I am also amused by those who see the term "classic" and the whine about the fact that the gun isn't made to the 1965 specs... or whatever prior year... and at the same time complain about the price being such that they'd rather buy "an original".
I my mind, these are the kind of people who expect something for nothing or set such high expectations that they'll always be disappointed and thus have something to complain about.
Case in point. At our local shop, a customer ordered a blued revolver - a 1917 classic IIRC - and when he came in to finish the transaction, he became utterly irate that someone in the store had already handled the gun. He was further incensed when he discovered the powder rings on three chambers and accused the staff of shooting his gun. He was further angered about a 15% restocking fee for cancelling a custom order. Whine, b***h and complain.
When I see people complain about the machined cylinder stop not being "original" I ask them if it'd be worth another $100 to them. Of course not.. that's the way S&W should build them. This is confusing, since the older stud method is actually less robust than the machined style which not only saves parts and labor, but production time. Folks complain about MIM, but forget the expense involved in machining very small parts with complex shapes and the waste involved when errors are made.
We'll soon see the day when revolvers are too expensive to produce. The extra labor needed to produce them, versus a semi-auto pistol, will eventually put them into the same category that a Colt SAA or Korth revolver is today.
When semi-autos have about 25 to 30% of their parts made from stampings and the frames made from injection molded Barbie dolls, the profit margins are much higher. The ability to interchange parts and minimal fitting will make these the bread & butter guns of all manufacturers, if they're not already.
