S&W Schofield, model of 2000

[Pancho Peacemaker]

I had the camera out this weekend, and I thought the Schofield would make a good subject for a few period compositions:

[Virginia Gentleman]

Very nice and I only wish they had chambered the gun in .45 Colt.

[Trailrider]

"Don't raise the bridge; lower the river!" The S&W 2000 is not an exact copy of the original Schofield. When S&W decided to bring out this gun in 2000, they made a conscious decision NOT to do so, probably fearing that if they either chambered it in .45 LC or even in .45 Revolver Ball (.45 Schofield), with the short cylinder and the forcing cone extending back to meet the cylinder face, somebody would probably try to change out the cylinder for the longer one and head up the .45 LC loads. Therefore, what they did was to shorten the frame to preclude installing a longer cylinder, a la the Uberti versions! As a result, the 2000 frame is actually shorter than either the Uberti version or the original! The 2000 are a beautiful gun, but they were too expensive and just didn't sell, and S&W discontinued them.

[Virginia Gentleman]

I still think that is one reason why they did not sell since the .45 Colt is so much more popular.  I agree the high price and design changes you mentioned along with the dot matrix roll marks and frame mounted firing pin did not help with sales to the CAS crowd.  One of the reasons I did not buy one was the bluing was not as nice as the Italian made guns coupled with the other changes it was a no brainer to go with Uberti made ones.  I also feel the same way about the current Colt SAA, it has too many design changes with the 3rd gens and the fit and finish does not rival what USFA did and what the Italian makers are doing now with the premium US finished guns.  The only potential issue with the SAA clones is no removalable/replaceable firing pin shield, but if one wants to spend the money, you can have one of these installed.

[Abominable Bill]

Great photos Pancho!
Those grips are beautiful

[Pancho Peacemaker]

I still think that is one reason why they did not sell since the .45 Colt is so much more popular.  I agree the high price and design changes you mentioned along with the dot matrix roll marks and frame mounted firing pin did not help with sales to the CAS crowd.  One of the reasons I did not buy one was the bluing was not as nice as the Italian made guns coupled with the other changes it was a no brainer to go with Uberti made ones.  I also feel the same way about the current Colt SAA, it has too many design changes with the 3rd gens and the fit and finish does not rival what USFA did and what the Italian makers are doing now with the premium US finished guns.  The only potential issue with the SAA clones is no removalable/replaceable firing pin shield, but if one wants to spend the money, you can have one of these installed.

VG,

I will differ with you on one point:   The bluing on these revolvers is some of the nicest I have seen on any handgun.  I own three Uberti Schofields and they are well finished, but the S&W beats them when side-by-side.

For traditionalists like myself, this revolver should only be produced in .45 S&W, regardless of popularity.

[Virginia Gentleman]

To me the S&W looked like it was painted and not as lusterous as the Italian guns and the dot font roll marking with modern fonted roll marks made the gun look like a modern retro piece that was not very authentic.  For the money, with the frame mounted firing pin too they did not seem like they were worth it to me.  Others may feel differently I am sure as it is only my opinion for what it is or isn't worth.