Am I wrong to be unhappy with MIM parts?

[Old Fuff]

Well Guillermo I guess you got told.

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?

 

[gdesloge]

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]

Fuff, #26 is a classic.

 

[Guillermo]

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]

please, please tell me you mistakenly added a zero re: Yugo sales? It just can't be that bad

 

[Jim K]

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]

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]

"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]

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]

"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]

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]

•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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Just wait till the manufactuers start to use 3D printers.

 

[Tallbald]

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]

•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]

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. 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.

 

[Guillermo]

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

 

[18DAI]

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.

 

[Old Fuff]

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]

I will buy a copy when they print the Thaddeus Jones Book of Quotes