Thread: 9mm revolvers ?
View Single Post
Old April 23, 2019, 11:24 AM   #243
stinkeypete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 22, 2010
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 293
How many times do I need to say it? "MARKETING!"

Here is the problem:
I took a deer a while back with a rifle that was 110 years old. My great great grandpa's... made in 1893. He got it at the Columbian Exposition.
In this case I "cheated" and used a .30 cal 150 g Nosler ballistic tip traveling around 850 fps because... OLD OLD OLD gun.

My go-to deer rifle is my Grandfather's 30-06, a Remington model 30 Express. He bought it sometime between when he got back from WW1 and 1930. It's a very solid rifle even today.... twist and rifling notwithstanding.

I have beautiful shotguns made in 1946 and 1955. You can't afford the quality today they had back then. Redesign for steel shot is a legitimate factor but not so much that I will buy a new one.

I have only managed to wear out one gun in my life: a H&R .22 Special which was the name of the .22 breaktop "target" revolver. The pawl just wore out and along with the whole thing getting wobbly and loose and the extractor star having been sticky for years it wasn't worth the money to have that revolver with a poor choice of design for a cheaply made revolver restored. It would cost more to have it repaired than to get a new gun, in other words. The Cheap H&R "only" gave 60 years of dependable hard service. It was my rabbit gun when I was growing up, handed down to me. H&R was known to be nowhere near the quality of a Colt or Smith.

So how can an industry make money when the products work well for on the order of 100 years? They have to rely on marketing and creating demand. So... 9mm is the thing. But maybe the new trend is .380... I like .380. It's old. It's new. .32 was a good try but only a nut like me even considers a custom revolver in .32-20 with the optional .327 Fed Mag cylinder because it costs as much as a motorcycle.

Last edited by stinkeypete; April 23, 2019 at 11:53 AM.
stinkeypete is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.09397 seconds with 8 queries