Smith better than Colt?
I want to get a 2" .38. I like older guns, and am trying to decide between an airweight chief and a colt cobra. I have heard the colts have some small weak internal parts prone to breakage. The colt I am looking at was made 1952 and times perfectly, but I am wondering if it is a less reliable gun than the chief.
0
-
Never havr heard anything about weak internal parts...I have had both Colt and S&Ws they are both fine weapons, it gets down to it being which feels better in your hand...and points more naturally. 0 -
Just how much are you planning to shoot your snub that you have to worry about durability? Either brand will be durable.
The design of the Colt, with the hand holding the cylinder tight as the gun fires, is the reason why the Colt will likely be more accurate. It is also the reason that, if the Colt is shot enough, eventually the hand may have to be stretched or replaced, a simple operation. However, the gun will continue to work fine even with a worn hand because, when the trigger is pulled, the cylinder will always be forced into tight lockup. It will normally take thousands of rounds to reach that point, where cocking the Colt slowly does not rotate the cylinder quite far enough to force it into lockup.
As I like to say, while a Colt may eventually get out of time, a Smith is always out of time. Pulling the trigger on a Colt always locks up the cylinder tight, even with a worn hand, whereas, with a Smith, pulling the trigger does not lock up the cylinder and there will always be play in the cylinder as the gun fires. That hurts accuracy.
I do not think that durability is the main difference between the two brands that should be considered. The main differences are size, weight and that all-important sixth shot in the Colt. Your money. Your choice.0 -
Colt is a little bigger, has a higher capacity, and is more collectible (read "valuable").
Smith is a little smaller, has a lower capacity, and is probably stronger.
I'd say if you want to keep it in the safe as an investment and maybe bring it out to fire once in a while, the Colt is the better pick
If you actually want to carry it every day, I'd suggest the Smith.
In *general* I'd say for carry purposes, stay away from the older 50s-era alloy frame guns, Smith *or* Colt.
If you're going to carry it, you probably want to use +P ammo. The current Smith airweight chiefs (eg the model 637) will hold up to unlimited numbers of +P rounds, while the same can't be said of the older Cobras (or older Smiths).
For what its worth, the Smith is also going to have a greater variety and availability of aftermarket parts (like grips, etc).
Older Colt Cobra will have an open ejector rod, and that *could* be a negative. Also, it seems sort of a shame to subject a nice "collectors" gun like the Cobra to daily wear and tear, though that's your call.
As to accuracy. . .its a snubnose. . .who cares?
Seriously, maybe the Colt is more accurate. . .maybe not, but at the 20 feet or less you're going to use it, it won't make a practical difference.
As to durability, the Smiths are probably more durable, though as mentioned, you would be hard pressed to wear out a Colt with ordinary loads and use.0 -
Kenworth better than Peterbilt, Chebby better than Ford, chocolate better than vanilla, blondes bettern red heads, peas or corn, chocolate or vanilla. You see my point, buy the one you like the best first, then get another, and another and another[:D][:D]Eddie 0 -
Both guns are $375, so price is not an issue. I had an early 1900s police positive that had a tiny little thin metal internal part that broke and tied up the whole gun. On inspection, it was so thin it looked like it was made to break. I think the later colts may have a little different internals. I have also heard that early alloy guns were weaker than modern alloy. 0 -
I have alot of J frames and a few Colts, including an older Cobra. If it's in very good shape that's a good price. I think the Colt is a better finished gun, but the mechanics of the Smith gives, I think, a faster and cleaner DA pull.
I really like my Cobra, but I most often carry a J frame Smith.0 -
I agree with dfletcher. I like my Cobra, but a S&W Model 37 is my carry gun. 0 -
Well capgun I guess that settles it! Buy both of them! 0 -
Ref: earlier post (hand holding the cylinder tight against the frame and the cylinder stop). I'm a little "off" on this. On a S&W the cylinder is "free floating" during ignition. The timing action (the trigger assembly/hammer) is not subject to the recoil "jolt". Unless a Colt is in perfect time, whereas the chamber is perfectly lined up with the bore (as in a new Colt revolver), there will be the trigger assembly taking a jolt during recoil.
The S&W's free floating cylinder "divorces" the action from the strain of bullet-jump alignment in older revolvers.
So, there you have it. Ice cream vs. cake for dessert.
One more thing..do this test yourself: At the gunshop, "dry fire" both revolvers. Keep the trigger back as far as it will travel after dry-firing, and try to gently "spin" the cylinders. You will not notice any significant difference in the rotational play. How do you like your eggs?
PS..ref weak Colt revolver parts: no longer a factor since Colt stopped making the Lightning and Thunderer models, sometime in the early 20th Century. Best, Joe0 -
Airweight S&W Chief.
I wrote Elmer Keith about them when they first came out. He said he fired 500 rds of 38-44 out of one and considered them safe for that load. He said the loads were punishing so you wont want to shoot many.
Some contributors on GB claim the frames will stretch with hot loads and that may be true but I give Keith's experience more weight.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments