Why no new, old revolvers?

[bikemutt]

Something occurred to me today that has me puzzled: how come no one makes the older style revolvers today, the one's which are commanding incredible prices owing to huge demand and a snuffed supply?

For example, anyone seen the price of Colt Pythons lately? Of course, we all have. The older Smiths too, are at least in the ionosphere.

Is it all because craftsmanship has been replaced by wonder-lathes doing the wishes of the NC programmers? Some, in fact many, still feel a forged trigger warrants a higher price than a MIM one.

The reason I bring this up is current revolver manufacture seems stuck in a different time warp than say the 1911. Some of the 1911 custom guns I see being produced today are remarkably innovative, beautiful to behold, and eschew the maligned MIM parts and other "shortcuts". And they sell for breathtaking prices.

I suppose it boils down to why aren't the Les Baers and Wilson Combats of the world crafting fine revolver legends? If not them, why isn't someone else? If we fast-forward the world 50 years will there be any revolver produced today that will elicit the same visceral connection to a then 30-something buyer as say a minty Smith 29-2 might do today?

This is semi-serious wonderment on my part I felt like sharing, nothing against MIM, I swear

 

[Mike1957]

S&W is making some revolvers that look kind of like the older ones. But it would not be hard to tell the copies from the real ones even if the new ones didn`t have those funny looking holes in the left side of the frame.

 

[ColtPythonElite]

IMO, there is no need to build 'em. There is no shortage of the old ones. There are still plenty of NIB Pythons getting swapped around. You can get one in the neighborhood of 1500 bucks. I doubt that if Colt built a new Python today, it would sell for any less than that.

 

[oldfool]

"why aren't the Les Baers and Wilson Combats of the world crafting fine revolver legends?"

they are
Les and Wilson just don't happen to be amongst 'em, that's all
wheelie people being in the minority class, you just don't see the adverts in gunzines is all
no shortage of class acts in custom revolvers

even the old highly regarded S&Ws and Colts don't even come close to what you can spend on either an autoloader or a six-shooter... all you need is enough want and enough cash

minty FA single actions will someday be regarded with the same awe as a minty 29-2
(mostly already are)
they just haven't been making 'em long enough yet
and if they do quit making them, guess what.. the old models will go for twice the price as those new models made by whoever purchases their name.. and they will most probably be worth twice-the-price

legends are earned, not manufactured

 

[skidder]

One reason is this: Most of the 30-something crowd, your referring to, is brainwashed by the flash and hype of semi-autos (movies and video games). Real steel means very little to them. It's not so much "appealing revolvers", but revolvers in general. Currently there are 200 viewing the revolver forum and 500 in the semi-auto handgun forum. These youngsters are selling their inheritance, pretty cheap, so they can spray and pray like they do in their video games. They get upset when they find out the $30 box of shells has a bottom . I'm not complaining...by no means...this leaves us "outdated shooters" a nice selection on the market. My last acquisition came cheap because the young sales attendant could not see how anybody could be interested in an old revolver, "not his style" he commented (Security Six).

 

[klover]

Let's keep it a secret

that the old revolvers are at all desirable. We all know that semi-autos meant the old sixes were out gunned, and therefore there is no other merit to those old pieces of junk

(more for us old foggies to collect)

 

[pendennis]

Revolver vs. semiauto comparisons are apples-to-oranges.

While lots of gadgets are hung from 1911 frames, it's still the same basic design, and it's far less complicated to make than a revolver.

The Python is mentioned, and it's part of a lost art that saw hand-fitted parts, metal finishing, and a certain aura that don't exist with modern revolvers. No one thinking clearly would ever mistake a Ruger GP100 with a Python.

If you think that existing Pythons are expensive, just think how much a new Python would cost with all the hand-fitted parts, the mirror-bright metal finish, and blueing which seems to be a mile deep. Add the cost of hand-fitted walnut stocks, and you're probably looking at a $2,000 revolver. When Pythons were discontinued in 2004, they were a Custom Shop-only revolver. Colt couldn't afford to price the revolver with the labor and overhead costs involved. They probably barely broke even, or perhaps lost money on the last ones built. The tooling was worn out, and the demand had already turned toward the "plastic fantastics".

S&W has long discontinued pinned barrels and recessed cylinders for magnum calibers. No need to do that. There's also little demand for finishes other than stainless. The outcry over MIM parts is, for the most part, baseless. MIM has proven its durability, and it beats forged parts by a long shot when it comes to cost. Even if a MIM part won't outlast a forged part, it will last long enough. How many cycles does a MIM part need to last; 10,000 - 25,000- 100,000? They only need to last the life of the gun, and not one cycle more.

The pinned barrel was a redundancy from the mid-1950's, until it was discontinued in ca. 1982. S&W had discontinued the soft fit area, and had gone the route that Colt, and the rifle makers had been using for years. A barrel which is slightlly softer than the frame, and slightly different barrel-to-frame threads, eliminates the need for the pin. However, S&W continued the practice for another twenty-five-plus years.

Recessed cylinders were probably overkill. It's less expensive to make them without the recess, and safety isn't compromised.

However, it is a bit ironic that S&W discontinued recessed cylinders, and Colt, a few years later, offered them in the King Cobra and Anaconda models.

Gun manufacturers do extensive market research, and they'd build whatever the customer demands, if enough customers demanded it. Customers don't demand blue steel and wood as much. Plastic and stainless cost less to make, and less to maintain. Simple as that.

 

[earplug]

Obsolete

Revolvers are obsolete.
They are harder to shoot quickly.
They are not as robust.
They are hard to manufacture.

Only collectors are interested in paying the big money for a gun such as a Python.
There are some specialized competition games that are fun with a wheel gun.
But for the most part the Semi Auto Pistol is better.

 

[niner4tango]

Korth?

Take a new S&W Classic, run it through the custom shop for an action job, and for a few days take-home pay you have an heirloom revolver.

Except for the lock. Which makes the value zero for people who want a new, old revolver.

If they'll make a 442 without a lock, why won't they make a Model 27 Classic without the lock? I would dislocate my shoulder pulling my wallet out to buy one. I wouldn't touch one as they are.

 

[CCantu357]

Seems to me the problem with making revolvers they way they used to is cost. Plastic guns are cheaper to make. I will say this, I am only in my 20s but I prefer a good Smith sixgun to anything else. What gets me is look at the 1911. 7-8 shots of 45. New Smith....7-8 shots of .357 Magnum. Same firepower. Granted if I was city police or military I would prefer a 15 shot semi-auto. But as a civilian shooter 6 to 8 shots of 357 is plenty for me!

 

[CajunBass]

I don't care if Smith & Wesson, or Colt, or anybody else made a gun, exactly like the old ones, and sold it for the same price I could buy an old one, it wouldn't matter to me.

I want the old ones, because they are old.

 

[StrawHat]

earplug

Revolvers are obsolete.
They are harder to shoot quickly.
They are not as robust.
They are hard to manufacture.

Only collectors are interested in paying the big money for a gun such as a Python.
There are some specialized competition games that are fun with a wheel gun.
But for the most part the Semi Auto Pistol is better.
Today 12:19 AM

I am not sure where to start refuting this nonsense!

 

[JohnM]

Obsolete
Revolvers are obsolete.
They are harder to shoot quickly.
They are not as robust.
They are hard to manufacture.

Only collectors are interested in paying the big money for a gun such as a Python.
There are some specialized competition games that are fun with a wheel gun.
But for the most part the Semi Auto Pistol is better.

We see some screwball comments here from time to time.
This one goes to the top of the list.

 

[woad_yurt]

I wouldn't say "obsolete" and leave it at that. Revolvers have been superseded by semi-autos for service work, for sure, but they're fine for us non-cop types. I have a Norinco SKS that's no longer militarily up to snuff but it's just fine for me.

I don't think revolvers will ever be completely obsolete because there are too many folks who'd like to own a gun that is as user-friendly as possible. There are hordes of people who simply have no inclination to learn how to clear a jam, rack a slide, etc. They just want the simple, revolver manual of arms.

There are also some folks that are just totally challenged, mechanically speaking. I was replacing a clutch in a friend's Tercel the other day* and had the transmission on the ground when he dropped by. He thought it was the alternator. Although I know him for a long time and like the guy a lot, I wouldn't want him operating anything semi-automatic around me.

* Money's tight these days so it's been side-job time for a while around here.

 

[Loosedhorse]

I suppose it boils down to why aren't the Les Baers and Wilson Combats of the world crafting fine revolver legends?

They are. Their names are Hamilton Bowen, John Linebaugh, and Gary Reeder. Expect Wilsonesque prices!



For factory guns, check out USFA and the already mentioned "Classics" line at S&W.

 

[CraigC]

Obsolete
Revolvers are obsolete.
They are harder to shoot quickly.
They are not as robust.
They are hard to manufacture.

Only collectors are interested in paying the big money for a gun such as a Python.
There are some specialized competition games that are fun with a wheel gun.
But for the most part the Semi Auto Pistol is better.

And I'm sure this all comes from someone who has spent enough time with revolvers to prove that it's all true. Mmmm hmmm.......

 

[DLEJones]

Oboslete and harder to shoot quickly...
here is a factoid on the world record for 12 shots..

Jerry Miculek holds the world record for the fasted 6 shoots fired and hitting the target, with a revolver....not an auto, a revolver...

Fire six shots, reload, fire six shots from 1 revolver S&W Model 625 revolver 2.99 seconds September 11, 1999

...let's not forget that during a stressful need to pull that CCW and defend yourself, there is less to go wrong...point and pull the trigger...

 

[Sam1911]

I think this is an easy question with a pair of related answers.

Answer 1: As Loosedhorse says, they are. You just have to search around and find the companies doing this work. And pay for it.

Answer 2: They aren't MUCH, because the demand is so very, very low.

Now, as we're drifting into the whys and wherefores, jumping on earplug's comments,

Revolvers are obsolete.

Obsolete is a funny word, seeming to mean both more and less than folks think. A revolver will still do the job it always would do. It also is rarely the most efficient choice to do that job, vis-a-vis cost, capacity, size, weight, etc. Small pocket revolvers have some clear (if debated) benefits over their similar-purpose automatic counterparts. Very large magnums (.44 and up) have some clear (and largely undebatable) advantages over automatics with similar purposes (because there are few, or none).

Service-sized revolvers are obsolescent. That doesn't mean they are not still cool, and highly valued, nor that some enthusiasts do not still choose them over other options. But they are surpassed in the role for which they were designed. No reason to be bitter about that ("These youngsters are selling their inheritance, pretty cheap, so they can spray and pray like they do in their video games..." ) -- it just is so.

For many of us, the benefits of an automatic (which are real) do not outweigh the desire to use a beautiful old wheelgun -- and we believe that we will never be put into a position where those benefits would make a fatal difference. That certainly may be true, and the joy of carrying a cool gun may bring us years of relatively greater happiness that is worth the small risk that we'll die someday when we wouldn't have had we had a gun we could shoot faster or that held more rounds.

They are harder to shoot quickly.

Not for Jerry Miculek!!! Um, but for the rest of the shooting public, like 99.99% of the rest of the shooting public, yes, they are harder to shoot quickly. Not that those people couldn't learn, but that it takes A LOT -- decades -- of practice to develop the skill to surpass with a revolver the rate of accurate fire that a given shooter can put out with an automatic. C'est la vie.

They are not as robust.

Hmmm... well, this again comes down to a matter of "enough." Many Glocks and other polymer guns are proving to last through absurdly high round-counts and very rough handling with only minor maintenance like spring replacement. No knowledgeable revolver shooter is likely to put his classic wheelie up against a Glock in a run-'till-destruction torture test. But so what? Most folks won't put 10,000 rds through a wheelgun, let alone 100,000, so the difference is moot. And if the gun does shoot loose, most can still be repaired and put into service again.

They are hard to manufacture.

Well, yes. At least, considering the advances in manufacture applied to the huge market for autoloaders vs. those alloted to the relatively tiny market for revolvers, that is true. We're talking superior levels of hand-fitting here anyway, though, so this is possibly also a moot point.

Only collectors are interested in paying the big money for a gun such as a Python.

Well, that is not sustainable. Yes, collectors DO like to pay a lot for classic guns only to safe them away, but even $2,000 for a beautiful Python isn't so much money to some buyers, who fully intend to use that gun hard. Such may be rare, but you can't say "only."

There are some specialized competition games that are fun with a wheel gun.

Yes. And some generalized competition games that are fun with a wheel gun, too! Just because they are rarely competitive against autos head-to-head doesn't mean that the games aren't fun!

But for the most part the Semi Auto Pistol is better.

For the uses and the training, and the real needs of many shooters with vastly different experience levels and purposes, this is true. Throw in soft qualities like "preference," "aesthetics," "classic," and "sufficient for my needs," and the word "better" is probably not really correct.

But, as good capitalists here (right? ) we understand that market forces do eventually, over time, boil down matters into measurable trends and empirical "truth." We do seem to be homing in on a type of gun that does the most, for the widest variety of shooter, with the least significant negative trade-offs, for the least cost. Outside of the niches of the very large, the very small, and the enthusiast market, the revolver isn't it.

 

[earplug]

Check out the overall scores at a pistol match where revolvers compete with pistols.
Bullseye, USPSA, Steel Challange.
Look at the bone stock USPSA production class results and the Revolver scores.

 

[Sam1911]

Check out the overall scores at a pistol match where revolvers compete with pistols.
Bullseye, USPSA, Steel Challange.
Look at the bone stock USPSA production class results and the Revolver scores.

Absolutely. And exactly what I alluded to. Most shooters (including most of us here in the revolver forum!) don't have the skills in to make a revolver run faster overal times (and/or better scores) in those competitions than we could (and certainly than other competitiors could) with an automatic.

But, also as I said, many users are willing to accept reduced performance and capacity for the love of revolvers. There are a lot of "soft" factors informing the decision of what to buy and carry, as I mentioned.

But, this doesn't completely answer the question of why some specialists don't make expensive repros for the enthusiast niche. And, as we've seen, the answer is that they DO!

 

[pendennis]

...Most shooters (including most of us here in the revolver forum!) don't have the skills in to make a revolver run faster overal times (and/or better scores) in those competitions than we could (and certainly than other competitiors could) with an automatic.

I wil go a step further. Most of us don't have the skills for semi-auto competition, either. Without the requisite skills, the semi-auto becomes just so much spray and pray.

 

[USSR]

Same reason why nobody manufactures a new M1 Garand. Who in their right mind would pay $1000+ for a replica, when you can buy a used real deal for ~$500.

Don

 

[CraigC]

Check out the overall scores at a pistol match where revolvers compete with pistols.
Bullseye, USPSA, Steel Challange.
Look at the bone stock USPSA production class results and the Revolver scores.

I really could care less what competition shooters are using, any more than I care what racing drivers drive. I've been an avid shooter for most of my life, having bought and sold at least 100 guns and have been a sixgun nut for at least 25yrs. USPSA, IPSC, Bullseye and Steel Challenge scores have NEVER had an influence on me or my shooting. You do understand that there is a whole world of shooting outside of competition and self defense, don't you?

Do you even know the meaning of the word "obsolete"???

 

[Drail]

Two reasons - consumers in today's society do not understand the difference between old style quality or why it costs more or is even desirable and consumers today generally make purchase decisions based only on price or style or "radical new technology". This is why we have a marketplace filled with cheap poorly made products that don't last but are easily and cheaply replaced when the product falls apart after 2 years. Manufacturers will make what they percieve their market wants and will buy. If everybody wants a Glock then they will all make Glocks. And here we are. If S&W or Colt started producing revolvers exactly like they made them 50 years ago the majority of the market would look at them and say they're overpriced, obsolete, and too heavy. They just wouldn't "get it". I put all of the blame for this state of conditions on TV. Especially MTV. Few people learn to "think" today. They want to follow the "in" crowd". Just like a herd of lemmings. My favorite piece of "logic" I hear over and over is "this is what the police/military uses so it must be the best". Spend some years in the military and see if you still believe that one.

 

[earplug]

Demand

I might have to apologize about my comments on revolvers.
I'm a match director for a local ICORE shoot, I help put on a monthly USPSA shoot and compete at a couple other matches with my revolvers.
I really enjoy my wheel guns. But most owners don't compete with their firearms and if you don't shoot them, they last forever.
There is little demand for new high end revolvers as much of the old stuff is still pristine and in demand.