S&W "Classic" Blueing

ligonierbill · April 19, 2021, 05:19 AM

What is your experience with the finish on S&W reissued "classic" models? How does it compare to the finish on the originals? The newest Smith I own is a 1954 Model 14. The blue has held up well, but it is nothing special. Special is my 1914 Colt Army Special that retains a deep, more blue than black finish.

Wheel-Gunner · April 19, 2021, 05:55 PM

My experience is the bluing on the "reissued" classics simply does not compare to the originals as far as appearance goes. It is worth pointing out that the originals had different quality bluing jobs, take the M27 vs M28 for example. But by and large, the old bluing is somewhat of a lost art in my opinion. My M27 has the most gorgeous blued finish, looks like a blackened chrome mirror......deep deep blue. My M28 also has a nice finish as well, but not as nice as the M27. Think more of a matte blue. With that said, my M28 still has a better blued finish than any of the moderns that I have seen.

Some say the modern bluing may be more durable, though I am not sure about this personally.

Others will chime in I'm sure.....

jackmoser65 · April 19, 2021, 06:01 PM

The difference has more to do with polishing than bluing.

dgludwig · April 21, 2021, 05:49 PM

Quote:

How does it compare to the finish on the originals?

What Smith & Wesson used to call "Bright Blue" (their answer/equivalent to Colt's "Royal Blue").

CajunBass · April 26, 2021, 07:35 AM

Not the best pictures in the world.

1980 Model 19-4 ANIB Anything that looks like wear is a trick of the light. The gun is flawless.

2018? Model 19-9 "Classic" I think this one was just out of the box when I took the picture, but it looks the same today after a few hundred rounds through it.

I don't think of one as being "better" than the other. They're different. I suspect the newer finish would hold up better to regular holster wear and such, but I can't prove that, since neither of these will ever see a holster.

RickB · April 27, 2021, 07:57 AM

I've owned two new Smith revolvers, a 544 from 1986, and a Thunder Ranch 22 from 2008.
The blued finish on both is/was very good, with sharp (distinct) edges, and flat flats.
In some light, the 22's barrel looks a bit plum, but the level and quality of polish matches the rest of the gun.
I used to have a late-'50s Model 29, and the finish on it was nice, but not different enough from the newer guns to make me pine for the "good old days".

Webleymkv · April 28, 2021, 02:28 PM

While I don't have a blued S&W from their new "Classic" series currently, I did briefly own a M40 Classic and I have a 1970's M28-2 that I had reblued by S&W about six or seven years ago. The quality and polishing, in my subjective opinion, is comparable to my older S&W's including my 1970's M27-2 and my 1950's Pre-27. The main difference is the color of the bluing on the newer ones is more of a black whereas the older ones had more of a bluish hue to them. As I understand it, the reason for this is that the chemical used in the older bluing (I believe it was called carbona blue) ran afoul of the EPA and so S&W was forced to switch to different chemicals that gave a slightly different color. I also previously owned a nickel M21-4 "Classic" and the finish on it was impeccable.

April 19, 2021, 05:19 AM	#1
ligonierbill Senior Member Join Date: May 20, 2007 Posts: 2,448	S&W "Classic" Blueing What is your experience with the finish on S&W reissued "classic" models? How does it compare to the finish on the originals? The newest Smith I own is a 1954 Model 14. The blue has held up well, but it is nothing special. Special is my 1914 Colt Army Special that retains a deep, more blue than black finish.

April 19, 2021, 05:55 PM	#2
Wheel-Gunner Senior Member Join Date: February 24, 2006 Posts: 277	My experience is the bluing on the "reissued" classics simply does not compare to the originals as far as appearance goes. It is worth pointing out that the originals had different quality bluing jobs, take the M27 vs M28 for example. But by and large, the old bluing is somewhat of a lost art in my opinion. My M27 has the most gorgeous blued finish, looks like a blackened chrome mirror......deep deep blue. My M28 also has a nice finish as well, but not as nice as the M27. Think more of a matte blue. With that said, my M28 still has a better blued finish than any of the moderns that I have seen. Some say the modern bluing may be more durable, though I am not sure about this personally. Others will chime in I'm sure..... __________________ "History does not entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. We must acquire proficiency in defense and display stamina in purpose." Dwight Eisenhower

April 26, 2021, 07:35 AM	#5
CajunBass Senior Member Join Date: May 6, 2005 Location: North Chesterfield, Virginia Posts: 4,767	Not the best pictures in the world. 1980 Model 19-4 ANIB Anything that looks like wear is a trick of the light. The gun is flawless. 2018? Model 19-9 "Classic" I think this one was just out of the box when I took the picture, but it looks the same today after a few hundred rounds through it. I don't think of one as being "better" than the other. They're different. I suspect the newer finish would hold up better to regular holster wear and such, but I can't prove that, since neither of these will ever see a holster. __________________ For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16 (NKJV)

April 27, 2021, 07:57 AM	#6
RickB Senior Member Join Date: March 1, 2000 Location: Boise, ID Posts: 8,518	I've owned two new Smith revolvers, a 544 from 1986, and a Thunder Ranch 22 from 2008. The blued finish on both is/was very good, with sharp (distinct) edges, and flat flats. In some light, the 22's barrel looks a bit plum, but the level and quality of polish matches the rest of the gun. I used to have a late-'50s Model 29, and the finish on it was nice, but not different enough from the newer guns to make me pine for the "good old days". __________________ Runs off at the mouth about anything 1911 related on this site and half the time is flat out wrong.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

April 19, 2021, 06:01 PM	#3
jackmoser65 Senior Member Join Date: October 11, 2014 Posts: 754	The difference has more to do with polishing than bluing.

April 28, 2021, 02:28 PM	#7
Webleymkv Senior Member Join Date: July 20, 2005 Location: Indiana Posts: 10,446	While I don't have a blued S&W from their new "Classic" series currently, I did briefly own a M40 Classic and I have a 1970's M28-2 that I had reblued by S&W about six or seven years ago. The quality and polishing, in my subjective opinion, is comparable to my older S&W's including my 1970's M27-2 and my 1950's Pre-27. The main difference is the color of the bluing on the newer ones is more of a black whereas the older ones had more of a bluish hue to them. As I understand it, the reason for this is that the chemical used in the older bluing (I believe it was called carbona blue) ran afoul of the EPA and so S&W was forced to switch to different chemicals that gave a slightly different color. I also previously owned a nickel M21-4 "Classic" and the finish on it was impeccable.