What'cha think?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

j1

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
939
Location
Nepa
I seriously think that older guns were made better. The older model 19 is a perfect example. What do you think?
 
It kind of depends. As production methods develop somethings rise and some fall. Many people have pointed out that S&W's revolvers seem to be more consistently acceptable now than the guns they've put out at various other times. And that it might be wise to ponder on the idea that there's less hand-fitting of their guns these days because there NEEDS to be less hand-fitting done to make them work. The basic forging and machining being more accurate to begin with, so less tweaking being required to make them work right.
 
This is a much-beaten topic, and it never seems to result in anything good. Partly it's because everyone's got their own definition of "good" or "better made".

IMO, newer guns don't have the fit and finish of the older guns, but they shoot at least as well. Matter of fact, while I love vintage blued S&Ws as much as anyone, for heavy use, I'd go for a newer one every time.
 
Here is what I perceive to be the difference.

Modern guns are the best we have ever had, thanks to modern manufacturing methods and the best steels and other materials. Even super cheap rifles like the Ruger American shoot amazingly well for the price, better than far more expensive or even custom rifles of decades past.

However, the hand fitting and finishing that went into the older guns, such as Colt's Royal Blue and S&W's hand fitting, adds character, skill, and if it can be said, soul to the gun. Every one had the skill and pride of many craftsmen go into it. Knowing that means something important. The gun becomes a work of art, in a sense; the distillation of hundreds of years of skill, experience and tradition, all aimed at providing us with a trustworthy and beautiful tool. That's why we see them differently.

Now, the new guns, of the highest technical quality, can also develop that sort of thing, but it is now we who have to add the soul. Whether it is from hunting, from using them to teach the kids to shoot, or even from using them as a dependable if battered truck gun, it is those experiences that make even the cheapest, most soulless gun into something much more meaningful.
 
Older Rugers, Older S&W, Older Colts, Spri Armory, / All the great and good ones ended my the late 80's.
Not a plastic gun guy, and not into the latest and non greatest.
 
The newest rifles are made well and are accurate but one needs to remember they are cheaper than what was made 40 years ago. Take for instance my Western Field model 780 in 30-06. It was a store brand basic rifle that cost $125 in 1969. Yet that store brand basic model had a hinged floorplate, polished steel finish, fully adjustable trigger, jeweled bolt, good quality iron sights, and a walnut stock. All those features in a rifle today would run you close to $800 or more. We would not consider it a basic, but rather a deluxe rifle today. Well, that is what the store brand rifle cost in 1969 - dealing with inflation the rifle would have cost $793 in current dollars. Rifles were better made then but folks were willing to pay more.

Ditto for revolvers or pistols.

Of course, the reality is that the higher finishing standards do not equate into greater accuracy, so what is it you consider important?

I like better finishes, roll stamps instead of laser etching, and so I prefer older arms. Even so, I don't mind those folks who prefer the lower prices today relative to what you get.
 
What do you think?
Click to expand...

Well...

Yes and no. Some changes to newer made revolvers (locks) are not improvements. Some manufacturing shortcuts (no high polished bluing) are cost-saving measures rather than refinements. These would qualify as a "no."

But engineering design changes to bolster reliability and newer alloys that are lighter, stronger, and corrosion resistant would definitely be enhancements.

As an old guy, I really like to think about how much better things were in the past, but it's only partially true. Lots of things have gotten better in recent decades. There's no one correct answer.
 
I agree that there is just nothing like the craftsmanship of older wheel guns. I saw an older 19 and a 29 a few weeks ago that were just so beautiful. I mean when you have this lustrous blue job, combined with sweet precision actions, I begin to get kind of dizzy and over whelmed by such sights.

GS
 
I'm going to agree, some guns yes, some guns no. CNC machines make some parts exactly the same so consistency is better. On the other hand CNC machines can't do everything better so hand fitting is still necessary. IMO barrels are MUCH better now days and are made of better alloys. Older hand fitted guns are probably more accurate out of the box and more pleasing esthetically. Inexpensive production rifles today can shoot as well or better than semi-custom rifles of yesterday where a lot of expensive work was done.

Like said above, there is nothing that compares to older revolvers. They were a piece of art as much as a handgun...
 
There were cheaper versions 'back then' as well as today. You cannot compare a Colt revolver that cost a month and a half pre-tax wages, or a Winchester rifle that cost even more, to a firearm that costs a weeks pay today.. Some of the cheap imports back then were junk, and there is good reason why you do not hear about the, today.
 
Well, considering Colt no longer makes DA revolvers, I'd have to agree with the OP's initial premise.
 
I disagree with you if viewed as an absolute, I sort of agree with you on a case by case basis. Older guns tend to have more character, but character isn't necessarily indicative of quality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top