Posted: 2/14/2005 12:28:31 PM EDT
|
I would like to say hello to all. I had a general S&W question and thought I would start here looking for some answers. Over the years I have owned and used S&W autos for duty and have often wondered (aside from politics) why most feel that they are useless compared to othe pistols for self deffense /duty/play? Have owned many over the years and have had no problems with them in reliability or accuracy. The only complaint is possibly weight. Ive carried a 4506 for over 5 years and have never had a FTF/FTE. Recently picked up a Sig 220/45 for something not as heavy. Anyone give me a good opinion? Thanks for your time. http://pic14.picturetrail.com/VOL524/1784448/3435384/60137021.jpg |
|
Most of them...for me...feel like a brick and point like a quart milk bottle. They also utilize obscelescent technology...as in they are still hand fitted. They also use magazine safties and are simply not capable of firing the numbers of trouble free rounds that, say, Sigs or Berettas or Glocks can do. No flame, they are certainly better than some, but not better than...or even equal to...the top-line european guns in my experience. My favorite S&W auto is the M1076 and it was a dismal failure. Sad but true. 
|
|
Well thank you for your opinion. Not taking anyones opinion as a flame. I agree on the comparison to some degree. The last 2 Smith's I have caried, the 4506 and 645 have giving me nothing but confidence over the years. I am in the process of transitioning to Sig 220. http://pic14.picturetrail.com/VOL524/1784448/3435384/42491459.jpg |
|
I've never had a problem with an S&W auto. I've had a 4566 TSW for 3 years now and my carry option is a 50/50 split between the Smith and my Glock 30. I like 1911s, SIGs and others, but the Smith is my main choice because: 1. It only cost $500, slightly used. I can beat the hell out of it or break it, and not feel bad. 2. I had a gun with a light rail before they were popular. 3. It came stock with a slimline grip, something that costs mucho dinero in 1911s. 4. The ambidextrous safety doesn't snag or break like 1911s do. 5. It come from the factory with a trigger job, unlike my 1911s. 6. Also came with Trijicon night sights, unlike my 1911s. 7. I like single stack magazines. Drawbacks? It isn't always easy to find a holster. Smaller manufacturers like Cen-Dex and Desantis don't fit holsters for many S&W autos. There's nothing quite like the feel of a 1911 in the hand, but after f*ing up my $1500+ Gunsite Service Pistol, I'll never carry anything that expensive again. In a time of crisis I might reach for it, but I cannot allow it to be beat to hell with daily carry. I like Glocks, too, but it's $600 for a Glock 21 that doesn't have slim grips, single stack mags, night sights (I have to special order that from my dealer), or a smooth trigger. And, unlike the 1911, no amount of work can be done on a Glock to make the trigger smooth. It's all for the best, though. Police contracts will keep S&W making auto pistols, and their lack of popularity with the public makes them CHEAP on the used market. |
|
Out of the many Smith autos I have had there were a few bad ones, one 659 with the frame machined offset (it still worked!) A few 5906s that refused to extract (like new) when slightly dirty and a 3906 that would extract the 123 grain loads but was not 100% with the 115 grain bullets. I also had a nice 4006 but it had a stepped, stagy let off. An early 59 I had shot VERY low, but never jammed. I'm not fond of the anti rattle spring on the trigger, they lose tension and rattle anyway. (wiggle back & forth when cocked) That said, I currently have left a 659, a 5906 and a (LN) 645 I would not part with, all with adjustable sights...those ugly protective wings (some say) on the rear sight. I do like the short reset on the trigger and they are plenty accurate for me. |
+1 Having said that, I really like my SW99 in .45acp, my Model 41 & Model 52! I have yet to figure out how a company can make such perfect revolvers & suck so badly on their semis????????? 
|