise.

Face it, the best cure for ignorance is a good education.

 

[CraigC]

I can, and have done so in the past, but its long and laborious task, and I got paid for doing it.

That's about what I expected. I love the internet. Only here can folks simply halt a discussion with "you're wrong" without ever having to prove it.

I suggest that you need to get a life.

Thank you very much for the suggestion but I am doing quite well.

If you are under the impression that these different finishing procedures resulted in anything close to identical appearance, you will soon find out otherwise.

You must think I just fell off the turnip truck???

Face it, the best cure for ignorance is a good education.

Condescension and elitist attitude duly noted, also what I expected, Ole Fluff.

 

[Old Fuff]

That's about what I expected. I love the internet. Only here can folks simply halt a discussion with "you're wrong" without ever having to prove it.

Well that's a two-way street. I did go to some lengths to describe the differences. Now you have the option to go out and do some research, and afterwards prove I'm wrong.

If you can.

Thank you very much for the suggestion but I am doing quite well.

You're welcome, and I truly believe you would find the suggested trip to be enjoyable and enlightning. Actually handling and examining is probably the best way to learn more about these early firearms.

You must think I just fell off the turnip truck???

Ah.... Well you said it, I didn't.

Condescension and elitist attitude duly noted, also what I expected, Ole Fluff.

Well again, I was trying to offer a constructive suggestion. Some of your comments led me to believe that some additional research on your part might lead to a better understanding of the issues. I am not obligated to take my time to write a long report simply to satisfy what you seem to be unwilling to go out and do for yourself.

 

[iflyem1]

"The Carbonia oil (a product of American Gas Furnace Co.) was used by many gun manufacturers in their own versions of 'DuLite' bluing, but the use of Carbonia oil does not make it 'Carbonia Blue' as only S&W did it."

- Bill Adair, Firearms Restoration


Does anybody else miss Bill besides me!!!!!

 

[357 Terms]

Guillermo? you gotta be a Taurus rep....am I right?
Why do these threads about new Smiths always go down the same road, with the same members?
We get it!..Ya'll hate em
Hillary hole, MIM, quality sucks, they are profit driven, crush fit barrels, and now there is an argument about Colt's blueing before WW2.
If you dont like Smiths then go buy A Taurus!

 

[valnar]

People always get upset when something they consider the "best" gets worse. Its because you have no other refuge. If there were 10 different revolver companies and all were similar quality - then one made their product cheaper - you'd still have 9 left to choose from. But if you consider S&W the best (as some do) and THEY build their product cheaper, its like a stab in the heart. Where else do you go except hunting for older versions "when they made them better"?

 

[357 Terms]

Right valnar; but its not necessarily poorer quality,its change. Smith has to cut costs to stay afloat. Better to trim costs than go under. Same old-same old "I remember when"

Well I remember when m19's went outa time on a constant basis, cracked forcing cones! All the old timers then all said "those junk k frames; get a mod 27/28 a real gun!"
The more things change the more they stay the same.

LOL! and does anybody remember all the bitchin when Bangor Punta bought Smith? For years afterward they were "junk,junk,junk".

 

[Guillermo]

If you dont like Smiths then go buy A Taurus!

Not in the market for a new revolver...but thank you.

I am appreciative of the people that plop down their hard earned money for the garbage that Smith produces. This keeps them out of the used gun market,

 

[357 Terms]

Guillermo; whats Taurus's 401k like? do they match/contribute?..dental?

 

[Guillermo]

whats Taurus's 401k like? do they match/contribute?..dental?

I have no idea. I haven't worked for anyone else in many years.

Nor do not own a Taurus. Have no plans to.

But were I in the market for a new revolver I am not idiotic enough to buy a Taurus-quality revolver at Smith prices.

I am glad that some people do. As mentioned before, it keeps them out of the used revolver market. Besides, I don't think that anyone that would even consider a new Smith is worthy of owning a high quality gun like my K22 from 1953. That would be like casting pearls before the swine.

 

[valnar]

Unless you want to buy 100 Smiths or plan on outfitting a police department, I say there is no reason to worry about the new ones. The old ones, in whatever flavor you like, are very prolific.

I have a small collection of about 10 older Smiths - the exact ones I want. I may want a couple more and that's it. After that, I don't care what S&W makes. Some people may want a larger collection though, and if you visit some of the S&W forums, they certainly do!

 

[Old Fuff]

… and now there is an argument about Colt's blueing before WW2.

Yup, and for that bit of thread drift I apologize.

Back to the original topic. Smith & Wesson created the Classic Series, hoping it would appeal to those that preferred what I will call “old school models,” which in some cases had attained cult status. They also offered some features that some might consider advantageous, such as barrels that didn’t have heavy, full-length underlugs, and blued finish in place of stainless. Basically, a classic is something made using the company’s current platform, but camouflaged to look like something they made during earlier years.

For those that have no objection to recent changes in the basic platform, but like the “old school look,” they have had a mixed reception. Those that were made on the N-frame and chambered in .44 and .45, as well as some J-frame snubbies have proved to be relatively popular, where those made on the K-frame have generally done less well. All have faced a stumbling block in that as limited runs the MSRP is often at or above what one of the earlier original guns might cost on the used market. The other is that many of those that hanker for the older revolvers do so because they dislike the so-called improvements the current platform offers, and in particular the internal lock. This has tended to reduce sales in what was a limited market in the first place.

So are they indeed worth the high price they command? It depends on how you feel about it. In some ways current CNC machining has tightened some tolerances, but on the other hand past craftsmanship and selective fitting of various parts made up for what might be considered looser tolerances. Without question, side plates generally fit better in the old days, and some small perks that were offered then have now disappeared.

As the value of older production guns continues to go up (especially certain models) the price disadvantage between original and classic versions will narrow, but by the same token, the ever increasing value of the older revolvers tends to make them a better investment if, or when an owner decides to sell or trade.

Put simply, in the end it becomes a case of buying what you like best. Regardless of one’s point of view, we are fortunate that ultimately there is a choice.

 

[357 Terms]

Posted by Guillermo

I am appreciative of the people that plop down their hard earned money for the garbage that Smith produces.

Smith and wesson garbage? How do I use that ignore button I've heard about on this forum?

 

[Guillermo]

Smith and wesson garbage? How do I use that ignore button I've heard about on this forum?

There are a lot of people you will have to block if you are offended by this truth.

One who is offended by a differing opinion must lack confidence.

Not sure that a discussion forum is the place for such a person.