What's the real deal with older S&W revolvers?

H

Handy

Moderator
Every once in awhile I get the urge to buy a DA revolver. Mainly, my interest is in having a nice example fine metal work, trigger and finish that shoots good groups. So any old .38 would be fine - no ported magnum needed. And it might as well be something not so expensive.

The problem is that, after reading this board and talking to people, I can't tell what constitutes a "good" gun.

For instance, I've been told that an 80 year old M&P might be just the item, being chock full of "old world" workmanship. But then I'll hear, when inquiring about WWII era .45 ACP revolvers, that the steel isn't modern enough (whatever that means), and these guns can't take much shooting!

So maybe those real old ones are out. How about a model 10? You hear about recessed cylinders and all sort of other niceties that the newer guns lack. But as soon as someone brings those up, everybody else jumps in with how much better and more accurate the newer guns are.


I really don't understand how a 90 year old Colt 1911 is said to still be comparable to the best materials used in autos, but older revolvers can't take much shooting with low pressure .45 ACP rounds? Obviously, personal preference plays into alot of the arguing on revolver eras, but there has to be some middle ground.

As for the new stuff, my brother owned a new model 60 for about a year - we were both dramatically unimpressed. Revolvers are suppposed to be more accurate than a typical auto, not less. (And yes, we both know how to shoot and tried different loads.) My uncles unidentified older blued S&W .357 was a tack driver, though.


Anyway, what model and caliber typifies the best ratio of quality to price for someone looking for a good example of a DA wheelgun? Thanks.
 
From your other posts, I consider you able to read between the lines, Handy. A lot of the snobbery is just that. A pristine older S&W is a joy forever. But, no recessed cylinders on 38s, just maggies and .22s. Enjoy!
 
In this case, there are some many lines to read between, I can't tell.

Are you saying that ANY old S&W would hold up to use and shoot well?
 
To check out how good a relover is use this link.

If a revolver was used and not abused then the age doesn't matter. I have four C&R 38's: a 4" M&P; a 5" M&P; a 6" Colt New Service; and a 38/44. Each one shoots good groups and the 38/44 handles +P loads (which I don't use in the other 38s) without any noticeble increase in recoil.
 
I've had a lot of S&W revolver side plates off. The absolute best quality control is the current production. Just did a trigger job on a model 500 4" and there wasn't much in there that needed to be changed or cleaned up. Modern CNC machining is outstanding.
 
What's the deal ?

I have several Smith double action revolvers both old and new. I think that the shooting of double action revolvers is getting to be a lost art. So I work very hard at practice. Dry fire every day and 2-300 rounds a week at the range. The older moldel 10's like the 10-5 are just a joy to shoot. And the new modle 67 is one of the best 38 cal revolvers you can buy. I also shoot a 686 357cal with 2-1/2 barrel that has had the action done by the factory and it is one nice shooter. Any Smith 38cal in good shape should do you just fine. So go out and get the best one you can afford and shoot the h-ll out it and keep the art of double action shooting alive and well. Best, and good luck.
 
But then I'll hear, when inquiring about WWII era .45 ACP revolvers, that the steel isn't modern enough (whatever that means), and these guns can't take much shooting!"

5,000 rounds + through mine and counting, with no problems.

Who knows what the previous owners put through it.

A Model 10 will not have a recessed cylinder. Only magnums made before 1983, and rimfires, have recessed cylinders.
 
Handy,
First things first.

-What do you want a Smith for in the first place? (user or range gun?)

-What do you want to use it for? (Target HD hunting etc.)

-How well can you handle recoil? (magnums generate a lot of felt recoil)

-What calibers strike your fancy? ( I know you prefer a 9mm, but revolvers are a different breed - big bores can shoot real soft in a revolver - or they can be hell on wheels - the reverse is also true, a .357 can be very tame in a big N frame, but a wrist snapper in a snubbie)

-Do you reload? If not, are you willing to?

-Do you prefer blue? If so, do you prefer the older deeper blue on the older models? Or stainless? Or nickle?

-What sized hands do you have? ( I guess a good semi auto reference would be a K frame feels a lot like a Browning High Power as far as reaching the controls and heft)(N Frames would be more like a Beretta or some other large frame double stack)< - -not that they really fell the same, just that if you like a HP you'd probably feel comfortable with a K frame.

- What kind of a dollar figure are you trying to stay around?
 
Fit and finish was probably highest in the 1920s and 1930s. With low pressure cartridges like the .45 and .38 metallurgy is perhaps less critical, but WW2 (as did to a degree WW1) brought about significant advances in this regard. Perhaps some of the best revolvers (and pistols) then were made in this country in the late 1940s through until the 1960s. During and after the 1960s all kinds of pressures were brought upon industry and things have been more inconsistant during and since.

Personally, if I was shopping for a revolver that was representative of quality and workmanship I would look to one made in either of these two eras. If it is a pre-war item I would be inclined to look harder - and pay more - for a very little used example in exceptional condition. But again with cartridges like the .38 and .45, working pressures are low and as long as you look after the piece and aren't planning on shooting tens of thousands of rounds through it, you are unlikely to have it fall apart in your lifetime.
 
Part of the story about the older revolvers not being strong enough is that today a lot of shooters push the envelope. The older revolvers are just fine with standard loads, but when you factor in the age, the potential amount of usage it has been thru, and the higher pressures that shooters like to run today then some of them become suspect.
It's like having an all original 1930 car that could have been driven everyday and now expect to drive it 70mph for a few hours.
 
Majic, that's why I'm surprised that one would worry about the 1917 models. .45 ACP is a low pressure/low recoil round that is rarely loaded heavy, unlike the .38s and .44s that people used to push.

Thanks for all the input. The concensus seems to be that all the better known S&Ws were well built and provide much shooting with non-magnum loads.


I guess I just wait for a deal on a 1917, M&P or M10.
 
I'm surprised that one would worry about the 1917 models. .45 ACP is a low pressure/low recoil round
Click to expand...

Elmer Keith stated he shot the rifling out of several 1917s using ball, jacketed 45 ACP. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Elmer was using free ammo at Ogden Arsenal in Utah. He said lead bullets are the hot setup for these.
 
S&w

I have a 1917?S&W .45acp revolver, actually, it is marked "Brazilian Army, 1932", not in those words , of course, but in Portugese, all else is the same as the 1917 domestic model, it is a good shooter, not match quality, but as good as my old eyes can shoot, 2" at 25yds with 200gr cast swc at 815 fps, a nice , low recoil loading for this revolver.
230gr fmj at 900fps are about the same, just not quite as accurate, 2 1/2 to 3", using an arpeture I clip onto my glasses to clear up fuzzy sights for my 64 yr old eyes.
I do not believe there is much difference in the metalurgy from 1900 to the present time, there may be some minor differences, but SAAMI standards are pretty uniform and really unsafe [ black powder types] should use black powder, not smokeless.
Really, most American, and Western European guns made since about 1900 are decent, if they are more or less standard brands, of course, there were some really cheap trash guns , especially from Belgium, without proof marks that are to be avoided at all cost, or , no cost, just do not buy one!
 
This pretty nice 1917 has a fairly heavy trigger but smooth action. It's a service grade revolver with a decent but unremarkable finish.
1917.jpg

In the 1950s- 70s, these and the Colt 1917 were selling for less than $40.00 and several gunwriters started free associating about the "Poor Man's Magnum." The loads they were using even made it into the 1959 Speer Loading manual.
19173.jpg

Some shooters still go looking for this handbook and one or two others that list the loads. It was quite a while before information started coming out that these loads would occasionally blow up one of the revolvers. One writer admitted that his heavy handloads had fractured the cylinder on one. Other jems of knowledge went. " The .45 Acp Cartridge is peculiar in that the cases show no signs of pressure until the gun blows up."

Every now and then, a gunwriter will reprint the old heavy Unique and 2400 loads sometimes remarking that they should be reserved for the newer acp revolvers instead of the older ones.

Many shooters thought that the 38-44 level loads were ok for use or " limited use" in any .38 revolver you might have. These included the loads of P.O. Ackey and Elmer Keith though keith always specified they were suitable only in large frame revolvers. Nevertheless, a lot of older .38s absorbed the loads in the Speer Manual featuring 146-158 grain bullets and 10- 12 grains of 2400.

Some questionable sources said that there have been variations in metallurgy in the Smith revolvers and that they were sometimes made from scrap automobile metal. Whether this is true or the writers were trying to explain popped locking lugs or jugged forcing cones is not clear.
m&pltsidesml.jpg

m&pcoinssml.jpg

This one is from 1938 and I shoot it only with standard factory performance loads.

I shot quite a few of the Herc 2400/158 grain lead loads listed in Speer Number 3 without apparent damage to my 1948 version M&P and a K 38 from 1958- but I wouldn't do that anymore.
 
MEC: That was a great write-up. Better than most gun magazines offer, and funny. I like your sense of humor. And the illustrations! :cool:
 
Handy

From your post it sounds like a nice 1960s or 1970s Model 19 would make you happy. Excellent engineering, beautiful metalwork, gorgeous blue steel, well made... what else could you ask for? It would run you about $350 for a '60s and $250 for a '70s depending on where you live.

Here are my 19s:

IMG_2742.jpg


They are a joy.

scott
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top