UncleEd
Member
Over the years, actually decades, I've flip flopped in my estimation
of S&W revolvers and Ruger revolvers, particularly in the .38/.357
variety.
Sometimes I've thought that if I had to chose just one it would be
the Smiths; then a little later the Rugers. I kept seeing and
admiring the qualities of both designs.
Now I just live with the fact that I want to own both in sufficient
numbers. I shoot almost exclusively double action and I like
both iterations.
Oh, I've also owned a good number of Colts, particularly the
Pythons and a few Diamondbacks. But they always seemed to
get sold in favor of the Smiths or Rugers. As nice as they were
and are, their innards always turned me off.
Had I been an accumulator of firearms, I'm sure a few Colts would
have been kept but they wouldn't get the workouts that the
Smiths and Ruger did and do.
As to any other revolver makers, just never bothered except one
Charter Arms snub back when Smith snubs were hard to find.
of S&W revolvers and Ruger revolvers, particularly in the .38/.357
variety.
Sometimes I've thought that if I had to chose just one it would be
the Smiths; then a little later the Rugers. I kept seeing and
admiring the qualities of both designs.
Now I just live with the fact that I want to own both in sufficient
numbers. I shoot almost exclusively double action and I like
both iterations.
Oh, I've also owned a good number of Colts, particularly the
Pythons and a few Diamondbacks. But they always seemed to
get sold in favor of the Smiths or Rugers. As nice as they were
and are, their innards always turned me off.
Had I been an accumulator of firearms, I'm sure a few Colts would
have been kept but they wouldn't get the workouts that the
Smiths and Ruger did and do.
As to any other revolver makers, just never bothered except one
Charter Arms snub back when Smith snubs were hard to find.