Quote:
|
just wondering why smiths are better,are there different materials,is the steel better,or am I just buying the name.I own Taurus/Rossi's,and they seem to be fine,so why is Smith and Wesson better?
|
"Better" is about as slippery a concept as there is. However, since you've defined a context of Taurus / Rossi this spares us from Ruger, DW, Korth, Colt and a host of other distactions.
One man's opinion:
http://grantcunningham.com/blog_file...urus_work.html
Seems plausible. If the materials, polishing and finishing is approximately equal but the prices are notably different, there are only a few reasons for the pricing discrepancy:
1. One scrimps on the precision of the internal parts.
2. Cost cutting in customer service.
3. One gets more simply due to the name.
4. Major differences in labor and overhead costs not offset by import costs.
5. Majick and Steamworks obscura.
6. Various efficiencies of fabrication and/or distribution.
7. Others which I've forgotten.
Grant Cunningham leans toward #1, folks that dislike S&W like #3, the rest of us probably think most, with the exception of #5, are contributory.
Those of us enamored of the principle of TANSTAAFL assume, as an article of faith, that if there's a big price difference you're giving up something. This could be as esoteric as "brand recognition" or as solid as "second rate internals" or as irrelevant to function as "resale value".
Generally, you're going to have to sort it out for yourself.