The BEST looking revolver in the joint >>

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of all the guns shown on this thread, I'd still have to pick the 686. It's a good contender for best .357 revolver ever designed. Mine's an unfired 6-incher. It has great balance and is gorgeous. I don't know if Smith & Wesson will ever produce anything as classy as these and some of their earlier revolvers or not. Prospects don't look good.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • 686.jpg
    686.jpg
    71.4 KB · Views: 13,517
Any S&W Six shooter made after 1975 is, well just another high production factory gun. Poor finish, poor fit, may as well buy a Dan Wesson or a Ruger
or Rossi .

Lemme guess, your oldest revolver dates to 1975 right? Right in the middle of Bangor Punta's milking of the S&W brand when only quantity mattered.

Try again.
 
Wrong my early S&W .44s date to 1880. My modern S&W .44 Mags 4th Mdl HE. thru -2s. The .357 Mdl. 27 from 1937, Etc. Bangor Punta owned S&W for some time and made fine arms. I think by the time it went from Pepsi Cola thru Lear Seigler Heater Co. to TKS it went to hell. I doubt you know your S&Ws very well or you would know those before 80 bring more money. I knew the post would get reaction from owners of the non-p&r high production handguns. Please understand Smith makes most of its money from tranmisson parts for heavy trucks. They know how to turn out things in mass.
 
Well, I don't particularly have a bad opinion of Ruger, Dan Wesson, or even Rossi, myself, especially Ruger and Dan Wesson. I can't see how not being any better is really all that bad, so long as there not any worse. I'm not much of a Smith freak, only got one old M10, sold my M19 and my 1917.
 
My best is this 66-1, factory class "A" engraved, with Elk grips. Knife is a custom Busse NICK Variant.

bestrevolver.gif

Changing gears:

Wrong my early S&W .44s date to 1880. My modern S&W .44 Mags 4th Mdl HE. thru -2s. The .357 Mdl. 27 from 1937, Etc. Bangor Punta owned S&W for some time and made fine arms. I think by the time it went from Pepsi Cola thru Lear Seigler Heater Co. to TKS it went to hell. I doubt you know your S&Ws very well or you would know those before 80 bring more money. I knew the post would get reaction from owners of the non-p&r high production handguns. Please understand Smith makes most of its money from tranmisson parts for heavy trucks. They know how to turn out things in mass.

Your tone is pretty arrogant. The revolvers made in the early to mid nineties were probably the best MACHINES ever made by the folks at S&W. The precision machining was beyond compare and the quality of the materials was up there too, before the MIM infestation. They may not have been as well finished from a cosmetics standpoint, but they were arguably better guns FOR USE. Collecting is a different story altogther. Rarity has a lot to do with that and as you point out, volume was up. But for a user, I challenge you to find a better revolver than the 629-4 shown below. It was made around '93 and is a functional masterpiece.

629andtk9.jpg
 
Bangor Punta owned S&W for some time and made fine arms.

Now I know you're really out there. That was the beginning of the end for some folks. It took the sell out Tomkin Brits to save Smith from the rock bottom depths of poor quality that they hit during Bangor and LZ.
 
I guess by Ranger 40's dictum, my 696, JM PC 627 V-Comp, and 5" h-l 686+, all made in this century, may have a chance at being decent revolvers - none are six shooters!

I'll take my post 2000 made S&W's, resplendent with their MIM parts and, yes, even some sporting that infamous 'Lock', over the older S&W's I've had. I love SS - the best thing to ever happen to a revolver as a tool. I will always remember the most troublesome and poorest QC example of all of my S&W's - actually more original faults than all of my other S&W's combined - an '83 variant 6.5" 24. The new 2001-2 made 6.5" Heritage 24 I bought, by comparison, was as nearly perfect as one could ever expect, in fit, finish, and function. I ultimately traded it for a nice SS revolver!

I'll see if I can find a picture - or take one - of my candidate for my best-looking S&W. It would have to be my first-ever S&W - a then new '01 made 625 Mountain Gun in .45 Colt sporting Ahrends square conversion cocobolo stocks with finger grooves. It is a higher polish - which could be better, if I didn't mind erasing the laser-engraved barrel, etc, logo. Great lines, too.

Stainz
 
Why'd you sell your 1917?

Couple of reasons. It was a clapped out old war horse that I ordered for a hundred bucks back when I was a "kitchen table dealer". I had to have a smith work it over to make it shootable. It was rather loose, Smith fixed the end shake, but shot okay, but would only shoot jacketed bullets. Anything lead would strip through the rather shallow rifling and tumble. Since I really don't like buying bullets, cast my own, I got rid of it. But, looking back on it, it was a historical old relic and I really should have kept it. :banghead: My aim at the time was for a revolver pin gun, was sort of into pins at the time. I thought I'd sell it and get a M625, but I never got one.

One thing about that old 1917, the DA trigger was smooth as glass. It'd been worked for 70 years. :D
 
a then new '01 made 625 Mountain Gun in .45 Colt sporting Ahrends square conversion cocobolo stocks with finger grooves.

Stainz,

How did those Ahrends conversions turn out? If you can get a good picture of the grips, especially from the backstrap, I'd be really interested. Some round to square conversion grips just don't look right, and I was considering a set of the Ahrends cocobolos no finger grooves for my 686.

I own both new Smiths and older, classic Smiths. As long as they are accurate, reliable, and are well put together I like 'em. I've got nothing against anyone who only buys NIB or who would never touch anything new from anyone. Does that mean I like the lock? No, I'd rather it wasn't there at all, but it won't stop me from buying new.

What will stop me is I discovered that gunbroker.com is a wonderful thing for buying used, if you shop around carefully and find a reputable vendor. I like summitgunbroker.com even more, though I've not purchased anything there yet. Of course, my gun fund is expended, so I won't be buying anything for a while :( .
 
Ranger 40:

Well, this M27 was made in 1977 so apparently it's a piece of crap according to you.

standard.gif


Yes, the fit and finish was generally superior in previous decades. Guns made in the 1960s usually look nicer than those made in the 1970s. Of course, the guns made in the 1950s look better than those made in the 1960s. Rising labor costs meant reductions in hand polishing because they can't sell guns at the prices required to pay for that work these days. That's just reality checking in. Doesn't mean the newer guns are junk, they just aren't quite as nicely finished.

I own S&W handguns from 1915 (S&W Triple Lock) to 2005 (22-4) with representatives from every decade in between and I like them all. You, of course, are welcome to your opinion.
 
I just don't get it - are you guys into pretty guns? I mean, don't you shoot them? Not a cylinder ring in evidence on more than one or two of the pictured ones. Of course I can understand that on a finely engraved collectible, but as for the others :banghead: it goes beyond my understanding as to why they all look so pristine since all of my own guns are for shooting, and therefore don't look anywhere near as nice...

All the best,
Glenn B
 
jad0110- You wanted an RM? It's an ex-cop gun and not very pretty but it shoots pretty good.

standard.jpg


Glenn- That 27 I pictured is also an ex-cop gun (with departmental markings to prove it) and I shoot it regularly. It's still fairly pretty, though.

Here's another post-1975 clunker. Shipped in 1977 to the campus police department at the Univ. of Louisiana. I got it about 1998 at a Salt Lake City show for $185. No idea how it got from LA to UT.

standard.jpg
 
We can still keep them clean, Glenn.

I pulled my 696 out of the safe a couple days ago. It now has no cylinder ring, and no scorching on the cylinder face. I clean the gun with a light metal polish (Pol, made in Germany) every now and then, so it would appear to the uninformed that the gun wasn't used that much. ;)
 
It IS mine, and I apologize for the naughty thought's it causes certain members.
I can't say who exactly, but their initials are vanilla_gorilla.

PistolsII004.jpg

Note to VG: It's a thing easily done. Start with a good glass-bead finish and then talk to Mr. Kim Ahrends about some round-butt to square-butt conversion grips in the wood of your choice. The shoes on my 686 are Cordia wood (aka Bocote) but he offers several other, equally tasteful, wood choices.

Here's baby-brother (617-10, 6", factory finish, grips again by Gentleman Kim Ahrends (Maple this time around)):

6171.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top