Revolvers at Scheels today

[UncleEd]

The mindset of many auto shooters (read that 9mm) is
"I can miss a lot because I still have so many more
chances to hit."

 

[.455_Hunter]

But, based on the B-27 sized “patterns” I see on far too many target boards every week, I think there would be a lot more “better” shooters if folks learned how to shoot correctly with a DA revolver first.

View attachment 1178759

(A closer peek at the lanes next over. Both are being shot at 5 yds.)
View attachment 1178758

But that’s just speculation from a diehard revolver fan.

View attachment 1178760
View attachment 1178761

Stay safe.

I had a similar experience the first time shooting my 1908 production Colt New Service in .38 WCF. I was getting fist size groups at 15 yards, while the folks in the next bay with a .40 cal Glock at 7 yards were doing their best impression of 50 yard open cylinder 000 buck patterns. They couldn't even process that a 100 year old gun could outshoot a new Glock, let along still function. It was quite amusing.

 

[Styx]

The age is far from over, but, I think those that understand that, are probably from another age, and have more experience and time behind a trigger with one, to understand and appreciate them. And a lot of the current offerings dont do much to encourage or enamor either. I love the older Smiths, but the new ones dont do anything much for me, and they dont seem to be too concerned about trying to remedy that either.

And as much as I like them, plastic in plastic, is all youll see me carry/use for anything serious. I might be old, but I aint stuck in the past. Gotta keep up to keep from falling behind.

I reckon while a small demographic of older gun owners who you find in the echo-chamber that is gun forums and social media have an issue with modern Smiths, the overwhelming majority do not. The facts are most do not own prelock or other Smiths, there are only a finite number of them in circulation, and of the handful of people who own them typically have more than just one.

Despite all the pontificating about how terrible current Smiths are, about the IL, and all the negativity about S&W revolvers in the echo-chamber online, S&W still manufacturers and sells hundreds of thousands of revolvers per year each and every year. They manufacture the most popular and preferred revolver worldwide. The use MIM parts, removal of the firing pin from the hammer, use of modern CNC precision machining vs doing it by hand, etc are industry standards that just about all other revolvers, popular semiautos, rifles, and shotguns utilize.

 

[trackskippy]

I have Smiths from all eras, most are pre lock, but I have and have had a number that had it. The lock never really bothered me, and Ive never had any issues with one that had it. Yea, if you want to bitch, its ugly, but so are Glocks and Hi Points, and ugly doesnt seem to hinder how they work either. Havent seen any difference in function or reliability with the guns with the locks, and I shoot most of my stuff enough to know if theres going to be a problem.

But when you compare the older guns to the newer ones, there are some pretty obvious differences in things. Not saying the new guns arent decent and serviceable, but just maybe some of the changes weren't really for the better, and just seem to take something from them. Probably more aesthetic than anything though. All of them seem to shoot just fine, accuracy wise, and Ive never really had any complaints about function with most of them.

If I had to bitch about anything with the newer guns, some of the finishes, sights, and grips would top the list, and to some extent, aesthetics with some of them. At least those are what Im usually dealing with when I get them and want to work around when possible, and the solution tends to be more "retro" when I do.

 

[westernrover]

I've bought and owned numerous late-model S&W. I've not owned older pre-lock ones, so I'm not comparing them to those. Having bought numerous Smiths and Performance Center revolvers and spent more than $10K on them, I do not have any issues with the IL, MIM parts, two-piece barrels, frame-mounted firing pins, modern CNC, or the aesthetics. If I did, I wouldn't have bought them.

That said, their quality sucks. It just flat sucks and bad. They have a very serious quality problem that is evidenced by the numerous revolvers they produce with flaws. It's not a bad design, it's bad execution. It's not that they don't build them the way they used to, they just don't build them the way they're supposed to. They screw up unbelievably. It's just astonishing the ways they find to screw them up.

To their credit, most of the time, they fix them, but sometimes it takes multiple trips back to the factory. In the last 5 years, I've sent revolvers back 13 times. In my experience, about 3 out of 10 they will fail to fix satisfactorily.

Nevertheless, I carry one everyday. When it's made right, it's right, and very good. I would pay 50% more if I could be assured that it would be right the first time.

 

[Styx]

I've bought and owned numerous late-model S&W. I've not owned older pre-lock ones, so I'm not comparing them to those. Having bought numerous Smiths and Performance Center revolvers and spent more than $10K on them, I do not have any issues with the IL, MIM parts, two-piece barrels, frame-mounted firing pins, modern CNC, or the aesthetics. If I did, I wouldn't have bought them.

That said, their quality sucks. It just flat sucks and bad. They have a very serious quality problem that is evidenced by the numerous revolvers they produce with flaws. It's not a bad design, it's bad execution. It's not that they don't build them the way they used to, they just don't build them the way they're supposed to. They screw up unbelievably. It's just astonishing the ways they find to screw them up.

To their credit, most of the time, they fix them, but sometimes it takes multiple trips back to the factory. In the last 5 years, I've sent revolvers back 13 times. In my experience, about 3 out of 10 they will fail to fix satisfactorily.

Nevertheless, I carry one everyday. When it's made right, it's right, and very good. I would pay 50% more if I could be assured that it would be right the first time.

What issues did you send them back for?

As an aside that's not directed at anyone, I've heard a few people say almost every newer Smith they've purchased had an issue, but I've purchased a M60-15 3", M686 2.5" and 3", and a M69 Combat Magnum 2.75" in the last 3 years. None have had any issues. That said, I wonder if these same revolvers were purchased by some on the forum or if they examined them now if they'd find something to be wrong with them.

S&W manufactured 232,476 revolvers in 2021. I'm not convinced a significant percentage of them are going out as bad as many claim or assume, nor that S&W revolvers from the past were as perfect as many claim them to be. I can't speak on their QC from back in the day as there was no internet or documentation like there is in modern times; however, I've seen a few retired LE and department armorers who paint a different picture that conflicts with the utopian era others recall.

 

[westernrover]

I can't make any claims from personal experience about how they used to be. I suspect they had some eras where they were very inconsistent. I understand that the pre-war era had the best quality, and that the post-war Helstrom era was second. I'm sure that some outstanding guns were perfectly produced even in the Bangor Punta era, but that time was also when they made a lot of bad ones.

The issues I've sent them back for comprise a long list. I've detailed some of them here in previous threads.

If you say you haven't had any issues with yours but wonder if someone else would find them, have you even checked them?

I wouldn't shop for a S&W without checking the b/c gap of every cylinder, checking the frame/crane gap, checking the firing pin length, checking for machine finish errors, checking the barrel clocking, checking the barrel isn't crushed where it threads into the frame (using a Brownells precision-ground "match"-spec revolver rod), checking the strain screw length and mainspring design that they could be expected not to misfire (not a ground-down strain screw in the slot of a ribbed mainspring), checking the crown for defects, checking the timing of each cylinder with a revolver range rod, checking the machine finish of the cylinder throats, checking the forcing cone, the lockup, the straightness of the ejector rod, the crane for bends, the crane plunger screw for cracks, all the screw heads for slot damage, and more. If I were to buy one, I would expect it to fire more than 100 rounds without a misfire. These are all things I would expect to find faultless on any $1000+ revolver. That has decidedly not been my experience with a string of S&W and PC revolvers that I've purchased in recent years.

But I'll reiterate that I am very pleased with one. It had its problems, but they were solved, though not entirely by S&W and the PC. I had the PC cut a second cylinder for moon-clips. It was their choice not to cut the original cylinder but send me a second one. They fouled it up and would not fix it. So I had the original cylinder cut by TK Custom. It's an outstanding gun that performs very well. It's just a pity that final result isn't the consistent experience I've had with S&W.

 

[Styx]

I can't make any claims from personal experience about how they used to be. I suspect they had some eras where they were very inconsistent. I understand that the pre-war era had the best quality, and that the post-war Helstrom era was second. I'm sure that some outstanding guns were perfectly produced even in the Bangor Punta era, but that time was also when they made a lot of bad ones.

The issues I've sent them back for comprise a long list. I've detailed some of them here in previous threads.

If you say you haven't had any issues with yours but wonder if someone else would find them, have you even checked them? I wouldn't shop for a S&W without checking the b/c gap of every cylinder, checking the frame/crane gap, checking the firing pin length, checking for machine finish errors, checking the barrel clocking, checking the barrel isn't crushed where it threads into the frame (using a Brownells precision-ground "match"-spec revolver rod), checking the strain screw length and mainspring design that they could be expected not to misfire (not a ground-down strain screw in the slot of a ribbed mainspring), checking the crown for defects, checking the timing of each cylinder with a revolver range rod, checking the machine finish of the cylinder throats, checking the forcing cone, the lockup, the straightness of the ejector rod, the crane for bends, the crane plunger screw for cracks, all the screw heads for slot damage, and more. If I were to buy one, I would expect it to fire more than 100 rounds without a misfire. These are all things I would expect to find faultless on any $1000+ revolver. That has decidedly not been my experience with a string of S&W and PC revolvers that I've purchased in recent years.

But I'll reiterate that I am very pleased with one. It had its problems, but they were solved, though not entirely by S&W and the PC. I had the PC cut a second cylinder for moon-clips. It was their choice not to cut the original cylinder but send me a second one. They fouled it up and would not fix it. So I had the original cylinder cut by TK Custom. It's an outstanding gun that performs very well. It's just a pity that final result isn't the consistent experience I've had with S&W.

FYI: I quoted you to ask what was wrong with your example(s) only. The two paragraphs that followed weren't directed to you or anyone in particular in this thread. I don't want you to think I challenging your experiences or opinion.

To answer your question, I give them a long look over at the LGS, look for any machining issues that stand out, manipulate the cylinder, hammer, cylinder release, crane, trigger, ejection rod, etc. I also check the timing, and I visually check that the barrel is straight. I then go out and shoot it. No, I don’t pull out gauges, micrometers, magnifying glasses, borescopes, rulers, scales, take it completely down and go over each and every component with a fine tooth comb searching for any imperfection, etc. I have never done that with any firearm whether revolver, semiauto, or rifle. At best, I'll do the no-go gauge on ARs I assemble from random parts.

Like I stated. From my checks, my 4 recent examples have been fine. They shoot fine without any malfunctions or issues, but I'm sure someone could find something that's wrong with it if they looked. I only say and assume that based on how everyone else on firearm forums seem to always get bad ones, but somehow (I think) I got 4 in a row that have been perfectly fine so far.

 

[someguy2800]

if they built new Smiths like they built old Smiths, they would cost $3000