chief series stainless or black ?

laktrash

August 12, 2010 05:26

I have a couple of S&W cs45's "one black one stainless" I'm hoping to add the cs9 and cs40 as funds permit. Which do you consider more collectable. Primarily use for limited range time and very little edc if any. I prefer the black but think stainless holds its finish better with time. I really don't buy to resale mainly to fondle

0

• 

  wpage

  August 12, 2010 07:59

  Black is classic and less glaring.

  0
• 

  nmyers

  August 12, 2010 08:12

  Agree, stainless looks better over time.
  
  But, if collectibility is what you want, stick with revolvers made pre-MIM parts.
  
  Neal

  0
• 

  beantownshootah

  August 12, 2010 08:34

  Hard to answer this question.
  
  
  
  
  The new series Smith autos largely have little collector's value at this time. That may change eventually, but who knows how long it will take. The "Chief series", I think, probably would be desirable eventually.
  
  Which will be more collectible in say 20 years? I'd say it going to probably be whichever one is rarer (ie fewer number of manufactured guns overall). I don't know which actually *IS* rarer, but my *guess* is its probably the blackened guns. This information might be available (eg from the Supica book).
  
  As to which one is more desirable as a functional gun, that depends. I think stainless guns are generally lower maintenance, and the shinyness of the stainless is actually probably *NOT* a disadvantage for concealed carry. Some people think that light-colored guns look bigger and therefore offer more visual deterrent value. If your gun is concealed carry, then it ought to remain concealed until you draw it.
  
  A black-finish gun is probably more appropriate for a "tactical" or military gun where you don't want to give yourself away with a reflection or glare.

  0

Please sign in to leave a comment.