Well as long as I can't sleep anyway, and at the risk of being redound I will offer some final thoughts :
The sky is not falling here - Companies like S&W , Colt, Ruger, and others are still producing an overall good product that serves the customer requirements most of the time. All can produce a product that fails to meet expectations and all do. But for the most part, they still produce very good product.
Metal Injection Molded (MIM) parts can be make quickly, consistently, and with proper heat treating can be very durable. I feel S&W foresaw this perception with consumers and offered a lifetime warranty, so how can you loose?
I have nothing against MIM parts and agree they can be both servicable and durable . I don't base that however on a lifetime warranty - "so how can you loose? " Well, like a cars brakes that fail while going down a mountain, there are moments when being under warranty might not bring a smile to your face.
Eliminating Handfitting requires tighter tolerances, not looser.
It is not the tightness of the tolerance but the tightness of the fit that makes the difference. A non-hand fit part must be controled for function and not for closeness of fit between it and another part. Therefore a looser fit between parts , not a looser tolerance within an idividual part.
The most successful companies identify their market and then strike a proper balance of design and functionality to achieve an acceptable level of perceived quality in their product.
I can tell you have your marketing hat on today ! LOL (respectfully)
My experience suggests that engineers left to their own devices will generally over-design a product, perhaps unwittingly adding unnecessary material, processes and cost to the package. This gets passed along to the consumer.
That's been my experience also , but keep in mind that in cases like the S&W revolver the "design" aspect of this product is about a 100 years old now. I don't think we're talking re-designing for form, function or customer satisfaction . The re-design here is mostly for dealing with modern materials, techniques in the manufacturing process, and to hold down costs.
I have no axe to grind with any of the firearms companies today. They mostly put out good servicable product for a reasonable price . You will find bad examples of just about any product as stated in previous posts and that has been the case - always !
Modern manufacturing techniques do not inherantly bring us a bad product . In the sense that much of what we buy would be cost prohibited if made using past labor intensive techniques, you might consider the process as being necessary .
I don't think however, that other than advances in metalergy, that modern manufacturing techniques produce a better firearm product. Some of the debate is in just how one would measure quality , and against what.
A not so smooth trigger pull for example (and a common mention) is perhaps a sign of not being able to spend polishing time at the factory , or from law suits having to do with too light of a trigger pull forcing the manufacture to make sure the pull is greater than desired by some. Is this a quality issue ? Some would say yes ,and some wouldn't notice.
I've personaly seen several guns that have had to go back for warrenty in the last few months. At least two of these resulted in a completely replaced firearm. Two others were X - Frame S&W's sold out of a fairly low volume shop . Companies included: S&W , Remington , Taurus , Kel-Tec I have not lost faith in any of these manufacturers and if one of their products fits my needs or wants I will not hesitate to buy it.
) And i am thinking of picking up a new 686 or gp100. Why the quality issues? What exactly are they?
The above quote is good advice, though, regardless of the manufacturer.
