"...And I am talking about all the failed frames."
Well, I think the reasonable question to ask is, "just how many failed frames have their been?" The last time I looked hard at this was about three years ago this spring. What I found at the time was that there
may be up to ten 'cracks' in either slides or frames, as agtman suggested. The point is, AFAICT, there could also have been less, as the issues with the Witness quality are clouded by multiple postings on different sites about the same gun / problem. We have no idea of whether or not these failures are from a long-ago-sold batch of guns, but the date of these postings generally suggest that the guns are long gone out into the market, or that the poor heat treating / assembly specs (spring rates) / whatever have been corrected by EAA CS, or whatever/whoever.
IOW, are these failures a relevant problem for today's purchases? Should we judge the EAA product based on these old (?) issues? The issue of the CS quality is kind of separate--I can see why some people worry about that, but generally speaking, I worry more about buying a gun where CS is probably not needed.
For whatever reason, EAA seems to have found a few 'haters' who follow discussions of it nearly everywhere. Then the fanboys show up (I should probably be counted as one). and then we have a discussion of "xxxx is no good" and "xxxx is good."
The result, in a discussion thread such as this one, is that the thread gets off the track--i.e., here we are, debating the merits of this brand / firearm, typically in a caliber / setup NOT inquired about in the original post, and now also debating the merits of a such a discussion about this brand. And, IIRC,
only one of us posting has responded to the original poster's query: Any other owners of a Witness .38 Super have any tips to offer?
So, can we get this discussion back on track?
Jim H.