Page 8 of 17 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 165

Thread: Smith & Wesson missed opportunities

  1. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by jtcarm View Post


    I think we’ll sooner see a “Super SP101” from Ruger.
    We can hope...

  2. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by jtcarm View Post
    I think you’re wrong on all three counts.

    Kimber & Colt didn’t get into the DA revolver market because there’s no money to be made.

    Now Kimber, Colt & Taurus all offer 6-shot .38/.357s that are between J & K-frame sizes. That leaves the two biggest revolver manufacturers, S&W and Ruger, with no competing product.

    Whether Smith is smart enough to come up with a6-shot J-frame & 1/2, well, no one here’s accused them of being smart. That would be about the only scenario where #3 would come partially true.

    I think we’ll sooner see a “Super SP101” from Ruger.
    I'd love to be wrong...

    Smith has been pretty schizo when it comes to the revolver line. On the one hand, they've innovated things like the two-piece barrel, and people who know what they are talking about think that the Magnum K-frames they are making now are far better suited to a steady diet of .357s than past iterations. On the other, they still flatly refused to put great fixed sights on any revolver other than the 640 Pro is kind of dumb.

    I agree that the thing we're most likely to see is a new platform from Ruger. Whether that will be a "Super SP101" or a "Super LCR" remains to be seen, but either way, sign me up. The fact that the smallest six-shot DA .38/.357 in their lineup is the GP100 is a hole that I'd really like to see filled.
    I was into 10mm Auto before it sold out and went mainstream, but these days I'm here for the revolver and epidemiology information.

  3. #73
    S&W might be putting more of their efforts into semi-autos than revolvers since semis are far more popular today.

  4. #74
    A J frame opened up just enough to have a cylinder that holds 6 rounds of .38 SPL.
    Quote Originally Posted by Buckeye63 View Post
    Also maybe a frame size between a J and K ( D size )
    At S&W that was the C frame Model 73 of 1973.
    Code Name: JET STREAM

  5. #75
    Let’s see……. A six shot J frame is not a J frame it is a K frame. It would have to be able to handle 357 as most revolver buyers are old people like me who grew up believing the 125JHP 357 magnum was the Hammer of the gods so they’re not going to buy a large revolver that cannot shoot those rounds.

    Looking at the above stats, the return on the tooling would not be very good it would take a long time to pay it off as it’s doubtful Manny would sell other than the niche people that take handgun classes or read forums like this. The vast majority of gun sales go to people who want to own guns not to people who actually shoot them.

    One cannot make a revolver into what it is not. The advantage to the J frame is its ease of carry in multiple spots and can be carried in multiples (NY reload)

  6. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Navin Johnson View Post
    Let’s see……. A six shot J frame is not a J frame it is a K frame. It would have to be able to handle 357 as most revolver buyers are old people like me who grew up believing the 125JHP 357 magnum was the Hammer of the gods so they’re not going to buy a large revolver that cannot shoot those rounds.

    Looking at the above stats, the return on the tooling would not be very good it would take a long time to pay it off as it’s doubtful Manny would sell other than the niche people that take handgun classes or read forums like this. The vast majority of gun sales go to people who want to own guns not to people who actually shoot them.

    One cannot make a revolver into what it is not. The advantage to the J frame is its ease of carry in multiple spots and can be carried in multiples (NY reload)
    It would have to be an entirely new frame sized between the J and the K (similar in size to a Colt D frame). If Smith can waste money on coming up with the Z frame, I think this would certainly be worth while. The advantage of this size is that it is much easier to tote/conceal than a mid size K/L frame, easier to shoot than a J frame, and it is still a six shooter. I agree with the other posters and this (in both stainless and airweight form) could breath some life back into their lineup. Guns like the Magnum Carry, the K6S, and the new King Cobra have proven that this can even be done in .357 Magnum.

    As another poster stated, Smith gave this a try in 1973 with the C frame. However, they threw in the towel quickly after some early production issues. Nealy fifty years has passed and more competitors are offering revolvers of this size. It would be nice to see them give it another shot.

    The lack of a small frame .38 or .357 six shooter is really the biggest glaring omission in both the Smith and Ruger line of revolvers.

  7. #77
    Member jtcarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Texas Cross Timbers
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Watson View Post
    At S&W that was the C frame Model 73 of 1973.
    I’ll be dipped, yep, there was such a critter.

    Coil MS and offset lock notches. Ditched it because the offset notches were too hard to manufacture.

    After 50 years, they ought to be able to figure it out.

  8. #78
    Site Supporter OlongJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    "carbine-infested rural (and suburban) areas"
    Quote Originally Posted by jtcarm View Post
    I’ll be dipped, yep, there was such a critter.

    Coil MS and offset lock notches. Ditched it because the offset notches were too hard to manufacture.

    After 50 years, they ought to be able to figure it out.
    Offset notches is the key thing that keeps the K6S cylinder to the small OD it has. It's pretty much a requirement if they are going to shoot magnums.

    It's frustrating that everybody who actually understands that concept also understands that SPL, maybe +P, is more than enough, and would probably practice and carry with a cylinder full of wadcutters.
    .
    -----------------------------------------
    Not another dime.

  9. #79
    Member feudist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Murderham, the Tragic City
    Quote Originally Posted by jtcarm View Post
    I’ll be dipped, yep, there was such a critter.

    Coil MS and offset lock notches. Ditched it because the offset notches were too hard to manufacture.

    After 50 years, they ought to be able to figure it out.
    Huh. learn something every day.

    Last edited by feudist; 11-01-2022 at 12:42 PM.

  10. #80
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Mesa, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by feudist View Post
    If S&W had actually had that in production in 1973 I'd have bought one instead of the M-60 I later got rid of. S&W really does have a problem doing things right don't they.

    Dave

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •