Smith & Wesson Revolvers
I noticed while editing a few pages that each individual Smith & Wesson Revolver has it's own page. Shouldn't we combine them all into one page like you did with the Glocks?
|
Good question. I would have to say no, just because Smiths have been around for so long and there have been so many models with various changes to each, that it wouldn't work as well.
Though I suppose this is fuzzy to some degree. Myself, I'm not always sure how to determine which guns should get their own pages and which shouldn't. For instance, the Cobray M11/9 is grouped under the MAC-10 page even though it's not at all a "MAC" (not made by Military Armament Corp.), just a derivative, but the Taurus PT92 is on a separate page from the Beretta 92F. We really don't have a policy in place yet to determine which guns get their own pages and which don't. Sometimes, it's pretty obvious, sometimes it's not. |
Quote:
On that note, I don't necesarily agree that the M11 should have it's own page, since it was built on the original blueprints for the .380 M11 by SWD who also contract built the MACs (10&11) after M.A.C. went under. It was merely stretching the .380 frame to allow for a 9mm round. In fact, upon close examination, the construction is nearly identical to the MAC-11, except one is stretched (and a different caliber of course). What I think needs SERIOUS work is the M1911 page. If a manufacturer makes more than THREE types of M1911s they should get their own page just because the M1911 page is a Mess. I suggest this: 1) M1911/M1911A1 (the first page and holder of all originals and absolute CLONES of those models as well as one offs). 2) M1911 Kimber 3) M1911 Detonics 4) M1911 Para Ordnance Just a thought. Doesn't anyone else get sick and tired of fixing the screwed up formatting on the M1911 monster length page? |
I fixed that page.
I put the image over the titles so they all fit. It works pretty well to keep them organized.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
I think I like MPM's idea. We should have a page for Colt M1911 variants (and maybe keep close copies like the Auto Ordnance which sometimes substitute for the Colts in movies), and then another for Kimbers, another for Detonics, etc. |
Quote:
I think a better example is the Ruger Mk II. After all a LONG time ago, Bill Ruger reverse engineered a captured NAMBU pistol in his garage, and made the "Standard" aka (the MK I, though never called that). The Mk II and III are just improvements on the MK I. I would not consider putting the Ruger MK II under the NAMBU page, even though the pistol born by cloning the Nambu in the first place. Does this example make sense? :) personally I don't have strong opinions regarding Taurus, but they do make a serious attempt to stand out and make their own distinctive lines of guns, so I wouldn't mind Taurus keeping their own pages, even the 92& 99. |
Huh?
Quote:
No it isn't. The images are a little above their titles but everything lines up now. Much better than it used to be. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
BTW, I love the STAR pistols. They fire really fast, much faster than an 1911 and they chamber in 9mm so there one less caliber I have to bring to set and if it's not a historical film, the Stars are just as good as any 1911 clone to be seen on film. :) |
I personally think they're ugly as sin, but the one they used in Phantasm was formed so perfectly and plated so shiny I couldn't stop drooling. He shouldn't have called it a "Colt Army Issue" though.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
"I'm just gonna go up there and take a look around. Nobody's gonna see me. But, heck, a Colt army issue will put a man down and keep him there." and takes it with him. When the Jawa thing jumps him, he draws it, and fires the gun backwards into it. When he draws it, though, there's a brief zoom in on the gun, where you see the external extractor, making it a Star. I've never seen Phantasm 2 though. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.