An Armorer's perspective on the NEW S&W Model 19 Classic vs originals

[General Geoff]

It's a long video at 50 minutes, but he methodically breaks down all the reasons why modern manufacturing techniques are NOT just about cost savings, they are also legitimate engineering improvements on fit, function, reliability, and longevity.


Now I want a new Model 19

[Ronin]

Great video. Thanks for sharing! Now I want a Model 19, too.

Says I gotta spread rep around before I can rep you again. Hopefully someone will step up.

[unclejumbo]

I have an "old" 686 and a new 686. There is no doubt that the new 686 is smoother, more accurate and a better revolver (I deleted the Hillary safety). I still prefer the looks of the old but I grab the new for shooting.

[Gunsnwater]

Watched that on my feed. He loves the Hillary hole too. Never mentioned how accommodating that hole changed the frame and destroyed the lines. He just likes how they supposedly drop together without any skills. Maybe that mindset is how so much fail gets shipped. He is a company man not a Smith&Wesson collector. The new blue not being able to stand up to hoppies number 9 is not mentioned either nor is the lack of high polish before getting blued.

[General Geoff]

Watched that on my feed. He loves the Hillary hole too. Never mentioned how accommodating that hole changed the frame and destroyed the lines. He just likes how they supposedly drop together without any skills. Maybe that mindset is how so much fail gets shipped. He is a company man not a Smith&Wesson collector. The new blue not being able to stand up to hoppies number 9 is not mentioned either nor is the lack of high polish before getting blued.

He said he didn't care for the hole personally, how is that love? He just said it doesn't bother him enough to dissuade him from purchasing and using the new gun. As for destroying the lines, that's an aesthetic preference, his review was mainly about its functionality as a tool.

Fact is, complex machines that require skilled hand-fitting and trimming of precision steel components just to work at all are not as commercially viable as equivalent machines which are put together with off-the-shelf parts and do not require much if any hand-fitting to function; the perceived market value of the former may exceed the latter only for people buying a work of art more than a functional tool. Nothing wrong with that either.

[JenniferG]

The Hillary Hole on Smith and Wesson adds nothing to the functionality or value to the gun. It detracts from both because it is a weakness in design and aesthetics. Knowing that the gun has been known on very few occasions to have stopped the gun from functioning would you yourself take it into a combat situation with an active Hillary Hole? Of course not, revolvers are no longer issued to PD's or military combat units and so it's now OK to put things into the gun that are known to fail. MIM parts are known to fail when they are used in high pressure, high friction applications. It's one of the reasons why Remington replaces the MIM ejectors on their police 870 shotguns with forged steel ejectors and leaves MIM ejectors for hunters and homeowners. These newer Smith and Wesson revolvers are fine for civilian use but on that fellow's 51 problems list some things have been added as others have been deleted. The grips on the newer model 29 aren't sufficient for the recoil of a 44 magnum.

[General Geoff]

MIM parts are known to fail when they are used in high pressure, high friction applications.

So do forged steel parts, if the design isn't engineered for the material's properties. MIM parts are far cheaper to manufacture to precise tolerances and thus cheaper to replace on the occasion they do fail.

If a properly-manufactured MIM part has a high rate of failure in a particular application, I would humbly suggest that that is an engineering fault, not a materials fault.

The Hillary Hole on Smith and Wesson adds nothing to the functionality or value to the gun.

Countless people utilize the lock every day. If the existence of it bothers someone who otherwise likes a gun equipped with it, they can simply remove the side plate and take out the flag.

[abner13]

So do forged steel parts, if the design isn't engineered for the material's properties. MIM parts are far cheaper to manufacture to precise tolerances and thus cheaper to replace on the occasion they do fail.

If a properly-manufactured MIM part has a high rate of failure in a particular application, I would humbly suggest that that is an engineering fault, not a materials fault.


Countless people utilize the lock every day. If the existence of it bothers someone who otherwise likes a gun equipped with it, they can simply remove the side plate and take out the flag.

MIM uses special 'powdered' metal alloys by Crucible Metal aka 'CPM'. The powder is very fine , some like talc. Proper alloy selection for each part is just as important.

http://crucibleservice.com/eselector...eralpart3.html

Many automobiles and high performance motorcycles use powdered metal connecting rods and transmission gears. S&W was making the gears use in some Harley-Davidson transmissions in powdered metal..

[kobsw]

In the end I think it comes down to preference and for me I'll take my "inferiorly" made 49 year old, P&R, Case Colored Target Trigger/Hammer, High Polish Blue with Walnut Target stocks Model 19-3 over that classic any day.



Regards,

Kobsw

[bripro]

^^^ what he said. My examples are not quite as nice but it is the same.

I do admit though that modern Smith & Wesson revolver’s do shoot just fine. For all those worried about the lock engaging unintentionally it is a very simple process to remedy.