Are Smith & Wessons diminishing in quality?

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

heavyshooter

Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2008
Messages
599
Location
Denver Metro Area
Please don't be offended by the question.

I have several Rugers and I decided that I am not truly a "gun guy" until I put at least one S&W (.38 Special or .357 Mag.) in my rotation. I am finding that the older Smiths (i.e. Model 10 and Model 19) seem to be of higher quality; better steel and the blueing of older guns is a better quality. And I really hate that "Internal Locking System."

Do I need to limit myself to an older used S&W (or maybe a Colt)?

Heavy
 
Yes & no.

Overall fit and finish has declined a lot since they no longer have the human touch of old master craftsmen fitting & finishing them.

On the otherhand, modern and new CNC equipment has increased the accuracy I believe.

It used to be all the holes in a cylinder for instance might not align exactly with the hole in the barrel.

New and tight CNC equipment can hold tighter tolerances, and has made it far more likely they are all exactly where they are supposed to be.

rc
 
IMO, rcmodel nailed it. I seriously doubt you'll get a better answer in this thread. In fact, I predict...well...never mind. I'll just get the popcorn. ;)
 
I wouldn't say their QC is diminishing, and there's a lot to be said for modern manufacturing processes, but there's nothing like the old guns.

Sign of the times, unfortunately.

CZ's prices have caught up with their quality and I can remember when you could get the Norinco 1911's for $300. Colts haven't been reasonably priced for a long time, and now Ruger is building AR's.:what:

The times, they are a-changin.......
 
They are different then the old guns.
That's reason enough for a lot of folks to hate them.

Also, they ain't called the Hillery Hole for nothing.
Slick Willie Clinton forced S&W to add locks in order to keep bidding on government HUD contracts.

There have also been a few reports of the lock failing and locking the gun up when they were first introduced.

Post that on the Internet once, and before long every S&W ever made with a lock is 100% sure to lock itself in the middle of a gun fight! :rolleyes:

rc
 
I recently had a smith and wesson Sigma chambered in .40s&w. i bought the gun used for a reasonable price(or at least it looked like it) and when i fired the pistol the first time the magazine fell out. just like that. i tried several times but couldnt get it to work. when i got home i saw the magazine release was worn internally. i tried to find someone who had the same problem but never did so maybe its not every sigma? im not knockin S&W but thats my experience with them. i sold it eventually. i heard that a local police department recently swapped their glock 21's for the M&P.
 
What's with the lock hate?
Click to expand...

Lets not even go there for the sake of the thread. I think that SW's quality is fine if you get a good specimen. The issue is that they depend too much on the perceived perfection of their CNC equipment. Therefore, many defective guns slip through the cracks and end up on retail shelves. My first 637 was very problematic... they finally replaced it with a new gun which works perfectly.
 
as said, the answer is both yes and no

there are some great older guns and there are also some real dogs...it has to do with the variance inherent in hand work when the pool of skill workers is diminishing.

if you're going to look for an older gun, you mind as well look for a gun with the recessed chamber rims and a pinned barrel.

i've been talking o a revolversmith about this issue...since he sees more S&W revolvers in a year than i've seen in my whole life... and his feeling is that finish is not as good, but that the alignment of parts and actions are more consistent. CNC machining and MIM parts allow them to hold tighter tolerences.

i don't worry too much about a gritty action in a revolver, i don't own a revolver that hasn't had it's action tuned...well, i have a couple waiting their turn...and that includes older S&W M27s and Colt Pythons
 
Guillermo

Yes their quality has plummented.
Click to expand...

Now, now... Don't get emotional...

There is nothing wrong with a new one that can't be cured by buying an older one. :D


As for myself, I prefer selected older ones because I prefer the way they were made with fewer changes that were made to cut manufacturing costs. Also many times the older ones with a little milage (and sometimes none) will cost less.

Face it... I'm a cheapskate. :evil: ;)
 
IMO the quality of S&W has declined. S&W has excellent customer service. How do you think it got that way?

I am grateful to the current company calling itself S&W.....for introducing me to Ruger.

Since S&W does not produce a handgun that I want, or could use, I bought a GP100 and SP101.

Rugers are superb revolvers with triggers that are very nice. Thanks Safety Wesson! :) TJ
 
In general, modern manufacturing technology has created firearms that are of a better quality than ever before.

The tolerances that machining can be held to are incredible. Metals are cleaner and more consistent. Lean manufacturing and improved process flow has been improved product quality so that less lemons get out the door.

Touch labor has been greatly reduced, good or bad, that has been the trend for all manufacturing since the industrial age began.

However, features change.

In the picture below is a 80’s vintage M624 in 44 Spl and a 2000’s M625 in 45 LC.

I don’t care for the trigger lock but it has not caused me any problems. I never cared for recessed cylinder heads as they were hard to clean and you could not see loaded cartridges from the side. I miss the hammer mounted firing pin. With a “direct strike” mechanism, more energy hits the primer and that provides more reliable ignition. I notice that the mainspring is weaker on the older revolver, and I believe that is because S&W needed a stronger mainspring when they changed to a spring loaded frame mounted firing pin.

I liked it when they pinned the barrel.

My modern S&W’s shoot well. So do my old ones. The old ones had problems, if you search the web you will read accounts of issues with them.

ReducedM625-9topM624bottomrightside.jpg
 
I didn't say that... Well not exactly....
Click to expand...

no...but you were pretty close.

Quality and workmanship have been compromised, no question. They do have some super light new materials but such is something that I have no interest in. I shoot a steel framed revolver much better than a Scandium, titanium or aluminum alloy.

If a revolver is on my hip it is a probably steel Detective Special with a lugged barrel. I do not want anything lighter. It is true that I can't shoot it as well as Old Fuff, who can shoot a hummingbird at 100 yards with his old DS clenched in his butt cheeks while doing a handstand on the hood of a moving car on a bumpy road. Still I am a good shot with it and have no desire for anything lighter.
 
Last edited:
We talk about "workmanship" being an aspect of quality; so, there is less workmanship in the newer guns simply because they don't have to be handled as much with fitting and assembly due to MIM and CNC; result: "workmanship is lacking". Where in the scheme of judging quality does that put our opinion?
 
mmcsret

You make a good point. Still, the last 3 new Smith revolvers that I laid my hands on had factory defects. Two glaring and one not as obvious. Smith fixed one very quickly and the others were returned to McBrides and swapped immediately.

KBintheSLC summed it up pretty nicely
 
A couple of years ago I helped a friend of mine buy a 686 from Bass Pro. The first one they brought out had a lot of side to side slop in the cylinder. No problem..we have another one. The second one had so much side-side play in the cylinder that it actually rattled. The third and last one they had in stock was okay.
 
Yes their quality has plummented.

Were I to be interested in a new revolver, which I am not, I would look first to Taurus.
Click to expand...

I wouldnt say that "plummeted" is a very accurate metaphor describing S&W's quality. I think previous posters have more-accurately described the pros and cons of S&W's modern manufacturing, and the results.

However, Taurus is still made in Brazil. Taurus doesn't have one single model that hasn't had a lot of QC issues.

I just bought one of the new 329 Night Guard in .44 Magnum, and despite the subdued finish, it is excellent in fit and finish. No complaints whatsoever.
 
I have a 1948 M&P, 1955 Pre-10, 1983 Combat Magnum, 2003 64-8 and a M&P 9mm. To be honest I have to say quality has improved. In all fairness its very hard to compare a 1948 and a 2003 and judge them on lockup, accuracy, and finish quality.

Accuracy is great on all 4, with the Combat Magnum being the best. Triggers are all amazing, the 64-8 has the smoothest pull. Finish, hard to compare since the pre-10 is quite worn, Combat Magnum is in 98%, old M&P is nickel, and 64-8 is Stainless. All seem to have equally good looking marks and logos so for that regards there the same.
 
IMO, rcmodel nailed it. I seriously doubt you'll get a better answer in this thread. In fact, I predict...well...never mind. I'll just get the popcorn.
Click to expand...

Oh no MrBorland!!! Be positive!!! :D ;) :) It is a sincere question. I want a Smith and I am not an expert on them. I want to hear from people with more experience.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Panzerschwein
  • Locked
Current S&W Quality?
2 3
Replies
54
Views
7K
Old Fuff
O
M
  • Locked
S&W 64 dash numbers
Replies
15
Views
1K
MikeG
M
R
  • Locked
Smith & Wesson quality
2 3
Replies
68
Views
3K
Guillermo
G
A
  • Locked
Smith and Wesson blue finishes
Replies
3
Views
1K
Standing Wolf
S
J
  • Locked
Smith and Wesson Internal Lock Questions.
2
Replies
47
Views
7K
MrBorland
MrBorland
Back
Top