Would you buy a NIB Smith and Wesson Revolver today? I have a chance to pick up a new model 64 and I was wondering if it was worth my time and money. Dose Ruger and Taurus make a better revolver today then S&W? I know that S&W use MIM parts but I have read and talked to enough people that say that MIM parts aren't all that bad. What's your two cents on on S&W revolvers today?
S&W--Hey or Ney?
- Thread starter Allist816
- Start date
- Status
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
No.
Everyone uses MIM parts, or something very similar.
Even Ruger & Tarui.
Everything on a Ruger except the cylinder & barrel are cast steel parts.
I think todays S&W are more accurate then they have ever been in the good old days due to better tooling then they had then.
The finish & grips aren't as pleasing though.
But just like a Ford or Chevy or a Ruger or a Tauri, they have to make 10% of them on Monday morning too.
Still in all, good older Model 64's aren't that hard to find at very attractive prices.
rc
Lucky Derby
Member
Personally I will not buy a new S&W until that stupid, ugly, unsafe lock is done away with.
As far as current production DA revolvers go, the Rugers are the best IMHO.
As far as current production DA revolvers go, the Rugers are the best IMHO.
medalguy
Member
What he said.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
How many S&W lock failures have you had yourself, or personally seen happen to someone else?
If it was even 1/10th of one percent as bad as the Internet would have you believe, S&W would have their doors nailed shut by personal injury lawsuits from people getting shot in gunfights because the lock failed.
It's much ado about nothing.
I don't like the hole in the side of the gun either.
But it's that, or S&W would have been history by now because they could not sell guns in their biggest markets at the time it was introduced.
rc
If it was even 1/10th of one percent as bad as the Internet would have you believe, S&W would have their doors nailed shut by personal injury lawsuits from people getting shot in gunfights because the lock failed.
It's much ado about nothing.
I don't like the hole in the side of the gun either.
But it's that, or S&W would have been history by now because they could not sell guns in their biggest markets at the time it was introduced.
rc
oasis618
Member
What he said.
gwnorth
Member
My feeling is that Ruger's are every bit as good as any current S&W. It's why I have a pair of GP100's and not a cuurent production 686. The 686 is just greatly overpriced for a gun that may be an equal to a GP100 but certainly is not superior to it.
Publius1688
Member
I recently bought a in box-new 442 as a concealed carry piece.
It was a decent buy, and I reasonably pleased with it, but it in no way whatsoever compares with my vintage S&W's.
It was a decent buy, and I reasonably pleased with it, but it in no way whatsoever compares with my vintage S&W's.
Lucky Derby
Member
Personally had lock failures-none-because I will have nothing to do with them.
Personally seen lock failures-one-A man shooting next to me at the range with a lightwieght J frame of some sort.
OP asked for our opinion of the New S&W-I gave him mine. If you wish to purchase one, carry one, recommend them to others, do as you see fit.
YMMV.
Personally seen lock failures-one-A man shooting next to me at the range with a lightwieght J frame of some sort.
OP asked for our opinion of the New S&W-I gave him mine. If you wish to purchase one, carry one, recommend them to others, do as you see fit.
YMMV.
i spoke with one of the foremost S&W revolver tuners about the MIM included in the new S&Ws before getting a M66-6, LE trade-in
His take on it was that the guns with MIM in the action were smoother and better fitted, in general, than recent non-MIM S&Ws.
I was really taken with the new style engraving on the barrel shroud, but the two-part barrel looked very interesting
His take on it was that the guns with MIM in the action were smoother and better fitted, in general, than recent non-MIM S&Ws.
I was really taken with the new style engraving on the barrel shroud, but the two-part barrel looked very interesting
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
Smith & Wesson still leads the way, for most factory production firearms~! 
Thanks for the replies. I was unaware of the problems with the lock on the revolvers. Is this more of a J-frame problem or are all the revolvers at risk? You know it seems like there is so much negative feed back when it comes to new firearms these days ( mostly with American guns ) it almost makes me not want to buy anything new. I don't really like to buy used because the gun stores where I live don't have a real big selection and most of them have some flaws with the fit and finish. I also don't like to order off the internet because you don't always know what your getting. It's hard to tell by the pics the sellers put out what shape the gun is in. What's a man to do.
Publius1688
Member
Hang out a gunshops! A 586 or 686 will follow you home before you know it.
Grey Morel
Member
Rugers copious use of investment casing was a great idea... in the 1960's.
These days, every machine ship in the developed world has a CNC machine. Investment casting makes very little sense beyond small internal parts.
You also have to be specific about how far back you consider "recent". My 19 and 36 are nearly 30 years old now... No noticeable difference in quality from my NEW 629.
I would buy, and plan to buy, several more new S&W guns - The 310 Night Guard and 48 Classic are at the top of my list. Believe it or not, I'm not worried about the lock.
These days, every machine ship in the developed world has a CNC machine. Investment casting makes very little sense beyond small internal parts.
You also have to be specific about how far back you consider "recent". My 19 and 36 are nearly 30 years old now... No noticeable difference in quality from my NEW 629.
I would buy, and plan to buy, several more new S&W guns - The 310 Night Guard and 48 Classic are at the top of my list. Believe it or not, I'm not worried about the lock.
hardluk1
member
Get a shotgun news and look for the model 64's they have in there. Ex security guns with DA only . Carried alot but shot very little. Great buys for less than 260 bucks + just a transfer fee. That should not be more than 10%.
S&W uses MIM, Ruger uses investment casting. The material, machining and heat treating probably make more difference than how the formed, but unfinished part is made. I like both the cast parts Ruger uses and the MIM that S&W uses. The cast parts are through hardened, smooth up nicely to provide a very nice trigger pull and typically don’t require much fitting to replace things like the hand. MIM also seem to me to be harder than the older parts that were forged. They are also, in my experience, just a little rougher, and a little harder to smooth up than the forged and case hardened parts, but when they are smoothed up, they provide a better, longer lasting trigger action than the forged parts. Most of my newer guns have the MIM parts and I work all of them and when I am done, they have very nice triggers.
I have heard that Ruger has changed their processes for making cylinders, but I don’t know any details. I have also read that when S&W changed to CNC production techniques for cylinders, they significantly improved the quality and consistency of the cylinders. I think good cylinders have a lot more effect on revolver accuracy than MIM or investment cast internal parts.
I am very pleased with all my Ruger and S&W revos. After breaking in the barrels, all have been very accurate. I also measure the chamber throats on all of them with pin gages to see the size and chamber to chamber consistency. All the newer stuff is very good, while the older Ruger single actions in .45 Colt tended to be tight and benefitted from reaming the throats.
I have heard that Ruger has changed their processes for making cylinders, but I don’t know any details. I have also read that when S&W changed to CNC production techniques for cylinders, they significantly improved the quality and consistency of the cylinders. I think good cylinders have a lot more effect on revolver accuracy than MIM or investment cast internal parts.
I am very pleased with all my Ruger and S&W revos. After breaking in the barrels, all have been very accurate. I also measure the chamber throats on all of them with pin gages to see the size and chamber to chamber consistency. All the newer stuff is very good, while the older Ruger single actions in .45 Colt tended to be tight and benefitted from reaming the throats.
It depends on a number of things, including first of all; what is the seller's out-the-door price??
I don't buy the commonly stated belief that new tooling makes perfect parts, because we see too many posts and threads started by folks that just bought a new gun, found it was defective, and are sending it back for repairs. Clearly if all of the new-age parts are perfect then all of the guns should be too...
The model 64 is a fairly common one, and unless you want to spend the money for a new one (that I presume will become used in short order) I'd save some money by looking for an excellent condition older revolver, but then - the asking price may be too good to turn down. Take your choice.
Were all of the older guns perfect then?? Of course not, but they didn't make claims of perfect perfection on account of new tooling.
I don't buy the commonly stated belief that new tooling makes perfect parts, because we see too many posts and threads started by folks that just bought a new gun, found it was defective, and are sending it back for repairs. Clearly if all of the new-age parts are perfect then all of the guns should be too...
The model 64 is a fairly common one, and unless you want to spend the money for a new one (that I presume will become used in short order) I'd save some money by looking for an excellent condition older revolver, but then - the asking price may be too good to turn down. Take your choice.
Were all of the older guns perfect then?? Of course not, but they didn't make claims of perfect perfection on account of new tooling.
The MIM parts don't bother me. It's the internal lock on the S&W revolvers that worry me. I asked my local gunsmith if they could remove it but he said they couldn't. If I knew that I wouldn't have any problems with the lock I would buy the 64 as soon as I could, but I could just see buying one where the lock is going to be a problem. I mean really how often dose the lock mess up on these guns? Some people say almost never while some say it's happened to them and have seen it happen to others.
If the lock is your only concern I wouldn't worry (even though I won't buy a S&W revolver that is so equipped). What the gunsmith was really saying was that he wouldn't because of potential liability, not that he couldn't.
If you use the Search feature (to the right/green bar at top of page) and the search term "internal lock" you will find much more then you ever wanted to know, including how to disable the lock.
Personally I wouldn't bother, but then I don't buy guns that have them anyway,
If you use the Search feature (to the right/green bar at top of page) and the search term "internal lock" you will find much more then you ever wanted to know, including how to disable the lock.
Personally I wouldn't bother, but then I don't buy guns that have them anyway,
glocking26
Member
I have bought and sold *a lot *of the newer S+W guns over the the years and everyone was a disappointment. I love all my older S+W guns. The fit and finish are great. I sold off my last newer one and will never buy another. It's not just me go over to the Smith & Wesson forum and read about all the recalls and parts breaking. It pains me to write this but the newer S+W guns suck.
Sorry Guys I just had to vent. *
Sorry Guys I just had to vent. *
gwnorth
Member
That's funny. You make it should like machining is somehow a replacement for the casting process, or that Ruger never machines it's cast steel parts.If investment casting is so arcane and outdated, why do so many manufacters still use it? From the aerospace industry to many other gun makers (cast frames are really pretty common in autoloaders, as are cast receivers in sporting rifles and shotguns). Nothing inherently inferior about cast parts, big or small, simple or complex.
TexasGunbie
Member
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2010
- Messages
- 270
I wish I have a SW so I can answer your question.
The only revolver I have is a Ruger Sp101, and I absolutely love it. I don't understand all these talks about the cast steel or other preparation methods, but from what I have shot through my Ruger, I am 100 percent confident in it.
I think it would be good investment to buy a Ruger revolver because you know a jewel like that will go up in price soon or later. One of these days the reputation may be on par with SW and you won't be able to pick up a cheap one anymore.
-Gunbie!
The only revolver I have is a Ruger Sp101, and I absolutely love it. I don't understand all these talks about the cast steel or other preparation methods, but from what I have shot through my Ruger, I am 100 percent confident in it.
I think it would be good investment to buy a Ruger revolver because you know a jewel like that will go up in price soon or later. One of these days the reputation may be on par with SW and you won't be able to pick up a cheap one anymore.
-Gunbie!
harmon rabb
Member
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2009
- Messages
- 2,699
I bought a nice shiny new 442. It had quite possibly the worst trigger to ever (dis)grace a handgun, in the history of the world. I think even the DA pull on my pos nagant 1895 revolver is better. It made the gun unshootable. I mean, the gun functioned flawlessly at the range, but accuracy was horrific due to that trigger.
God rid of it and got a SP101 and couldn't be happier. Much better trigger (yes, in DA as well). The j-frame wasn't really suitable for pocket carry anyway, and a proper gun belt hides the extra weight of the SP101 easily enough. I also have a GP100 that I like, but think I like the SP101 more actually.
Smith makes an 8-shot .357 that's pretty tempting though..
God rid of it and got a SP101 and couldn't be happier. Much better trigger (yes, in DA as well). The j-frame wasn't really suitable for pocket carry anyway, and a proper gun belt hides the extra weight of the SP101 easily enough. I also have a GP100 that I like, but think I like the SP101 more actually.
Smith makes an 8-shot .357 that's pretty tempting though..
- Status