Smith & Wesson Revolvers

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by MT2008

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.

I agree, the Smiths have variations upon each model type, and to put them all on one page would create an unwieldy monster page which would have it's formatting screwed up every time someone edited it. It would be a nightmare.

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?