Am I wrong to be unhappy with MIM parts?


PDA






Tallbald
October 25, 2011, 06:13 AM
Folks first off please let me say I'm not wanting to start a negative debate or anything. I know times change and so do manufacturing methods. It's just that having grown up in the days when my Smiths had beautiful color hardened triggers and hammers, and my Ruger double actions were made with triggers that didn't have hollowed out backs, I feel let down that the old ways are being left behind. I bought an SP101 this spring to replace one given up in a split. I never noticed at the shop that the triggers had changed. The revolver is a fine shooter, and I feel I could rely on it very well. But it was somehow just not "right" to me. I have debated on a new SP101 in .22, but you know if it too has the hollow trigger back too I'm going to pass. I have decided to stick with my older Single Sixes for entertainment. No MIM parts. I guess when Ruger came out years and years ago, cast parts were "just wrong" to the forged part Colt and Smith lovers too. Just my thoughts and personal preferences.
I guess this is similar to my loving wife's and my enthusiastic collecting bug for vintage sewing machines. Lots of cast iron, steel, nickel, beautiful machine work and graphics. No plastic, no computer chips and there are lots of neglected specimens to rescue and display. A 1934 Singer hand crank with beautiful deep black finish speaks to me as does a 1930's made Smith or Colt does. Don

If you enjoyed reading about "Am I wrong to be unhappy with MIM parts?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
bigfatdave
October 25, 2011, 06:21 AM
which MIM parts have failed on you, exactly?

Geckgo
October 25, 2011, 06:25 AM
I think the same thing everytime I see a plastic trigger guard, just makes me shudder. Then I remember that I don't intentionally torment my guns and I've NEVER had a problem with one because of materials. One of them things that we just need to accept as time goes on, unless you want to routinely pay more for sturdier things.

Same goes for:
computers
cell phones
10% ethanol at the pump (this one really bugs me)
UNleaded gas
Walmart "furniture" (the MainStays stuff)
Chemicals in tobacco to make it go out if you don't keep puffing
Lite Beer
Combination spices
premade first-aid kits (wife and I actually argue over this)
fire ants
etc.

All stuff that you just need to get used to cause it's here to stay

CajunBass
October 25, 2011, 06:28 AM
Just buy what you want.

Tallbald
October 25, 2011, 06:31 AM
None have failed on me and I don't expect MIM would. I'm confident they are fine. I just wonder if I'm alone in my aging man hope that some things would never change......Don

JohnnyCremains
October 25, 2011, 06:56 AM
I think these hollowed out triggers look like cheap crap. It's part of the reason I have sworn off buying any more new guns.
Oh and I've seen MIM AR15 triggers in Busmasters fail many times.

MIgunguy
October 25, 2011, 07:25 AM
Never had a problem with MIM myself.

premade first-aid kits (wife and I actually argue over this)
Unless you're an EMT or have accident prone kids, is that really worth arguing over?

oldfool
October 25, 2011, 07:47 AM
I cannot get myself real excited over MIM, pro or con
IMO, the one and only definition of quality is fitness for function. Period. If it works it works, if it doesn't it doesn't. MIM, unless badly done, works just fine. Badly done, no matter the new or old technology used, does not fine. Hand fitted doesn't work unless it's done right; people tend to forget that too easily.

"New & improved" is only rarely either. The more loudly touted, the less likely it is either. In the mass media age, everything is loudly touted. That is a big part of the problem. Marketeers mostly are in hot pursuit of 'different', and anything different will do.

Dirt cheap too often performs like cheap dirt, that much you can count on, but things do change, it's what life is all about, and improvements do happen slowly over time. You have to notice the little things. It is the accumulation of little things that represent real improvement over time. A lot of firearms, handguns in particular, come with standard features that used to be exclusively aftermarket.

The good old stuff is good stuff only so long as you are very picky about the stuff you pick. Always was that way.

Things change. I used to have a deadly jump shot (basketball), but it jumped up and left town so very long ago it's only a dim memory. I don't even miss it anymore.

I like the good old stuff (and aged bourbon), but I also like -
graphite composite fishing rods and gun cleaning rods
stainless steel guns
cell phones and rechargeable batteries
automatic defrost
electric smokers with digital time/temperature control
computers & usb memory sticks and internet gun forums
digital watches and digital cameras (and digital hearing aids)
gun cleaner in aerosol cans
zip lock bags & nylon tie-wraps
keyless car door locks & air conditioning in autos
modern scopes and red dots and fiber optic sights
laminate rifle stocks
LED flashlights
nylon holsters and cordura boots

and... easy opening cans & bottles...but only when they open easy !
(and MIM is a lot like that last one)

but.. I just cannot develop any personal fondness for "blocky glocky" guns, no matter how well they function
somewhat like "cheap bargains", I guess you can stand only just so much "new & improved" in your life

Tcruse
October 25, 2011, 07:49 AM
The new parts may very well be stronger and last longer than the old parts. Maybe not as visually appealing to us. Remember when "they said" that a plastic gun would never be good, well lots of us own Glocks with very high round counts.

lobo9er
October 25, 2011, 07:51 AM
Benefits of the Metal Injection Molding Process
The benefits of the Metal Injection Molding process are best realized by considering the Metal Injection Molding manufacturing process during the initial design stage of the parts or assembly. The primary benefits include:

•Design Freedom - MIM offers design flexibility similar to plastic injection molding. Geometrically complex parts that cannot be produced using the conventional powder metal processes without secondary machining are possible using the MIM process.
•Enhanced Details - MIM provides intricate features such as dovetails, slots, undercuts, threads, and complex curved surfaces. MIM can produce cylindrical parts with greater length-to-diameter ratios.
•Reduced Assemblies – The MIM process can be used to combine two or more simpler shapes into a single, more complex component to minimize assembly costs.
•Reduced Waste/Machining - MIM's capability to provide net shape components eliminates many secondary machining operations.
•Improved Properties - MIM parts are typically 95% to 98% dense, approaching wrought material properties. MIM parts achieve greater strength, better corrosion resistance, and improved magnetic properties when compared to conventional powder metallurgy processes

heres a little info that might cheer you up.

MrBorland
October 25, 2011, 08:17 AM
•Design Freedom - MIM offers design flexibility similar to plastic injection molding. Geometrically complex parts that cannot be produced using the conventional powder metal processes without secondary machining are possible using the MIM process.
•Enhanced Details - MIM provides intricate features such as dovetails, slots, undercuts, threads, and complex curved surfaces. MIM can produce cylindrical parts with greater length-to-diameter ratios.
•Reduced Assemblies – The MIM process can be used to combine two or more simpler shapes into a single, more complex component to minimize assembly costs.
•Reduced Waste/Machining - MIM's capability to provide net shape components eliminates many secondary machining operations.


Another way to say this is that should your gun ever need repair, it'll be an easier and cheaper fix, as MIM replacement parts are generally drop-in; little-to-no fitting hand fitting required.

Am I wrong to be unhappy with MIM parts?

The newer guns may not have the fit and finish of the older ones, but they shoot just as well, maybe better. So, if you fit and finish are most important to you, no you're not wrong. If functionality is most important, yes you're wrong. If the doom and gloom you read on gun forums about MIM parts has convinced you new guns categorically suck, yes, you're wrong, IMHO.

Old Fuff
October 25, 2011, 09:03 AM
For decades, starting in the late 1940's I have watched a sometimes slow, and sometimes fast, decline in fit and finish in top-line handguns. Sometimes a quick end has come when the older models have been discontinued and replaced with new ones that are less labor intensified.

In fact most of the changes or discontinuance can be attributed to increasing labor and overhead costs which are a fact-of-life in manufacturing economics in all industries.

While in some cases the newer guns are equal to the older ones so far as function is concerned, they lack a certain intrinsic look and feel that was the hallmark of the uncompromised "best quality" of the past.

It would seem that most of today’s buyers are satisfied if the things they buy will simply work, but some of us who have longer experience are harder to convince.

We are not satisfied with simply equal (or even better) mechanics. We are guilty of wanting it all. Anyone who has ever completely disassembled and examined an older Colt or S&W revolver knows exactly what I am trying to explain. In comparison to current or recent production the differences are obvious.

Admittedly if manufacturers still made them "the old way" I couldn't afford to buy them - which is the reason they don't do it - but for my modest requirements I'll stick with the old, that are sometimes available on the second-hand market at very reasonable prices, especially if you factor in the handcrafted quality they represent. ;)

Guillermo
October 25, 2011, 12:18 PM
Undeniable Fact Alert

MIM parts are used to so as to increase profitability...not improve the revolver.



The MIM apologists can't get by that simple fact.

jrb_pro
October 25, 2011, 12:40 PM
Is it bad that I thought "MIM" meant "Made in Mexico" for about two years.

:(:D

ATLDave
October 25, 2011, 12:47 PM
[B][COLOR="Red"]MIM parts are used to so as to increase profitability...

How does that distinguish them from any other components used by a for-profit gun manufacturer? The question is whether they sacrifice quality for that profitability.

Guillermo
October 25, 2011, 12:51 PM
The question is whether they sacrifice quality for that profitability

handling a new S&W revolver there is no doubt that quality has been sacrificed while increasing price.

the last 3 new 686's I handled had manufacturing defects.

(one horrendous crane/frame fit...2 barrels)

That said...more power to them.

What company would not use a cheaper method to make crappier guns and raise the price if they could?

ATLDave
October 25, 2011, 01:13 PM
OK, were any of those issues MIM? I have no particular view on MIM, but it seems that quality problems can certainly come from forged, cast, milled, or MIM parts.

lobo9er
October 25, 2011, 02:36 PM
MIM parts are used to so as to increase profitability...not improve the revolver.



The MIM apologists can't get by that simple fact.
__________________



Improved Properties - MIM parts are typically 95% to 98% dense, approaching wrought material properties. MIM parts achieve greater strength, better corrosion resistance, and improved magnetic properties when compared to conventional powder metallurgy processes

If I understand it right MIM parts also utilize better metalurgy.
MIM haters may get hung up on that.

MrBorland
October 25, 2011, 02:47 PM
MIM parts are used to so as to increase profitability...not improve the revolver.

The question is whether they sacrifice quality for that profitability.

the last 3 new 686's I handled had manufacturing defects.

(one horrendous crane/frame fit...2 barrels)

OK, were any of those issues MIM?


ATLDave's got you in quicksand, Guillermo. Best stop struggling. :D

Listen, as modern production has gone to more modern methods (e.g. CNC machining, MIM parts), QA/QC becomes more the issue: It's not whether the manufacturing process inherently sacrifices quality, but rather does the company have a good QC process in place to identify out-of-spec parts & guns before they go out the door?

Just for balance, here's my exhibit: A bone stock MIM & Lock-infested 4" 617 with a stagey DA trigger. Shot at 25 yards, unsupported, double action, with ammo I bought locally at Dick's:

http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp239/becke016/GunsTargets/SW617B-16Freestyle.jpg

Tallinar
October 25, 2011, 03:22 PM
Not all parts on a gun endure the sort of strain that necessitates the use of casting or forging. For such parts, I am not opposed to the use of MIM or even a bit of plastic (such as a plastic trigger guard). Yes, MIM allows manufacturers to keep costs down and profits up. But on the other hand, in some cases it might allow them to keep costs down for the consumer as well (whether this plays out or not would have to be examined on a per manufacturer basis).

As long as the function of the gun is not inhibited in any way, I'm really not enough of a gun snob to go on the witch hunt for MIM parts. Frankly, I don't have enough of an expendable income to have that luxury. Given my financial stance, if I want to be a shooter (ie, one who shoots guns, not just owns them), I am perfectly willing to accept a certain level of manufacturing expediency if it's not at the expense of functional quality.

Jim Watson
October 25, 2011, 03:47 PM
MIM & Lock-infested 4" 617 with a stagey DA trigger.

All that proves is that you have excellent trigger control with a "stagey DA trigger."
And the barrel isn't MIM. Although it may be ECM rifled these days.

My FLG was in the habit of "boosting" the hammer of a 1911 as the last step in a trigger job. Hold the hammer forward against the sear HARD (he uses a popsicle stick for leverage) and dryfire a few times to burnish the parts into each other. Works fine with milled parts but he rolled the hammer hooks right off a Major Big Name Brand gun's MIM hammer.

I have quite a good trigger pull on a MIMful SA 1911A1. It might not last as long as with milled parts that SA will cheerfully sell you, but it is fine now.

MrBorland
October 25, 2011, 04:24 PM
All that proves is that you have excellent trigger control with a "stagey DA trigger."

Naw - I have excellent trigger control with all triggers. :D

Somehow these MIM/Lock threads always seem to devolve into "new S&Ws suck" threads, and there's some evidence of that already. I offered that they still function & shoot fine, and posted a target (using a factory stock gun) to back it up. The shooter matters not - if I had one, I could've used a ransom rest to make the point.

One can tap complaints about the newer guns out on a keyboard, or they can practice with the gun they have. I know which route improves proficiency, and which doesn't, so to me, MIM/Lock threads always seem predictable & pointless. This thread started out with a legit & open question, though, so it seems fair to the OP to provide some balance.

blindhari
October 25, 2011, 05:04 PM
Point Of View
A Rolls Royce Silver Ghost was available in 1906. Salesmen by 1908 had instructions to tell any who inquired about "previously owned" cars to have a skilled mechanic take apart the transmission, engine and all gears to inspect for wear before purchase. This would be the equivalent of having a high end master gunsmith take apart a Colt Python prior to purchase. The average gun buyer today neither knows or cares about exquisite craftmanship in firearms. Like Chevy and Ford, firearm manufacturers will go out of business trying to make a living with highly finished handcrafted weapons. If you want a car to race you can hot rod it yourself($$), buy someone elses work($$$), go to a custom shop($$$$), buy a Ferrari($$$$$$). If you need to get to work a used VW Beetle will do it for you at 30 mpg. Regular production firearms are just that, regular. Give it another 100 years though and they will be on Antiques Roadshow as examples of fine craftmanship.
You pay your money and get what you pay for. Me I just want it to work.

blindhari

Guillermo
October 25, 2011, 05:38 PM
ATLDave's got you in quicksand, Guillermo. Best stop struggling.

not in any way shape or form.

everyone admits that Smith's revolvers are not as good and more expensive than their earlier counterparts.

MIM parts, 2-piece crush fit barrels do not a quality revolver make.

gdesloge
October 25, 2011, 05:50 PM
"everyone admits that Smith's revolvers are not as good and more expensive than their earlier counterparts."

"MIM parts, 2-piece crush fit barrels do not a quality revolver make."


Let's quantify this, shall we?

How exactly are the revolvers inferior?

Do they shoot less accurately or consistently?

Do they fail more often?

May we please have some proof - other than opinion - as to how exactly the newer guns are inferior?

Charts and graphs are excellent for this purpose.

gd

Old Fuff
October 25, 2011, 06:03 PM
Well Guillermo I guess you got told. :eek:

It seems like those Colt Diamondback's you have aren't so great after all. What is obviously better is a later-day revolver that is partially CNC machined and has MIM parts that a trained monkey can put together, and the latest in plastic trigger guards (or whatever). Of course the lockwork in your Diamondback is 100% steel, not 95 or 98 percent, which is clearly good enough, and they didn't just drop in, they were actually individually fitted.

All that careful hand fitting doesn't matter, so you're better off with one that's a functional equivalent --- which is the way we define quality now. Only a fool would want an older gun that was as accurate as one of the new ones, and sported hand fitting to boot. Everyone knows that you can’t hit a bull standing broadside at 10 feet with them old Colts that lock up like a bank vault door.

Sure they do…

Hopefully you will see the light and understand that a product that was created through using cost-cutting technology is by far the best. Why would you want anything else? :rolleyes:

gdesloge
October 25, 2011, 06:57 PM
Again, (possibly without the sarcasm), how are the new revolvers inferior?

If MIM is so awful, shouldn't it be exploding or catching on fire or poisoning someone?

I suppose that if you can't offer anything other than an opinion, at least you make it funny.

Or not.

gd

Racinbob
October 25, 2011, 07:36 PM
Fuff, #26 is a classic. :cool:

Guillermo
October 25, 2011, 07:48 PM
accuracy
build quality
fit and finish

take your pick

of course there are no charts and graphs because Smith is not so stupid as to release the data concerning the firearms that come back for warranty work.

I know, it seems incongruent that a company idiotic enough to put a storage lock that works on the same axis as the recoil is not made up of retarded baboons that would publish such data...but such is the case.

Still, there is nobody that I have ever met that thinks that a, for example, "classic model 27" is 1/2 the gun of a model 27 from 45 years ago.

Obama is president. Yugo sold 126000 cars in the US. MSRP is a "classic" model 29 in nickel is over a grand...and people w buy it.

a sucker is born every minute

bikemutt
October 25, 2011, 08:00 PM
please, please tell me you mistakenly added a zero re: Yugo sales? It just can't be that bad :(

Jim K
October 25, 2011, 10:14 PM
OF was more on point when he realized that if guns were made today like they were 50 years ago, he (we) couldn't afford them. The manufacturers use MIM not so they can make more profit, but so they can make any profit at all, something they won't do if guns are priced off the market. I am sure the Brady gang would be happy if a handgun cost $2000 or more, but would we?

Jim

Guillermo
October 25, 2011, 10:21 PM
OF was more on point when he realized that if guns were made today like they were 50 years ago, he (we) couldn't afford them

I doubt that

but since the majority of the new gun buying public will belly up and pay...why should they do any different?

If you can sell goose squeeze for saffron prices...wouldn't u?

gdesloge
October 25, 2011, 10:47 PM
"accuracy
build quality
fit and finish"
"there is nobody that I have ever met that thinks"
"a sucker is born every minute"


Great to learn your opinion. Thanks for sharing.

I suppose that if you had any facts to present that you would do so.


"of course there are no charts and graphs"

Do you mean to tell me that no independent magazine, laboratory, military or law-enforcement agency has ever quantified if these revolver are inferior? Has an engineering firm never tested MIM materials for use in any applications?

Again, nice to hear your opinion.

gd

Guillermo
October 26, 2011, 12:24 AM
Do you mean to tell me that no independent magazine, laboratory, military or law-enforcement agency has ever quantified if these revolver are inferior? Has an engineering firm never tested MIM materials for use in any applications?

no one with any intelligence believes that the current S&W revolvers are the measure of the revolvers they made in 50 years ago, with the exception of light weight.

If it takes a chart to tell you that...GREAT!!!

pleasepleaseplease be one of the Yugo buyers

less competition for the outstanding guns that were once made by S&W.

my last purchase was a K22 made in 1953 that I paid 290 bucks (20 shipping, 10ffl).

gdesloge
October 26, 2011, 12:30 AM
"no one with any intelligence"

That is all well and good, but I asked for some substantiation about the failings of MIM parts, rather than opinion.

All you have is opinion, apparently. That is fine, but just acknowledge it.

gd

Guillermo
October 26, 2011, 12:37 AM
but just acknowledge it

if you want statistics...they are simply unavailable

an intelligent person would look at folks like Wilson Combat that quit using MIM

S&W mentions LACK of MIM in special models

YMMV

lobo9er
October 26, 2011, 07:45 AM
•Improved Properties - MIM parts are typically 95% to 98% dense, approaching wrought material properties. MIM parts achieve greater strength, better corrosion resistance, and improved magnetic properties when compared to conventional powder metallurgy processes

Is this not a true statement? I'm asking, because i'm just going by what I read on a couple websites.
FRom what I read MIM is an advancement. Making less expensive to build and making some parts stronger.

lobo9er
October 26, 2011, 07:53 AM
no one with any intelligence believes that the current S&W revolvers are the measure of the revolvers they made in 50 years ago, with the exception of light weight.

I'm doubting "MIM" is solely at fault.

Tcruse
October 26, 2011, 07:54 AM
MIM parts are not OK for every part of every gun design. However, used in the places where they provide an advantage they work better than other alternatives. The old gun designs had some real limits on shapes/sizes of the parts because of the lack of the newer options. So, the lack of MIM parts may be also the lack of modern design and performance. We just expect more from our guns today. We expect them to need less maintenance, use higher pressure ammo, shoot more rounds, cost less and last longer. Maybe, we should avoid guns that do not have MIM parts.

PabloJ
October 26, 2011, 07:58 AM
Folks first off please let me say I'm not wanting to start a negative debate or anything. I know times change and so do manufacturing methods. It's just that having grown up in the days when my Smiths had beautiful color hardened triggers and hammers, and my Ruger double actions were made with triggers that didn't have hollowed out backs, I feel let down that the old ways are being left behind. I bought an SP101 this spring to replace one given up in a split. I never noticed at the shop that the triggers had changed. The revolver is a fine shooter, and I feel I could rely on it very well. But it was somehow just not "right" to me. I have debated on a new SP101 in .22, but you know if it too has the hollow trigger back too I'm going to pass. I have decided to stick with my older Single Sixes for entertainment. No MIM parts. I guess when Ruger came out years and years ago, cast parts were "just wrong" to the forged part Colt and Smith lovers too. Just my thoughts and personal preferences.
I guess this is similar to my loving wife's and my enthusiastic collecting bug for vintage sewing machines. Lots of cast iron, steel, nickel, beautiful machine work and graphics. No plastic, no computer chips and there are lots of neglected specimens to rescue and display. A 1934 Singer hand crank with beautiful deep black finish speaks to me as does a 1930's made Smith or Colt does. Don
YES. The country is exactly where the Roman Empire was at it's last legs and you're complaining about insignificant MIM parts.

oldfool
October 26, 2011, 08:36 AM
the topic is not crushed fit barrels or internal gun locks
the topic is not brand X
the topic is MIM

Me, I think Jim K nailed it best. People want custom hand fitted, forged, deep blued, etc, etc, but they want it all at MIM prices. Champagne taste on a beer income. "We ain't in Kansas anymore, Toto", and 1950 is gone. Don't hold your breath waiting for summertime 'gasoline wars" at 10-15 cents a gallon. If you want all that NIB, you get to pay for it. Truth is you always did. Pony up the cash if you want it NIB. You can have it for a price, but most either will not, or cannot, ante up the price.

For all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, though, extreme few can actually point to specific and practical reasons why MIM is "bad". Instead it always seems to evolve (devolve) into 'lists' of don't like this or that, instead of staying on topic.

oldfool
October 26, 2011, 08:41 AM
curious
just how many revolver manufacturers in business today are "100% MIM free" ?
and which ones are they ?
(I never seem to hear much about that, it's always a brand bashing party instead, it happens every time, no fail)

I would suspect Freedom Arms, maybe
will the re-intro of Dan Wesson revolvers be 100% MIM free ?
others ???

Rollis R. Karvellis
October 26, 2011, 08:48 AM
Just wait till the manufactuers start to use 3D printers.

Tallbald
October 26, 2011, 08:49 AM
Sorry if I offended anybody folks. All I was sharing was my sadness that some things don't stay the same, particularly, the way things I like are produced. I'll be more selective in any posts I make in the future. Note that I acknowledged MIM gave me no problems I know of. I simply shared that I was not happy with the way things on guns I like have changed. Don

Jim Watson
October 26, 2011, 09:07 AM
•Improved Properties - MIM parts are typically 95% to 98% dense, approaching wrought material properties. MIM parts achieve greater strength, better corrosion resistance, and improved magnetic properties when compared to conventional powder metallurgy processes

Is this not a true statement? I'm asking, because i'm just going by what I read on a couple websites.
FRom what I read MIM is an advancement. Making less expensive to build and making some parts stronger.

It is perfectly true, but is a red herring with no connection to the thread.
S&Ws are not, were not made by "conventional powder metallurgy processes."
We are looking back to The Good Old Days when they were made of milled bits and pieces.
(The Colt Mk III series and Dan Wessons DID use powder metal lockwork parts and the result was fairly grim.)

MCgunner
October 26, 2011, 09:16 AM
I think these hollowed out triggers look like cheap crap. It's part of the reason I have sworn off buying any more new guns.

Man, how boring is THAT attitude. :D But, hell, if you have enough, why buy more, eh? That's why I'm all off into reproduction cap and ball now days. I only need so many working guns. I kinda like these cap and ball guns for toys. :D

Guillermo
October 26, 2011, 09:18 AM
I'm doubting "MIM" is solely at fault

of course you are correct

just look at the sticky at the top of the revolver section concerning disassembly of the Model 10. The picks show some "amazing" tool marks.

@ gdeslodge
I apologize for the tone of my posts. It was uncalled for. Long difficult day.
Sorry

Thaddeus Jones
October 26, 2011, 09:34 AM
Ever notice the MIM defenders always say; "MIM parts are <insert your favorite percentage> the strength of forged parts." I noticed that too. ;)

So, I prefer forged parts, which are 100% the strength of forged parts. :)

As to the current company calling itself S&W, they are simply Taurus North. Only differences being that Taurus charges a reasonable price for their revolvers and Taurus is still able to put the barrels on strait rather than canted. :D

Old Fuff
October 26, 2011, 10:07 AM
Sorry if I offended anybody folks. All I was sharing was my sadness that some things don't stay the same, particularly, the way things I like are produced. I'll be more selective in any posts I make in the future. Note that I acknowledged MIM gave me no problems I know of. I simply shared that I was not happy with the way things on guns I like have changed. Don

I doubt that you offended anyone, although this may, or may not be said of other posters. The questions you ask, and the points you made are good ones.

The issue isn't so much a matter of MIM parts causing problems (which they generally don't) but rather they degrade the overall appearance and quality when compared to earlier parts they replaced. MIM parts are usually functional equal to earlier parts, but if nothing else they appear in terms of looks and finish to be inferior.

If I should buy a new S&W and didn't like the hollowed out back of the trigger, I would replace it with an older one that wasn't hollowed out simply because the newer one bugged me. But rather then spend the money replacing parts I'd rather use it to buy a gun that didn't have MIM parts in the first place. Why put up with something I don’t like when I don’t have to? You needn’t either.

While it hasn't been mentioned, one main reason S&W changed to MIM hammers is because machining a conventional part to work with they're internal lock would have been expensive, where MIM technology makes it easy. From their perspective this was more then enough of a reason to change to MIM, but since I'm not particularly interested in having internal lock equipped handguns the change offers me nothing.

The closer tolerances in MIM parts make it possible in theory for all parts to fit in any gun, but depending on how these tolerances and dimensions stack up you may end up with a good, bad or indifference trigger pull, which is a good reason to examine what you buy before you buy it. The same can be said about older guns, but then skilled assemblers would switch parts to get a perfect fit - a process called "selective fitting," that couldn't be used today except on the most expensive guns.

If you should conclude, as I have, that the older guns offered better value, because they were made at a time when cost-cutting wasn't a driving force that it is now, then you have the option of buying older guns for sometimes attractive prices. I'll let others pay more for less because they have every right to do so. But if you feel that MIM parts don't offer what you like, don't feel bad. I assure you that you are in very good company. If others are satisfied with MIM parts let them be so. Nowhere is it written that they know more then you do. ;)

Guillermo
October 26, 2011, 10:09 AM
I will buy a copy when they print the Thaddeus Jones Book of Quotes

Guillermo
October 26, 2011, 10:12 AM
although this may, or may not be said of other posters

I resemble that remark :fire:




I'll let others pay more for less

this is the money shot

Old Fuff
October 26, 2011, 10:14 AM
It is not a sin to be offensive in a good cause... :uhoh: :D

Loosedhorse
October 26, 2011, 10:17 AM
People want custom hand fitted, forged, deep blued, etc, etc, but they want it all at MIM prices.And there it is.

I'm sure that when Ford developed the assembly-line-produced, interchangeable-parts Model T, the companies making cars in craftsman fashion laughed at the low quality. And shortly went out of business. (I suspect that some have noticed that those beloved high-quality Colt DA revolvers aren't being made any more; is the reason for that greed, or reality?)

There are a few manufacturers still in existence that essentially still make hand-fitted cars. And we know the prices on those. But today, even most "luxury" car makers used that awful assembly-line process.

There are collectors that buy old Bugattis and Benzes because they are marvels--almost works of art. But most of us don't drive those.

ATLDave
October 26, 2011, 10:18 AM
Sorry if I offended anybody folks. All I was sharing was my sadness that some things don't stay the same, particularly, the way things I like are produced. I'll be more selective in any posts I make in the future. Note that I acknowledged MIM gave me no problems I know of. I simply shared that I was not happy with the way things on guns I like have changed. Don

I can only speak for myself, but I wasn't offended by your post (or anyone else's, for that matter, but I'm not easily offended). It's OK to have a preference, or to harbor doubts, especially when those are expressed in those terms. I don't have the manufacturing or metallurgy background to have a personal opinion about MIM. For those who have an opinion, I am curious as to the basis for it. (We could also have separate discussions about internal locks, or friction-fit this or that, or life in the closing days of the empire, but this thread was about MIM.)

Old Fuff
October 26, 2011, 10:24 AM
People want custom hand fitted, forged, deep blued, etc, etc, but they want it all at MIM prices.

Of course!! and the Old Fuff is at the head of the list. But he goes out and finds "custom hand fitted, forged, deep blued, etc, etc," and buys them for MIM prices.

Sometimes he buys them for less. :what:

To each their own... :)

LCPor9mm
October 26, 2011, 06:36 PM
People want custom hand fitted, forged, deep blued, etc, etc, but they want it all at MIM prices.

And there it is.

+1
Cost does not always equal value. 1911 no mim $2,000-$3,000. 1911 mim $500-$1,000. Good day at the range with 100 rounds through either one...Priceless!
To answer your question OP, NO you are not wrong to dislike mim. If you want to pay more for a gun that was machined rather than cast because you can tell the difference in build quality, appearance or longevity that is certainly your prerogative. Me, I just want it to work at a "reasonable" price. MIMs the word.

gdesloge
October 26, 2011, 06:39 PM
"MIMs the word"

Very clever!:)


gd



Mum's the word

Meaning: Keep quiet - say nothing.

Origin

'Mum's the word' has become a popular name for baby product shops and nursery services, but the 'mum' in this phrase isn't mother. Nor has 'mum' anything to do with Egyptian mummies, despite their prolonged taciturn disposition. That 'mummy' derives from 'mum' being the name of the bitumen used for embalming.

The 'mum' of 'mum's the word' is 'mmm' - the humming sound made with a closed mouth, indicating an unwillingness or inability to speak. The word is of long standing in the language and first appeared in print in William Langland's Middle English narrative poem Piers Plowman, circa 1376:

Thou mightest beter meten the myst on Malverne hulles
Then geten a mom of heore mouth til moneye weore schewed!

That loosely translates as 'You may as well try to measure the mist on the Malvern Hills as to try and get her to speak without first offering payment'.

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/mums-the-word.html

splithoof
October 26, 2011, 07:55 PM
After owning numerous Smith's manufactured from the 1930's to a two year old 625, I see no issue with MIM parts. That 625 is one of the most accurate revolvers I have ever used, and after thousands of rounds of all grades of .45ACP including hot reloads, steel-cased imported ball, premium brass-cased USA fodder, and everything in between, it continues to shoot very well, to point of aim. Lockup is tight, stock trigger very smooth, timing is correct. It rarely gets cleaned, and spends lots of time in a great quality kydex holster that is slowly polishing the finish in some spots due to all the practice draws. I would have no problem buying another.

BYJO4
October 26, 2011, 08:13 PM
Almost everything changes over time due to cost or technology. Mim parts being used today hold up very well and I would only replace with a forged part if one broke. I doubt if most people would even know the difference unless someone pointed it out to them.

bsms
October 28, 2011, 01:05 AM
"Still, there is nobody that I have ever met that thinks that a, for example, "classic model 27" is 1/2 the gun of a model 27 from 45 years ago."

You just met one. 45 years ago was 66, and I didn't start buying guns until the late 70s. Still, my new 29 is finished better than the 28 I bought then, and the trigger is better and the lockup tighter. I don't own the 28 any more, but I'd bet they will be equals in reliability and the new gun is probably going to be better for endurance. And IIRC, S&W guns in the late 70s and early 80s were NOT getting high marks for quality!

Was a '66 Model 29 twice as good as my new one? No. Not for shooting. Not for reliability. Not for durability. Perhaps slightly better for trigger, but it would be close. Blueing? Probably much better then than now, so if the quality of bluing is what defines a good gun, then you're right. Otherwise...not a chance.

olafhardtB
October 28, 2011, 03:44 AM
I love s&w j frames. The first one I got was a pinned barrelled M34 it came wiyh a glitch and was sent back to the factory twice. When it came back the second time It was a buttery smooth dream. This is the only pre-lock J that I have kept. I traded of all my other pinned barrels and I don't miss them. My newbies complete with lock please me more. I have noticed gun snobs moaning about plastic trigger gaurds and going estatic over horn.

1911Tuner
October 28, 2011, 06:00 AM
Again, (possibly without the sarcasm), how are the new revolvers inferior?

Go find an old long-action Smith & Wesson and pull the trigger. Understanding will fall upon you.

oldfool
October 28, 2011, 07:39 AM
old Fuff,
"But he goes out and finds "custom hand fitted, forged, deep blued, etc, etc," and buys them for MIM prices."


Me too, but that doesn't mean I am opposed to the notion to new guns, nor opposed to new technology (when it works). The used gun market is no big secret, but exclusively used-guns-only and the challenge of finding LNIB is not getting any easier or cheaper. Besides, some of that new fangled stuff actually works admirably well.

Truth be known, there are very few of us here who own nothing but the classic good old stuff, and I am pretty sure that includes quite a few in this thread who decry "MIM". Most of us do own at least a little of "brand Z" non-prestigious-name stuff that works. I own my fair share of that too. It's only the yesteryear longing for the glory days of Colt and S&W competing head to head to claim the 'finest revolver ever made' title that really heats up our peevish factor.

I say again you can still have that in new revolvers, if willing to pay the price, and some do. Mass produced, no, but has been already noted, that good old stuff never was 'mass produced' by today's definitions. Is there any revolver more admired than the Colt Python.. yet it is well acknowledged their lockwork was intricate, mayhap even a little 'delicate', and could only be done right by merit of highly skilled, experienced (expensive) hand fitting. Which is why Colt fell out of the revolver market; they could not, would not bear the cost burdens that go with.
(I am old enough to remember what those fine NIB Colts used to cost, too, relative to the price of their competition, they always were higher priced.. that being some part of the reason so many cops carried S&Ws, which is some part of the reason so many used S&W 'cop' guns still can be found)

You can still get that precision workmanship and 'select' materials, you just don't get it from Colt or S&W (absent custom smithing); you get it elsewhere by paying the price.

Cannot help but ponder the eternally recycled rumors that go around every few years, re: "Colt is going to make Pythons again, whoopee !" Every time that happens, what are the dominant comments ?
#1 - yeah, but is this... New Coke ??
#2 - yeah, but who will be able to afford it ??

Well, if you want it, Pony up the cash... or do without it
After all the #1 volume seller is the low price and dubious quality leader.
You can always buy MIM from them instead and complain about that.

(hmmm.... now I am wondering if my decades old T-revolvers have MIM in 'em.. ain't got a clue offhand, but they do work real well)

Guillermo
October 28, 2011, 07:21 PM
Reading this makes me realize why Olive Garden does so well.

In today's market you don't have to not suck.

You just have to not suck as bad as the immediate competition.

But for those of us that cook, we can't imagine eating that crap.

PRM
October 29, 2011, 08:18 AM
My Model 60-9 broke two of the MIM hammer blocks. Snapped at the weakest point. S&W used to answer this problem by mailing the customer new drop in hammer blocks. The only problem was they were also MIM. Although this is a part that should not bind or break ~ trust me they do, and yes they will affect the function. I did a search of the internet and found this to be a fairly common problem. Enough so, that about 10 months ago, I was told by S&W Customer Service this part is no longer MIM, but the old style stamped metal. They sent me one and I have had no further problems.

If you are a fan of MIM ~ go for it, I will take the old style dependability any day.

Old Fuff
October 29, 2011, 09:41 AM
Go find an old long-action Smith & Wesson and pull the trigger. Understanding will fall upon you.

Indeed! But first be sure to disassemble (or have a qualified gunsmith do it) and clean out all of the turned-to-varnish grease, carbon fouling, and dead spiders that may have taken up residence over the past 50 years or more. Then relubricate and assemble.

Also be aware that "back then," mainsprings were heavier because primers weren't as easy to set off. If you find the double-action pull to be heavy, simply remove the old spring, and replace it with a post-World War Two one. No other alternations are necessay, and you can always switch back to the original one.

Old Fuff
October 29, 2011, 10:02 AM
The used gun market is no big secret, but exclusively used-guns-only and the challenge of finding LNIB is not getting any easier or cheaper.

If you are a serious collector, like-new-in-box may be the only kind you'll buy, but most folks - at least on this forum - are looking for shooters and play-toys, and that includes me. If one is willing to go along with some minor cosmetic wear, and forget the box and accesories, the drop in price can be substantial and often is.

This is not to say I won't jump on a LNIB if the opportunity at the right price happens to come along, but it seldom happens these days.

I'm also willing to go for older I and K-frame's in less then popular or non-Magnum calibers, and a 5 or 6-inch barrel doesn't turn me off at all. N-frames are great, but for obvious reasons more expensive - unless lightning hits.

I prefer high-carbon/blued steel over stainless, and that cuts out most new guns right off the bat.

When you get down to the bottom line, the loss of my business - such as it is - doesn't cause any manufacturer's bottom line to twitch a bit. But my experience - which is considerable - tells me I'm going in the right direction for my needs. Others in different situations should do the same.

Guillermo
October 29, 2011, 11:16 AM
When you get down to the bottom line, the loss of my business - such as it is - doesn't cause any manufacturer's bottom line to twitch a bit

Interestingly enough, I am in a similar situation. While I have enough calibers in my life and eschew the obsolete cartridges, I opine that it would be nice to have the option.

If they made a decent product at a reasonable price, I would look at some new J frames (stainless is a very practical material for carry guns) for sure. (david e has convinced me that I need to try a "hammerless" J frame)

Maybe I would not buy new but if they made a decent product it would take some pressure off of the used market. Now days the discriminating revolver buyer has no choice. This has spiked prices.

Old Fuff
October 29, 2011, 11:43 AM
I would look at some new J frames (stainless is a very practical material for carry guns) for sure.

So would most people, but not I. Stainless alloys used in handguns are strong, but soft – which is why S&W stopped early on when they came out with the model 60 and went back to conventional hammers and triggers that were case hardened and then flash-chrome plated for a better cosmetic look. As I noted in another post, military services (where small arms see use in much more harsh environments then most personal handguns) have generally avoided going to stainless.

If I had a problem with corrosion I would have a “conventional” handgun electroless hard chrome plated – inside and out – which can also be done on non-ferrous alloys by the way – and have the advantages of high-carbon steel with rust resistance equal or superior to that of the stainless material usually used in firearms.

(david e has convinced me that I need to try a "hammerless" J frame)

Why? I’ll crank up the ol’ bench grinder, and you send me one of your Diamondbacks… :what: :evil: :D

Guillermo
October 29, 2011, 12:32 PM
I’ll crank up the ol’ bench grinder, and you send me one of your Diamondbacks

Well I do have 5....hmmmm:rolleyes:

Of course he is a proponent of the very high grip which even a bobbed hammer would preclude.

Old Fuff
October 29, 2011, 02:01 PM
Of course he is a proponent of the very high grip...

So am I. Goes back at least as far as Ed. McGivern.

... which even a bobbed hammer would preclude.

Not the way I do it. :evil: :neener:

1911Tuner
October 30, 2011, 11:09 AM
Also be aware that "back then," mainsprings were heavier because primers weren't as easy to set off.

Modern primers are more sensitive than the old ones, but part of that in the early .357 Magnums was likely due to the fact that the ammo makers used small rifle primers with the hellishly high pressured original loading.

lono
November 17, 2011, 01:09 AM
I have broken two MIM thumb safeties in about 500 rounds. This is on a Kimber Raptor 2 ss. They are currently sending me a third left side thumb safety. IMHO MIM is not worthy of being used on firearms.

Jim Watson
November 17, 2011, 01:25 AM
but part of that in the early .357 Magnums was likely due to the fact that the ammo makers used small rifle primers with the hellishly high pressured original loading.

My period references are gone, but it sticks in my head that some early .357 magnums used large pistol primers. I had a large primer .38 Special in my brass collection and the 1939 Stoegers lists one variant of .38-44 with large primers. Unfortunately, nobody then was smart enough to handload magnums and they did not catalog components for it at the time.

As recently as the 1960s, Federal recommended their small rifle primer for .357 magnum... because they did not then make a magnum pistol primer. I shot a bunch in 9mm during the Early Obama Primer Panic and they did just fine.

16in50calNavalRifle
November 17, 2011, 03:39 AM
I always enjoy and learn from threads where some of THR's experienced members have at it, such as this one.

But one small item caught my eye: oldfool, did you say that Dan Wesson revolvers were coming back?

Boomie
November 17, 2011, 09:35 AM
I've always heard we are in a Golden Age of firearms now where accurate, reliable firearms are the norm and are more accessable then they have ever been (from a cost point). I certainly know my rifles, while not as pretty as older models, are much much more accurate. I assume these sort of things are due to the use of polymers, MIM, etc.

flightsimmer
November 17, 2011, 09:55 AM
I'm assuming that MIM means "Made in Mexico" or does it?

I do know what everyone is getting at though.

I liked the Dan Wesson .357 Magnums with removeable barrels (I'd like to find and buy a full complete set) but I don't like the way the new Smith & Wessons do it.

10mm, when you care enough to send the very best.

huntsman
November 17, 2011, 10:51 AM
None have failed on me and I don't expect MIM would. I'm confident they are fine. I just wonder if I'm alone in my aging man hope that some things would never change......Don
I’m comfortable living in the past and I don’t need to buy a new gun so no MIM for me either.

OldCavSoldier
November 17, 2011, 11:15 AM
I have purchased several S&W revolvers with the MIM parts and the trigger lock. All the revolvers have undergone VERY HEAVY use and I have had NO FAILURES of any kind. With the vast majority of S&W revolvers being made of "stainless" steel or other-than-steel alloys these days, I think there really is no accurate comparison, especially regarding "fit and finish."

Back in the day, S&W occasionally produced a blued gun that had issues, just as they occasionally produce a stainless gun with issues these days. I think most of the perceived "new guns suck" issues revolve around current QA/QC practices, combined with the fact that these days, S&W produces many more variants than they did 50 years ago.

As for price of current guns being much higher than in yesteryear, I propose that current guns actually are less expensive than guns 50 years ago...take a look at the ratio of the average salary or hourly wage in 1960 vs the cost of S&W guns, and then take a look at the ratio of salary and hourly wage in 2010 vs the cost of S&W guns. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that the current ration is much better for the consumer.

Finally, and I promise to jump off my soapbox, the true measure of a gun is "does it function as intended" and "does it allow the shooter to place the bullets where he/she wants them to be." Yesteryear S&Ws did, and current S&Ws do.

Thanks, all, for your indulgence.

Guillermo
November 17, 2011, 11:24 AM
already back (allegedly...I have not seen any)

http://www.cz-usa.com/products/by-brand/dan-wesson/

Guillermo
November 17, 2011, 11:30 AM
I assume these sort of things are due to the use of polymers, MIM, etc.

if one were to accept the idea that newer guns are more accurate (I do not) the use of MIM, polymer etc are not the reason. With regards to revolvers, a tight gap properly lined up w the cylinder into a barrel with proper rifling is where accuracy comes from.

If properly seated and therefore straight, the crush fit barrels of today are just as accurate as the threaded barrels of yesteryear.

None of this has to do with MIM or polymers

Boomie
November 17, 2011, 03:26 PM
Quote:
I assume these sort of things are due to the use of polymers, MIM, etc.

if one were to accept the idea that newer guns are more accurate (I do not) the use of MIM, polymer etc are not the reason. With regards to revolvers, a tight gap properly lined up w the cylinder into a barrel with proper rifling is where accuracy comes from.

If properly seated and therefore straight, the crush fit barrels of today are just as accurate as the threaded barrels of yesteryear.

None of this has to do with MIM or polymers

I made two statments: 1) It's harder to get a lemon now and 2) Guns are cheaper now. The use of polymers and MIM and what-not are for point #2.

To be fair - most of my personal experience with this statment applies to rifles, not pistols.

Sky
November 17, 2011, 03:38 PM
Folks first off please let me say I'm not wanting to start a negative debate or anything. I know times change and so do manufacturing methods. It's just that having grown up in the days when my Smiths had beautiful color hardened triggers and hammers, and my Ruger double actions were made with triggers that didn't have hollowed out backs, I feel let down that the old ways are being left behind. I bought an SP101 this spring to replace one given up in a split. I never noticed at the shop that the triggers had changed. The revolver is a fine shooter, and I feel I could rely on it very well. But it was somehow just not "right" to me. I have debated on a new SP101 in .22, but you know if it too has the hollow trigger back too I'm going to pass. I have decided to stick with my older Single Sixes for entertainment. No MIM parts. I guess when Ruger came out years and years ago, cast parts were "just wrong" to the forged part Colt and Smith lovers too. Just my thoughts and personal preferences.
I guess this is similar to my loving wife's and my enthusiastic collecting bug for vintage sewing machines. Lots of cast iron, steel, nickel, beautiful machine work and graphics. No plastic, no computer chips and there are lots of neglected specimens to rescue and display. A 1934 Singer hand crank with beautiful deep black finish speaks to me as does a 1930's made Smith or Colt does. Don

Yes the MIM parted stuff feels .....not as solid...not as weighty....not as substantial.....not like you want it to..less quality..same for me.

Maybe they have figured out how to make MIM better now than just a few years ago??

Whatever, as long as they work and are accurate then I use what I can afford and have at hand.

I remember after using an M-14 an picking up my first AR I thought, "What kind of plastic Mattel POS are they wanting us to use now?? We change sometimes for the better but that does not mean we are required to forget what went before.

Guillermo
November 17, 2011, 05:59 PM
1) It's harder to get a lemon now and 2) Guns are cheaper now

I misunderstood.

MIM and polymers defiantly contribute to those facts.

batmann
November 18, 2011, 02:51 PM
All things in life change, MIM is just one of those changes. Smith, Ruger and a bunch more are using that technology to cut costs and at the same time give as good or better over all performance. MIM parts last as long, are more precise and don't require hand fitting.

OldCavSoldier
November 18, 2011, 05:05 PM
So would most people, but not I. Stainless alloys used in handguns are strong, but soft – which is why S&W stopped early on when they came out with the model 60 and went back to conventional hammers and triggers that were case hardened and then flash-chrome plated for a better cosmetic look. As I noted in another post, military services (where small arms see use in much more harsh environments then most personal handguns) have generally avoided going to stainless.

If I had a problem with corrosion I would have a “conventional” handgun electroless hard chrome plated – inside and out – which can also be done on non-ferrous alloys by the way – and have the advantages of high-carbon steel with rust resistance equal or superior to that of the stainless material usually used in firearms.



Why? I’ll crank up the ol’ bench grinder, and you send me one of your Diamondbacks… :what: :evil: :D
The reason the military has not generally gone to stainless is because it is lots more difficult to remain un-seen in the dark if you have a non-coated stainless weapon, and the expense of getting all those weapons black-coated if they did get stainless.

I have several friends/former runnin' mates still in uniform in harm's way who carry black-coated stainless pieces that they procured themselves. (yes, they are allowed...no, they are not enlisted...no, they are not in your every-day regular line unit....)

oldfool
November 18, 2011, 07:34 PM
risky business to mess with Old Fuff, you might come home and find part of your trigger guard missing... !
but I may have found an kindred spirit in OCS there
(doncha' just love them old guys)

anyway... OF, using terminology like "soft" in reference to stainless steel is a tad too broad you know, a bit much like referring to mild steel as "mild"
but you knowed that

on the other hand, referring to SS as 'corrosion proof' is about as sensible as referring to a water 'resistant watch' as 'water proof'.. both of which drive me a little nuts

Guillermo
November 18, 2011, 07:54 PM
risky business to mess with Old Fuff, you might come home and find part of your trigger guard missing

That is THR gold right there!!! :D



both of which drive me a little nuts

That don't take a full tank of gas!!! :neener:

oldfool
November 18, 2011, 08:02 PM
That don't take a full tank of gas!!!

nope, just a little 90 proof, amigo!
I didn't think you were going to let these guys slide on by that "MIM is ok" just yet
(but we ain't give up on you yet, G)

PS
me, I am huntin' cap-n-ball guns, because I heard some guy on THR might trade a nice Diamondback for one... IF both were guaranteed no MIM :D

Guillermo
November 18, 2011, 08:44 PM
I heard some guy on THR might trade a nice Diamondback for one

Actually I have turned my attention to long arms.

Latest acquisitions are a couple of Winchesters.

A Model 63 (22lr) and a Model 12 (12 gauge)

Damn....them old guns is smooth!!!

oldfool
November 18, 2011, 08:55 PM
you ain't seen smooth in them old smoothbores, G, until you bust clays with a Savage 410 pumper, bud.. (no MIM in 'em, you know)

and never was a Winnie rimfire rifle for slick-n-smooth that could match a Browning BL22, slick, smooth, and crisp all at the same time... you just too used to them old worn out beat up Colts, what feel smooth on account of being shot too loose, you know :D

(but we sliding a tad off topic now, even for TGIF)

Guillermo
November 18, 2011, 09:34 PM
I grew up w a 63...amazing gun.

The 12 is slicker than greased goose squeeze on a teflon pan.

And no MIM....

(I said that so we can't be accused of thread hijack :evil:)

oldfool
November 18, 2011, 11:10 PM
as I too oft tell milady, G, " I wouldn't do it for just anybody, but seeing how it's YOU"

http://www.collectorsfirearms.com/admin/product_details.php?itemID=45989
go ahead... hurt yourself...

but I bet milady can out shoot it & you with her own old made-in-Japan (not even Belgium) Browning SA-22 autoloader, even though it's a takedown barrel.. uhhh, with a 20X scope on it.. 10 nickels or empty 410 shotshell brass ends at 50 yards offhand
The woman has hands "like a rock", even now

Loser is obliged to to send a hot link on a no-MIM S&W k-22 or Colt Diamondback 22 at half that price; refusal by default means you have to shoot no less than 500 rounds out of a S&W 617 w/ MIM... and beat MrB on score for the last 50 rounds offhand, 15 yards, DA, honor system scoring, shot timer by David E at your option for photo finish call

but if you can tie score, we will call it a draw, 'nolo contendre'
"beer & BBQ by Bert" after, win, lose, or draw

Pony up :neener:

Guillermo
November 18, 2011, 11:24 PM
I just bought a 63 that is almost that nice for 425 (25 shipping, 10 ffl) so 900+ :eek:

No thanks

being as how I don't know anyone with a S&W 617 (MIM gun) I can't do that either.

This is not a bet I can take amigo.

But we should get together and shoot.

You bring your MIM stuff, I will bring my MIM-free stuff and we can settle this for the OP once and for all

oldfool
November 19, 2011, 12:12 AM
I can't take that bet either, you know, G
(I don't own no MIM anything, either)

So unless MrB is willing, I think we will have to both pass, but we ought someday do a shoot together, anyway. Next best thing to 'shooting buddies' and family range days is..
cyberspace friends who shoot responsibly.. be it 'MIM internet tech' or hammer forged friendships; forged in the fire of shared common interests is well forged, always was, new or old.

(and for all the rest, there is THR, with or without VISA)

Be well, and don't let that young un' of yourn sneak off with that old '53 k-22..
(just put a pretty ribbon on it, and put it under the tree with her name on it when she comes home for Christmas, hugs non-optional)

respects to all

Guillermo
November 19, 2011, 12:27 AM
Be well, and don't let that young un' of yourn sneak off with that old '53 k-22

She will get it sooner or later :D:D

flightsimmer
November 19, 2011, 07:15 AM
I just bought a 63 that is almost that nice for 425 (25 shipping, 10 ffl) so 900+ :eek:

No thanks

being as how I don't know anyone with a S&W 617 (MIM gun) I can't do that either.

This is not a bet I can take amigo.

But we should get together and shoot.

You bring your MIM stuff, I will bring my MIM-free stuff and we can settle this for the OP once and for all
Ah yes! The S&W model 63, a fine hand gun.

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo106/flightsimmer_2009/SWMdl342.jpg

10mm, when you care enough to send the very best.

MrBorland
November 19, 2011, 07:52 AM
I can't take that bet either, you know, G
(I don't own no MIM anything, either)

So unless MrB is willing, I think we will have to both pass, but we ought someday do a shoot together, anyway. Next best thing to 'shooting buddies' and family range days is..
cyberspace friends who shoot responsibly.. be it 'MIM internet tech' or hammer forged friendships; forged in the fire of shared common interests is well forged, always was, new or old.


Aw, nuts. Just finished shining up the ol' (er...new) MIM 617. :mad: My 5-screw K-22 never needs shining (it's deigned by the S&W Gods to be perfect in every way, of course ;)), so it's ready to go whenever The Call might come.

Be well everyone & happy shooting!

Guillermo
November 19, 2011, 10:11 AM
Well Mr. Boreland, when we get this set up we will surely put you on the guest list.

After the competition is over you might be kind enough to coach us on what we did wrong.

But no matter what, you are always welcome. :D

If you enjoyed reading about "Am I wrong to be unhappy with MIM parts?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!