Quote:
I don't think anyone is asking for a PhD dissertation.
This forum is filled with opinions. We don't need statistically valid, double blind studies for this thread, either.
|
Well if you want to come up with an answer by comparing 2 new S&Ws to two old S&Ws, then go ahead. I think that to be a fruitless endeavor. I was pointing out the right way to answer such a question, which would invariably have flaws anyways. It would be very hard to prove either side with any degree of certainty. Your post before made it seem as though you thought it would not be hard to show, because the older guns are still around. That was IMO over simplifying the situation. I thought the idea of the thread was to attempt to prove newer guns are overall better. Not to say "hey, I like newer guns, but I like abc about the old stuff." I didn't mean to offer a PhD dissertation, so perhaps I misunderstood the thread. I put the level of thought into the thread and my post that I felt was required given the subject matter.
Quote:
|
In my experience, I can draw some comparisons from a rather large pool of Bangor Punta, Tomkins, and Saf-T-Hammer guns I've dealt with over the last few decades. I've seen far fewer problems with the post-2000 guns than the older ones.
|
I think if comparing older S&Ws to newer, and there is no rule for how old, for the old, I think the comparison should be from the best periods for S&W, before WWII, and for the first 18 years or so after. If you don't have much experience with the older 5 screw guns, I think its better to say "newer guns are better than bangor punta guns" since that is where your experience lies.
As I said, I think the high majority of us have S&W experience with newer S&Ws, one old 5 screw, and some bangor punta stuff. However, most of my S&W collection is pre bangor punta. Its an instance of apples to apples and oranges to oranges. I don't think anyone would say the bangor punta stuff was the pinnacle of S&W quality, so to discuss those guns vs new guns basically takes away from the older gun side of the debate.