100% MIM free

Mass produced? I don't think there are any. At least not American made. The last off the shelf 1911 clones that was available with all machined steel throughout were the Norincos.

USFA

With the exception of their new LCR models (which I'm not sure about), other Ruger revolvers use investment castings rather then MIM parts. I presume that this is because the revolvers were designed to use castings, and they have been tooled up to produce them "in house" for some time.

I'd be willing to bet Freedom Arms could be on the list.

Others might include Korth and/or Manurhin, if they're even still being made.

Most of the pre lock S&W's are MIM free to my knowledge. I just paid a pretty penny for a model 66 pre lock but it's worth it.

Which revolver makers manufacturing new revolvers today are 100% MIM free ?
(or autoloaders, for that matter, but mostly focused on revolvers here)

Click to expand...

The Berretta 80 series is MIM free if you don't mind .380acp

What's a woobie war? I hear this term used on the forum but don't know it's meaning.

woobie = childish

Old Fuff said:

With the exception of their new LCR models (which I'm not sure about), other Ruger revolvers use investment castings rather then MIM parts.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but by their own admission, Ruger uses MIM parts in some of their most popular revolvers. Not that it is or even should be a big deal.....other than fodder for internet trolling.

I'd be interested to know exactly what these parts are. I have been in and out of numerous Ruger revolvers and never discovered any MIM parts (which doesn't concern me a bit ) I wouldn't be surprised (or concerned) to find MIM parts in their center-fire pistols. The pistols were designed to use this technology in the first place.

Priceless, oldfool, simply priceless.

4v50 Gary said:

Mim free? Ruger. Investment casted throughout except for the barrel and cylinder (machined from round stock).

Click to expand...

Again....incorrect. E-mail them, or call them, they'll be happy to tell you, yes...... they do use MIM parts in their revolvers . Why continue to perpetuate another internet myth with incorrect information? Or is it just too hard to accept that the MIM process has been accepted by the gun industry as a functional tool to produce quality guns. The quality of firearms has not been sacrificed because of MIM parts. The fit and finish of firearms has been sacrificed sadly by the same factors that makes folks cherish the old ones. Human craftsmanship and cost. Labor used to be cheap and workers took pride in their work. Nowadays, labor costs have skyrocketed and many folks take no pride in the work. Their mind is not on their work anymore, it's on the text message they just got from their wife or the thoughts of what the weekend will bring. Thus....productivity and quality suffers. Add to this all us folks with 401ks and other stockholders that want a profit from our investments. This isn't just affecting the gun industry but all industry. It isn't affecting just one gun manufacturer, it affects them all. You want a perfect gun with a mirror finish and only handmade, hand-fitted parts? Better have deep pockets, cause it won't come from mass production.

The issue of Ruger using MIM technology to make parts shouldn't be an issue, but what the particular parts are might be. If they are using MIM parts in revolvers (other then the LCR line) I would think it's a recent development. If they are using the technology to make rear sight bases or front sights, I don't see a problem. If they are making parts for recently introduced internal locks they're might or might not be. I wouldn't like to have a revolver with a MIM transfer bar safety or mainspring strut.

The only solution for those that don't like what's being made now is to buy that which was made before. Works fine for me.

Ruger tells me they started using MIMs about ten+ years ago, the first part was the extractor on the M77 boltguns. The new Ruger bolt-action trigger is MIM. From there, it's creeping thoughout the lineup.

The SR pistols have them, the LCP has at the very least a MIM hammer, the SP triggers are MIM, the SP hammers soon will be, and MIM hammers & triggers won't be far off in the GPs.
The brand new GP I have here, as far as I can tell without stripping it down, has no MIMs, at least none visible externally. Oops- it does have what appears to be a MIM front sight blade.
The .357 LCR has a MIM trigger, may have other MIM internals.

There are undoubtedly more, I didn't look at the P90 I had here a while back, but it probably does.

Ruger's found that for certain applications MIMs are more practical for them than cast.
Info comes from personal observation & phone conversations with a Ruger rep who has a background at Pine Tree.

Denis

This as all very well, and I am not going to have an emotional upset over the GP-100 (or any other Ruger) having MIM iron sights - front or back. But this thread has been revolver-specific, and until I learn differently I will say that Ruger isn't making principal parts out of anything but bar stock and investment castings, except in the new LCR

This is not to say or imply that I have any objection to Ruger or anyone else using MIM technology, when it's limited to the kind of parts you specified.

Well, what do you define as "principal parts"?
Frames, barrels & cylinders won't be MIM, but hammers & triggers are principal parts by my definition.

I included the rifles & pistols as a broad overview to counter the misconception that "Ruger doesn't use MIMS!"
Denis

I think, (but can't prove it) we can add the Colt SAA to the USFA, & FA list.
Frank

John,

I thought that Wilson Combat started using MIM parts and then quit as MIM does "not play well with others"

I also was of the opinion that Les Baer was MIM free as is Dan Wesson

Do you have information to the contrary?



Of course the modern revolver has turned to crap and MIM is rampant.

At least you can still buy a quality 1911

http://www.edbrown.com/FAQ.htm#aau

the following is from the FAQ section

Do Ed Brown handguns have any MIM (metal injection molded) parts?

No, we use no MIM parts in Ed Brown firearms. While the current thinking is that MIM parts are "good enough" for firearm applications, this thinking doesn't fit with our philosophy at all. All Ed Brown parts are made from either forgings, bar stock steel, or quality investment castings.

Click to expand...

Frames, barrels & cylinders won't be MIM, but hammers & triggers are principal parts by my definition.

Click to expand...

O.K… I’ll concede that hammers and triggers are principal parts. I’ll withhold judgment on those until Ruger actually incorporates them, which so far I believe they haven’t.

I included the rifles & pistols as a broad overview to counter the misconception that "Ruger doesn't use MIMS!"

Click to expand...

Again, it isn’t MIM technology that concerns me so much as how the technology is employed. In the list you provided, I personally wouldn’t want extractors, strikers (firing pins), and possibly components in rifle trigger assemblies included in any firearm I might purchase.

I fully agree that we are going to see more and more MIM parts in future firearms, not because they are necessarily better, but because they will be less expensive then the parts they replace. If they are correctly designed for the application, and not purchased from a sub-contractor on the basis of "lowest bid," this may not be of consequence, but cost-cutting changes seldom result in a higher quality product, just one that will simply get the job done. Forgive those of us that want (and sometimes demand) more.