hardluk1
member
I love wessons just not the smiths.
In the event that you must ask. It becomes obvious you do not own one! It also would be a rare situation when anyone, who clams to be "into" handguns would only own one Smith&Wesson revolver.
Two things every person should own. A 1911 in .45ACP and a .357 Magnum wheelgun.
BTW I can't afford my dream Smith at the moment either, but those $280 Model 10's from Bud's might slake some of your thirst in the interim.
A person who says this doesn't know what he's talking about. Today's Smiths are better made than the old ones. The metal is better and the production is better. I have a new 649 in my shop with a trigger, both DA and SA, that would have taken a gunsmith quite a bit of work to achieve. Many of the older guns, especially the Js, had terrible rough triggers.Once upon a time they were, perhaps, the finest large production revolver ever made. Their whole line was outstanding. Their "flagships" such as the Model 27 were hand made pieces of functional art.
Now they are making glorified Tauruses (Tauri?) with the quality control of Yugo. MIM parts, idiotic locks, CDC guns that barely get touched by human hands. Even their "custom shop" puts out trash. And then there is the Governor...
My old K-22 from 1953 is a truly amazing gun. Excellent action. Laser like accuracy. Trigger pull on my hand ejector (1928) is truly wonderful.
THOSE are Smith's worthy of love. And they built the reputation that lasts to this day.
Well,in my own PERSONAL experience (having owned many revolvers over the last 4 decades)I would rate the S&W triggers as good but not that far superior to many others. I did a closed eye test of triggers between a Smith Model 29-2 and a Taurus M44. They both had identical rubber grips. It was virtually impossible to tell them apart by feel.the trigger says it all
Why people love S&W revolvers
Can't stand them!
Capacity limited ugly guns
*swyped from the evo so excuse any typos*
Posts like this prove that friends shouldn't let friends post while they're drunk.Can't stand them!
Capacity limited ugly guns
*swyped from the evo so excuse any typos*
Likely because Colt makes way more money off of the big, easy to fill government contracts.the Smith is still in production, the Colt isn't. That pretty much says it.
Truer more in recent years than in Colt's heyday. The cost of hand fitting went up, and colt tried to adapt by switching to coil springs and parts that drop in easier. The following guns admittedly weren't very popular, which certainly contributed to Colt's decision to pull out of the DA revolver market.The Colts were terribly expensive, due to the extensive hand fitting required
The timing issue has been debated to death on this forum and others, and I don't want to jump into that here. I'm curious, though, where you got the idea that the metal is soft compared to a Smith? I've always been under the impression that Colt's metallurgy was superior to Smith's. When Smith built the .38-44 outdoorsman because the .38-44HV was beating their M&Ps apart, colt claimed the ammo was fine in their D frame guns. I'm sure plenty of this was just corporate competition, but the D frame is only slightly larger than a Smith J frame so...The metal was soft. They went out of time frequently.
A Smith trigger isn't anywhere near as good as a trigger that has been tuned...And the triggers weren't anywhere near as good as a Smith that had been tuned.
A WITCH!!!! A WITCH!!!! WE FOUND A WITCH!!!!