So, have you traded in your '51 Navy Colt for one of them new fangled top break cartridge guns, yet?
ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!
But if you had the opportunity to take apart a reprehensive group of Smith & Wesson (as well as other) revolvers made from the Civil War to present, you would notice differences in workmanship. Quality of material is another matter; because without question today's steel and non-ferrous alloys are better.
However just for example, I have a little .38 S&W top-break that when locked has NO cylinder end-shake nor rotational movement – and all 5 chambers are concentric with the bore. Sideplate-to-frame fit is so tight that you can hardly see it. This little gem was made around 1884 without the benefit of CNC controlled machinery. I don't see this being duplicated today.
In a .38 Military & Police, made during wartime in 1918, the internal lockwork was highly polished before the parts were case hardened, and the quality of the blued finish is so much better then you see now there is no comparison. The smoothness of the double-action trigger pull is so good it could move you to tears.
In both cases the stocks were individually fit to the frames before they were finished (blue, nickel plate, or whatever) for a perfect fit, and then serial numbered to the particular gun.
Clearly, being driven by cost-cutting lay well into the future.
What would you think would happen if someone in Smith & Wesson’s top management went to the production engineers and said that they wanted to have a second notch cut along side of each cylinder stop notch, and a hardened insert staked in place to prevent the ball on the cylinder stop (that’s the part that you see sticking up in the bottom of the cylinder window) from dinging up and battering the cylinder stop notch. And to put frosting on the cake when the operation was finished the fit was so tight it couldn’t be detected without a strong magnifying glass!!! Could they do it without causing a substantial increase in the revolver’s cost? Could they even do it at all?
Well the fact is they did exactly that, during the late 1890’s/early 1900’s.
I could go on and on, but anyway, poking your nose into some of these older guns can provide an education. What they make today isn’t bad by today’s standards, but they can’t touch what came before.