Smith & Wesson No. 3, for Bryan Pettet
by Hoot 
, Diversityville, Liberal-sota, Wednesday, March 02, 2016, 13:46 (3127 days ago)
edited by Hoot, Wednesday, March 02, 2016, 13:49
Howdy Bryan,
Finally connected with Dad and Bro' Dan and managed to make off with their respective examples. I imagine one day they'll want them back but, for the moment, they reside at Casa Hoot.
Dad's is the "S&W 2000" chambered in .45S&W whereas Dan's is an Uberti in .45 Colt. Dan's came to him used so I tried to keep that in mind in the comparison. Dad's was new.
Cosmetic and Mechanical
The S&W is most definitely a higher grade of polish. Both in the smooth, mirror-like quality and the crispness of the corners. The color case on both is somewhat grey but the S&W shows a bit of blue.
The outer machining (visible w/o disassembly) shows the S&W to be closer fit. The sideplate on the Uberti has a little 'hickey' along the bottom edge and the cutout for the stationary portion of the latch is a bit wide of the latch bits.
The locking bolt on the S&W is also noticeably more substantial. Although lock-up is about the same between the two with maybe, just maybe, a bit looser on the Uberti. That could certainly come about through use though.
The grip panels on the Uberti are quite good. The S&W has a pair of faux ivory which were inexpertly shaped by an amateur as a gift to his father (that would be me) so it isn't really apples-to-apples.
Function
The S&W has a considerably nicer trigger but I certainly could live with the Uberti. The Uberti doesn't seem to have as positive of a trigger reset as the Smith; again, wear? The Uberti is historically correct with the firing pin mounted on the hammer where the S&W utilizes a frame mounted pin.
Pulling the hammer back on each is just about the same. The S&W has two distinct, equal clicks but the Uberti has more of a 'click-clunk'. In writing, that seems a bit harsher than in real life. Truth is, if the Smith wasn't here, I probably wouldn't even comment.
The rear sight on the Uberti is a bit more usable, having a wider 'bottom notch' (wide U with a narrow U in the bottom) where the S&W is very tiny. Dad had the front sight replaced with a bead as he was having trouble picking it up. However, I believe the original was thinner than the Uberti.
No question that the S&W wins overall but, for the extra dollars, I would expect that.
If there are specific questions unanswered, please let me know and I will attempt to reply with something sensible.
Cheers!
Nice review...
thanks for going to that much trouble. I was expecting the comments about superior fit and finish in the S&W. I was NOT aware that the S&W locking lug was substantially different. That surprises me a bit.
The firing pin differences were expected as were your comments on the trigger pull. Interesting that you liked the rear sight better on the Uberti.
Is it fair to say that you generally like the Uberti? Any qualms in recommending it or would you pay the extra coin for the S&W?
Yep, one could come home with me no problem.
by Hoot , Diversityville, Liberal-sota, Wednesday, March 02, 2016, 15:08 (3127 days ago) @ Bryan Pettet
The rear sight on the Smith is a generous U-shape with a teeny little notch at the bottom. It's small enough that a fella doesn't even notice it at first and thinks, "Now just how am I supposed to consistently position the front blade in this?" It is a proper width for a thin bladed front, once you find it. Not very quick though.
I wouldn't have any qualms about picking up an Uberti were the cash in the pocket and one found. I would want a historically correct caliber though, likely .45 S&W, .44 Russian or the like.