S&W riding high


PDA






Owen
June 19, 2006, 05:56 PM
From Today NSSF Bullet Points:

SMITH & WESSON PROFIT SURGES, RECORD REVENUE REPORTED . . . Smith & Wesson on Thursday reported a surge in fourth quarter profit and record revenue for the fiscal year. Net income for the fourth quarter was $4.2 million, or 10 cents per share, compared with $1.8 million, or 5 cents per share, in the same period a year ago. For the full year, revenue increased 27.4 percent for a record $157.9 million. "Our results for the year reflected solid execution on the strategy to grow our core handgun business, to diversify our company, and to enter into new markets with new products," said Michael F. Golden, Smith & Wesson president and CEO. Firearms sales for the year grew 29.8 percent, reflecting a 69 percent increase in pistol sales and a 13.7 percent increase in revolver sales. Net income for the year was $8.7 million, or 22 cents per share, an increase of $3.5 million, or 8 cents per share, over the previous year. Smith & Wesson is traded on the American Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol SWB.

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W riding high" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Srigs
June 19, 2006, 11:44 PM
It is good to see an US gun company doing very well and moving in the right direction. :)

carpettbaggerr
June 19, 2006, 11:47 PM
Imagine how well they'd be doing without those stupid locks........

Lone_Gunman
June 20, 2006, 12:00 AM
I won't buy anything from them as long as they put the stupid locks on the guns.

raz-0
June 20, 2006, 12:38 AM
Oddly enough. With the M&P I do not believe you CAN get one with an internal lock yet. Maybe if you are doing a departmental order or something. But in the general retail supply, they are too busy filling orders for ones without the lock.

Lone_Gunman
June 20, 2006, 08:48 AM
I wish S&W would make a "limited edition" series of guns without the lock, kind of like the Heritage edition guns they made around 2000. They could tout these as more of a collectible gun than a self defense gun, and therefore leave off the lock in the name of historical correctness.

JesseJames
June 20, 2006, 11:10 AM
:)

Birukun
June 20, 2006, 02:09 PM
Are you talking about the internal lock?

Or the magazine disconnect?

Either way, the internal lock and the magazine disconnect will no doubt be easy to change, as soon as replacement parts are available for the models that do not have them.

I pick mine up after the 1st, I will report back if it comes with the internal lock. I had not noticed it when I originally looked at it, I saw it shown as 'optional' on the S&W website - thanks foir bringing it to our attention. Since I live in the People Republic, no doubt it will include both 'safety' features.

Since I will have it apart to disable the magazine disconnect, seems like one more thing to do while I am in there!

Bill in SD

roo_ster
June 20, 2006, 02:16 PM
My SW1911 does not have "the lock."

This goes to show just how small firearms companies are.

BozemanMT
June 20, 2006, 02:26 PM
Nice, i bought 200 shares at about 4.50
it's up over $8
nice:D

Jim K
June 20, 2006, 02:34 PM
I have come to the conclusion that what began as a legitimate concern about the S&W internal lock has now come close to insanity. Every time S&W is mentioned, in any context, the lunatic fringe begins raving and ranting and frothing at the mouth about "the lock". Get over it, folks. If you don't want the lock, don't buy S&W or Taurus or Ruger or any of the other guns with a lock.

You can also avoid cars with ignition locks, which might fail, or house doors with locks which might leave you trapped inside or locked out.

I have several S&W and Ruger guns without locks, and some with. The lock is simply of no concern to me.

And please don't rant about all those failures where thousands of people have been killed when their S&W revolvers locked up. I have tried to trace a legitimate complaint or any verifiable such incident and came up with zilch. Nada. Zip. Nothing but more raving and screaming and ranting and frothing. If you know of such an incident, with a real person who can be contacted or a real posting that can be verified, say so; otherwise shut up, already.

Get real, get a life. If all you ever have to worry about in life is a lock on a gun you claim you will never own anyway, you will be darned lucky.

Jim

Lone_Gunman
June 20, 2006, 03:35 PM
If you know of such an incident, with a real person who can be contacted or a real posting that can be verified, say so; otherwise shut up, already.


Search for posts by someone named Erich who occassionally posts here. He has actually had one lock up while shooting. Talk to him if you want a first hand account. He has posted his experience here.

As for the lock itself, it probably mechanically fine, though. Anything man made can and eventually will screw up. I have enough of an engineering background to know that adding unnecessary parts to a design can cause malfunctions you otherwise would not have to even consider.

My main concern is the idea of the lock, and what it means for the company to continue to keep putting it on their guns. The lock comes from the Clinton era, a particularly dismal time for gun enthusiasts. The lock represents an unsavory collaboration between government and a private company to make guns "safer" in the name of public health and the common good. That kind of "nanny" mentality makes me, and most other people who dislike the locks, sick. I don't need the government, or any company, telling me I need a lock on my gun.

My secondary concern is aesthetics. The hole uglies up one of the prettiest handgun designs out there, ie, the S&W DA revolver.

Jim K
June 20, 2006, 03:52 PM
If Erich or anyone else who HAS HAD a lock failure will contact me, or post here, I would appreciate it. But ONLY if YOU have had a failure; no rumors about some guy somewhere who might have....

The problem is that reaction to what you call the "nanny" mentality. I agree to a point, but I think it has been carried to extremes in this case. The lock is there; it does not have to be used (I have never used one). But I do lock my guns in a safe, which I assume you would also reject as being "nannyism". (In case anyone who reads this is planning to come to my home with evil intent, I didn't say I lock ALL my guns in a safe.)

I see no more reason to complain about S&W locks than about the door and ignition locks on my car. Even less, since I have to use the car ignition lock unless I go to a lot of trouble to remove it. I don't have to use the S&W lock.

Jim

Werewolf
June 20, 2006, 04:35 PM
Net income for the year was $8.7 million, or 22 cents per share, an increase of $3.5 million, or 8 cents per share, over the previous year. Smith & Wesson is traded on the American Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol SWB.That's great for S&W but in the grand scheme of things that net income is chicken feed - literally. 8.7 million is about 1.8 days worth of net income for the last company I worked for.

8.7 mill is small cap and S&W is a biggy compared to many firearms manufacturers. The firearms industry really is small which is why the anti's had a real chance of putting them out of business before congress passed the law to protect them.

Still it's great to hear that their business and sales are growing. There are very successfull companies out there that'd kill for a 27.4% annual increase in revenue.

Congrats to S&W, their management team, their workers and an economic and cultural environment that makes their success a reality.

Deanimator
June 20, 2006, 05:02 PM
They don't make anything I'd buy, especially not in revolvers.

I hate stainless steel, ugly obtrusive integral locks, and round butts on N frame revolvers.

I've got a ton of S&W revolvers, not one of which is newer than 30 years old.

In terms of product line, S&W is where Chevy was about 1975.

TX1911fan
June 20, 2006, 05:47 PM
I agree with Jim. I suppose many of you who hate locks on guns would have no problem placing your firearm in the glove compartment of your car, which also has a lock. It's man made, so I guess, given the popular logic, could fail at the worst possible time and when you need to retrieve your gun, it just locks up and won't let you in. In my 40 years of life, I have never, ever had anything with a lock become locked on its own. Now, I've seen stuff that was locked, and then the lock became disabled, but that is different. I fail to see how this can be such a issue. Would I prefer S&W didn't put them on? Sure. However, I don't object to Dodge putting locks on my truck, or Ryland putting locks on my house, or DISH network putting locks on my satelite service. If I don't want to use them, I don't have to, but someone might want to.

Lone_Gunman
June 20, 2006, 05:50 PM
Here is Erich's description of what happened with the lock:

The internal lock on my S&W 60-15 self-activated when I oafishly knocked the unloaded gun off a counter onto the hardwood floor. The "gun locked" flag got jarred to where it was sitting crossways in its slot. I had to go to the safe, dig out the box, dig out the keys, fully activate the lock, and then fully de-activate it to get the flag properly situated.


This was from a thread at THR.

I will pm Erich and see if he will add anything.

Erich
June 20, 2006, 08:30 PM
Hello,

I've been trying to avoid these lock threads as if they were zombie bear threads, but I wanted to answer my friend Lone Gunman's PM. Here's what happened to me (as I've announced all over the internet umpty million times - Jim, go to the extensive ILIF threads on the S&W Forum for the most detailed info that I've seen - tho several other folks have spoken up over time and have not posted on the ILIF threads).

I oafishly knocked my 60-15 off a counter onto a hardwood floor. The "gun locked" flag got situated crossways in its channel and the gun totally locked up. I had to go dig the box out of the safe, find the keys, and then fully engage and then fully disengage the lock to get the gun back in working order.

I traded the gun away and won't buy another with a lock (I have, however, bought several pre-lock S&Ws since then :) ) - I've never had an ignition lock on a car fail me when I needed it. ;) I don't really care what anyone else does - put five locks on the thing. Make a "Houdini Special" - I don't care. But I won't buy it.

Personally, I believe that the Taurus lock design is superior to that of S&W, and I wish that S&W had simply licensed it instead of coming up with that unattractive Rube Goldberg-esque thing they put on their guns.

Ha! I just noticed that Lone Gunman had quoted me from a previous thread already! I've retyped what happened to me in so many threads (surely dozens by now) that it's almost word-for-word worn a groove in my brain.
:banghead:

If anyone wants to email me on this, feel free, but I doubt I'll be back on this thread. :)

Deer Hunter
June 20, 2006, 08:51 PM
I wish people would stop bitching about the locks...:scrutiny:

Lone_Gunman
June 20, 2006, 08:57 PM
As I have said before, I just wish S&W would re-issue the non-lock guns in addition to their lockable models, and let the consumer decide if he wants a lockable gun or not.

Of course, I have an opinion which would sell more.

Erich
June 20, 2006, 09:16 PM
Deer Hunter, I only mentioned it because I was asked. And because someone's research somehow didn't turn it up.

Have fun at college next year. :)

orionengnr
June 20, 2006, 09:20 PM
I think that civil discourse can still exist. Maybe.

Jim Keenan, I respect your contributions to the forum, your post count and your expertise.

That said, I think that your post displays a somewhat closed mindset. The whole "get over it" attitude is defeatist and disingenuous.

The fact that a problem exists with "The Lock" is a matter of degree and kind, (degree if you want to discuss it, and kind if you don't) and is well documented (check on smith-wessonforums.com for additional first person accounts).

The fact that S&W has allowed itself to get goat-roped into this deal is regrettable. The fact that S&W continues to uphold it's side of a senseless, unilateral, unlawful "agreement" without any basis in fact, reason or law is deplorable...and to many of us, unforgiveable.

The fact that there are some very vocal/aggressive "Lock Apologists" out there is the most disturbing part to me.

There are many S&W owners who are:
--loyal to the brand and its heritage, and
--appalled and repulsed by what has transpired in the last six years
to our favorite revolver brand.

Much the same as I, as a lifelong Republican, am repulsed and appalled by what has happened to my Party.

And no, I will not "get over it"...in either case.

Civil (and factual) replies are welcomed.

Note to self...better go on-line and find me an asbestos suit...ah, a better idea would have been to do that a while ago...

Jim K
June 20, 2006, 09:59 PM
Hi, Orionengnr,

I went to the S&W Forum a number of times, looking for specific "it happened to me" threads. All I ever found was post after post of rants about what might/could/maybe happen. Erich's post has been the first that said that it did happen, and I am now looking at how. I honestly don't see how it could happen as he says, but I will take his word for it. If others have had similar experiences, I would like to hear from them also.

Erich, if the incident happened as you say, I have two questions. First, why did you not return the gun to S&W so they could determine if there is a design defect. Second, why did you trade off an obviously defective gun? It seems to me that both actions were very irresponsible. You claim to worry about the locks because they may fail, yet you sold a gun you say HAD failed, knowing it could fail for someone else, perhaps with fatal consequences. That is like selling a car with defective brakes, hoping to get your money and not caring if someone else gets killed.

I do know that after the unfortunate "agreement" with the Clinton administration, many gun owners simply went berserk. They told a lot of what I can only call "imaginitive" stories about S&W guns blowing up by the thousands, triggers and hammers breaking off, and, of course, locks failing.

I surveyed every gun shop I could contact, asking about those occurrences. When I reported the lack of such happenings, I was accused of lying, being a shill for S&W, taking bribes, etc. I was told that there was a giant conspiracy between S&W and all the dealers in the country to suppress the bad information. One gentleman told me that the BATFE had threatened to revoke the license of any dealer who reported an S&W failure. One fine, upstanding anti-S&W type e-mailed me a death threat. It went on and on.

Jim

mec
June 20, 2006, 10:12 PM
"I honestly don't see how it could happen as he says, but I will take his word for it. If others have had similar experiences, I would like to hear from them also. .."

Erich said it happened and it did. He does not have an agenda and is not an internet fussbudget. He explained in one thread that he was embarassed about having dropped the gun and causing it to lock up and chose not to return it to S&W because he felt that the flag came up because he had clumsily knocked the gun off a table. This might not have been within the expected parameters of 'normal use.'

Ala Dan
June 20, 2006, 10:35 PM
I for one, am very glad too see the Smith N' Wesson Company doing well.
I have forgiven, and forgot all the wrongs that the previous owners did
with the Klinton administration; and hope they are dead and buried. I still
think S&W revolver's are the world's best.

Lone_Gunman
June 20, 2006, 11:32 PM
Jim,

You asked for a first hand experience, and I asked Erich to indicate what happened. He recounted his story, and his story is the same every time he tells it.

I apologize to Erich for drawing him into this thread only to be bushwacked. You are all but calling him a liar with comments like "if the incident happened as you say". Of course it happened as he said, and to imply otherwise is insulting. Erich has no reason to be lying that I am aware of, and is only even participating in this thread because I stupidy private messaged him ask him to relay his personal experience to you, as you had requested.

Finally to chide him and call him irresponsible for selling the gun instead of sending it to S&W is a low blow. How do you know he did not make the purchaser aware of the problem? Maybe he sold it to a gunsmith. Maybe he didnt want to go to the trouble of boxing the gun up, carrying it to UPS, and sending it to S&W. Maybe the new owner was told of its problems, and didnt mind going to the trouble of sending it back if he got a good deal on it. I personally have bought several defective weapons on the cheap, and subsequently had them repaired.

I don't mean this disrespectfully to you. I just don't think you treated Erich fairly.

Stainless Chili
June 21, 2006, 03:20 AM
UGGG !!

I just had a horrible brain fart.

Liberals with locks on their minds.

"If we have put a satellite controlled car ignition lockout device,
why can't we have a satellite-controlled lockout on a gun?

That way we can control who uses them!"

It will make sense - to an insane person.

454c
June 21, 2006, 04:10 AM
Jim,I usually enjoy reading your post but,your post in this thread has me scratching my head.

Yes,there are many lock wars on the S&W forums.Try a search for "ILIF" or "internal lock induced failure".


Remington got the hint and dropped the locks.This would not have happened if customers had "get real,get a life","get over it" or "shut up".

orionengnr
June 21, 2006, 07:56 AM
For your measured and logical response.
I have read sooo many posts saying that it is all an Internet myth, and that no evidence exists. It has been a while since I've reviewed this one:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/500103904/m/228102718

but there were (at last read) at least half a dozen credible first-hand accounts (along with the usual assortment of "replies"). Since then I have read of several others on different forums (including here and on THR) and I encouraged each to add his experience to the above tread. As I said, it has been a while since I've reviewed it.

As far as your statement about gun dealers denying the existence of a problem, I think that speaks more to the experience / motivation / integrity of the dealer than it does to the truth of the matter. I'm sure that many have no direct knowledge, some do but are in denial, and some just want to sell you something. (If you want to see some really heated exchanges, look further on the S&W forum.)


For me...I was new to revolvers about three years ago. I bought at least three before I was aware of The Lock. At a certain point I stumbled across a thread like this and started reading. Didn't stop me from buying two more, but the more I read, the less confident I am in Lock-equipped S&W revolvers for CCW. This resulted in the sale of two so far, and the likely future sale of the remainder at some point...

mec
June 21, 2006, 08:24 AM
that smith and wesson forum string is a good one and touches upon how to nobble the lock if you choose:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v508/500magnumnut/lock1b.jpg

I am also glad that Smith and Wesson is prospering. their revolvers are very accurate and shootable. If I were to get one with a lock and planned to use it for anything more critical than target shooting, I would probably do something like the above. I do find the smith forum posts credible and Ayoob cites the owner of a New Hampshire indoor range who rents out guns for on premises use who had observed and documented several self- engagements.

Erich
June 21, 2006, 09:38 AM
Howdy,

I didn't send the gun back to S&W because it was working fine according to their design parameters. The problem wasn't that the lock was broken, it was that the poorly designed lock was there and was able to come out of its slot. Since the lock wasn't broken, there wasn't anything that S&W could do for me (short of removing the lock, which they wouldn't do) - so why call or write?

I traded the gun off because S&W sold it with the poorly designed lock onboard, and it was working perfectly within their design parameters. No ethical problem whatsoever - as many of you have indicated, lots of people are just fine with this design feature. (Your posts' tone on this somewhat disturbs me, Jim. I trust there's just a misperception of tone due to the difficulty of communicating through this written medium.)

While (as mec relates) I felt like a doofus for knocking the (unloaded!) gun off the counter, I got rid of it because I think this sort of impact is very much within the parameters of what a self-defense gun might have to experience (and yet still be able to function after experiencing!) in a real fight. I've done some force-on-force training with handguns, and I think any major f-o-f trainer (Lee at RBFC, Southnarc, Gabe Suarez) would agree with my conclusion that the amount of knocking around a gun may receive requires the thing to be durable.

Anyway, as I have always said, I hope everyone who wants to buy a S&W with the lock does so. I've shot a number of them, and they're very nice guns - but I don't like the lock adding a potential problem that could make it impossible to use the gun to defend myself.

Birukun
July 1, 2006, 06:19 PM
Picked it up today! SKU#109XXX

Internal lock - NO
Mag disconnect - YES

Can't wait to get to the range.....

Bill in SD



*Mod Note: Serial number obscured.

Sam
July 2, 2006, 06:05 PM
I'm with Erich on this one.
Have absolutely no reason to doubt his story. Been shooting with him a few times, reliable, has good friends(best eval of someone's character) and never tried to blow smoke up my backside.

Customers want me to remove the things and weld up the hole, but the liability is just too freaking high. My agent's anal orifice is puckered tight just because I'm responding to this thread.
Cut my income by a bundle because if I won't remove the lock they just don't get the other work done that they came for.

Da lock outperforms Shopvac, Kirby and Hoover.


Sam

mec
July 2, 2006, 07:09 PM
that signature line sounds like ayn rand.

Jim K
July 2, 2006, 07:52 PM
In other words, Erich is telling the truth because he is on the side of the angels (and against the LOCK) but all the gunsmiths and dealers I have spoken to are liars and crooks who are part of a conspiracy with the evil S&W.

Come now, fellas. With all due respect, this issue has gotten so out of hand that I find it hard to believe anything any more. I have tried to get the lock on a Model 60 to bend, twist, or anything else. I removed the grips and beat the gun unmercifully in every direction with a plastic mallet a lot harder than it could ever be hit in simply falling onto or off a table. The lock stayed where it was. I tried to get the lock to release under blows, or to set under blows, without success. I won't say that one single gun could not have had some kind of problem, but a design problem as widespread as claimed would certainly have happened to someone else.

In addition to the lock "problem", there were supposedly thousands of reports of S&W triggers and hammers breaking off. I asked the same questions at that time and could find no confirmation. Again, the story was almost invariably spread by folks with a passionate hatred of S&W for other reasons. As with lock failure, I can't say it never happened but it certainly didn't happen to the extent the ranters claimed. In fact, one gunsmith did show me an S&W hammer with the spur peeled off; it was not MIM, it was an old hammer.

Jim

Lone_Gunman
July 2, 2006, 09:10 PM
As with lock failure, I can't say it never happened but it certainly didn't happen to the extent the ranters claimed

I am confused by this statement, as I don't see where in this thread anyone has claimed that lock failure has occured in any great numbers. I suspect that lock failure incidents are extremely rare.

The point is that with a pre-lock Smith and Wesson, the risk of lock failure is zero, while with the post-lock guns, there is at least some marginal risk.

This risk is probably not significant, unless of course, you are the person whose gun locks up when you try to use it to save your life.

You asked for a first hand experience. I provided one to you in the form of Erich, and you still don't seem satisfied. In fact you were rather rude to Erich and implied that he might not be telling the truth, despite the fact that his story has never changed since he told it the first time.

By the way, not everyone who hates the locks also hates Smith and Wesson. I bought one of their 1911s about a year ago (which of course had no lock), and have been very pleased with it.

Sam
July 2, 2006, 09:46 PM
MEC,
That is a Rand quote. You have to take that oath to live in the gulch.

Mr. Keenan,
I do not know of your experiences with others concerning "the lock". I don't know you from diddly squat.

I do know that you have made a point of personally insulting someone that I respect and trust, and by extension, me.

I do not know what caused this rude, unjustified, contemptable behavior on your part, but do suggest that you examine your own motives and behavior.

It is however quite clear to me how you managed to generate a death threat over the issue.
Me I own a hundred SWB. I bought it based on my faith in an american company's ability to succeed after after throwing off the yoke of England. I bought when it didn't look so good. When it had fallen to 25% of issue value.
I want S&W to win, and win big. They aren't going to do it with the lock or your backing.

Sam

tegemu
July 3, 2006, 02:21 PM
My relatively new Smith & Wesson 1911, a Scandium Commander has NO external locks on it. If there are I haven't a clue where they would be. Now it did come with a cable, bicycle like, lock as do most guns these days.

Justin
July 3, 2006, 02:47 PM
Enough.

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W riding high" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!