Guillermo
member
absolutely
MIM in a 325 Taurus a good thing
MIM in an 850 S&W...not acceptable
Of course as long as people buy Taurus quality and Smith price...I guess S&W would be stupid to spend more. Obviously not enough of us care.
100% MIM free
- Thread starter oldfool
- Start date
- Status
absolutely
MIM in a 325 Taurus a good thing
MIM in an 850 S&W...not acceptable
Of course as long as people buy Taurus quality and Smith price...I guess S&W would be stupid to spend more. Obviously not enough of us care.
Guillermo
member
LOL
A- I never claimed to be an expert
B- if you think that is a "dressing down" you must be a 7 year old girl
Thanks though...
It is a very funny post
The problem with oldfool's list is that when it comes to NEW mass-produced revolvers there are two kinds, those that have MIN parts, and those that don't but soon will. :banghead:
From a purely functional point of view this probably isn't a problem, because with a few noteable exceptions, they do work.
But for some, "do work" will never be enough, because there is a difference between "do work" and "best quality."
Anyone who has decided to buy a new, current, mass-produced revolver is going to have to accept MIM parts and other cost-cutting introductions - including in some cases polymer plastics (which work great in pistols, but leave me cold when it comes to revolvers).
The rest of us can have it our way, by buying older revolvers, or spending some really big, big bucks for one of the high-end semi-custom guns. In most cases I much prefer the former over the latter unless I win big in some lottery.
So to each his own.
From a purely functional point of view this probably isn't a problem, because with a few noteable exceptions, they do work.
But for some, "do work" will never be enough, because there is a difference between "do work" and "best quality."
Anyone who has decided to buy a new, current, mass-produced revolver is going to have to accept MIM parts and other cost-cutting introductions - including in some cases polymer plastics (which work great in pistols, but leave me cold when it comes to revolvers).
The rest of us can have it our way, by buying older revolvers, or spending some really big, big bucks for one of the high-end semi-custom guns. In most cases I much prefer the former over the latter unless I win big in some lottery.
So to each his own.
Guillermo
member
too bad u didn't learn anything from posts 32 and 39
Frank V
Member
Wow
There is a lot of information here as well as some emotions.
I really don't think we'll ever see a return to the "old S&W" quality, fit & finish. We do have some great old Smiths that can still be bought & in some cases actually cheaper than the new ones.
I kind of long for the "good old days" too, but we'll never see them again. I think these are the new good old days. We have more choices now than ever before. Heck if we don't like the MIM, don't buy it. I've shot one that was surperb. I know one example isn't a huge sample. If the MIM revolvers were falling apart, locking up, or inaccurate, in every example & with everyone who bought one, they wouldn't sell & I think they are selling.
I guess the bottom line is if you don't like it, don't buy it, if you do like it or it's not a big deal to you buy it. That's kind of what I do. Sure if offered a nice S&W mod. 27 in pre lock pre MIM, & a nice new one with lock & MIM for the same money, I'd buy the old one. That's my choice, everyone has a choice. Let's exercise it & be happy!!!!!
Thanks, Frank
There is a lot of information here as well as some emotions.
I really don't think we'll ever see a return to the "old S&W" quality, fit & finish. We do have some great old Smiths that can still be bought & in some cases actually cheaper than the new ones.
I kind of long for the "good old days" too, but we'll never see them again. I think these are the new good old days. We have more choices now than ever before. Heck if we don't like the MIM, don't buy it. I've shot one that was surperb. I know one example isn't a huge sample. If the MIM revolvers were falling apart, locking up, or inaccurate, in every example & with everyone who bought one, they wouldn't sell & I think they are selling.
I guess the bottom line is if you don't like it, don't buy it, if you do like it or it's not a big deal to you buy it. That's kind of what I do. Sure if offered a nice S&W mod. 27 in pre lock pre MIM, & a nice new one with lock & MIM for the same money, I'd buy the old one. That's my choice, everyone has a choice. Let's exercise it & be happy!!!!!
Thanks, Frank
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Okay. Okay. Here are few facts, based on an understanding of the metallurgy and backed by my own experience.
MIM isn't an improvement. It's a cheaper way to make things. It may be "good enough" for its assigned role, and probably is in most cases...but that doesn't change the first two sentences.
MIM is nothing new. Good MIM is quite good. Bad MIM is worse than junk. The problem is that it's nearly impossible to tell by looking at it unless the piece has obvious surface flaws.
For many applications, even mediocre MIM is "good enough" for the task. In others in which it's been assigned...not so much. It tends to work well under friction and compression stress, but not under shear or impact. i.e Sears and disconnects, it's probably okay. Hammers...not so much.
Assuming a non-impact stressed part, if the MIM part lasts for 500 cycles, it'll probably last for 50,000. I have two early Colt 1991A1 pistols that I bought and used strictly for range beater duty way back in late '91 and early '92. They both had MIM sears and disconnects. They're both on their third barrels, and have passed 375,000 rounds combined, about equally split. I replaced the disconnect on one at roughly the 70,000 round mark because it was a little worn...not because it had failed. It's still operating on the original sear. The other still has both the original sear and disconnect.
A friend asked me to replace those parts in his Colt because he didn't trust MIM, despite my telling him that he probably didn't have anything to worry about.
After I finished the job, I gave him a demonstration with his old parts. I laid the sear on an anvil...convex side down...and whacked it with a 4-ounce hammer 2-3 times. It didn't shatter. It didn't even crack. When I installed it in a pistol, it functioned...although the trigger action was a little rough. Then, I clamped the disconnect in a vise and whacked it with the hammer. It bent at about 15 degrees, but it didn't snap.
I've seen these same parts in other guns fail within a few hundred rounds. Apparently, Colt has dealt with a vendor that makes quality MIM. Some others apparently haven't.
It's not the process. It's the material and the execution. If it's properly made of good material, it's good enough for many...but not all...applications. Really good...read that as "expensive"...MIM can actually be better than its machined barstock counterpart, but don't count on MIM of that level to wind up in a 500-dollar gun.
MIM isn't an improvement. It's a cheaper way to make things. It may be "good enough" for its assigned role, and probably is in most cases...but that doesn't change the first two sentences.
MIM is nothing new. Good MIM is quite good. Bad MIM is worse than junk. The problem is that it's nearly impossible to tell by looking at it unless the piece has obvious surface flaws.
For many applications, even mediocre MIM is "good enough" for the task. In others in which it's been assigned...not so much. It tends to work well under friction and compression stress, but not under shear or impact. i.e Sears and disconnects, it's probably okay. Hammers...not so much.
Assuming a non-impact stressed part, if the MIM part lasts for 500 cycles, it'll probably last for 50,000. I have two early Colt 1991A1 pistols that I bought and used strictly for range beater duty way back in late '91 and early '92. They both had MIM sears and disconnects. They're both on their third barrels, and have passed 375,000 rounds combined, about equally split. I replaced the disconnect on one at roughly the 70,000 round mark because it was a little worn...not because it had failed. It's still operating on the original sear. The other still has both the original sear and disconnect.
A friend asked me to replace those parts in his Colt because he didn't trust MIM, despite my telling him that he probably didn't have anything to worry about.
After I finished the job, I gave him a demonstration with his old parts. I laid the sear on an anvil...convex side down...and whacked it with a 4-ounce hammer 2-3 times. It didn't shatter. It didn't even crack. When I installed it in a pistol, it functioned...although the trigger action was a little rough. Then, I clamped the disconnect in a vise and whacked it with the hammer. It bent at about 15 degrees, but it didn't snap.
I've seen these same parts in other guns fail within a few hundred rounds. Apparently, Colt has dealt with a vendor that makes quality MIM. Some others apparently haven't.
It's not the process. It's the material and the execution. If it's properly made of good material, it's good enough for many...but not all...applications. Really good...read that as "expensive"...MIM can actually be better than its machined barstock counterpart, but don't count on MIM of that level to wind up in a 500-dollar gun.
Guillermo
member
everything John says is 100%.
The frustrating thing is that MIM is the same hardness all the way through. It doesn't have to be.
Because they are trying to save money (labor costs, as MIM is more expensive but comes out of the mold ready to use...thus saving finishing costs) they use a single step process.
If they were to create a soft, more flexible core and then mold a hard surface to encase it they could have the best of both worlds.
This still doesn't solve the issue of MIM not being as "slippery" across another type of metal as it is on MIM.
Also note, a sear is a pretty big part. MIM is usually just fine. It is the small parts that are more likely to have problems with being brittle.
Of course somewhere along the line the logical person has to question what the point is.
As John said "It's a cheaper way to make things."
The frustrating thing is that MIM is the same hardness all the way through. It doesn't have to be.
Because they are trying to save money (labor costs, as MIM is more expensive but comes out of the mold ready to use...thus saving finishing costs) they use a single step process.
If they were to create a soft, more flexible core and then mold a hard surface to encase it they could have the best of both worlds.
This still doesn't solve the issue of MIM not being as "slippery" across another type of metal as it is on MIM.
Also note, a sear is a pretty big part. MIM is usually just fine. It is the small parts that are more likely to have problems with being brittle.
Of course somewhere along the line the logical person has to question what the point is.
As John said "It's a cheaper way to make things."
- Status
