The Golden Age of American Handguns?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cosmoline

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
23,646
Location
Los Anchorage
I've been thinking about this recently, and it seems to me that the golden age of American handguns was between the end of WWII and about 1982. I would include these as examples of Golden Age handguns:

--S&W two-digit revolvers, including K frame magnums, most N and NT frame models, the J frames, and others were either introduced during this period or reached their peak. Triggers tend to be excellent during this period, as does overall quality.

--Ruger flattop single actions and three screw models. Ruger "six" line of double actions. These have the best triggers and balance of any Rugers, and are a notch less bulky than the modern lines.

--Colt Mk.III firearms and the Python & others in the snake line. These represented the perfection of earlier Colt short guns, with improved lockworks and stronger frames.

--The civilian production of the 1911 and BHP, as opposed to the military production that dominated in the eariler period. From what I've read it was only after WWII that civilian shooters started getting interested in these platforms in large numbers. Prior to that, most US civilian interest in semis was restricted to smaller platforms such as the 1903 or 1908.

After this period, the importers secured ever larger portions of the US handgun market. More than that, their designs set the standard. While classic American designs continue to be popular, quality and attention to detail is not what it was. For example, while S&W continues to make lots of revolvers, they have a decidedly "fun gun" feel to them. Ruger makes serious wheelguns, but since the epic courtroom battles of the 70's the company has packed more and more steel on its frames. Other safety and cost-cutting measures have decreased the quality of trigger pull and balance. Colt has all but vanished, of course.

Before this period, in contrast, there were many great designs but the materials weren't the best. Engineering still relied on extensive hand-fitting and stoning of parts. The advent of improved steel and machining techniques, along with introduction of new designs that utilized superior coil springs, went a long way towards resolving persistant timing problems, strength and sensitivity to abuse. A Model 36, for example, is vastly stronger and more reliable over time than a lemon squeezer from the 19th century. And an OM Blackhawk is considerably stronger and more reliably than the vaunted Peacemaker.

American handgun cartridges also came onto their own during this golden age. The .357 of course had been developed prior to WWII, but at that point it was a rare custom-order affair for the wealthy elite. After WWII its use became much more widespread, and an array of other great magnums evolved.

On top of all this, the gun writers of the time included the likes of Elmer Keith, Bill Jordan, Skeeter Skelton, Col Cooper, Charles Askins and many others. They not only had enough clout to criticize new designs from advertisers, they could call up the president of the relevant company and have changes made. More than this, they literally changed the way we shoot and view handguns.

What do you think?
 
I can't help but think that we are in a great period now. S&W has taken the lead with their innovative .500 Magnum... and lite weight.357M/.44M revolvers simply weren't possible a few years back. Writers? John Taffin sets a high bar - Mas Ayoob covers other areas - even Venturino can be entertaining. Competitors? Watch Jerry Miculek - or Bob Munden demonstrate their abilities. I miss many folks - but certainly appreciate those we have now... for the period we are blessed to be in their company. Gosh, this keeps up and I'll be praising The Lock.

One thing I sorely miss - just a hint of quality control at some of our American firearms makers would be appreciated.

Stainz
 
I've been thinking about this recently, and it seems to me that the golden age of American handguns was between the end of WWII and about 1982.

I tend to agree with you. As a 50-something year old guy, I am nostolgic about buying quality, pre-lock, pre-paperwork, low priced quality revolvers and semi-auto's back-in-the-day.

You just layed down the dough and out the door you'd go. Just like buying a loaf of bread.

But in the 1980's, S&W auto-loaders had many, many problems as I recall. I bought a 1980's NIB Colt 1911 Govt 9mm that was the most problematic gun that I have ever owned. Even my trusty NIB Ruger Security-Six from the early 1980's would spit out lead slivers from the cylinder gap and hit me in the cheek.

Quality declined noticibly in the 1980's by my experience.

Aside from the threat of nuclear war with the USSR, I would live in the 1950's again if I could. The World made more sense to me then.
 
The Smith and Wesson portion of this Golden Age took a bad hit when Hellstrom died and officially ended when Bangor Punta took over.
 
I feel the Golden Age was the Pre-war guns. Most of the Post-war guns are just continuations or versions of the Pre-war guns.
 
feel the Golden Age was the Pre-war guns. Most of the Post-war guns are just continuations or versions of the Pre-war guns.

That's a good point. I'm inclined to view prewar handguns as classier myself. But from my hands-on experience there's no question that the post-war short guns saw the perfection of ideas that initiated before the war. The materials got better, the knowledge greater. The handguns produced during that period seem to offer the best balance between power and practical utility. They're the culmination of earlier efforts. And I think of it as a golden age because the handguns were never as good before, and have never been as good since.
 
I think a lot of things look better in retrospect than they may have been.

I grew up on naval bases, surrouneded by WII/Korean vets. Most of them are probably gone, but from what I remember as a kid, they didn't - how shall I put it - think too highly of the 1911. I really don't want to start a flame war, but I remember being told as a kid by some of those vets that the only good use for a "45 automatic" was to throw it at the enemy.

Now many folks look back and consider those 45s darn near an act of divine providence!

It's amazing how much better and cheaper things get when we look back a couple of decades. I remember the Car Talk guy talkng one time about how the Mopar "Slant Six" engine would really compare with a modern 4 banger!

If I had to bet a nickel, I would be that many/most of the current handguns have better metallurgy and more controlled tolerances than any of the weapons people rember so fondly from 50 years ago.

Mike
 
I also wonder if people really understand inflation when they look back at prices.

If a pistol cost $25 in 1920 (the S&P was at $6.81), what is its cost in current dollars (more or less)? $4500 dollars or so.

I think that there was a time when revolvers were very cheap, when all of the police departents were switching to autos. But other than that, I am not sure that guns are any more expensive than they ever were. Does anyone know some inflation adjusted prices? I am curious.

Mike
 
RPCVYemen is dead on with his cost/inflation argument. Decent firearms have never been cheaper than they are now.

That said, I think Cosmoline is correct with his golden age argument with regard to revolvers. In terms of quality, a new Smith & Wesson 642 is an absolute joke compared side-by-side to a 70s-era J-frame Smith or especially a Colt Detective Special. Revolvers could easily be better now than they were then, but they're not. Revolvers have been relegated to 'fun gun' status.

Automatics are a different story, though. There's never been a better time for reasonably priced, decent quality autoloaders. I do mourn the loss of automatics like most of the Colt line and the Smith & Wesson 39-2 and 10xx series, though.
 
If I had to bet a nickel, I would be that many/most of the current handguns have better metallurgy and more controlled tolerances than any of the weapons people rember so fondly from 50 years ago.

What you say might apply to the firearms of 100 or 150 years ago, but fifty years ago is another matter. The advances since the 1970's have been in polymers and cost-saving methods, not in the ability to control tolerances or in the quality of steel. I would put a 60's vintage M28 or Python against any modern revolver in any competition, from accuracy to strength.

There's never been a better time for reasonably priced, decent quality autoloaders.

True, but how many are *REALLY* American? Even the 1911's by US companies tend to be made overseas. That's why I qualified it. I think the golden age of American handguns ended when the European wondernines and inexpensive foreign knockoffs started flooding the market in the 80's.
 
I think it can be summed up by the Winchester Model 70

People always ask, "Pre-64 action or after?"
 
True, but how many are *REALLY* American? Even the 1911's by US companies tend to be made overseas. That's why I qualified it. I think the golden age of American handguns ended when the European wondernines and inexpensive foreign knockoffs started flooding the market in the 80's.

Certainly. The golden age of American-made handguns has long since passed. Fortunately, the array of modern automatics for sale in the USA is much more diverse and of generally higher quality than it was during the American manufacturers' golden age.
 
If one limits their they're observations to Smith & Wesson and Colt pistols and revolvers, the so-called Golden Age, so far as workmanship and finishing is concerned was between about 1920 through 1940. I base this on having disassembled and examined numerous and uncounted examples, as well as others dating from the mid-19th century to present.

In spite of improvements in materials and machine tools, the guns made back then put anything being produced today to shame. Then fine guns were made like fine clocks, and attention was paid to fine details that are totally overlooked or ignored today.

Better materials? Well in some ways yes, but keep in mind that steel technology had advanaced to the point where Smith & Wesson was able to market the first .357 Magnum in 1935, and a year later Colt introduced their Single Action Army (1873) and New Service (1898) models, chambered to use that same cartridge. Had they been so inclined, S&W could have introduced a .44 Magnum at the same time as they did the .357.

Of course someone is going to point out that economic conditions today are far different then they were back then, and those fine "between the wars" guns wouldn't be affordable today. Absolutely true! I agree. But that doesn't change the fact that workmanship standards of that era did produce better made handguns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top