Smith Wesson Performance Center

[qswdef]

I got spoiled 10-12 years ago when I bought a 4" and 6" 686 which were spectacular out of the box. I need a totally reliable 2-4 inch 44 mag that goes boom everytime, no exceptions. I'm reading articles and reading forums that lead me to believe that good ol' S&W may not be making them like they used to. Would a performance center model eliminate the bugs I'm reading about more and more? Is it worth the money, or should I just get a standard model and spend the difference for a smith to get it right from the getco?
Thanks

[D.R.E.]

I got spoiled 10-12 years ago when I bought a 4" and 6" 686 which were spectacular out of the box. I need a totally reliable 2-4 inch 44 mag that goes boom everytime, no exceptions. I'm reading articles and reading forums that lead me to believe that good ol' S&W may not be making them like they used to. Would a performance center model eliminate the bugs I'm reading about more and more? Is it worth the money, or should I just get a standard model and spend the difference for a smith to get it right from the getco?
Thanks

Depends on the smith, of course

I have had two 44mag PC guns and was happy with them. (These were the 6 1/2" barrel with big orange clear sight. I'm forgetting the official name.)

On the downside, my dad sent a Lew Horton 44spl in that he really liked and they ruined the frame. They gave him another $1000 gun, but...

[trashman]

I have a 3" 629 "Trail Boss" in .44 Mag with the unfluted cylinder -- it's a modern production gun and it's my backpacking piece -- I trust my life to it (lock, MIM, and all).

The stock trigger is actually quite slick -- it has smoothed out over time.

The Performance Center changes out their tooling more frequently (so I understand) than the regular production lines so their guns are more consistent. But - for what it's worth, all the PC guns I've handled or shot really did just kinda make me go "hmmm...not sure if it's worth the extra 30%".

--Neill

[dfletcher]

While I'm no big fan of the modern Smith & Wesson revolver compared to the older ones that's probably based more on sentiment than anything else. That aside, I think the Smiths are from a technical point better made than years ago, but the nicities such as deep bluing, checkered top straps and other options are gone. And of course there's the internal lock - I'm not hating it, but it is like wearing brown shoes with a navy blue suit.

So I think buying a new Smith 29 is fine, if not Ruger makes a 44 Magnum that will go "bang" every time you pull the trigger. I have both, I like the Smith better but have no problem relying on the Ruger - the Ruger probably gets more use.

[oghl888]

Buy a regular .44 and send it to a good after market smith.

My last PC 627 was dissappointing. The finish on the barrel was not as good as it should be. The DA trigger was heavier than my older 686s (from the mid 90's). The SA trigger was the only part that lived up to the PC name of the gun. Unfortunately, I shoot DA mostly.

[trashman]

I wonder if some people say the older S&Ws have a better trigger than the newer ones is actually because the older ones have been shot for a few decades, which would smooth out the trigger on its own (metal against metal for thousands of round).

I think that there is some truth to this -- the metal .vs metal contact does eventually wear to perfect surface contact. My Model Pre-27 from ~1950 has about the slickest trigger of any gun ever.

On the other hand, the MIM triggers have really consistent and excellent pull out of the box (brand new). You are less likely to get a lemon or a star -- but you really can't do much to improve the pull since MIM isn't meant to be stoned -- the surface hardening is pretty thin.

--Neill

[hybridatsun350]

That's one badass little gun!