Korth Firearms?

[newfrontier45]

Second, this is an internet message board. Before you brag to us (esp me) about the size of your collection, make sure its impressive, to everyone. I am not impressed by 48 revolvers, nor am I impressed by $60,000 worth of firearms. Ask yourself why might that be?

I didn't add any of that info to impress you or anyone else. You said that concern over looks indicates a novice, I'm letting you know that you are dead wrong and how. I got to where I am honestly and I don't appreciate your comments at all. I'm not impressed with a nurse that thought "tacticool" was cool four years ago telling me that the criteria by which I choose a firearm makes me sound like a novice. I lurked for a long time and read a lot of your comments before I registered. I'm not impressed at all with your knowledge but what does that accomplish? Other than to make an adult discussion about guns personal, which is juvenile. Actually the reverse of what you suggest is true but I don't expect you to understand that.

Everything about a revolver is fair game. I won't buy certain guns because I don't like the style of front sight they come with. Some of these are easily corrected with a little gunsmith help, some are not. When you've REALLY been around the block a few times you obsess about the smallest details. Which is why I'm satisfied with fewer and fewer factory guns but own more and more customs. If utility and function were the only requirements, we'd all be shooting Glocks but for most of us, there are other factors involved. I don't know why we expect good looks out of an $800 S&W but not a Korth that costs several thousand dollars. When you're paying that much for a single gun, you should DEMAND both.

This kind of goes hand in hand with some of the "reverse snob" attitude I was talking about earlier, to the point where it's another forums cliche. Someone always pipes up to add "heh, I don't care how my guns look, they're just tools for getting work done, I'm no sissy."

There's always condescension where beauty is involved. If you like your guns "pretty", if you like them to have fancy finishes, engraving or exotic stock materials, you're a sissy or have lace on your drawers. Maybe I should've majored in psychology because this mentality fascinates me. Perhaps it's just insecurity. I'm not ashamed to admit that I expect my guns to function but I also want them to be beautiful, to varying degrees. Which is one reason why I prefer to hunt birds with a Merkel 28ga, instead of an 870 Express.

I am simply saying you don't buy a Camaro because it looks better than a Lambo.

Why not? I wouldn't buy a Lambo because they don't appeal to me but there are other exotic cars that do.

Oh, and for the record, I find this to be a lie, or maybe your head is on backwards.

No smart guy, function is a given. This should be obvious to anyone but a novice.

...looks are not the chief concern...

Who said it was???


So are you saying you'd spend $5000-$10,000 for a revolver that you didn't love everything about??? Tell us another lie.

 

[lifesizepotato]

I started typing my admittedly long-winded response before you (Winchester) posted your rebuttals to newfrontier, so I didn't have that to go on.

Either way, I do think that the types who are shopping for Korths are going to want them to be attractive guns. They are meant to be engineering marvels, too, stronger and better made than anything else, but they also strive to be the jewel-like centerpiece of any gun collection. If their guns were flawlessly made and perfectly accurate, but looked ugly, I don't think their target audience would buy them. Speaking for myself, I know I wouldn't. It's the reason I don't have much interest in Freedom Arms, which, by all accounts are wonderfully constructed - I just don't dig the styling.

To work with your car analogy, if a Lambo looked like a Yugo, but somehow maintained the supercar performance and price, would anyone buy them? Some, for sure, but most would just go with a pretty Ferrari instead. You expect the whole package in Ferraris, Lambos, etc., because of the price premium. With a Korth, because of the premium, you expect a gun that functions perfectly AND nails it in the looks department. If you think the Korth misses that mark and is ugly, it's fine to discuss why or how.

That said, it's entirely possible I'm typing a lot of words while missing your point.

Edit:

Oh, and for the record, I find this to be a lie, or maybe your head is on backwards. Are you saying that you don't care about the accuracy or the reliability? Of course you care about function. We all do, as you attempted to say about looks. While we all do care about looks, there is also a pecking order for features of a quality revolver, and no matter what your opinion is, looks are not the chief concern (unless you are new to revolvers).

This kind of has me questioning your credibility as a collector. Not to "no true Scotsman" this debate, but I think any real collector knows that you can never tell someone they're wrong for what interests them in guns. If literally the only thing someone values in revolvers is their appearance, there's no way you can tell them they're wrong or they need their priorities reevaluated. That's not how collectors think.

 

[TennJed]

The thing about the car analogy is, you can have "true enthusiast" on both sides. A guy with limited funds may be most concerned with the function of his muscle car, but someone wealthy may want that function and performance and a certain look and prestige. That is why you have $250,000- $500,000 sports cars. They are not just about the looks and they are not just about the performance. They are about both, and more power to those that can enjoy it. If I could afford to carry a Korth around in a Ferrari F12berlinetta, I would

 

[newfrontier45]

Very true and the measure of a "true enthusiast" is usually not in dollars. It's our passion that makes us enthusiasts, not the dollars spent. By the same token, lots of dollars spent does not necessarily make it conspicuous consumption. Bottom line, we really should try not to judge people.

 

[Winchester_73]

I lurked for a long time and read a lot of your comments before I registered. I'm not impressed at all with your knowledge but what does that accomplish? Other than to make an adult discussion about guns personal, which is juvenile. Actually the reverse of what you suggest is true but I don't expect you to understand that.

I would like you to elaborate on that rather than me assume what you mean.

I'm not impressed with a nurse that thought "tacticool" was cool four years ago telling me that the criteria by which I choose a firearm makes me sound like a novice.

Well you bothered to investigate me, so since I am not impressive to you, perhaps stop doing it. You are wasting your own time, researching someone who is not worth it, to you. Someone not worthy of your respect.

Bottom line, we really should try not to judge people.

Fair statement, but try taking your own advice. You judged me for making one statement about a glock 5 years ago, and you judged me for saying looks are not important. They don't have to be to me, and they can be for you. You can do what and buy and think whatever you want, I just commented on it. Sorry that our opinions differ, although at this point, I think we are close on the issue in all actuality.

To work with your car analogy, if a Lambo looked like a Yugo, but somehow maintained the supercar performance and price, would anyone buy them? Some, for sure, but most would just go with a pretty Ferrari instead. You expect the whole package in Ferraris, Lambos, etc., because of the price premium. With a Korth, because of the premium, you expect a gun that functions perfectly AND nails it in the looks department.

I can see that point, that for the money one would want BOTH, but they are not equal to me. I guess performance is more important in the Korth scenario, but of course, if they were really ugly, they would probably sell less, although they would not be really any less special to me. Part of my opinion stems from me thinking the Korth is far from ugly, and its differences in looks are probably due to its quality of design moreso than a simple "we have to make it perfect looking" since beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

This kind of has me questioning your credibility as a collector. Not to "no true Scotsman" this debate, but I think any real collector knows that you can never tell someone they're wrong for what interests them in guns. If literally the only thing someone values in revolvers is their appearance, there's no way you can tell them they're wrong or they need their priorities reevaluated. That's not how collectors think.

Well, Korths are certainly collectors items in a sense, but I think they are bought for their manufacturing quality and for their performance probably more so. In other words, I think avid shooters buy them, and from the looks of things, every owner in this thread shoots theirs a fair amount, if not a lot. I would say collecting another type of firearm is different in many ways. The Korth goes above and beyond to try to be the top of the food chain, and does not sacrifice anything to lower the MSRP, and I respect that. Someone collecting 1911s because they like them, liking the look, is different than what I was implying. I see what you mean however, and I agree with you.

The thing about the car analogy is, you can have "true enthusiast" on both sides. A guy with limited funds may be most concerned with the function of his muscle car, but someone wealthy may want that function and performance and a certain look and prestige. That is why you have $250,000- $500,000 sports cars. They are not just about the looks and they are not just about the performance. They are about both, and more power to those that can enjoy it.

That is a good point. Dollar amount does not equal enthusiast level.

 

[newfrontier45]

I would like you to elaborate on that rather than me assume what you mean.

My point is that there is no point in making personal comments. It's counter-productive and nobody learns anything.

Someone not worthy of your respect.

Respect is earned. You can call me an a-hole all day long and I don't care but hit me with a little unwarranted condescension and my blood boils. You made it personal and I gave you a little subtle retort. We can argue like 13yr old girls or we can have a discussion like men without all that foolishness. I prefer the latter.

You judged me for making one statement about a glock 4 years ago...

I judged your credibility, not your character. I try not to judge people by their age and don't care for it when it happens to me but if you were wet enough behind the ears five years ago to think that a Glock with a 33rd magazine and attached light was the "sexiest gun", then I think maybe you're not qualified to pass judgement on me and the criteria by which I choose a handgun. Particularly one that costs several thousand dollars. We don't have to agree on anything but I won't be condescended by someone thirteen years my junior. I've been a student of this sport for nearly 30yrs and while most were drinking, partying, getting married and raising kids I was buying guns, hunting and shooting. I am constantly expanding my knowledge and my library. I've probably spent more on books in the last year than most do in their lifetimes. I'm not one of those guys with little more than a passing interest in this stuff that decided to start buying guns five years ago. When I was having my first custom gun built 13yrs ago, you were 14yrs old. So while I appreciate your enthusiasm, not everybody with a low post count was born yesterday. I know what I'm about and I'd appreciate it if you kept that in mind.

For the record, I don't find the Korth revolver to be ugly. I just don't think it's beautiful enough to me to pay $5000 - $10,000 for one. This is not meant as a slight to Korth of their owners. It's strictly a matter of personal preference. If I'm spending thousands on a sixgun, it has to look like the one above or this:

 

[Winchester_73]

wet enough behind the ears five years ago to think that a Glock with a 33rd magazine and attached light was the "sexiest gun", then I think maybe you're not qualified to pass judgement on me and the criteria by which I choose a handgun.

I think we all learn at different speeds, but of course, you have to look back at where you were at, at my age. If you are much older, you should know much more than myself, right?

hit me with a little unwarranted condescension and my blood boils. You made it personal and I gave you a little subtle retort.

IMO, to be offended at my statement, to that degree, when my comment was not directed at you, some pomposity has to be involved. You made it about you, as if you are the biggest kid on the playground, and you are looking for a reason to beat up someone. Egos are fragile things. Kind of like you stating you being not impressed with my knowledge. Rather than be offended, I realized you know me only through an internet forum. You never met me or anything. In addition, its your own opinion, just one person's. I won't be shaken up by one person's comments too easy. When I see all of the other differences you have compared to others, it only makes sense that the whole outlook differs.

If I'm spending thousands on a sixgun, it has to look like the one above or this

So it has to be all scratched up for you to like it? I guess the easy way to sum up our differences is that you prefer luxury, and I prefer performance. Some guns of course have both. I can appreciate your opinion, even though it is not my own. Kind of like how I rarely wear jewelry (can't afford it with the prices of guns!) but I can appreciate a fine watch or ring.

And one last thing, 48 guns and $60,000 does mean you have a ton of experience, and experience itself does not mean you know more than someone with less experience, it means you should.

There is a reason you cited your experience in that way, and a reason you cited how much you are spending on a custom Ruger. You can ponder on that yourself.

 

[newfrontier45]

...you have to look back at where you were at, at my age.

I was doing a lot more reading and listening and a lot less blabbering.

There is a reason you cited your experience in that way, and a reason you cited how much you are spending on a custom Ruger. You can ponder on that yourself.

There is a reason and that was to differentiate myself from the reverse snobs, with whom I frequently find myself at odds. Because while we share the unlikelihood of buying a Korth, the reasons are vastly different.

IMO, to be offended at my statement, to that agree, when my comment was not directed at you, some pomposity has to be involved.

It appears as though I am the loudest voice in this thread with regards to the Korth's looks. If that was directed at someone else, I must've missed it. Who was it directed at??? Even if meant in general, I'm still the loudest voice in this thread with regards to the Korth's looks so either way, it was directed at me. Appearance is a heavy factor in my decision making and I make no apologies for it. So it doesn't really matter who the intended recipient was.

...as if you are the biggest kid on the playground, and you are looking for a reason to beat up someone. Egos are fragile things.

Are we getting all personal again now??? My ego has nothing to do with it. I don't care if anyone agrees with me. I don't need my ego stroked and I'm not always right. I haven't spent the most money and I don't have the biggest collection. I just refuse to be talked down to and condescension is my hot button. It's a character flaw.

And one last thing, 48 guns and $60,000...

I said four dozen revolvers, not four dozen guns.

 

[Winchester_73]

I just refuse to be talked down to and condescension is my hot button. It's a character flaw.

Well I am sorry that you felt that way by my post. I was questioning how someone could look at something with so much quality, and yet nitpick it with looks concerns. My comment was attempting to say "lets look at the great strong points of a Korth, before we analyze something that is much easier to attain." Low end guns can have interesting looks, and even though I respect that you yourself are not a novice, we all have seen novice people pass on say a S&W, because the Taurus has a vent rib, which is primarily for looks. Often times too much importance is placed on looks, when the guns don't look vastly different from each other most often.

For the record, the Camaro vs Lambo (assuming new vs new, not vintage) was an analogy was to show that the Lambo is better in nearly every way, and so the Camaro should not be considered over a Lambo, nor should it be in the same conversation unless one does not care about the Lambo's superior traits. If the Camaro "looks better" and the person chose the Camaro over the Lambo, then that person should not have a Lambo at all, because everything the Lambo is about would be wasted on that person anyways. The Lambo is in a different class, and the "looks" you see are there for reasons other than "looks."

 

[bac1023]

Very nice

I'm not one for engraved handguns, but I appreciate the work that goes into them. Besides that Bowen does some great custom Rugers.

As for Ruger, I'm a big fan. However, I really prefer the old 3 screw style and I own several 3 screw Blackhawks and Super Blackhawks. I do own a couple New Model BHs as well.

As for custom handguns, I use the 1911 as my platform. I'm fortunate enough to own some full custom models from several of the best smiths and builders in the world. I love every one of them.

 

[dayman]

How often do long winded forum arguments make either party look good?
I'm sure you're both big-time expert collectors.

One of you likes one thing, another likes another.

As far as Korths go, I imagine - like all expensive things - they're worth it if you want one more than you want the money it costs to own one, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[newfrontier45]

However, I really prefer the old 3 screw style and I own several 3 screw Blackhawks and Super Blackhawks. I do own a couple New Model BHs as well.

I prefer them as well and it's getting worse. I find the Old Model action to be much smoother and a crisp 2lb trigger is easy to obtain. I've got a late `60's .357 that's destined to become a .38-40 or .45ACP and last year I picked up a peach of a `58 .357 flat-top. I'd love to have an Old Model Super shortened and converted to a Bisley. Haven't been able to bring myself to spend the money for one of the new .44Spl's because I'd rather have another custom Old Model.

My comment was attempting to say "lets look at the great strong points of a Korth, before we analyze something that is much easier to attain."

I appreciate the way these guns are built and understand fully what it all means. Surely more than you know. Same for Freedom Arms and I absolutely adore single actions. My point is that I do not care how meticulously they are built, how accurate they are or how long they last when I don't find them as attractive as a polished blue 586. Much less a Triple-Lock, Registered Magnum, 1950 Target or Colt New Service. By much the same token, I think Pythons are "attractive" but I wouldn't buy one of those either. I have no problem buying a $500 XD to leave in a vehicle because that IS just a tool. But we're not talking about tools. No sir, when I spend that much I want it all. I have to feel something when I look at it and if I don't, it's a mistake. If you think that makes me short-sighted, I don't care. Spend your money how you like and I'll do the same.

For the record, the Camaro vs Lambo (assuming new vs new, not vintage) was an analogy was to show that the Lambo is better in nearly every way, and so the Camaro should not be considered over a Lambo, nor should it be in the same conversation unless one does not care about the Lambo's superior traits. If the Camaro "looks better" and the person chose the Camaro over the Lambo, then that person should not have a Lambo at all, because everything the Lambo is about would be wasted on that person anyways. The Lambo is in a different class, and the "looks" you see are there for reasons other than "looks."

Better for what? Better for going around a track, absolutely. Better overall quality? It better be. Better for driving across the country? Probably not. Better for getting my blood pumping? Nope. I simply don't care for them and haven't lusted after them since I was a teenager. I don't care how well made they are or how fast they are. No appeal. I hate V-10's and don't want anything to do with a paddle shifter. I like big American V-8's and manual transmissions so yeah, I'd rather have the ZL1 Camaro with the all aluminum 6.2 with 550ft-lbs of torque than the Lamborghini and its screaming V-10 that you have to run the hell out of. Not to even mention ride quality. Like I've been trying to say, "better" ain't better if it ain't what you want. I'm not looking down my nose at them, they're amazing engineering marvels, just like Korth. They're just not for me. Now if you want to talk about Aston-Martins, that's a different story. They cost a bit less than Italian supercars but to me, they're infinitely more appealing.

 

[TennJed]

How often do long winded forum arguments make either party look good?

Ding, Ding. Ding, we have a winner

 

[Winchester_73]

Much less a Triple-Lock, Registered Magnum, 1950 Target or Colt New Service.

What is a "1950 target"? Do you mean a S&W 44 spl or 45 acp / 45 colt lightweight barrel target revolver? Just curious.

I appreciate the way these guns are built and understand fully what it all means. Surely more than you know.

I'll take that to mean, "I (you) appreciate them more than I (myself) give you credit for" rather than another assumption.

How often do long winded forum arguments make either party look good?
I'm sure you're both big-time expert collectors.

One of you likes one thing, another likes another.

I guess that about sums it up. However, I'm not arrogant enough to call myself an expert. I also despise self proclaimed "experts" even if some of you think sometimes I come off that way. Every time I see the word "expert", I'm reminded of what Bernard Levine, an expert of knives, esp vintage knives once stated:

An expert has 4 qualifications. That person is an expert because:

1) They know what they know
2) They know what they DO NOT know
3) They know the difference (between #1 and #2)
4) When they don't know, they know who to ask or where to get the info.

I've always liked that definition of "expert."

Better for what? Better for going around a track, absolutely. Better overall quality? It better be. Better for driving across the country? Probably not. Better for getting my blood pumping? Nope. I simply don't care for them and haven't lusted after them since I was a teenager. I don't care how well made they are or how fast they are. No appeal. I hate V-10's and don't want anything to do with a paddle shifter. I like big American V-8's and manual transmissions so yeah, I'd rather have the ZL1 Camaro with the all aluminum 6.2 with 550ft-lbs of torque than the Lamborghini and its screaming V-10 that you have to run the hell out of. Not to even mention ride quality. Like I've been trying to say, "better" ain't better if it ain't what you want. I'm not looking down my nose at them, they're amazing engineering marvels, just like Korth. They're just not for me.

I actually like American V8s myself, but most of them are not in the supercar class. We have different tastes, but its not a reason we can't love each other. That's my opinion anyways, and I'm stickin to it!

 

[newfrontier45]

I'll take that to mean, "I (you) appreciate them more than I (myself) give you credit for"....

That is how I meant it.


I would never call myself an expert either and wouldn't respect anyone who did. There's a hell of a lot I don't know and haven't done and I recognize that. The experts are the ones that write the books, I just read them.

 

[Winchester_73]

I would never call myself an expert either and wouldn't respect anyone who did. There's a hell of a lot I don't know and haven't done and I recognize that. The experts are the ones that write the books, I just read them.

Well hey, while we are on the subject of books, what books have you gotten on revolvers or pistols in the last year? You mention you've spent a lot on them in the last year or so. I myself am looking for the Bob Best book on the Colt DA revolvers. I also just got the S&W American Model by Pate, which I like so far.

 

[newfrontier45]

I managed to practically steal a signed copy of Bruce McDowell's book "A Study of Colt Conversions and Other Percussion Revolvers" for $60, still sealed in plastic, which usually goes for over $200.

Walter Smith's book "Pistols & Revolvers".

"Shooting" by J.H. Fitzgerald.

"Magnum: the S&W .357 Magnum Phenomenon" by Timothy Mullin.

A leatherbound version of Ed McGivern's book.

Skeeter Skelton's "Good Friends, Good Guns & Good Whiskey".

Mike Venturino's "Shooting Sixguns of the Old West".

Walter Winan's "The Modern Pistol and How to Shoot It".

Charles Suydam's "U.S. Cartridges and Their Handguns 1795-1975".

Mark Hampton's "Handgun Hunting".

Tim Mullin's "Handbook of Handguns: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Military, Police, Sporting and Personal-Defense Pistols".

"Big Bore Revolvers" by Max Prasac.

"Fine Colts: The Dr. Joseph A. Murphy collection" by R.L. Wilson.

"Black Powder Long Arms & Pistols: Reproductions & Replicas" by Dennis Adler.

Plus a bunch on history, Indian beadwork, leatherworking, politics and ancient philosophy. Now if I can just find the time to read them all.

 

[newfrontier45]

What is a "1950 target"?

A pre-model 24.

 

[Winchester_73]

What is a "1950 target"?

A pre-model 24.

They were also in 45 colt or 45 acp, and were the pre 26, with the lightweight taper barrel. The model 1955, aka pre model 25 were the heavy barrel variants, in 45 colt or 45 acp.

 

[PzGren]

This thread has just ever so slightly veered away from "Korth Firearms" over the last two pages.

Winchester 73,

I have previously admired the quality of your gun collection. I am impressed by the selection and knowledge that went into building up your collection, making it more than a mere accumulation of guns.

I had shot Korth revolvers owned by affluent friends a long time ago and it took me over two decades to find mine and I found it for a laughable price. When I compare the quality of my 1969 Korth to the quality of the few registered Magnum that I had inspected and handled, there are still differences. The Korth has the trigger on a bearing, making the characteristics absolutely unique. The bluing is very wear resistent and the metal finish is flawless inside and out. I would give a slight advantage to my early Korth, over the registered Magnums. Unfortunately I do not call one my own and my love for K-frames will probably preclude me from that investment.