Author Topic: S&W ? (Read 1564 times)

azmark · « **on:** November 05, 2011, 10:15:40 AM »

I've heard several negative opinions of the quality of S&W revolvers. I'm sure you've heard some of these. Is S&W really the epitome of quality? Are their products worth the price?

tacklebury · « **Reply #1 on:** November 05, 2011, 11:18:19 AM »

I think they are way over priced for their quality. I get by with the firearms I have and non are smiths.

irold · « **Reply #2 on:** November 06, 2011, 01:56:28 AM »

I , too , think Smith is overpriced. They are a quality firearm. They seem to bring higher resale , but if ya don't intend to resell......maybe a wash. I prefer Ruger revolvers , strong , dependable , and have had really good customer service in the past. Sometimes the actions need some smoothing....other than that..

regards irold

Gene R · « **Reply #3 on:** November 06, 2011, 01:26:40 AM »

I too agree that they are a little over priced. But after my Taurus kick that kicked me in the pants with serius failures in multiple new guns, I stick to S&W and Ruger. I have had no failures with either. I would rather pay a little more and know that it will work every time than have the waisted time and disappointment from not being dependable.
Gene R.

azmark · « **Reply #4 on:** November 06, 2011, 03:53:21 AM »

Gene,

Have you had failures in Taurus revolvers or semi-autos? I don't own a Taurus, but haven't ruled them out completely either.

Gene R · « **Reply #5 on:** November 07, 2011, 04:36:56 AM »

Mark,
About 1 1/2 ago I was purchasing Taurus because I didn't want to spend S&W kind of money on trail/boat guns. I had 1ea 991 22mag, 2ea 990 22lr, and a 94 22lr.
The 94 kept keyholing after 3 times of sending it back to get fixed, I traded it on a S&W m63
The 990's both started to not fully turn the cylinder when you pulled the triger or cocked it, I traded them for a S&W m617 (had a friend by a 991 at the same time, his wouldn't fully rotate either after a couple hundred shots)
The 991 shoots real good, but I gave it to my son. Just told him to shoot it and if it gave him any problems, trade it for anything but a Taurus.
I hope that helps.

Gene

rockbilly · « **Reply #6 on:** November 07, 2011, 08:57:14 AM »

Over the years I have owned near 100 different Smith and Wesson revolvers, I have only had a problem with one, a Model 17 that was hard to open the cylinder. That was corrected quick and efficiently after I finally got off my butt and got the gun in for adjustment. As for quality, I think it rates right up there at the top.

The S&Ws do seem to run a little high but I have always been of the opinion that you get what you pay for. I have no problem with several others mentioned in other post and even own a couple of Rugers, Trurus and several Colts, but for me, when the chips are down it will always be Smith and Wesson!!!

teamnelson · « **Reply #7 on:** November 07, 2011, 09:25:17 AM »

I have 6 S&W revolvers now; I like the pre-lock ones best. I've traded into all of them, and always felt like I did well in the deal. For me the brand means consistency, but I like my Taurus and Rugers just fine.

jakeemt · « **Reply #8 on:** November 07, 2011, 09:29:21 AM »

I owned two taurus'. A 357 tracker with binding and timing problems from the factory and a 66 with the same issue. Won't be buying from them again. Never had a problem with ruger or s&w.

Old Griz · « **Reply #9 on:** December 24, 2011, 07:35:06 PM »

I have only bought three new S&W revolvers, and that was many years ago before they cost so much. I still have seven more that I bought used, and I have loved them all. Extremely accurate and smooth. They are really expensive today because they know you can't get a better DA revolver now that Colt is out of the picture. Don't be afraid to buy a used S&W. You can get some great deals.

The Ruger SP101 is one of the best designed guns of all time, but the triggers are a might stiff. Still the S&W K frames are awesome guns and feel great in your hand. Easy to aim, and easy to shoot. The N frames are in a class by themselves. Expensive? Yes. Worth it? Yes. You get what you pay for.

williamlayton · « **Reply #10 on:** December 25, 2011, 02:25:10 AM »

I don't have any revolvers that are not S&W---course I buy used and shooters--no collector pieces here.
I trust S&W but do understand that among many a lemon will emerge.
I don't like taurus and never have.
I owned two Rugers--both single six's--and enjoyed them. I don't like single six's any more or single actions for that matter.
Blessings

StrawHat · « **Reply #11 on:** December 26, 2011, 01:21:50 AM »

Having owned revolvers for nearly 50 years, I have found few that even come close to S&W. Rugers are much heavier and have a clunky feel in my hand. Taurus and Rossi were cheap, poor quality imitations when I experiemented with them. Colts were even more costly and I do not care for the way they stack in DA use. I have not purchased a S&W in nearly 10 years and that last one was a 38 Special M&P, hardly new, so I am not familiar with current quality or prices. I see used ones priced reasonably.

Lloyd Smale · « **Reply #12 on:** December 26, 2011, 01:27:04 AM »

I guess i think there overpriced but still am willing to buck up that much more to avoid the other crap that competes with them. Id gladly pay twice the price for a smith revolver then a comparable tarus or rossi and anymore the price of a double action ruger isnt that much differnt then a smith. With the ruger you get a bit more strenght usualy but its usually in a rough clunky package. Bottom line is smiths are still the best fit and finished DA revolver the average guy can afford.

bluedog6 · « **Reply #13 on:** December 26, 2011, 01:59:10 AM »

The Smiths are the best revolver out there. There is no comparison to a Taurus. Take the 22's for example. Taurus has copied Smith's model 63. If you ever have the opportunity, pick each of these revolvers up and handle them. You will immediately see and feel the difference. If you like the Taurus fine, but there is no comparison to a Smith, no more than comparing a Pinto station wagon to a Lincoln. I see numerous 50-60 year old Smith that are still being used to both hunt with and target shoot. In future years I don't imagine we will see very many 50 year old, functional Taurus revolvers.

Dee · « **Reply #14 on:** December 26, 2011, 02:23:37 AM »

I have been a Smith man since I first bought a hand gun to carry for a living. I carried'em for 20 years and used them, and I tried all the other revolvers EXCEPT Taurus and few others. I had some of those brought to me to work on, and many times found the metallurgy bad. As some one already said, Ruger is well built, a little ruff out of the box, and in some areas of the pistol "overbuilt unnecessarily", and they are usually heavier.
I think part of the reason the Smith is higher than it used to be, is the dollar is worth less, the new safety system installed, causing some design change, because of lawyers and frivolous lawsuits, and insurance because of the latter. It still has a short crisp action, and is as reliable as the sun comin up.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #15 on:** December 28, 2011, 03:21:13 AM »

I am a big fan of S&W revolvers. Sure they are more expensive, but to me it is worth the extra money. I am also a Ruger fan as well. I find the S&W's to be more like a Swiss watch and a Ruger like a Timex, takes a licking and keeps ticking. Now Taurus is not a gun I am willing to invest anymore money in. Tried a few different Taurus models, and sold all but one. It is a 9 shot .22 L/R. I hate the gun, but my wife likes to shoot it.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #16 on:** December 28, 2011, 03:22:01 AM »

Quote from: Lloyd Smale on December 26, 2011, 01:27:04 AM

I guess i think there overpriced but still am willing to buck up that much more to avoid the other crap that competes with them. Id gladly pay twice the price for a smith revolver then a comparable tarus or rossi and anymore the price of a double action ruger isnt that much differnt then a smith. With the ruger you get a bit more strenght usualy but its usually in a rough clunky package. Bottom line is smiths are still the best fit and finished DA revolver the average guy can afford.

Well said Lloyd...

GRIMJIM · « **Reply #17 on:** December 28, 2011, 04:44:55 AM »

My friend is a s&w collector and also has quite a few taurus revolvers and likes them for what they are. He has had some issues with them but has told me he had good experiences with customer service
I also have the nine shot 22 and enjoy it. The raging bull series of revolvers, I have a 454, are fairly decent also.
I would not compare them to the smiths though. I only have a couple, a model 10 and a 686, but the quality difference is substantial.
If I had the cash, I would opt for a s&w over any other revolver in the price range.
I unfortunately cannot afford a fredom arms.

williamlayton · « **Reply #18 on:** December 29, 2011, 01:40:32 AM »

I choose S&W.
Blessings

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #19 on:** December 29, 2011, 01:58:44 AM »

Quote from: azmark on November 06, 2011, 03:53:21 AM

Gene,

Have you had failures in Taurus revolvers or semi-autos? I don't own a Taurus, but haven't ruled them out completely either.

I have had trouble with them. S&W is high priced but they offer some guns not offered by others. I have had good and poor service from S&W when repair was needed. One thing S&W was sold and for a while offered less quality so it could depend on what era guns you inspect as to the quality you see. If Ruger offers a gun that is equal to S&W I always go Ruger. If not then I pay the price for S&W. As example Ruger does not offer a pocket revolver that works as well as a 340 PD . But if you want a 5 shot SS revolver their SP101 can't be beat.

teamnelson · « **Reply #20 on:** December 29, 2011, 05:39:30 AM »

In addition to a passle of Smiths, I still have the following Tauri (Tauruses?): 1st generation 66, 94, 606, 1911A1.
No issues with any of them, although the DA trigger pull on the 94 is very heavy. Their 1911 is one of the sweetest OTS set ups I've seen, and mine if fantastic - no mods except some grip panels. Trust my life to it, the 606 or 66. Gave the 66 to my son for his 12th, and fully expect it to serve him well for his lifetime and longer.

That said, I would not buy a Taurus off the internet - I'd want to see it first, or get it from someone I trust in a person to person deal. And in all fairness, I am slowly replacing all of my Tauruses. And all of my post-lock S&W with pre-lock. Just got a 586 pre-lock square butt last month - beautiful shooter! Good timing too as my daughter has claimed my 586+ for herself.

painted horse · « **Reply #21 on:** December 29, 2011, 06:36:58 AM »

As long as Smith and Ruger are around I won't be buying any Taurus. And yes, I do think a S&W is a "finer" revolver than a Ruger. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the "shooting Loose" issues with a Smith 44mag had to do with some smaller internal parts that has since be rectified and had nothing to do with frame or cyl strength. (anyone have info on that?) I like the above analogy of the Swiss watch and Timex comparison. I'll be buying a new 44mag sometime in Feb. and it WILL be a S&W 629 w/5in barrel. (I have several Ruger's in 45 colt) they are tough guns.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #22 on:** December 29, 2011, 07:57:34 AM »

I shot some "FOR RUGER TC GUNs ONLY" loads in a mod 29 custom DX and it messed up the frame . I have a J frame that went out of time in less than 100 rounds of standard lead ammo.

anachronism · « **Reply #23 on:** December 31, 2011, 05:02:23 PM »

I prefer Ruger DA revolvers to S&W, but at this time I have more S&W revolvers than Rugers. I'll get this corrected pretty soon. I do not even consider Taurus, Rossi or any of the import brands anymore after watching some of the guys at the range struggle to keep their guns functional. It has occured to me that these companies "lifetime" warranties are a good thing, because many people seem to need to use them. I had a Llama 9mm once that gave me really bad headaches, and I simply avoid bargain brand guns. Are Smiffs overpriced? Absolutely!, so is everything else. So is Ruger, but I still prefer to buy once, and cry once. It's more efficient that way.

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #24 on:** December 31, 2011, 06:06:44 PM »

I am like some of the others here.
I have 8 S&W revolvers from 22LR to 44 Mag and in all frame sizes.
I have both double action and a single action S&W top break.
Mine are all older guns. Pre lock and except for the 22LR all have the pin on the hammer.
I think it is personal preferance as to the lock and the location of the firing pin.
My friend has a 629 with both the lock and the frame mounted firing pin, and he loves it.
If you are going to buy new, the S&W will hold it's value longer over time.
Buying used, a S&W will sell if you need to sell it for about the same price as you purchased it.
There are more after market items for the S&W guns than the others so if you want special grips, lasers, trick triggers, target spring kits, speed loaders, and holsters of all shape and sizes it will be easier to fing for a Smith than any other.
I have or have owned Dan Wesson, Colts, and Ruger revolvers and all have been well made and were or are accurate, and none gave me any problems.
Good luck with your purchase and get what you want. Check the used racks first. Buying a gun you kind of want will always make you wish you had the other.
With that said. The cylinders on the Rugers are slightly longer allowing for the use of heavier bullets for hunting. If you are thinking 44 mag for hunting and want ot use 300 grain bullets, get the Ruger. You may not be able to close the cylinder on some loads.
The Federal loaded 300 grain flat points just close in my M29

3030guy · « **Reply #25 on:** December 31, 2011, 06:20:21 PM »

I have Rugers and Smiths. I shoot Smiths, they are worth the money.