Price of Revolvers

[Confederate]

Looking at the new list prices from Ruger and Smith & Wesson, I'm surprised to see them shooting up to $650+. Many are into the $700 range, yet I see excellent revolvers still being sold for $300+.

It used to be that the price difference between new and used pistols weren't all that far removed, but now I wouldn't consider buying a new Smith & Wesson when I could get guns that are just as good (and with the old factory bluing) for considerably less.

This will probably drive the prices of old revolvers up or slow sales of new guns, I don't know which. If I were to set out for a new revolver now, it'd be a used Model 27 or a used 66/686 in great shape. (I don't even like many of the new offerings.) Still, there are some with an extra shot that might be worthwhile. Have they resolved all the issues with the 7-shot revolvers?

 

[symr00]

List prices are a whole lot more than what retail stores sell them for.

 

[Sunray]

"...the old factory bluing..." Smith quit doing the deep, rich, bluing prior to W.W. II. You'll pay more for one of them than you will a BNIB Smith.
symr00 is right. The MSRP is usually higher than the retail price. There's not much market up in firearms. Mind you, most of the manufacturer's plants are union shops with the ensuing high wages.

 

[Old Fuff]

Street prices - what new guns actually sell for - is often far removed from the manufacturers' suggested retail price. The key word here is "suggested," and the makers seldom try to enforce it.

But you are right in thinking that the used market offers some excellent guns for attractive prices. For that reason I am far more likely to shop for used models rather then new ones - which become used as soon as you walk out of the shop door. Just be sure you know how to check out what ever used gun you're considering, and always ask yourself, "why did the former owner sell it?" If it seems to be too good there may be a reason...

 

[Snake Eyes]

The only revolvers I buy are used, because I only buy Colts.

They aren't getting any cheaper either.

 

[Confederate]

No, I've noticed. I don't ever recall owning a Colt, though I once handled a Python: beautiful gun.

The lustrous bluing Smith & Wesson offered ceased in the 1980s because of environmental concerns. Their current process is an acid blue, which is more black than blue. The old stainless guns also were more polished than the ones today, though I remember my first Model 63, which looked horrible (like they'd given a chimp sandpaper).

I'm glad to know that list prices are higher than going prices. There was a time when that wasn't so. In fact, sometimes one had to pay over retail for one of their guns. People would pay half again more than list and they they'd complain that it wasn't worth the money. As one Smith rep told me, "When you pay $700 for a $500 gun, it's still a $500 gun!"

 

[lesjones]

Confederate: Exactly right. Warren Buffet once said "Price is what you pay. Value is what you get."

 

[RustyShackelford]

NIB prices/used revolvers

Prices for NIB(new) and used revolvers in my area are out of control. I went by a big shop that stocked a used S&W model 19 .357magnum in what I would call fair condition for around $450.00! . I've seen old used Rossi .38spl revolvers for $350.00. Older model Taurus guns for around $100/200 higher than the fair price.

I know shop owners want to make $$$ but the mark up on handguns is crazy, .

Rusty

 

[TonyB]

In theory,you would buy a NEW gun to avoid problems..unfortunatly,this is not the case..you're taking a chance either way....my personal track record is that my used guns have caused me less problems than the new ones I've bought.I love finding a "sleeper" in a gun store...guns that arn't as pretty or shiney..but work great.

 

[Panthera Tigris]

I would think if autos are so much more popular now than revolvers, like I keep hearing, that they'd drop the prices on revolvers dramatically to keep a market for them.

Maybe the talk that autos are so much more popular is inaccurate?

 

[MCgunner]

I can get a NIB 642 Smith locally for a tick over 300 bucks. Buying a used Rossi for 350 sounds insane! They don't cost that new!

Only thing that bothers me about Smith is all the reports of the lock failures, but I'm thinking that's a buncha BS, personally. Having a lock is BS of course, but my Taurus has one and it's never failed. It's a little less noticeable on the gun, though, on the back of the hammer. I don't know where the key is and don't care.

I'm wanting a few used Smiths, maybe a 3" or 2" M10 or 13 or something, but I like buying new, also. I think Taurus revolvers are about the best buys for the money right now, just a personal opinion that I'm sure someone will argue. But, I really like the quality of the Taurus guns and the price is right compared to the competition. Frankly, I'd rather have a new Taurus than a used Smith if the money is the same, assuming similar revolvers. the Taurus really compares well and costs less.

 

[Panthera Tigris]

There was a thread late last year at the S&W forum with a guy who had his lock personally fail, but he dropped the gun on the floor, causing the failure. I've only read about failures in the lightweight revolvers, I've yet to hear of one in the steel revolvers.
All of my revolvers are Smiths and one Colt, but I'd have no problem at all picking up a Taurus.

 

[Master Blaster]

...the old factory bluing..." Smith quit doing the deep, rich, bluing prior to W.W. II.

Actually thats not true, the guns made between 1950 and 1985 have the deepest richest bluing, from all of the examples I have seen, the best bluing being between 1950 and 1975.

Prior to WWII most Smith revolvers had a matt blue that looked more brown, very few had the high polish deep rich bluing, only a few of their most expensive models had the high polish seen after WWII and before Bangor Punta took over.

My 1967 27-2 has the deepest richest bluing of any handgun I have ever seen. Its better than the royal blue on almost all of the pythons I have handled.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I agree with the basic comments that the demand is for the quality of the old guns and not for new. Thus the price has driven up the costs of the old ones because of scarcity and demand. I know I tend to snatch up anything nowadays that looks reasonable.

Good quality Smiths and Colts are like the perfect investments. The only go up in value recently.

 

[Father Knows Best]

I would think if autos are so much more popular now than revolvers, like I keep hearing, that they'd drop the prices on revolvers dramatically to keep a market for them.

Maybe the talk that autos are so much more popular is inaccurate?

That's not how it works. First of all, relatively small changes in price are unlikely to result in significant shifts in product mix between revolvers and pistols. After all, few buyers go into the gun store thinking, "I want a handgun, I'm willing to spend $500, and I don't care if it's a pistol or revolver." If that were the case, then pricing the revolver at $490 while the pistol is $510 would cause them to buy the revolver.

In fact, however, the vast majority of buyers are not cross-shopping revolvers and pistols. Rather, you have pistol buyers and you have revolver buyers. A revolver buyer may cross-shop Taurus and S&W products, but is unlikely to cross-shop S&W revolvers with, say, Glocks. Sure, at some point the price differential could become so great that it has a significant impact on the buying preference, but it would have be in the many hundreds of dollars.

Second, as I pointed out, S&W prices its revolvers principally with an eye on its competition -- other revolver makers. S&W has decided to position itself as the "premium" product, kind of like Cadillac (S&W) vs. Ford or Chevy (Taurus). It knows it will get buyers to pay a premium for a product that is perceived to be higher quality, made in the U.S.A., and that carries the S&W history with it. The question is just how much of a premium it can get away with charging before too many buyers decided the extra price isn't worth it and just buy a used S&W or a new Taurus.

Finally, keep in mind that S&W also makes pistols. It has no real incentive to lure buyers away from pistols to revolvers. Instead, it tries to maximize profits. Revolvers are actually very expensive to manufacture. They have a lot of heavily machined parts that need to be carefully assembled and fitted. A double action revolver is a much more precise instrument, in many ways, than any autoloading pistol -- it's like a swiss watch! I'm sure that S&W can produce its M&P pistols for a lot less than it can even its most basic revolvers. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the cost of making a pistol is less than half the cost of making a revolver. In order to keep their profit margins up and maximize returns, they need to keep prices high on the high-cost revolvers. You do that by maintaining the "premium" positioning, and not by slashing price.

 

[Master Blaster]

On the topic, old vs new;

Personally I have both bought new revolvers and also older ones. The old ones are a better deal, as long as they dont have any serious mechanical problems or wear. New Smiths come with the lifetime service policy so maybe thats a better deal and worth the extra money over a used one, also there is a question of new models and availibility in the old / used revolver market.

I like many of the old revolvers like the K-22 and the M&P and I think they are a real deal if found very good or even excellent condition, worth much more than they sell for around here.

I bought a new 686 6" and 4" a few years back because the used ones were non existant, and I like to inspect before I buy.

A two year old or three year old used car with low mileage, sells for a lot less than a new car, but many folks prefer to pay the new price to get one new.

 

[Confederate]

I don't know, perhaps revolvers have been underpriced. When you think of something built to the tolerances of a revolver, and the fact that they often last indefinately (a polite term for longer than me), maybe $300-350 was a bit unrealistic.

If I could find a late-70s Model 13 in great condition I think I'd pay more for it. That was one fine handgun for the money when it was available. At the time police departments were getting away from .38s, the Model 13 was a wonderful alternative.

Those were happier days when cops didn't need all the weaponry they do now. *Sigh!*