What Is Your LEAST favorite Smith & Wesson "modern day" handgun?

A

Ala Dan

Member in memoriam
Greetings & Best Wishes To All:

Gentlemen, and ladies too we have discussed
many subject's and various topics here on
TFL in the past; now I would like to know
your feelings concerning your LEAST favorite
Smith & Wesson "modern day" handgun? For me,
there aren't many; but one stands out in particular. That being the Smith & Wesson
Sigma .380 caliber. When first introduced,
it was advertised as "the throw away gun";
in other words, when you put 2,500 rounds
thru it toss it in the nearest trash pile
and go purchase another one. :eek: I would
like to know your opinion on any other
"undesirable" Smith & Wesson handgun? All
replie's are certainly welcome. :)

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

Message edited by Dan H. Ford on 02-11-00
 
This just shows that you can`t teach an old dog etc. I went through the S&W Instructors Course over 20 years ago. At the time, the only autos they had were the 39 and the 59. I never liked them even though I had a 39 for awhile. I like their revolvers having carried the M&P my whole career and won`t even consider a Smith auto. Weird.
 
Any present mfg Smith and Wesson revolver.
Older square frame, are wonderful, but the new round frame style are just awful. Thankfully there were many of the older style made, and a lot of them show up on the market at very reasonable prices. I've tried 2 of the newer ones, a 617 and a 66, and traded them both away. The upside to the situation is the number of really pristine 6 shot Model 19's that abound. A lot of people are shedding their 6 shot for the newer models and/or an auto. I see more and more of the older ones turn up, used, but in many cases unfired, because their previous owner(s') wanted something a bit more modern.
 
Least favorite....

Any S&W auto loader since the Model 39. The 39 is the only one they ever made that felt comfortable in my hand. I use one in IDPA Stock Service Pistol class.
I feel that the only thing that killed off the 39 is everyone wanted high capacity magazines.

S&W revolvers. I love them all. The "N" frames are difficult for me to fire accurately in fast double action, but the "K" and "L" frames are great.
I don't care for the round butt models, but there are conversion grips out there that fill in the grip.

Neil Casper
 
I don't care much for their giant 45.. DAO and OR their full-size Sigma Series. Believe it or not, the Sigma .380 ACP is the only one I find somewhat reasonable simply due to it's size and weight.

But some of my fav's are S&W also...
Ben

------------------
AOL IM: BenK911
ICQ # 53788523
"Gun Control Is Being Able To Hit Your Target"
 
The 317 airweight .22 revolver!
My best friend has one. I love it's size and weight, but that is about all. He left me shoot it at the local range. The double action trigger pull is terrible! It was too long and felt like 50 lbs. I tried the single action, but the hammer is small and hard to pull back quickly. I have heard that the "Lady Smith" 317 addressed these problems, but I have not seen one. Also the 3" "kit gun" is supposed to be better. Smith and Wesson has this tiny gun listed as a self defense gun. I find that it has more problems than "just being a .22! "
CALVIN
" want MORE gun control? use BOTH hands! "
 
S---y looking plastic
I'm nuts to even consider buying one
G-----m pieces of cheap trash
My @$$ that a real gun!
A total waste of time and money
 
I like the Sigma .380! It's inexpensive, snag-free, light, easy to shoot, and a great fit for my hand (for a small pistol). I wouldn't choose one as my one and only handgun, but it's a good fit for its niche.

My least favorite S&W: The 2.5" 686. Why put such a stubby barrel on a heavy-framed revolver with adjustable sights? If it were a 3" barrel with fixed sights I'd be much happier.
 
Bulldozer, come'on now, tell us how you really feel!?
My brother and I are members at the S&W National Firearms Training Center in Sprinfield, MA and we shoot at their range regularly: both handguns and rifles. It is a top-shelf, professional operation. One of the neatest things at the range is we can shoot anything S&W has to sell. It's like going into Home Depot and trying out any tool on their shelf under actual conditions. You name it and you can fire it. I can say that I like their tactical line of weapons but they are pricey. I don't like any of the composite weapons. The trigger pull must be 10 pounds! It is high because it doesn't have a "regular" safety. I don't care, particulary, for revolvers although the .44 Magnum is just a piece of awe inspiring firepower. One warning shot from that gun would stop anybody in their tracks. In particular, however, I owned a S&W "Valueline" model 410 .40 cal. SA. Recently, in March issue of Combat Handguns, they reviewed this gun with three others. They loved it as a ccw. I'll tell you that I traded it in after 8 months. I'm not the worlds best shot but I defy anyone to keep all the rounds in the black at 75'. The gun would be fine for close up encounters, but anything past that might as well run in a straight line. For $410, you can buy much, much better weapon. Brand new, if you shook the gun side to side you could hear the barrel banging back and forth in the receiver! They should just fold that "valueline" up and concentrate on reducing the cost of their tactical line. I did get to shoot a limited edition,$1800 customized tactical .40 and my scores improved immediatly. So much for saying it's all the shooter and not the gun.
Rome
 
Among S&W autos I'm sorry to say that the only ones I like nowadays are the high-dollar ones (3913, 4006, 4506, etc.), which are closest to the traditional models in design, workmanship, and materials, and that, of course, I can no longer afford. The rest of S&W's current line of autos just doesn't interest me.

I have mixed feelings about the revolvers. I think they're basically good guns. But I'm not sure their quality control is what that it should be, and I don't care for the cast marks on the new hammers.

As for the Sigma .380, well--after how many years?--I still haven't adjusted to the fact that it's made by Smith & Wesson. ;)

[This message has been edited by jimmy (edited February 11, 2000).]
 
Smith and Wesson model SW9M - a compact blow-back 9mm pistol. I fired 14 rounds of Winchester Silvertip and the darn thing broke. Sent it to S&W and they fixed it, but I traded it in on another gun.

I will likely never buy a Smith auto again.
 
25 years ago there used to be a saying: "If you want a revolver buy a S&W, if you want a semi-auto buy a Colt." Things have changed. I still think that S&W make the best revolvers but I don't have anything specifically bad to say about Ruger and Colt. Colt was never, in my opinion, the only semi-auto maker to buy from. My Browning HP in 9mm was a great gun and one I truly regret selling. I don't feel that way about a Colt Commander in 9mm that I eventually sold.

Oh yeah your original question. I don't like the new super light Titanium 38 J-frames. I've never fired one but know the physics and wouldn't want to fire a +P 38 in such a light frame. The old J-frame 36s and 49s are still the best for a belly gun. I have never owned or fired any of the S&W semi-autos. I'm not sure why. I find that the reliability of my H&K and Glock semis preempt me from trying an S&W especially when prices are comparable. I recently checked out a 40VE(I think that's the model number) and was pleased with how it felt in my hand and that the DAO felt quite decent especially since I learned to shoot revolvers first. The problem is that I've heard too many mixed opinions to spring for this even though this used one I saw was only $240.

------------------
 
I have to give my vote to the gun I'm holding right now: a 4516. A friend of mine sent it with me to a gun shop to see what they'd give for it because he didn't like it either. I even had it in the car at the shooting range the other night and I had absolutely no desire to shoot this ergonomics nightmare (and I shoot a CZ52!). If the other Smith's are like this, I really don't see the point. This thing is too big for CC and too small to be accurate (esp in .45), the grips might fit in SOMEONE'S hands, but not mine (the 2x4 reference above is very accurate). It seems to be a pretty well-made gun, but I don't think it was designed for humans...
 
Funny--the other day I was thinking how odd it was that in 40 years of pistol shooting (including law enforcement and instruction) I have never cared for any S&W semiauto, shot as few as I could manage, and been consistently underwhelmed by them. OTOH, ugly as Glocks are, I would carry one tomorrow without hesitation. Now when it comes to wheelguns, S&W has made some world class stuff and the list is long. (Excepting L and N frame snubbies!)

------------------
 
317 DA trigger...what a waste of an otherwise great idea.

Current budget line of .22 autoloaders...fire 50 rounds through them and the fouling will keep them from going into battery.

I actually likes and shot well with the old 59.

My main gripe with S&W autoloaders are the magazine disconnect and nasty DA triggers. They do have nice sights and seemingly robust construction.
 
I want to say "what Rae said", but S&W revolvers have a small loyal fan club.

Robert Foote points out that S&W has made some world class wheel guns.

I have had the opportunity to buy some S&Ws at fine prices at my local gunshop, but no way! Have any of the new models got the transfer bar yet? I mean that little firing pin! I have seen several broken in the showcase.

Can somebody enlighten me on this?
 
I have a dislike for those two tone Titanium? airweight models. I guess I really don't care for any two tone guns like that.
I own 2 Smiths and their older ones, Those I liked when I bought them and still do today.

Happy Shooting :)

------------------
Help Stamp Out Gun Ignorance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top