Contender : differance between G2 and older model?

[Shooter6br]

Confused about the G 2 vs older model. HELP PLEASE:violin:

[No_1]

Butt stocks don't interchange and from what my smith buddy says the G2 triggers are not as nice from the factory and are harder to fine tune. Bout all I know.

R.

[pmer]

The G2 sports better leverage for opening the action. And its compatable with older contender barrels. The Encore is stronger and has its own line of barrels.

[45nut]

The original contenders came out about 1967, the newer G2 (generation 2) came out about 2005 I think, not much earlier. The G2 is essentially a scaled down Encore frame with the ability to handle the G1 barrels, but with a new trigger assembly and new grip and updated metallurgy.
For 99% of the barrels available the G1 Contender frame is quite up to the tasks, but reports of damaged , stretched frames with cartridges of added horsepower should diminish with the G2 frame.
T/C now is a subsidiary of S&W and is moving their entire operation out of NH to MA . I for one cannot see how this will help the shooters, but there it is.

[jhrosier]

.....T/C now is a subsidiary of S&W and is moving their entire operation out of NH to MA . I for one cannot see how this will help the shooters, but there it is.

It's the new math that is confusing you.....

S&W eliminated 350 jobs in NH.
They then "created" 215 "new" jobs in MA, and collected huge tax incentives for creating the new jobs.

Jack

[lathesmith]

Also, G1 Contenders have to be broken open to re-cock if the hammer is pulled back and then lowered, while the G2's do not. Not usually a big deal, but there are occasions where it can throw you if you forget about it.

I see the G2's and Encores are always denigrated for their "terrible" trigger pulls, which are supposedly much worse than G1 Contenders. Having owned all three, I was hard-pressed to tell much difference between the ones that I owned, and I sure hated having to break the action to re-cock while in the hunting field. I am sure the older Contenders as a group probably do have better triggers than the G2's and Encores overall, but this can vary quite a bit from gun to gun apparently. Anyway, I have always been satisfied with my G2's and my Encore, maybe I'm just easy to please.

lathesmith

[onesonek]

It's the new math that is confusing you.....

S&W eliminated 350 jobs in NH.
They then "created" 215 "new" jobs in MA, and collected huge tax incentives for creating the new jobs.

Jack

That sounds like "biden" logic !

[45-70 Chevroner]

There were 3 Models of the first generation TCs. #1 had a half cock safety only. #2 had a crossbolt hammer safe which placed it in the safe position or pushed all the way to one side or the other placed it in center fire or rim fire depending on which direction it was pushed. #3 and a togle shaped similar to an arrow head that had 3 positions center for safe left or right for center fire or rim fire. If the hammer was manually lowered all three models had to be opened and closed to recock. I have owned all three models and still have model #2 and #3 wish I still had model # 1 as it is worth double what any of the three newer ones are worth. I have shot the G2 and it shoots just as well as the three older models but I don't like the feel of it as well.

[Shooter6br]

Thanks 45-70 Now I can fique out which model is what

[10x]

There were 3 Models of the first generation TCs. #1 had a half cock safety only. #2 had a crossbolt hammer safe which placed it in the safe position or pushed all the way to one side or the other placed it in center fire or rim fire depending on which direction it was pushed. #3 and a togle shaped similar to an arrow head that had 3 positions center for safe left or right for center fire or rim fire. If the hammer was manually lowered all three models had to be opened and closed to recock. I have owned all three models and still have model #2 and #3 wish I still had model # 1 as it is worth double what any of the three newer ones are worth. I have shot the G2 and it shoots just as well as the three older models but I don't like the feel of it as well.

Thank you

[45-70 Chevroner]

I didn't expect this, but your welcome. This thread is 7 years old. I am glad I could help. You never know what might happen on here.

[Mr_Sheesh]

Well, dunno about you, but I've learned to expect thread resurrections, from time to time :)

[10x]

I didn't expect this, but your welcome. This thread is 7 years old. I am glad I could help. You never know what might happen on here.

If information is accurate and helpful it never grows old,

[uscra112]

This thread gives me an opportunity to mention a serious drop-safety issue with early Contenders.

The Gen 1 has a unique set trigger system, which is why you can dry-fire it without ever cocking the hammer. (Try it.) While this setup makes for a delightfully light trigger pull, it has a potentially fatal flaw. When the trigger is cocked by opening the gun, a hammer-block slide is interposed between hammer and frame, like many revolvers. When you pull the trigger with the hammer cocked, this slide is retracted by a spring.

BUT

If the trigger is pulled with hammer NOT cocked, the hammerblock slide is free to retract if the hammer is manipulated even the slightest bit, thereby taking pressure off the slide. **The hammer is now resting on a live primer if there is a round chambered.** A blow to the hammer spur can fire the piece, as you might well expect. There was at least one major lawsuit over this, where a hunter had "decocked" the piece and put it back into a shoulder holster. Later on he leaned over, the gun fell out and landed on the hammer, killing him. This is why the later versions of the Contender have a more conventional fire control arrangement.

I still have my Gen 1. I love the set trigger feature, and with a 12" K-Hornet barrel it's a superb woodchuck killer. But I am very careful to remember this little quirk whenever I am shooting it.