Smith vs other brands

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why would people spend good money on a Smith revolver with the lock when they can get one from Ruger, Colt, Dan Wesson or Charter arms without one? :scrutiny:

For me, they are the only answer if you want a revolver.

Ruger-clunky and unrefined
Colt-not a player since 1980
Dan Wesson-? Maybe if I shot IHMSA
Charter-1970s throwdown guns
 
For me, they are the only answer if you want a revolver.

Ruger-clunky and unrefined
Colt-not a player since 1980
Dan Wesson-? Maybe if I shot IHMSA
Charter-1970s throwdown guns

I am glad you said that and not me (but I will deny all support of you if caught by enemy agents). My asbestos underwear is not nearly thick enough to throw such words around.

The Ruger and Colt fanboys will be along shortly to burn you at the stake as a heretic.

:rofl:
 
I am glad you said that and not me (but I will deny all support of you if caught by enemy agents). My asbestos underwear is not nearly thick enough to throw such words around.

The Ruger and Colt fanboys will be along shortly to burn you at the stake as a heretic.

:rofl:

Hey I’ll even say Taurus makes a pretty decent imitation!!!

I’m being a little tongue in cheek but there’s not much innovation in the revolver world. In general, Smith’s are much more svelte and I can overlook the lock if needed. Triggers and bores are typically good as well.

Ruger could/should take a lot of metal off their revolvers. Pretty much everything they make is a bull barrel and the top straps have the contour of a brick.

Charter’s are ok but pretty rough compared to a smith.

I don’t really see the lock as an issue. I would wager you are more likely to break small parts than have the lock “lock” itself.
 
Hey I’ll even say Taurus makes a pretty decent imitation!!!

I’m being a little tongue in cheek but there’s not much innovation in the revolver world. In general, Smith’s are much more svelte and I can overlook the lock if needed. Triggers and bores are typically good as well.

Ruger could/should take a lot of metal off their revolvers. Pretty much everything they make is a bull barrel and the top straps have the contour of a brick.

Charter’s are ok but pretty rough compared to a smith.

I don’t really see the lock as an issue. I would wager you are more likely to break small parts than have the lock “lock” itself.

Again I agree with you. I am a S&W fanboy. I have only a couple revolvers that are not S&W and they are either collectibles (my Webley and Iver Johnson) or don't get used (Ruger Blackhawk). The revolvers I use are S&W.

Ruger will never slim their revolvers down. Too much of their reputation is built on shooters being able to hot rod cartridges in them. You can't design a svelte revolver to SAAMI spec when everyone thinks they can load over SAAMI spec in your revolver. It works for the Ruger fanboys...
 
Ruger will never slim their revolvers down. Too much of their reputation is built on shooters being able to hot rod cartridges in them.

Apparently you have never heard of the New Vaquero, which has a smaller frame and cylinder than the 'original model' Vaquero or the current Blackhawks.

'original model' Vaquero at the top of this photo, New Vaquero at the bottom. Notice how much larger the cylinder is in the 'original model' Vaquero vs the New Vaquero.

pofvJoS4j.jpg




Am I a Ruger Fanboy? You bet.

pmB92Lnej.jpg

plr8kaSnj.jpg




Am I a Colt Fanboy? You tell me.

plDFhbrKj.jpg


pn6KOclMj.jpg


pnlSkZw6j.jpg

posWhShLj.jpg

poXPmNQoj.jpg


poMGtaA9j.jpg


pnspVqVvj.jpg




Am I a S&W Fanboy?

Let me just say I have a lot more Smiths than Colts or Rugers. Too many to show here.
 
Apparently you have never heard of the New Vaquero, which has a smaller frame and cylinder than the 'original model' Vaquero or the current Blackhawks.

'original model' Vaquero at the top of this photo, New Vaquero at the bottom. Notice how much larger the cylinder is in the 'original model' Vaquero vs the New Vaquero.

View attachment 912426




Am I a Ruger Fanboy? You bet.

View attachment 912427

View attachment 912428




Am I a Colt Fanboy? You tell me.

View attachment 912429


View attachment 912430


View attachment 912431

View attachment 912432

View attachment 912433


View attachment 912434


View attachment 912435




Am I a S&W Fanboy?

Let me just say I have a lot more Smiths than Colts or Rugers. Too many to show here.

Ruger slimming down one revolver model is not saying much for their overbuilt tendency. That's like saying S&W makes over built revolvers because they make the X-frame.

Ruger has never appealed to me much mostly because of their feature sets. The first Ruger that has really appealed to me since I bough my Blackhawk almost 20 years ago was the GP100 in 10mm Auto. The new Super GP100 (Super Redhawk) in 9mm is also somewhat appealing to as a competition revolver. As determined in another recent thread I am a hard core Colt hater, revolver or otherwise. The only Colt that has any appeals to be at all is a 1917 but I would rather have the S&W version. :D
 
I own 7 S&W revolvers, none with the lock. I generally don't care for the IL, but would not refuse to own a newer gun just because of the lock. I also own 1 Ruger (SP101). I've always liked Smiths. My first was a 686 4", and I will never part with it.
 
I must say that the Dan Wesson 715 in my collection is built like a tank, is accurate as can be and has a trigger and fit on par with Colt or Smith.
It has the best double action of any revolver I've ever owned.
Only complaints, the shrouds are a bit heavy and could be dehorned a bit better and I can't find a set of wooden Roper style grips for it.
Oh and did I forget to mention it has no stinkin lock.:p
By the way Driftwood Johnson that is a Super collection of revolvers.
Really love the Bisley's
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top