Opinion of Smith & Wesson?
- Thread starter duucfho
- Start date
Crankylove
New member
Never owned a Smith myself, but there are about a dozen in the family that I have shot a bit. Most of these pistols are 10+ years old minimum, with a couple from the 50's, but nothing newer than my bothers no-lock .357 purchased in '02-03. Over all, I find them to be well made, accurate, and have a good fit and finish. I have fired my family's .44 Mags, 357 Mags, .22 lr, in just about every frame size they made, and found no real faults with them. That said..........I still prefer my Rugers for dollar for dollar quality.
no problems with my smithsThe name Smith & Wesson is an internationaly recognised name
And as such is beyond the petty bickering going on here. What we feel about the decisions made by the people owning the name in the past should be left in the past.
I own several, currently, have owned more in the past. I don't care for the locks, I prefer the pinned & recessed revolvers. My son has one of the new 1911s, and while it isn't a colt, it is a fine gun.
Yes, the current owners of S&W should man up and admit the previous owners screwed us. And they should do something with that hideous Hillary hole (like move it where you don't see it, like other gunmakers)
I'll bet if they did that, things would go a lot better for them.
And as such is beyond the petty bickering going on here. What we feel about the decisions made by the people owning the name in the past should be left in the past.
I own several, currently, have owned more in the past. I don't care for the locks, I prefer the pinned & recessed revolvers. My son has one of the new 1911s, and while it isn't a colt, it is a fine gun.
Yes, the current owners of S&W should man up and admit the previous owners screwed us. And they should do something with that hideous Hillary hole (like move it where you don't see it, like other gunmakers)
I'll bet if they did that, things would go a lot better for them.
Recoiljunkie44
New member
SO crazy buck Im sure what you meant when you said your smiths would drive tacks is you held it by the barrel and use the bottom of the grip to drive tacks in! So you have a very expensive hammer! I would rather go to the store and buy a hammer than get a smith!!!!
I had a 686 nearly 20 years ago, it was a great gun, but since then management has changed several times and beancounters , not gun lovers run the company now.Chuxk Hawks doesn't really care for them now.http://www.chuckhawks.com/smith-wesson_dark.htm
Poll seems to be heavily in favor of S&W
and by the way, what does a category "never owned one and loved it" mean?
I don't get that one.
If I never read the book, or saw the movie, my opinion on how good they are really doesn't carry much weight, now does it.
That being said, I don't own any Glocks. But I know people who do, and I have shot them, more than a bit. And that's why I don't own any!
and by the way, what does a category "never owned one and loved it" mean?
I don't get that one.
If I never read the book, or saw the movie, my opinion on how good they are really doesn't carry much weight, now does it.
That being said, I don't own any Glocks. But I know people who do, and I have shot them, more than a bit. And that's why I don't own any!
earlthegoat2
New member
Make mine pre lock,
If this thread was specifically about newer ones I would have voted for Taurus.
If this thread was specifically about newer ones I would have voted for Taurus.
edward hogan
New member
Every S&W I have ever owned has been superb!
I don't know about any models with integral gun lock device; would never buy one that had such a feature, or any weapon.
Arguably the finest revolvers ever made.
The model 41 and 52 are two of the finest target autoloaders ever made.
Never got into their centerfire autoloaders; there were always Colts for those purposes in my life...
Have been thinking about getting a 460 S&W, but only because I like the Casull ctg so much.
I don't know about any models with integral gun lock device; would never buy one that had such a feature, or any weapon.
Arguably the finest revolvers ever made.
The model 41 and 52 are two of the finest target autoloaders ever made.
Never got into their centerfire autoloaders; there were always Colts for those purposes in my life...
Have been thinking about getting a 460 S&W, but only because I like the Casull ctg so much.
Sigh, It's threads like this that seem to bring out the worst S&W-hating trolls (not naming any names as not everyone dislikes S&W is a troll, but I think everyone knows who they are). The company that made the infamous Clinton agreement was severely boycotted and forced to sell the company for a fraction of what they paid for it. Apparently though, that's not good enough for some people. I guess they want D.B. Wesson to rise from the grave just to commit ritualistic suicide in pennance for the sins of his heirs or some other such nonsense. Perhaps this isn't clear enough: S&W is owned by a completely different company which can do absolutely nothing about the Clinton agreement. Refusing to buy and discouraging others from buying a current S&W product does absolutely nothing to punish Bill Clinton, Tompkins PLC, Sarah Brady, or D.B. Wesson's ghost.
Secondly, we have the issue of the lock. If you dislike it because you think it's ugly or because its presence somehow represents the decay of intelligence in western society, fine, you're entitled to that opinion. However, please don't try to make the lock into a reliability issue that it is not. While lock failure is certainly not impossible, I've yet to see more than a handfull of documented lock failures, certainly not enough to represent any significant number when compared to overall production. As a matter of fact, I've seen many more failures of both new and older S&W revolvers due to problems not related to the lock than I have lock failures. Of the few documented failures I've seen, the majority seem to be limited to lightweight scandium revolvers shooting hard-recoiling magnum ammunition. So, if you don't feel comfortable owning or depending on a S&W because of the very minute chance that the lock may fail you, fine, you're entitled to that opinion as well. Just please don't make it out to be something it isn't.
Secondly, we have the issue of the lock. If you dislike it because you think it's ugly or because its presence somehow represents the decay of intelligence in western society, fine, you're entitled to that opinion. However, please don't try to make the lock into a reliability issue that it is not. While lock failure is certainly not impossible, I've yet to see more than a handfull of documented lock failures, certainly not enough to represent any significant number when compared to overall production. As a matter of fact, I've seen many more failures of both new and older S&W revolvers due to problems not related to the lock than I have lock failures. Of the few documented failures I've seen, the majority seem to be limited to lightweight scandium revolvers shooting hard-recoiling magnum ammunition. So, if you don't feel comfortable owning or depending on a S&W because of the very minute chance that the lock may fail you, fine, you're entitled to that opinion as well. Just please don't make it out to be something it isn't.
The only S&W I have tried was the Model 10, and I love it. Never tried anything they have offered in semi auto, or anything of their other revolvers. Funny part is that I have ALWAYS considered S&W quality for revolvers, and Colt for Semi autos, and never the two shall mix. I don't know why.
Edit:To fully flesh it out...
S&W made revolvers
Colt made semi autos
Ithaca made shotguns
and Remington made rifles.
Edit:To fully flesh it out...
S&W made revolvers
Colt made semi autos
Ithaca made shotguns
and Remington made rifles.
Last edited:
Recoiljunkie44
New member
I wouldn't mine owning a Dan Wesson because at least its finely something inovative! unlike the 100 plus years of smith medoicracy! Give me a w 15 over a 686 anytime !
I've seen more S&W revolvers rendered inoperable, locked up as it were, by their internal locks (three in the last three years) than I've seen K-frame magnums with cracked forcing cones in 39 years (one, this year).
Yet it seems every thread on K-frame magnums here has at least one respondent (if not three) who cautions that K-frames are not meant to be shot with 357 ammo. Soo....K-frame magnum forcing cones are an issue, but IL's are not?
You like IL Safety Wessons? Good for you. Buy all you can. There are PLENTY available. Just don't pee down my back and tell me its raining. Regards 18DAI.
Yet it seems every thread on K-frame magnums here has at least one respondent (if not three) who cautions that K-frames are not meant to be shot with 357 ammo. Soo....K-frame magnum forcing cones are an issue, but IL's are not?
You like IL Safety Wessons? Good for you. Buy all you can. There are PLENTY available. Just don't pee down my back and tell me its raining. Regards 18DAI.