I'm no big fan of recent production S&W revolvers

[Guillermo]

do we know if it's just the number of returns that's gone up, or number of guns per thousand sold?

The S&W rep I talked to was bemoaning the large total of returns and did not go into it very far...mostly he was wishing that they had no lock and QC.

The gun retailer said that it was a higher rate of returns.

Of course some might say that such is only a portion of the market and while I think representative sample, it might not be.

Maybe S&W only sends their bad guns to Central Texas?

 

[Guillermo]

BTW

The S&W rep HATES the lock.

He hears about it EVERY DAY.

Got to love a company that ignores what their customers want.

He says he could sell a lot more guns if the lock was gone.

Only police departments that will not allow locks on j frames BUGs are why we see those with regularity.

 

[bikemutt]

The lock is the deal breaker for me. I bend over on Scandium guns because I have to; but that's my choice, I don't have to have one.

My LGS has quit showing me any new S&W with a lock, unless the model number starts with a 3.

The integrated lock on a revolver is something I just don't get.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Almost didn't open this thread, so tired of the anti MIM and lock boys

MIM? Internal lock? Ahhhh!!!!! Clearly it's crap!

Yeah, I have two Smiths with all those sinful parts, and haven't had any problem. I'm not saying I don't prefer forged parts, and no lock, I just don't think they are as big of a problem as people make them out to be. Granted, I have a small sample size though.

 

[Guillermo]

460

In my opinion, the use of MIM parts is not a problem in a value oriented product.

Every knowledgeable person acknowledges that S&W has done everything that Taurus does production-wise to cut corners.

Ruger and Taurus are fine using those and other cost cutting methods and others such as cast parts and frames.

The problem with S&W is that they are asking a premium price and delivering a bargain product.

 

[Old Fuff]

The integrated lock on a revolver is something I just don't get.

Three major manufacturers (Smith & Wesson, Taurus and Ruger) have incorporated internal locks in some, if not all of they're revolvers to provide a defense against lawsuits if an unauthorized person - in particular a minor or prohibited person obtains an unsecured handgun and a tragedy occurs. The real responsibility lays with the gun owner, but this in no way stops certain lawyers from suing the gun manufacturer. I don’t see it this way, but the respective company attorneys do. Liability Insurance carriers also favor locks for obvious reasons, and may revise premiums upward if they are not present.

In addition the manufacturers expect that at least some states, and perhaps the federal government will in the future pass statutes requiring internal locks, and it’s easier to make provisions for one while in the process of making other unrelated changes.

None of the above seem particularly concerned about what some consumers think.

 

[bikemutt]

I have to disagree a bit with Guillermo on the value message S&W products; I believe they are asking a premium price for what they believe is a premium product. Now their belief may be misguided, in fact, I'm certain it is. On the other hand Guillermo is so right that S&W is not listening. I don't really know how a business listens; is it those who buy your products despite shortcomings, or those who don't buy your products because of the same shortcomings? I do believe they are in the cat bird seat right now, it's not easy to get the attention of a man who's eating well.

 

[Guillermo]

it's not easy to get the attention of a man who's eating well

Hey Bikemutt!!!

Hope you are doing well amigo.

I would argue that S&W is feeding well not because they are worthy, but because they have a wheelgun monopoly analogous to the robber barons.

(Taurus and Ruger are not direct competitors price-wise)

That you and others find that S&W make a product worth the money is why they are successful.

After all, anything is worth what you can sell it for. And no matter what the reason (including lack of competition) your point is valid.

The market says that they are worth it.

(the market says that $8 cups of coffee are worth it too)

 

[sleepyone]

Congrats on your new gun! I have a 4" 686 Plus with the dreaded lock and love it. All cylinders lock up perfectly. It has been my hunting sidearm since buying it. Used it to kill my first hog from 8 yards. It ran about 150' and then dropped dead.

 

[Guillermo]

Used it to kill my first hog from 8 yards.

bet that was an exciting hunt!!!

 

[bikemutt]

No matter what we may believe Guillermo, there will be no move back to the old days. It's done, over.

I hug my 586s daily

 

[Guillermo]

It's done, over.

No doubt

But I opine that we get the kind of guns we deserve.

If Dan Wessson can produce a no-MIM gun for 1K, s&w, with their volume, can do the same for CONSIERABLY less (if nothing else, just economies of scale can be a huge difference ).

It is because we buy their version of Taurus at premium prices that they continue to cheapen their product and increase prices.

 

[Guillermo]

Put another way, as long as we belly up to the bar and order 16 dollar drink of Usher's green label...why should they stock Glenmorangie?

 

[hAkron]

No doubt

But I opine that we get the kind of guns we deserve.

If Dan Wessson can produce a no-MIM gun for 1K, s&w, with their volume, can do the same for CONSIERABLY less (if nothing else, just economies of scale can be a huge difference ).

It is because we buy their version of Taurus at premium prices that they continue to cheapen their product and increase prices.

This is a very good point. Though one of the design philosophies, as I understand it from a vintage Dan Wesson ad I read on eBay the other day, was to produce an accurate revolver that required little or no hand fitting.

 

[skidder]

Put another way, as long as we belly up to the bar and order 16 dollar drink of Usher's green label...why should they stock Glenmorangie?

My theory is...

They both have the same "label", and once you've had a few you won't really care what's in the bottle.

 

[Guillermo]

once you've had a few you won't really care what's in the bottle

MIM guy huh?

 

[skidder]

The S&W rep I talked to was bemoaning the large total of returns and did not go into it very far...mostly he was wishing that they had no lock and QC.

This has always been my biggest concern. They are stubborn to listen to loyal customers who really want to buy their product. I bet if they redesigned the lock and moved it to a more appealing and less critical location, their sales would increase. Some of those loyal customers that were snubbed right from the start by Saf-T-Hammer might give them another shot.
Honestly, who would be offended if the lock was moved??

MIM guy huh?

MIM-- Masonry Institute of Michigan. How the heck did you find out?
You're good G, my wife doesn't even know.

 

[Woogeroo]

Almost didn't open this thread, so tired of the anti MIM and lock boys living in the past and hand-cranking both their ice cream and their Fords.

Thanks for validating my purchase of five S&Ws in the past few years.

My ice cream machine has an electric motor... and who would drive a Ford anyway?

Modern engineering and advanced metallurgy are fine if it makes the gun better, more durable, more accurate and last longer.

However, if I wanted to do a bunch of silly things to make my gun work, I'd just buy an automatic, not a wheel gun.

-W

 

[Bubba613]

Modern engineering and advanced metallurgy are fine if it makes the gun better, more durable, more accurate and last longer.

Amazing that none of the guys bashing Smith have been able to address these points. Probably because Smiths today are better, more durable, more accurate, and last longer.
I'm sure if there had been discussion boards back in the day some old codgers would be griping about the sissy hammer block safety while others would be swearing that double action was a fad and they would stick with their trusty single action guns.

 

[Old Fuff]

Supposedly the introduction of modern manufacturing technology should insure that all parts are identical and perfect - or at least as much so as is possible.

Larger components are made using machines that are controlled by computers rather then human hands, and smaller ones are molded using methods that produce tighter tolerances then was ever possible before.

So it would seem that when these perfect parts are assembled, the result would be a perfect revolver (or whatever).

This being the case no guns should be returned for warrantee repairs.

 

[hAkron]

Are all of the internals MIM? Has the aftermarket addresses this with forged steel trigger/hammer sets?

 

[Guillermo]

Has the aftermarket addresses this with forged steel trigger/hammer sets?

For some parts, like the trigger, yes. Some gunsmiths won't do "action jobs" without changing it. (I think they use a Smith part for the guns that had not been redesigned for MIM, but they used MIM triggers, like the 1997 686. I can't say for the MIM guns)

The problem is that MIM does not slide smoothly against parts made of other materials so simply changing one part does not solve the problem.

Smith tried to overcome this with the Jerry Miculek 625 by chroming it. Of course since MIM doesn't take plating well, it flakes off.

 

[hAkron]

Is it due to the sintered nature of MIM? Where you have many 'bits' all going in different directions, rather than all going the same way as with forged? Polishing and smoothing along the 'grain' rather than the microscopic grinding across a jagged a sintered surface?

 

[Guillermo]

I do not know but that seems logical.

The molding process would not create a "grain".

Interesting enough, while they do not polish well, they do "burnish".

 

[Guillermo]

dry firing can considerably smooth an action in an all MIM gun.

My current wife has a 686 with the MIM trigger and the action is horrid.

She won't let me send it off to have the offending parts banished.

FYI, that gun went back to Smith with an improperly set barrel.