used versus new

[Bezoar]

i spent alot of time looking at used, and wornout revolvers in the last year. I never could find an honest priced deal, by the standards of this and other forums.
Today was at a small gunshop and found two honest priced handguns.
a police positive 38special.400.
a sw 45acp revolver. 500. not the typical 1917. the front sight was a regular half dollar style, no thin section to the top of it. but had the 1917 barrel and cylinder pin latch.

the police positive was the nicer of the two. better finish and all.

the 45acp well, the finish sucked. 80 percent on the cylinder with a heavy turnline. the rest id say 90 percent.

couldnt handle them, the place was busy and i didnt like the other customers.

but the thing is, the police positive simply seemed the better one, just strange as it is.
but i was hit with the same question from both of them,

why spend that money on a gun, that has no chance at factory repair, when i can get a gun made today for the same price and have a factory repair plan?

or spend more on the gun, and get a brand new one with the lock, and the factory warranty, that wont technically expire until im 84?

 

[ColtPythonElite]

Very few revolvers ever need repaired.

 

[Old Fuff]

If the Colt was chambered in .38 Special then the revolver itself is a Police Positive Special, not a Police Positive, and yes... it does make a difference.

So does the date of manufacture. You can tell by the serial number that is stamped on the frame behind the crane. The "crane" is the hinge-like part the cylinder swings out on, so you have to open the cylinder to see the number.

The Colts are fine revolver, but they have been discontinued for decades so replacement parts and an increasing lack of skilled gunsmiths who can fix them make it imperative that anyone who is looking for a gun they expect to put a fair amount of shooting with need to know exactly what they are buying.

I won't comment on the supposed S&W because from the description I haven't got the slightest idea what it is. Clear photographs would help.

 

[Old Fuff]

After I sent the above post I re-read the first one, so I should make it clear that I personally prefer buying carefully selected used handguns over new or recent production ones.

I my opinion - and experience - the best of older (usually used) guns exhibit better workmanship, fit and finish; that defines higher quality. Even if they are priced the same as a current one (which is seldom the case) they still offer something more.

But it is imperative that you know what current pricing on both is, and what the exact purposes you have in mind should you buy (whichever).

 

[Twiki357]

I can’t speak to the Colt. But I have 23 Smith & Wessons. Only 3 were purchased new, two of those in the 1960’s. All 20 of the used ones (From 1907 to 1982) were checked out before purchase and the only problem I’ve ever had was an ejector rod on a Model 19 that would come unscrewed under recoil. Corrected with a drop of loc-tight.

So, in my book, a properly cared for Smith & Wesson will out live you.

 

[Cee Zee]

The only S&W revolvers I know of that might develop a problem would be the 29's and 629's that someone put ammo through that was too heavy for the design. .44 mag ammo was boosted up to levels that Ruger and Taurus revolvers could tolerate with their cast metal design. But the much older designed 29 series is known to have issues with heavy loads. As long as you stick to the loads that they were designed to use there shouldn't be a problem. But they have a reputation for jumping time among other things if you fire ammo that is too power for the design.

Most S&W stuff simply won't die in my experience. Even after the barrels have had their rifling worn away the guns still shoot but just not as accurately as they once did. I've seen S&W pistols from way back that still worked perfectly. I've seen models made in the 1800's still working fine and still being used by someone as a carry piece but I guess that was a good while back I saw that. Still I saw one that was very old I got to shoot it and it worked just fine. And my 629 is still going strong but then I haven't shot the heavy stuff through it. I stick to loads similar to the original Keith load.

 

[Lucky Derby]

I have a S&W .44 Hand Ejector made in 1921. The action is smoother than the new ones. It is as accurate as any handgun, not specifically set up as a target pistol could be. I sometimes carry it. I would choose it over anything currently coming from the S&W factory. It is simply a better built firearm, IMHO.
Yes, I know there have been improvments in metalurgy, but I doubt I will wear this one out.
It will still be shooting big chunks of lead long after I'm gone.

 

[ljnowell]

why spend that money on a gun, that has no chance at factory repair, when i can get a gun made today for the same price and have a factory repair plan?

I'll tell you why, because there is no American made revolver made today that will match the quality and craftsmanship of those old revolvers.

In modern revolvers you will pay a fortune and have it imported if you want that kind if quality, like Korth.

 

[CajunBass]

I almost never buy a "new" gun. I don't even look at new guns. Especially a revolver. I'm not one who says that the new guns aren't any good, they might be, I really don't know. I'm just not that interested in them to find out. I like older guns. They're the guns I wanted when I was young and couldn't even aford to think about owning.

No warranty? Big deal. I have never had a gun break. I'm sure they do, people talk about it all the time but it's never happened to me. So it's not something I worry about. If one does, I'll either take it to a gunsmith and get it fixed, or I'll buy another gun. It's not something I'm going to lose sleep over.

Others have addressed the Colt you mentioned. That Smith & Wesson sounds like something someone put together from parts. It was fairly common "back in the day" as they say when parts and pieces were common and inexpensive, and labor was reasonable. That one I'd be really careful of.

 

[Waveski]

Old Colt in good condition VS new gun with internal lock?

NO CONTEST.

 

[bannockburn]

The only "newer" production revolver I have is a S&W Model 638 which I picked up a couple of years ago. A decent enough gun but it just doesn't compare in terms of overall quality and construction to the much more vintage revolvers in my collection.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

i spent alot of time looking at used, and wornout revolvers in the last year..................why spend that money on a gun, that has no chance at factory repair, when i can get a gun made today for the same price and have a factory repair plan?

or spend more on the gun, and get a brand new one with the lock, and the factory warranty, that wont technically expire until im 84?

Howdy

I think part of the answer depends on your definition of 'wornout'. Worn finish on the outside is one thing, worn internal parts resulting in a gun that does not function properly is something entirely different.

I am an avid collector of old S&W revolvers and I get a chance to inspect a lot of them, antiques made before 1899 as well as more modern ones. With the antiques, yes many do have mechanical problems simply because they are so old. Lots of times the mechanism does not work properly because the internal parts are simply worn out. However with the more modern 'Handejectors' I seldom come across one that is actually worn to the extent that it does not function properly.

Current MSRP for a S&W Model 10 is $739, a Model 17 (the K-22) is $989, and a Model 36 (Chief's Special) is $749. I picked up this 38 M&P Model of 1905 First change a few weeks ago for $450. It shipped in 1906. Yes, there are some blemishes to the finish, actually the gun looks better than this, the lighting was very harsh when I took the photos. But mechanically the gun functions as well as it did when it left the factory over 100 years ago.

You just have to be diligent in your search, they are still out there. If you want a gun that does not show its age, that is one thing. If you can accept some honest wear, that is something else. If you want a modern Smith with MIM parts and a lock, the choice is yours.





P.S. Last week I did come across an old M&P, probably from the 1920s that did have a mechanical problem. It was very worn on the outside, but that does not bother me. The dealer was asking something like $475 for it as I recall. I was ready to bargain with him when I discovered there was a problem with the double action trigger. Something was not right and was catching inside. I have enough nice old K frames that I decided I did not need one that needed work, so I passed. That is probably the only old Hand Ejector that I have found recently that had an actual mechanical problem inside.

 

[RainDodger]

They ARE out there. It might take a while, but eventually you'll stumble on one. Someday, unless my family gets hold of my estate and turns them all in to a recycler (they would do that), my estate will be out there... here is a 1953 Combat Masterpiece that my dad bought brand new in 1955. I have the original receipt for $50.00 even. I've not found any new S&W that has a nicer feeling action and trigger than this one.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Very Nice.

But I'll bet it was not wearing those grips in 1955.

 

[short barrel]

The only used gun I ever bought is the one I still carry daily--a Cold Cobra in the original box, made in 1955. It looked unfired at time of purchase. All used guns were sold by the original buyer for reasons we can't know. Too risky for me. I'd rather spend the extra money and have a new one.

 

[RainDodger]

Correct, Driftwood.... It was not. Back in the day, my dad tossed the factory grips and put on a pair of "hi-tech" Fitz plastic target grips with a thumb rest. Amazingly ugly, but pretty fancy way back then.

These are modern S&W Magna grips, but at least they have the center diamond.

 

[BSA1]

I have had to have two of last revolvers purchases repaired after I brought them. I had no problems with getting both of them repaired.

The first one is a well finish worn S&W Model 10 that the cylinder started binding and not rotating after a few cylinders of ammunition. It was a former private security company gun and had been carried a lot with the right grip badly beat up. I sent the gun to S&W for factory repair. The charged me around $125.00 including shipping and I got a gun back with a like new factory action.

My second gun is a Colt Police Positive Special that was skipping a chamber. Frank Glenn, Phoenix, Arizona repaired it for a little over $100.00.

Assuming you are only talking about holster wear on the finish I would jump on the Colt P.P.S. In fact I am interested in the name and phone number of the dealer that has the gun.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

These are modern S&W Magna grips, but at least they have the center diamond.

Actually, those are not Magna grips. They are Checkered Target grips with a speed loader cut.

These are Magna grips on my Model 17-3 that I bought brand, spanky new in 1975. Funny how much inflation causes prices to go up, I paid $125 for it in 1975. A lot of money back then for a kid in his twenties.





When I bought this Model 19-3 the same year, these grips were known as the Goncalo Alves Oversized Target Grips. I think I paid $135 for it, if I recall correctly.

 

[buck460XVR]

why spend that money on a gun, that has no chance at factory repair, when i can get a gun made today for the same price and have a factory repair plan?

I'll tell you why, because there is no American made revolver made today that will match the quality and craftsmanship of those old revolvers.

In modern revolvers you will pay a fortune and have it imported if you want that kind if quality, like Korth.

While the fit/finish/bluing of new guns may not match up with the of older guns, accuracy, reliability and durability for the most part is just as good if not better. So having a newer gun that shoots just a well as an old one and can be shot without fear of not being able to repair it is invaluable if one is looking for a shooter as compared to a safe queen.

Similar to old cars. Folks only take their collector cars out for parades and a lunch cruise on sunny days for a reason. The every day driver in the garage is there for the same reason. There are many different reasons we buy firearms and those reasons are as varied as the firearms available. One does not need a Korth for an everyday shooter and the majority of revolver owners couldn't tell the difference in accuracy between it and a Taurus at the range. For most revolver owners, the miniscule difference in accuracy is not worth the extreme difference in cost. To some, it is. Neither is wrong.

 

[Ohsheepdog]

I would purchase a used Smith and Wesson anyday over a new one. To me anything made from the forties to the late seventies and even eighties just can't be beat. If you're looking for safe queens, you probably will have a hard time finding a bargain. But if you don't mind a little wear on the finish which to me is just means it's been broken in, you'll find a bargain for $200-$500.
I have a 1952 combat masterpiece that was owned by to Delaware cops as their competition gun, and they estimated it has over fifty thousand rounds through it. The finish is worn, but the action is as smooth as it can be & it's just as accurate as it ever was! It it feels perfect in my hand. I can't imagine a better 38 revolver! I paid $225 shipped.

 

[RainDodger]

You are 100% right, Driftwood. I stand corrected on my terminology! I'm obviously not a S&W collector! (I'm more of a 1911 guy)

 

[ljnowell]

While the fit/finish/bluing of new guns may not match up with the of older guns, accuracy, reliability and durability for the most part is just as good if not better. So having a newer gun that shoots just a well as an old one and can be shot without fear of not being able to repair it is invaluable if one is looking for a shooter as compared to a safe queen.



Similar to old cars. Folks only take their collector cars out for parades and a lunch cruise on sunny days for a reason. The every day driver in the garage is there for the same reason. There are many different reasons we buy firearms and those reasons are as varied as the firearms available. One does not need a Korth for an everyday shooter and the majority of revolver owners couldn't tell the difference in accuracy between it and a Taurus at the range. For most revolver owners, the miniscule difference in accuracy is not worth the extreme difference in cost. To some, it is. Neither is wrong.

I don't believe accuracy it durability to be at the level of the old guns either. Overall quality isn't there. The triggers are horrible compared to the old guns and they are made as cheap as possible the materials put into them aren't as good either.

There is a reason that an older smith sells for what the new one does, or more, if in comparable condition.

Anyone that tries to say that a new smith and Wesson is of the quality and standards if the old ones is out of touch with reality.

 

[buck460XVR]

I don't believe accuracy it durability to be at the level of the old guns either. Overall quality isn't there. The triggers are horrible compared to the old guns and they are made as cheap as possible the materials put into them aren't as good either.

There is a reason that an older smith sells for what the new one does, or more, if in comparable condition.

Anyone that tries to say that a new smith and Wesson is of the quality and standards if the old ones is out of touch with reality.

Accuracy and durability have come along with better materials and production methods. Triggers on older guns have been used and broken in. Comparing them to a new gun right outta the box is not being realistic. Every gunsmith I know claims that modern triggers, even those with MIM can be tuned just as good as the old triggers.


I've yet to see any older S&W that was not a collector, sell for more than a new identical model. Maybe it's because of where I live, I dunno. I see this all the time on internet forums so it must be true. I like older Smiths too, but for a shooter, I would never pay more for an older gun, with wear, without any warranty than the same identical gun, brand new with a lifetime warranty. But that's just me. Other folks are free to spend their money any way they wish.

I collect old planes. The old router planes are beautiful works of art with patina from age and sell for many times what they sold for new. Still, if I'm going to route something, I grab my Porter Cable. Ain't as pretty and has a terrible finish, but it does a much better job. Like any tool, a gun must perform up to a certain standard relative to what you pay for it. A gun that will shoot reliably and is repairable for my entire lifetime is worth more to me than a prettier gun that may well become a paperweight because it can't be fixed tomorrow. That's the reality that I'm in touch with.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Accuracy and durability have come along with better materials and production methods. Triggers on older guns have been used and broken in. Comparing them to a new gun right outta the box is not being realistic. Every gunsmith I know claims that modern triggers, even those with MIM can be tuned just as good as the old triggers.

Perhaps you missed my earlier statements.

Brand, spanky new Smiths generally cost more then nice used ones. There was really no need for a warranty with the old Smiths, they seldom failed. I have over a dozen old K frames that average well over 50 years old, and they all work just as well as the day they left the factory. No, it is not 50 years of wear that makes them work better, they worked beautifully when they left the factory. There was more hand labor put into them (at much lower labor rates then today) and the hand fitting of the internal parts made them work beautifully. No tuning was necessary. Like all manufacturers, Smith and Wesson has striven over the years to remove cost from their product. That is why they went to MIM parts, they are less expensive to produce than forged/machined parts. And they have driven as much cost out as possible by attempting to tolerance the guns so they do not need the expensive hand fitting that they used to.

I like older Smiths too, but for a shooter, I would never pay more for an older gun, with wear, without any warranty than the same identical gun, brand new with a lifetime warranty. But that's just me. Other folks are free to spend their money any way they wish.

I have been buying used Smiths for many years now. Like I said, they seldom fail and seldom need any work. So what good is a warranty? Besides, unlike Colts, there are plenty of parts still available, and they are not as hard to work on as a Colt.

I used to be a woodworker too, and I understand about how nice the old planes were. I never made any money if I hand planed everything rather than running it through a thickness planer. I do understand that. Now. Do you think your Porter Cable router will still be working after 100 years? I have Smiths that are.

 

[ljnowell]

Accuracy and durability have come along with better materials and production methods. Triggers on older guns have been used and broken in. Comparing them to a new gun right outta the box is not being realistic. Every gunsmith I know claims that modern triggers, even those with MIM can be tuned just as good as the old triggers.





I've yet to see any older S&W that was not a collector, sell for more than a new identical model. Maybe it's because of where I live, I dunno. I see this all the time on internet forums so it must be true. I like older Smiths too, but for a shooter, I would never pay more for an older gun, with wear, without any warranty than the same identical gun, brand new with a lifetime warranty. But that's just me. Other folks are free to spend their money any way they wish.



I collect old planes. The old router planes are beautiful works of art with patina from age and sell for many times what they sold for new. Still, if I'm going to route something, I grab my Porter Cable. Ain't as pretty and has a terrible finish, but it does a much better job. Like any tool, a gun must perform up to a certain standard relative to what you pay for it. A gun that will shoot reliably and is repairable for my entire lifetime is worth more to me than a prettier gun that may well become a paperweight because it can't be fixed tomorrow. That's the reality that I'm in touch with.

An older but NIB S&W trigger is better than a NIB new S&W. I never specified a gun "with wear" I was talking about like new condition guns. A pinned and recessed model 19 in NIB condition is infinitely better quality than the new K Frames smith is putting out. It's not even a comparison. The quality isn't there nor is the fit and finish.

Fit and finish matter a lot too. To be honest I find it ridiculous that someone could even argue that the new S&W revolvers are even close to the old ones in quality. They aren't.