View Full Version : Help! I'm wanting a SMITH!

George Hill
November 23, 2000, 03:54 PM
I just read the article about the .45 CQB... It's clouded my thinking... aarrgghh - I'm falling to hype!



November 23, 2000, 06:25 PM
George If I were you I would buy one.If you read the article on the CQB then you read the other articles.It seems like the gun industry was never mad at S+W.Kimber still has them make slide forgings etc.The NRA never quit taking there ad money it goes on and on.The only ones we are going to hurt by putting S+W out of bussiness is us.Clinton and his gang would celebrate a huge victory by letting gun owners do something they couldn't do.Also we as voters over the years actually helped put S+W in the position they were in.And in this election may have done it again as 40% of gun owners voted for Gore.(not me)So place the blame where it goes right on our shoulders.BILLG

November 23, 2000, 06:50 PM
"We", Bill? maybe you, but not me.

We are not hurt if S&W goes out of business, we are better off. I really think other companies would think twice before making another agreement like that.

Do I like any S&W products? Sure I do. I just bought a USED mint condition model 625. Not a penny of that money went to S&W.

George, if you wait a bit, you'll be able to get what you want on the used market without directly financing a company that is willing to compromise your rights away for their own financial gain.

George Hill
November 23, 2000, 06:58 PM
Yes I read the other articles...
A description of handcraftsmenship of a fine .45 is one thing.
A sentamental crybaby piece about the factory workers? Thats a Liberal kinda move... For the Children... Blah.
No - If I want that type of .45 I'll buy a SIG P220.
And be completely happy with it.

But I do like that bushing set up...
That slide mounted safety is still something I just can not tolerate.
The hype has worn off me...

November 23, 2000, 07:54 PM
I am not trying to start anything here but if you pay your NRA dues you are supporting S+W,if you buy a Kimber you support S+W.The NRA takes S+W money and Kimber pays S+W money.Many others in the Gun Industry support S+W.So do we boycott all who deal with S+W?Or do we just blame S+W.First we put S+W out of bussiness then Kimber,Colt,Remington,Winchester etc and on down the line.Just what Clinton wants Gun owners doing what the Government couldn't do.Don't get me wrong I do not agree with S+W decisions.But we need to focus on the problem which is the Governments position on gun control and our right to keep and bear arms.BILLG

November 23, 2000, 08:48 PM
Any ideas as to how Glock gets their money to Sheitz und Weasel??? Foikem.

Mike Irwin
November 23, 2000, 09:08 PM

Little comment about NRA and Smith & Wesson.

When I was working for NRA (associate editor of American Rifleman, October 1990 to April 1994), the company that handled S&W's advertising purchaed advertising space in contract blocks.

This means that they can purchase a particular location, and KEEP that location, in the magazine.

When I was there, S&W was purchasing in 1-year increments, with right of renewal.

So, yes, NRA keeps taking S&W's money, but they are currently contractually obligated to do so.

Once the current contract runs out, however, it is very unlikely that NRA will continue to take S&W advertising.

Breaking the contract is possible, but the price required to break the contract is quite substantial.

November 23, 2000, 09:17 PM
i deal with the NRA so that they can do what they can for my gun rights...i don't deal with s&w because they did nothing to aid my gun rights - they went with the fed-gov for monetary gain...i boycott s&w for selling out...i don't like kimber: has to do with their business policies, not their weapons....Colt at least went out, rather than sell out...as for who we boycott: i can only speak for myself....

to the point: if you want that s&w, get it...you don't have to justify yourself to anyone - that's your decision...i still carry an s&w, but i will never by another....and if s&w goes under, fine - their employees should have quit if they didn't agree with company policy...

November 23, 2000, 10:24 PM
The Clinton administration is very good at it....Divide and conquer. If we turn against the biggest and best American manufacturer of firearms, we're doing exactly what they want! We (all of you...not me) put S&W out of business and we are eliminating one of our biggest gun rights supporters. C'mon folks, think about it! Who will be the next one they put the squeeze on? Colt's already doing what they want without any pressure and I don't hear any griping about them. Do all gun owners good and support S&W through this and I'm sure it will change when we get a new administration!

November 23, 2000, 10:38 PM
Nobody except S&W is hurt if S&W goes out of business...

The demand for firearms will remain unchanged, people will just be buying them from other manufacturers that didnt make a deal with the devil.

It is an unfortunate consequence of their decision that many of their employess may lose their jobs.

Those jobs, though, are not worth as much as our second amendment.

November 23, 2000, 11:06 PM
S&W will put themselves out of business trying to live up to the agreement they made with the administration.They won't need any help from anyone else,as they can not and will not be able to dictate the policy they agreed to,and force compliance by others.However, just as bad feelings were voiced about COLT giving up the manufacture of some products,as soon as the supply began drying up ,prices of the items Colt dropped went up up up.So will it be with S&W.Supply and demand will rule!!! The same people who now say they won't have any S&W products anymore will wish the H--- they had a ton of it down the road a ways.

Mike Irwin
November 24, 2000, 03:33 AM
I posted this message (under the underscored line) in the General Handguns section a few days ago. Quite frankly, I'm rather stunned that some people view the spontaneous boycott of S&W as somehow being a maneuver that hurts us as gunowners.

Let's get something straight. If, by S&W going out of business for lack of sales prevents another manufacturer from signing a similar agreement, then IT IS WORTH IT TO SEE SMITH & WESSON DIE.

S&W CHOSE to sign this agreement. Do those of you who are castigating gunowners for opposing this agreement really KNOW what it entails?

Do you have ANY idea as to what could happen to our ability to purchase new firearms in this country if EVERY other manufacturer were to sign on to it?

Somehow you seem to think that the Government wants us to kill S&W. To that I say...


The Government wanted EVERY manufacturer to sign this agreement. They wanted consumers to do exactly what you're doing, IGNORE the horrific potential of this agreement, and blindly go about business while the Gov't forced other manufacturers into line.

Well, guess what, guys?

Those of you who continue to purchase S&W products?

You're the ones who are activly participating in the promotion of this agreement to all firearms manufacturers.

Quite frankly, YOU are the ones who are playing right into the Gov'ts hands.

Smart move, gents. You're going to be used like pawns, and you're going screw future generations.

Now that is something of which to be proud, don't you think?

Anyway, on to the message I posted in General Handguns.


To all of those who think that gunowners are "cutting off our noses to spite our faces," I can only ask...


If gunowners gave the impression that we simply didn't care about the agreement that S&W signed with the Government, even given the onerous provisions that the agreement entails, just how long do you think it would take other gun manufacturers to fold, too?

Where, then, would that leave us?

Take a REALLY good look at the provisions of S&W's agreement with the Government, and then try to imagine what the effect would be if EVERY manufacturer signed on as an active participant.

Here are just a few immediate consequences...

Try, for example, the "new guns won't accept high-cap magazines made before Sept. 1994."

No matter that such magazines are still LEGAL. No matter that that particular agreement has an expiration date on it. Essentially, a Glock 17 or a Sig 228 made under the terms of this agreement can't use perfectly legal magazines.

There's also an ancillary cost involved with that, the re-engineering costs. How much might that add to the cost of a new gun?

How about the "manufacturers will not sell guns that are resistant to fingerprints?"

Just what does that mean? How about no more Glocks, or any of the other polymer framed guns with impressed checkering or pebbling?

How about "authorized user technology"? Want to make a bet on what that will eventually entail? Computer-chip controlled firearms? How much cost will THAT add to a new gun? And, an even more critical question, will the Government be given the codes to these chipped guns that will allow them to develop a technology to disable them?

Think that's a pipedream, or an unrealize fear? Consider how far computers have come in the past 20 years. The system sitting on my desk at work has more power than 1,000 comparable 1980-era computers daisy chained together.

Do those of you who think "enough is enough" actually expect the Government to believe that this agreement is enough, or to fully comply with its own agreement?

Perhaps you've forgotten that S&W was promised relief from lawsuits ("city, state, county and federal parties agree to dismiss the parties from the pending suits"), which still hasn't materialized.

Perhaps you've also forgotten that the Government's promise of "most favored firearms manufacturer status" was rejected by Congress?

Read through the provisions of the agreement again. Look for open-ended statements that would allow the Government to come in and make extremely excessive demands of the manufacturer, dealer, or retailer. There are quite a few of them.

Ask yourself just how long it would be until the Government decides that "hey, NONE of Glock's firearms pass the safety requirement" because the trigger in the trigger isn't sufficient. How much will THAT add to re-engineering costs of a new gun?

How would all of you who are willing to forgive and forget S&W's sell-out if this sort of agreement were injected into other products that you're in contact with in your daily life?

Radios, televisions, computers, refrigerators, books, automobiles?

How about automobiles? How about this for starters...

"Within 36 months, all automobiles will be equipped with a hands-free driving system."

"Within 36 months, all automobiles, SUVs, trucks, and minivans have to get a minimum of 75 miles per gallon."

"All new automobiles manufactured after X date will have to run only on XXX fuel, and not be capable of accepting petroleum distillate fuels."

"All automobile dealers will have to carry $1 million in insurance to cover lawsuits arising after an automobile they legally sell is involved in an accident."

I will admit, there is an enormous difference between what is happening with S&W and what might happen to automobiles. But perhaps that's why the Constitution doesn't have an ammendment in the Bill of Rights covering modes of transportation, but there is one that covers firearms.

I'm truly sorry, but those of you who are willing to accept S&W's sellout, and the terms forced upon it and gunowners by the Government, just aren't stopping to consider the potential long-term costs.

One of the legacies left to us by our ancestors was of a nation of free, law-abiding men and women whose right to own firearms for personal protection and the common defense was unquestioned.

By caving in to the Government's demands and accepting S&W's betrayal, we would send the message that we no longer care about the legacy left to us by men such as Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, or the rest of this nation's Founding Fathers, nor do we care for the sacrifice made by millions of men and women who have fought in this nation's defense in times of war, or who have stood watch over it in times of peace.

That, I believe, is truly the sadest outcome of this debacle.

November 24, 2000, 02:09 PM
I agree with you Mike. I shake my head when I hear,"...I won't buy post-sellout S&W, but I WILL buy a PRE-sellout."


If you really dislike the S&W agreement with the government then you will not buy ANYTHING that is S&W, REGARDLESS of its manufacture date. It is counter intuitive to think that laws of supply/demand do not apply to S&W products.

If you really want a pre-sellout S&W and dislike the agreement, and BUY one, then you have taken money from another manufacturer that DIDN'T sign any agreement.

On the CQB, it looks good, but...


James K
November 24, 2000, 03:03 PM
Buy from whom? I don't know of any dealers and few distributors who will handle S&W products, simply because they can't afford the insurance, training programs, loss of other sales, store inspections, and all the other garbage they have to go through to sell S&W products under the infamous agreement.

I don't like the idea of putting a manufacturer of fine firearms out of business, but I know of no other way to express my disgust with them.

If I don't buy, they go out of business, which serves the anti-gun agenda. If I do buy, there is more pressure on other companies to conform since S&W suffered no consequences. I think my main beef is not the agreement, but that Shultz lied about it, claiming up to the last minute that S&W would not make any deals, even when he was actively making deals.


George Hill
November 24, 2000, 04:05 PM
Guys - Chill...
This wasn't about S&W the Company or its Agreement...
It was about the PISTOLS.
Even before the Agreement - I disliked Smith autos.
Mainly for two reasons.
1. Slide mounted safeties.
2. That hairdryer grip profile.

Honestly - Other than those two points - Smith does make a fine auto. I would put them very close to SIG in quality.
full length polished rails, smooth action, and one of the best factory triggers in the business... plus the bonus of good sights. Everything you would want.
Accurate, reliable and tough.
But my two complaints are accute enought to void the Smiths in my book. If these factors are not an issue for others, I have in the past recomended them.
It was just surprising for Kodiac to want a Smith!
That special bushing is very cool.
I would that I could have one on my Springfields!

So - enough about that damned agreement... no more... We are talking guns here.

Mike Irwin
November 24, 2000, 05:05 PM

Actually, I WILL buy pre-sell-out S&W. Why? Because I buy them used, the older the better. Not a penny goes to the company. Of my 10 or so S&W revolvers, only 1 of them is 1980s vintage. Every other one is pre-1980s. The oldest is 1917.

As for Smith semi-autos, I have never cared must for them in any event.

1. Rotten ergonomics.
2. Safety placement (but I can deal with it).
3. WAY WAY WAY overpriced.
4. I don't agree that the quality is there, especially not when compared with the price.
5. Generally bad triggers.

November 24, 2000, 07:07 PM
At the last two gun shows, I have $700 in my pocket and I was looking to buy a pistol. The only gun that grabbed my was a S&W Tactical 9mm. But I didn't buy it. I walked out empty handed instead of buying a S&W...

And I consider it a religious atrocity to walk out of a gun show empty handed.

November 24, 2000, 09:21 PM
I'm with Dr45ACP. If they go out of business it won't hurt me one bit. There will always be those who will step up and take their place if we still have the RKBA. If all were like S&W we would lose that right. Jerry

George Hill
November 24, 2000, 09:42 PM
I wanted to talk GUNS here but most of you only want a chance to talk about THE AGREEMENT...

Does anyone else want to talk about GUNS in this GUN THREAD?
Maybe we should have an ANTI S&W FORUM for you guys.

I was talking about the GUNS!

S&W is under new management... and I bet money that when Bush gets in the Whitehouse...
This Agreement is out the Window.
Just Watch.

Now - Does anyone want to talk about the freakin pistols?

November 25, 2000, 12:45 AM
George I agree...

I am disappointed that S&W hasn't come out with newer generation auto loaders. At one point, early 90's, I considered the Sigma, but as I followed them they began to have some problems and I nixed the idea.

My issue with Smith autos, Agreement or not, is that they just don't have the appeal to me that they did years ago. Most autos I have owned since then have fit my hand better, been more concealable, less expensive, lighter, etc. When I see the ads for the new tactical models I just see them as the same old model with the doohicky on the frame to mount a light or laser-ugly. The 945 was a little nicer, but not enough.

Mike I.-
I think I see what you are saying. I only meant to point out that there was/is an inconsistency in the logic regarding buying Pre vs. Post manufactured pistols.


November 25, 2000, 01:28 AM
George, I read the same article. Smiths PC pistols are something to behold indeed! I was lucky enough to find a 3-3/4" 945 {pre} earlier this year and its a home run! I can honestly say that this pistol is equal or better than any custom built 1911 I've ever held or owned (and I have seen examples from all the top dog 1911 'smiths). The fit and finish are perfect and the accuracy is unreal. Some of the features on my sample include-

titanium Briley bushing
Novak sights
Wilson beavertail and thumb safety
Ed Brown wedge m/s housing
Videcki trigger

I really like the CQB in that article but I have never likes the S&W decocker or mag 'safety". Thats why I have my dealer looking all over the country for a {pre} 945 4" or 5" model right now... if he finds me one I will buy it and NO $$ will go to Smith.

So, Kodiak, if you want a {pre} S&W PC pistol take a look at gunsamerica or elsewhere... they are worth every penny and are a bargain compared to any semi-custom pistol available today.

Mike Irwin
November 25, 2000, 04:39 PM

Chill, dude.

Unfortunately, given what has happened with S&W, in my opinion you CANNOT talk about one without talking about the other, especially if you are talking about the new guns.

Now, in one of my previous messages I DID give you my opinion of S&W semi-autos.

That's not a new opinion, either. I've felt that way about S&W semi-autos for many many years.

The CQB is what, $850 or so MSRP?

Can you say ^%*^(*&$#)(*^)(*&^)(*&$)(*&$)(*^)(*& INSANE price? You could do it yourself for less than that.

I'm sorry, that gun simply is NOT worth that price.

As for S&W's new management. No, not really. They're still owned by the same company, Tompkins, in Britain. They have a new general manager, but his strings on major issues, and the agreement is a MAJOR issue, are still pulled by corporate.


Why is than an inconsistency? If you buy used, you don't support the company that sold you out. In fact, the majority of the guns that I've purchased were made when S&W was still American owned.

November 25, 2000, 05:54 PM
No, don't buy it!

November 25, 2000, 06:26 PM
George, buddy. Calm down boy. Just take two Glocks, and call me in the morning!!!!;)

November 25, 2000, 06:55 PM
Even if you buy a NEW S&W, your money does not go to S&W. You buy from a dealer who buys from a distributor. That gun comes from a distributor, not fatory direct. A distributor bought from S&W and has them in their inventory. Then your dealer orders from them. So by not buying you are in reality hurting the distributors, and puting them out of business. And I am willing to bet that they carry other brands than S&W. That new Glock, SIG, Kimber, etc. that you buy comes from that very distributor, and I bet that your money that you pay the dealer for your new toy, is used to pay the dealers account at the distributor, and the distributor uses the funds to buy more inventory. Damn, you just helped to buy a S&W. Better boycott the distributors too. So when the distributors are out of business there will be a logistical nightmare in buying a new pistol. I have enough problems getting a reply to a question from a manufacturer, let alone product direct. I've been involved in the business for about 8yrs now and this is the way that it is.

As to S&W autos, I owned one, it was my first pistol. But I didn't like the ergos or weight. So I traded it. They really don't have anything to offer that is of interest to me, with the exception of a few revolvers.

By the way, should your Pre-sellout brake, will you get parts from the factory? Or scrap the piece? After all, you will be contributing to the beast. In additon, don't take advantage of the lifetime warranty too. Just my observations.

Mike Irwin
November 25, 2000, 07:32 PM
Sorry, One, but that is an incorrect statement, and one that needlessly splits hairs instead of placing the blame where it truly lies, with people who continue to support Smith & Wesson by purchasing new firearms.

The daisy chain goes STRAIGHT back to S&W, and quite frankly in the situation you describe I have ABSOLUTELY NO SYMPATHY for the retailer OR the wholesaler.

Without consumer demand, a company withers.

By continuing to traffic in S&W handguns, wholesalers and retailers essentially are working to put themselves out of business due to the onerous provisions of the agreement that S&W signed with the Federal Government.

Many wholesalers and retailers have dropped S&W products.

The retailers who still sell new, post agreement S&W products? They don't get my money.

There's only one shop I've been in that still sells new S&W handguns, and I can state for a fact (I used to work there, so I know the owner pretty well) that the owner is a complete and total moron, and in fact supports STRICTER gun control laws that would put even more firearms dealers out of business, as well as laws that would make gunshows illegal.

The guy is the greediest bastard I've ever met. He's also not very bright in that he has the idea that new laws won't affect him, but WILL affect all the other dealers on the face of the earth.

November 25, 2000, 07:46 PM
Yeah, alot of disributors said that they will drop S&W. But I can pick up the phone and get one in 24 hrs. As to The agreement, it hasn't had the repecussions that are spoken of in my area. Dealers still sell the guns, and they haven't signed the Dealer Agreement. Distributors would sell their own family members, if that was what was in demand. They may say that they will do this or that, but if there is profit to be made, I will guarantee it will go into their profits, rather than anothers.

November 25, 2000, 08:11 PM
I wanna anudder S&W M38 and a 3913, and I wanna sendem both to the Performance Center.

Oh, wait, these are both available used!

American Pistolsmiths Guild http://www.AmericanPistol.com

Mike Irwin
November 25, 2000, 08:53 PM
And then let the distributors suffer for their own stupidity. Once they back up enough inventory, both they AND S&W will feel the effect.

S&W is feeling the effects right now.

Their largest distributors severed ties. Consumer purchases are down markedly.

S&W recently laid off several hundred employees, and significantly lengthened the yearly summer furlough.

To say that S&W isn't feeling the pin just because people don't buy guns directly from the factory simply isn't true.

George Hill
November 25, 2000, 09:36 PM
That sounds very reasonable if you take all into consideration... This is a Smith Design... so it seems to be cheaper - but a 1911 with that much handfitting and finishing would be worth at least Times Two of what this Smith is asking.
Its not the money... its the handgun.
And if you like the design - it will be worth it.

November 26, 2000, 12:58 PM
It is a great pistol but you must resist the temptation it go over to the dark side! use the force Luke

Mike Irwin
November 26, 2000, 03:04 PM

There's no handfitting involved with the CQB. It's all factory production stock, AFIK. It may make a quick pass through the Performance Center, but it certainly doesn't spend much time there.

There are other new firearms from other companies, companies that haven't sold gunowners to the Romans for a few pieces of silver, that offer as much as the S&W CQB.

The bottom line is, though, if you want one, get one.

I still believe that the price is way too much for an underachieving design from a gutless company.

George Hill
November 26, 2000, 03:25 PM
Naw - even if I had one in my hand... and had the cash in my pocket... and the Agreement never happened...
I'ld pass.
Smiths feel like I'm holding a hairdrier with that grip... hate that thing.
Just dont fit my hand.

Nice gun if it wasnt for that and the slide mounted safety...

I dont know which I hate worse

November 26, 2000, 05:25 PM
Performance Center 945

Category: Smith & Wesson Pistols - Autos
Model: Performance Center 945
Price: $1,099.00
Description: Blue commander size. 45 acp aluminum frame with frame mounted extended safety. Fish scale slide serations. Beavertail grip safety. Novak sights. Front of grip frame is checkered. Special match barrel and tuned trigger. This is a super factory custom combat 45.

GunsAmerica Stock # 976070130
Phone: (978) 632-6499

[email protected]

go on George, take a gander... :D

November 26, 2000, 05:25 PM
Glad to see that you have come back to your senses!!!;)

November 26, 2000, 05:29 PM

December 21, 2000, 12:03 PM
>S&W will put themselves out of business trying to live up >to the agreement they made with the administration.They
>won't need any help from anyone else,as they can not and >will not be able to dictate the policy they agreed to,and >force compliance by others.

100% agreed. I am inclined to not buy from them because of the Clinton deal and thats bad enough for them but I also assume very few places will carry them no matter how bad I want one becuase of the contract specifications. I assume this will kill the company eventually and then it also means no lifetime warrenty for any gun I get. But I already have a few smiths so if I kill the mfg then I risk my other guns also. If we kill the company fast then perhaps it is bought and resurrected in whole. I still loose my warrenty this way only sooner. How many of us have older, "unknown to the government", guns that still need parts/service from time to time.

I don't blame any buyer either way. I just want them to take it into consideration.

December 21, 2000, 01:43 PM
Shut 'em down...An abject lesson to the industry. It's not infighting, folks. S&W is on their side. Don't forget it. They've proven that they'll sell gun owners out for cash and protection.


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin

I think this quote applies to this situation.

Will Beararms
December 22, 2000, 10:11 AM

Take a Les Baer and a Clark Custom 1911 and call me in the morining. ;)

December 22, 2000, 10:49 AM
One...it doesn't matter. If the end user doesn't buy a product, the distributors will simply stop carrying that product. I understand what you're saying, but a lot of current inventory in distributor stock was purchased AFTER the sellout. As far as I'm concerned, they made a bad business decision and, per the laws of capitalism, will have to suffer. As far as not being able to have factory support for a pre-sellout gun; nobody said sticking up for what you believe in would be convenient. Stand up and make this one count. When you have 'em by the throat, LEAN IN!

Futo Inu
December 22, 2000, 02:53 PM
Stongly disagree with BillG et al!

December 22, 2000, 05:15 PM
I've heard the "forcing S&W out of business will only play into the hands of the anti-gunners" argument and it doesn't hold water. What the anti-gunners want is for ALL of the gun makers to sign the agreement, and then they can utilize the loopholes and open-ended clauses and make gun prices skyrocket.

Holding S&W's feet to the fire is the only way to make sure that Ruger, Taurus, Glock, Kel-Tec and the others DON'T sign a similar agreement. And the recent economic woes at S&W make it more likely that they won't cave in. Is everyone aware that Taurus pays for a one-year membership to the NRA if you buy a new Taurus gun? I think that is putting their money where their mouth is and serving the interests of their customers.

December 24, 2000, 10:27 AM
George, the feeling only gets worse when you pick one up. I first saw the CQB about a year or so ago, and have lusted for it ever since. Very nice balance, feel, ah heck, the only drawback is not saving the $$$ for it.

December 24, 2000, 12:11 PM
Take that $850, go out and buy a HK Tactical. Go to the range and shoot 500 rounds. You will be 'over' your need for S&W. I promise.

December 24, 2000, 12:34 PM
The only S&W I've ever liked is the 4006. If I come across one that is used or on clearance*, I may buy it. That said, I'm starting a Beretta collection with a 92FS Inox. Next will be a 96G. Beretta can have my money for being a very pro-2nd Amendment company.:)

*Only if the dealer is not restocking.

December 24, 2000, 08:51 PM
I'd rather have a sister in a cat house then a brother carrying a new Smith! ;)

December 24, 2000, 10:13 PM
NOW you've done it.....see what you've started? :eek:

George Hill
December 26, 2000, 12:49 AM
I am pleased to say that there are no Smith & Wesson ANYTHINGS in my house or in any of my Safes... no where, no how... Zip, Zilch, Nada.
I think its going to stay that way too for a very long time... Unless this new S&W CEO does some serious time on his knees.

December 26, 2000, 02:59 AM
George buddy,
I know what you mean!!! Looking through the latest issue of GunWorld magazine they have an article/advertisment for the Performance Center model 952 9mm. Boy, it looks nice!!! I did not think that I would ever fall for a Smith. :eek: Help me Obewan, you're my only hope!!!!

December 26, 2000, 03:17 AM
How 'bout those XX76 S&W pistols of the early 90's? I owned a 4576. It was nice. No safety, frame mounted decocker, just like the Sigs. Sometimes called a Smith-Sauer or Sig & Wesson.

I recently sold my 6906 (an utterly reliable pistol) because I felt dirty carrying it. But if I was to find another 4576, well, I'd be dirty again.

December 26, 2000, 06:20 PM
George, I'm wanting a Smith,too. A Registered Magnum- any barrel length - certificate not necessary.

PS- I know this is the semi-auto forum,but S&W doesn't make any new guns I want.

December 26, 2000, 08:10 PM
I have posted this before, but I thought I would try one more time(the last time I really didn't seem to get any reaction). If you want to fully support a boycott, you must not buy used products either. When you buy a used S&W, it removes that gun from the available category, and makes it more likely that a person who doesn't know or care about the boycott will buy a new gun from a dealer. Indirectly, then, it makes sales of S&W products greater than it would if you didn't buy the used product. The boycott will have some effect if only used guns are bought, but it will have more of an effect if none of the boycotted products are bought, new or used. Just FWIW.

Mike Irwin
December 27, 2000, 01:47 AM
For the simple reason that the used market is completely flooded with S&W handgun right now, ESPECIALLY revolvers. There are so many that prices for the used guns are going to remain depressed for years to come.

Many of these guns are only lightly used, meaning that they are even better bargain over the new guns.

Quite frankly if, as you say, someone either doesn't know or doesn't care about the boycott, they are just as likely to purchase a new gun as a used gun.

But by explaining to them the bargains to be found in the used market, they'll be a LOT LESS likely to purchase a new S&W, which will have a direct impact on the company.

December 27, 2000, 08:34 AM
Well, I don't know that I would agree that my comments are "complete bunk", but I would agree that if there are a lot of guns on the used market, it diminishes the impact of buying used. I personally don't have a problem in not being a purist on the boycott and buying used S&Ws, and I have recently gotten a couple of good deals on Mod 65 and 66 revolvers. Thanks for your follow up.

December 28, 2000, 09:18 AM
They still have evil black rifles and standard capacity mags too.

Both explained to me that the agreement does not effect them in the least, legally speaking. It only applies to those FFLs that wish to be "Master" level dealers of S&W products. That's where you are able to get even better distributor prices, and better access to the PC custom guns. Since neither dealer chooses to sign on with S&W for that 'program', they remain able to deal in any legal products they choose to carry.

If I have been mis-informed in any way, please let me know.

December 28, 2000, 02:56 PM
I am also wanting to buy a SMITH. I will never buy another new S&W product period. However if anyone has a used 686 with an 8 3/8" barrel they would like to part with at a resonable price, plese E-Mail me. If you are trying to get retail price for a used gun, don't bother.