Older Smith & Wesson vs. New ?!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Don Lu

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
406
Location
Georgia
What is the big deal ?! Im new to revolvers but since I've been on these boards I've seen so much bashing of newer smith revolvers. What is the big deal? Is it just the locks and MIM parts that make it a lower quality somehow or is it the politics behind the newer locks, or is it just a bunch of older people that cant or do not know how to handle change ? what is really going on ??:scrutiny:
 
The infernal lock and MIM are simply symptoms of a larger problem........How do you build a revolver for less money so you can stay in business?

The fittment of S&W revolvers made prior to the 1980s was superior to later guns. After about 1982, it doesn't matter anymore, really. It's not a bunch of folks that can't handle change. Just hold an example from each era in each hand and compare them.

The Pre-war S&W revolvers were fitted even better still, and they have an action that is much smoother, known as the long action.
 
I've been shopping for a new revolver. One reason I signed up on this board, is that there are alot of folks who know six guns. I've lurked over on some other boards too.

I've noticed that there are a whole bunch of people who don't like what S&W has done to their revolvers. That is on every gun board I've found. They really hate the key lock, and they are not wild about the mim parts neither. There are alot more folks angry about that key lock than anything else I've read. They seem to have some real good reasons to not want it there. The best one being that some of those key locks are locking while the fellas are shooting them!

I've also noticed that only a few of the same folks, and I mean the exact same folks, are on alot of boards making excuses for why the key locks are on the guns, saying the new guns are better than the old ones, and criticizing the folks that don't like them. Usually I root for the underdog, but in this case, I'm suspicious.

If the die hard fans of a manufacturer, are saying they are not going to buy any more guns from them, that tells me there is a problem with that manufacturers product. In my buisness, if the sales guys say that the customers are not going to buy from me, I'd find out what the problem is and fix it. I want to sell as much as I can to as many folks as I can. I especially want my largest, oldest customers to keep placing orders.

I've been looking for a 4 inch .357. I looked last week at the 620, and 686. I was not impressed with the 620. The rifling was shallow, the washer on the end of the new style barrel looked bad, the trigger was gritty, and those fellas were proud of that gun. That is till I was leaving, and the price started dropping. It dropped over $100 dollars for I hit the door, then the fella said if I'd buy it, he'd sell it for cost + $25. I liked the 686, but that hole for the key lock sure makes the gun ugly.

I think I'm gonna find me a used model 66, police trade in to tied me over. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but with all these folks telling what problems, and poor quality is attached to these revolvers that S&W is making, I'm gonna wait to buy one. If these were just grumpy folks that didn't like changes, I could see your point. But these are folks that love S&W revolvers, and own a mess of them, and want S&W to git rid of the key locks so they can buy more!
 
I love S&W revolvers but I'll never own a new one. First, there has been a steady decline in quality, and second, there is that ugly a**ed lock; that was the last straw for me. If they had put it somewhere less obtrusive maybe I could have dealt with it, but I just can't stand that hole in the sideplate!

But then again I am a traditionalist (I only have three screw Rugers too) so maybe I'm just an old fart stuck in his ways. :D
 
For myself the big appeal of a revolver is it's predictability, if the cylinder is full of bullets all I need do is pull the trigger(DA's) and BANG. There is no safety to disengage, no wondering if there's one in the tube, just point and shoot.
Now add the internal lock :barf: with who knows how many parts ? collecting all sorts of debris, if any one were to actually use the lock they would be asking for a problem that should not exist in the 1st place.
I have no desire to own a new S&W :(
 
If your interest in Smiths lies mainly with the very popular models then you will be very happy with the older guns which are widely available for very good prices. Interest outside of the regularly encountered models is hard on the wallet and some of Smith's current offerings in this category are relative bargains compared to the vintage articles. Also, there are numerous models today that were not available anytime in the past. One has to accept the lock to play with the X frames for example.

Mechanically, the action hasn't changed much outside of the addition of the lock and the MIM parts. If a gunsmith from the 50s opened up a 500SW Mag he or she will have no problem working on it. Strength wise, the newer ones are definitely superior. Aesthetically, the older models had better looks.

Old and new they are products of mass production (check out the SCSW to get an idea of how many frames S&W made even back in the day) and are subject to variations and the whims of the bean counters. The older, better ones that exist today are here because they were the best of the bunch made in the factory that week. The Monday and Friday guns were not cherished and thus are not here with us.


I prefer anything before the mid 60s and after the mid 80s BTW.
 
People don't like the locks for three reasons:

1. The locks are a reminder of a S&W sellout. When S&W was owned by a British firm, they sold out gun owners to settle a lawsuit by the Clinton administration. One of the things they agreed to do was to put locks on handguns. Gun owners boycotted S&W and the British firm eventually sold out to an American company -- Saf-T-Hammerless, a manufacturer of gun locks. About the only thing left of the agreement is the gun locks.

2. The locks are ugly. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but I've never seen anybody say the locks improved the looks of the revolvers.

3. A perception of unreliability. There have been very, very few documented reports of problems with the locks. The handful that have been documented have involved very high pressure loads in light weight handguns. That's why I call it a perception of a problem. I don't think the problem really exists to any significant degree.

Yes, some MIM parts are used but a majority are not. MIM parts are routinely used by most/all manufacturers to some degree and are not necessarily "bad." In a few cases, there have been issues of quality control; for example, look at the thread at http://smith-wessonforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/530103904/m/9231047611/p/1.

However, every manufacturer, including S&W, have occasional quality control problems. For example, in the 1950s there were problems with Chiefs Special Airweights.

I own a number of pre-lock S&W revolvers and love them. I'm in the process of buying my second post-lock S&W revolver (both J-frames). The earlier ones definitely have better triggers.

In short, I prefer the older Smiths because of fit and finish. However, I don't mind buying a newer model if it fills a particular need (okay, a "want").
 
I have been in the happy circumstance of being able to inspect, examine, disassemble and snoop inside of Smith & Wesson revolvers made from the Civil War during the 1860’s to present. The guns they made during the latter 19th century and early-middle 20th represented the finest handgun workmanship in the world. They did things with relatively crude machinery that isn’t matched today. Their actions are so smooth, and they lock up like a bank vault. They were made with highly skilled human hands, not CNC controlled machines.

But…. And this is a very big “but.”

The materials they used, which were the best available at the time, don’t even come close to those used today. And labor costs have risen to the point where if they built guns “the old way,” you wouldn’t be able to afford to buy them.

The objections to the lock are partly practical, and partly emotional. But the fact is they are there, and will stay there, because our court system allows attorneys with an anti-gun agenda to try and sue firearms companies into bankruptcy.

I admit to buying the older guns. Most of the present models don’t particularly appeal to me. I’m more of a blued-steel sort of guy, and they’re increasingly into stainless, aluminum and plastic. But again, that’s where the market is going.

The nice thing though is that everyone can choose – old or new. It simply depends on what features are most important to you. ;)
 
I'm in the process of buying my second post-lock S&W revolver (both J-frames). The earlier ones definitely have better triggers.

Your perception of the not-as-nice trigger pull may have more to do with the fact that they are J Frames, which don't have as sweet of a pull as the larger K, L, and N frames. I have a post lock 686 that, compared to my 1959 K-22, has a slightly heavier DA pull that may actually be just a tad smoother than the older K-22. SA feels pretty similar (both excellent.)

The nice thing though is that everyone can choose – old or new. It simply depends on what features are most important to you.

Nicely said Fuff. I have new and old, and love them all. The only reason why I may not buy as many new ones in the future simply has to do with the fact that I can find used ones for less money if I look hard enough.
 
I have been in the happy circumstance of being able to inspect, examine, disassemble and snoop inside of Smith & Wesson revolvers made from the Civil War during the 1860’s to present. The guns they made during the latter 19th century and early-middle 20th represented the finest handgun workmanship in the world. They did things with relatively crude machinery that isn’t matched today. Their actions are so smooth, and they lock up like a bank vault. They were made with highly skilled human hands, not CNC controlled machines.

But…. And this is a very big “but.”

The materials they used, which were the best available at the time, don’t even come close to those used today. And labor costs have risen to the point where if they built guns “the old way,” you wouldn’t be able to afford to buy them.

The objections to the lock are partly practical, and partly emotional. But the fact is they are there, and will stay there, because our court system allows attorneys with an anti-gun agenda to try and sue firearms companies into bankruptcy.

I admit to buying the older guns. Most of the present models don’t particularly appeal to me. I’m more of a blued-steel sort of guy, and they’re increasingly into stainless, aluminum and plastic. But again, that’s where the market is going.

The nice thing though is that everyone can choose – old or new. It simply depends on what features are most important to you.
...YES !!!!...that's about best balanced, most clearly stated historical assessment of the S&W revolver quality manufacturing issue and the internal lock I have ever read...anywhere....and God knows !!!!.....it's the perennial "topic de jour" on all the wheelgun forums !!! Can we give Old Fuff an award for his reasoned, mature "take", and "sticky" his response ???

-regards
 
Oh, I guess I'm just an old fogey who doesn't like change. :rolleyes:
I don't like changes in quality and workmanship, replaced by corners-cutting and mediocrity.
Now, I'm not saying this is the case with all recently-made guns, but like the previous poster said: Compare them side-by-side for yourself. I think you'll see what we mean!
 
Quote by XB: "The Pre-War S&W revolvers were fitted better still."

How true. In Elmer Keith's book "Sixguns" he tells of a visit to the S&W factory and observed a group of people sitting around a table, a box of triggers and hammers (?) available, and their job was to match these to get, as close to possible, a perfect fit. These parts were surface hardened to a glass-like consistency and required no further fitting.

I have a Colt Trooper MKIII with what I consider a very good trigger, and my son has a Python made in 1976 which has a better trigger, but both fall short of my old Pre War S&W M&P long action. Looks like those days are gone forever.
 
Reason number Four:

3. A perception of unreliability. There have been very, very few documented reports of problems with the locks. The handful that have been documented have involved very high pressure loads in light weight handguns. That's why I call it a perception of a problem. I don't think the problem really exists to any significant degree.

Or...

4. I personally know someone who has had his S&W Lock Itself Up (completely and totally, requiring a 'smith to untie it) and have read of a number of others.

Not perception, but reality.

As opposed to Denial of Reality...

I sold the Internal Lock revolvers I owned, and will not own another. Period.
 
I am no fan of the "lawyer locks," but I would point out to those that own revolvers that have them... If they don't trust the locks and are worried about the "malfunction factor," one drop of red Loctite will solve the issue with little fuss or bother.

If S&W should produce a new gun that really turned me on, I'd probably buy it. But the lock issue would be taken care of within a half-hour after I got it home. :scrutiny:
 
I wont say i will never own s smith with the lock, but as of now i have none i am a smith & wessson nut! mostly n frames but a few k frames , i have a couple made in the 50s they are fine guns , call me old and stuck in my ways but thats what i and many more love, i know the lock and mim parts have hurt sales , im jusy glad there are used smiths out there to be had, i am grabing all of them i can, :D *csa*
 
Old Fuff, do you put that drop of locktite right in the key hole ? My local gunsmith said that I'd need to, "grind off the nub on the hammer", to guarantee reliability if I bought one. He said that if I super glued the keyhole, there was a little spring, which aligned with the recoil arch of the revolver. The key dosen't need to turn to activate the lock, if or when the spring fails, the flag alongside the hammer would pop up, engaging the hammer lock. In his opinion, a poor design which was causing the problem. I saw directions for taking off this nub, over on the S&W forum. Which method do you recommend?
 
I would be satisfied with the loctite solution, but I'd take the lockwork out and apply it to the part that turns from the inside. Grinding on the hammer is more through, but if you used the gun in a justified shooting a lawyer in a future civil suit (or for that matter, a criminal charge) might try to make an issue about what you'd done to the lockwork. With the loctite the modification would be less likely to be detected, and you could simply say (and truthfully so) that the lock was stuck. It may have happened, but I have never heard of a safety moving after being loctited. I agree that the S&W safety is a Mickey Mouse kind of thing. As locks go I prefer the kind used by Taurus. What solution you use may depend somewhat on where you live, and the kind of state/local government that is in place.

The very best answer is to have a revolver that was made before locks were introduced. They can't hold you accountable for something that was never there, and I prefer the older non-MIM lockwork anyway.

I have no problem with the lock on "toys." I do have serious reservations if they are on weapons.
 
Thank you sir. I have made up my mind. I don't have enough discretionary spending money to have a range only revolver. My revolver will have to work for a living, as well as shoot paper. I'll begin the search for a like new pre lock S&W. I appreciate your opinion, and experience.
 
That shouldn't be difficult, but it depends on what model you are interested in. If you live in an area where dealers carry a large stock of used guns that would be great. Otherwise check out the Internet auctions or speciality dealers such as www.armchairgunshow.com. If you don't see what you are looking for send them an e-mail with a "please look for" request. They often go through a fair number of guns before the website is upgraded. Also watch the "handguns for sale" posts on this forum.
 
Yeah, without disassembly and some understanding of the action/interaction, I'm not sure where to put that "one drop". I have a friend who just bought a 642, though...maybe we'll experiment with his! :)

Just kidding...but if anyone can state just where that "one magic drop" goes, and whether it requires disassembly, I'm not the only one who would appreciate it.
 
100_5053.jpg

I'll admit I prefer the old snubbys, but truth be told the pre-lock 638 Airweight Bodyguard has the sweetest trigger of them all.

All of the old snubby's (Colt's too) have the narrow, serrated trigger.. It's rough on the fingers if you fire more than a few rounds. The 638 came with the "Target" non-serrated, wide trigger and there is world of difference.

I hear that S&W will once again be mfg the grip safety model 40 shortly. Apparently this model will NOT have the "lock", as the grip safety satisfies the Governments requirements for safety.

I like my pre-40, but I'll certainly check out the new ones..

I'll give S&W credit.. They do have a great Customer Relations/Repair Dept, and that's a big deal to me.

Best Wishes,

J. Pomeroy
 
I just find those internal locks as more detriment than poistive and in application, triggers end up feeling heavier & longer :barf:
 
The internal lock does several things for me.

It holds all that I am opposed to and violates my conscience.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top