Smith 27-2 versus new Model 27 Classic

Status
Not open for further replies.
Honestly, a new S&W 27 Classic doesn't even hold a candle to the original gun they attempted to make the new one sorta look like.

You want a real Royals Royce or Ferrari?
You shouldn't buy one of those kit cars built on a Volkswagen chassis that kinda looks like the real deal at a glance.

rc
 
I went with the real classic, for less than the new "classic". Can't comment on the new ones, but the older ones are outstanding.
 

Attachments

  • Model 27-2 Pic 2.JPG
    Model 27-2 Pic 2.JPG
    74.5 KB · Views: 60
I talked to a S&W rep years ago. Of course as a salesman, he had to say they were making better guns today. The reality is they just have managed to cheapen the production cost, example MIM parts. The reason S&W have these locks is because the group owning the patents couldn't sell or get royalties from any gun company. They bought S&W so they could make money on the patent. I have three model 57s, one five inch, and two 31/2. Every time I need money and think about selling one I think twice. I can shoot them all well and never will be able to replace them.

Cheers,

ts
 
OK, I appreciate the comments so far but, has anyone actually handled one of these Classics? Leaving the lock out of it for now, is it simply impossible to re-make a classic? Smith must have a great deal of financial and reputation capital tied up in this venture, the model 27 is not the only one they've exhumed, why on earth would they do this just for a fail?
 
I have looked over the new ones quite carefully a few times. I was sorely tempted to buy a 4" 21 in nickel my transfer dealer had in stock a little while ago; debated it quite hard. The price was attractive, so was the gun. It was well built - the mechanical quality of the gun was excellent and on average above many of the '70s-era guns that you can find now as a comparable. I am referring to the b/c gap, the cylinder fitment, the trigger action, etc. In my opinion they look on average to be well made guns and satisfying guns to shoot.

Where they don't quite measure up is in a) some of the finish details and polishing on the high-end ones (like 27, 25, and 29 - the flagship models), b) the average quality wood stocks, and c) the presence of the safety lock.

If they'd spend a few more dollars on the grip quality, and loose the lock, I'd own a few of them. But I'm picky on those points. If you are not as critical on those points, or don't want to take the time and effort to hunt up a pristine older one, I'd not hesitate to get one.
 
bikemutt said:
OK, I appreciate the comments so far but, has anyone actually handled one of these Classics? Leaving the lock out of it for now, is it simply impossible to re-make a classic? Smith must have a great deal of financial and reputation capital tied up in this venture, the model 27 is not the only one they've exhumed, why on earth would they do this just for a fail?
Click to expand...

They are not "failing" persay. The new "Classic" is still a much higher quality than anything that is CURRENTLY offered by their competitors.

What you are talking about is a competition between pre-MIM S&W and post-MIM S&W. I doubt the company sees their past production as much competition as they do current manufacturers offerings. It's not really an equal comparison.

And to answer your question about whether it's impossible to remake a classic, the answer is NO, it's not impossible. The issue is that it's not COST EFFECTIVE to completely replicate the old guns. Materials and labor costs have increased too much to be competitive.
 
When the original .357 Magnum revolver was introduced in 1935 it was intended to be the no-compromise/best quality flagship in their line. Thereafter the price included extra money so that workers - especially final assemblers - wouldn't be pressured on time issues. Best quality remained the principal goal. This was especially true prior to 1965 when the company was privately held, and owned by members of the extended Wesson family.

There were some lapses during the Viet Nam era, but generally the model 27 suffered the least.

Now there are some folks that really believe that the current guns that are made on CNC controlled machines are better then those that were built by experienced and skilled craftsmen. I strongly disagree, and in particular when it comes to model 27's. Are there lemons? Sure, but very few. This was the revolver the company staked its reputation on, at a time that they really cared.

Last but not least, the current Classic Line of guns has as a general rule, either held or decreased in value over time. In some cases they were discounted before eventually being sold. On the other hand the older model 27's have only gone in one direction, and that's up.

That should tell you something.
 
OK, I appreciate the comments so far but, has anyone actually handled one of these Classics?
Click to expand...

Ok. I have LOOKED at one. Only one. To tell you the truth, it wasn't a bad looking gun. It did have some "engraving" (Laser etching I would imagine) that I didn't care for, but I don't care for the fanciest hand engraving job ever done, to tell you the truth. The grips looked to be made out of the same stuff the Rhino's grips are made from. I don't know if it is or not, but that's what it reminded me of. Overall, not really "bad", just not as nice as the 1978, Model 27-2, in the presentation case I was looking at and ended up buying. And the new gun was tagged at $1275.00. The 27-2 went out the door for $750.00. Absolutly a "no brainer."

I do own a Model 21-4, "Thunder Ranch" in 44 Special that I suppose is comparable to the new 27's. It's MIM, got a frame mounted firing pin, round butt grip, a non pinned barrel and the lock. It is a beautiful, good shooting gun. I admit I haven't shot it a lot, but then I don't tend to shoot any of my guns a lot. I paid about the same for it that I did for the 27-2. Yes, I'd rather have a true "classic" Model 21, but I've never even seen one, and this one is a long way from being "bad."

I think if I didn't already have two old 27's, I'd look at the new "classic" line differently, just like I did the 21. At first I said I didn't want it. But the longer it sat around the dealers rack the better it got to looking. Actually the more I was wiling to look at it with a more open mind and see that it was a very nice gun (I know, some will say lower my standards). But I've got a 44 Special Smith & Wesson I probably wouldn't have otherwise. :D
 
I am very happy with my 70's M27.

Things I miss from the old production to the new :

I like the hammer mounted firing pin. This direct strike mechanism applies more energy directly on to the primer and you are less likely to have misfires. Because of the energy loss in the current mechanism, it is my opinion that the later pistols have stronger mainsprings which translate to heavier double action and single action pulls.

Whether this is due to new mainsprings or happenstance, either way, you have to have stronger mainsprings when you are dealing with transfer bar (not in S&W) , then free floating firing pin, as energy is lost each time it is transferred to another mechanical object.

I miss the pinned barrels. There was absolutely no doubt your barrel was not going to unscrew.

I don't think the electrochemical (ECM?) cut barrels are better than the older reamer cut. They are shiner, mine have shallower looking lands and grooves and I have heard that there are non uniformities in the throat due to the ECM process.


DSCN1755M27-2.jpg
 
This was the revolver the company staked its reputation on, at a time that they really cared.
Click to expand...

This is the money shot

One cannot compare a MIM, IL, CDC revolver to a hand-crafted flagship of (at the time) arguably the world's finest handgun manufacturer. It is like comparing a Model A to a Duesenberg.
 
Well, that does it for me then, I'll just be patient and wait for a 27-2 of my liking to come up.

When Old Fuff and Guillermo are in agreement the planets have clearly aligned and further debate is futile :)
 
When Old Fuff and Guillermo are in agreement the planets have clearly aligned and further debate is futile
Click to expand...

I know... When I read his post I considered going out and drinking myself into a stupor... :neener:
 
Bikemutt,

Old Fuff and I are in agreement 95% of the time.

Don't be too hard on the guy, a 5% failure rate is pretty darned good!!!! :neener:
 
I really don't know why anybody would pay more for a new "Classic" than a very good original. Or even the same. Or even $200 less. I bought this NIB 24-3 two years ago for about the same as a new "Classic" and would do so again any day of the week and twice on Sunday. I'll take any Bangor-Punta era S&W over a new one every time.

IMG_8747b.jpg
 
Don't be too hard on the guy, a 5% failure rate is pretty darned good!!!!
Click to expand...

One more remark like that and I'll crank up my bench grinder and come "Fitz" your Diamondbacks... :evil:
 
I never travel without my trusty bench grinder. You never know when you might ...... :uhoh:

Like they say in the Boy Scouts. "Always be prepared..." :evil:
 
I handled almost all of the "Classic" line at the SHOT show. Blech. I'm sure they are fine guns, especially compared to today's basic line, but the finish and feel pales in comparison to the originals. Now with that said, there was a 325 Performance Center with a lovely trigger and great feel. (Though the finish was still crap.)
 
Above everything already said there is something else about the new classic line that really makes me mad. The M36 has been in the catalog forever but when S&W brought out their Classic line they changed the grips on the M36 and added it to the line. I'm guessing the only reason they did so was to raise the price but gave you nothing additional to justify the price increase. It's just double wrong!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

mesinge2
  • Locked
The 586 is Back!!
Replies
19
Views
1K
ArchAngelCD
ArchAngelCD
B
  • Locked
Smith and Wesson model 27 classic
Replies
8
Views
647
bannockburn
bannockburn
F
  • Locked
Found a Used Model 27 today
Replies
2
Views
443
finfanatic
F
R
  • Locked
New Model 27 vs Old Model 27-2 vs 686 6" S&W
Replies
12
Views
5K
Backpacker33
Backpacker33
cluttonfred
  • Locked
Model 60 Pro Series
Replies
11
Views
9K
TexasBill
TexasBill
Back
Top