MIM...Fact or Fiction

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RedAlert

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2006
Messages
678
Location
Silverdale, WA
Anyone who has read the posts on this forum has heard the bashing of MIM parts. Claims made by some would have you believe they are the spawn of the devil; or worse.

But I want to know if these claims are fact or fiction. Are MIM parts failure prone? Do they not function properly? What parts that have been replaced my MIM parts have been PROVEN to be faulty? How many failures?

I'd like to have a FACT filled discourse on the subject. I don't want "I read it on the internet." and have that introduced as fact. I don't want to hear "Charlie at the range heard Bill talking about MIM failures. I'd like to see URLs to sites that offer factual information. I'd like to see URLs for documented failures, etc. I'd like to see photos.

Come on this is a chance to use this forum to prove or dispel the myths associated with MIM parts.

Ralph
 
The search feature is your friend. I give this one less than 24 hours before its locked.

MIM when done well is as good as other production methods and is cheaper to produce. If it is not done properly it will fail and fail catastrophically. Its your gun and your money do as you see fit.
 
Sorry rellascout..Your response is just the type I was hoping to avoid. Not one fact. Oh excuse me you did mention it was "...as good as other production methods and is cheaper to produce."
Come on folks there is factual information that I searched and read but I was hoping for information I hadn't yet found.
 
I have never had MIM parts fail on a firearm but I have had them fail else where. Off the top of my head, carburetor housing, shrink wrap machine, boat tie off, and I know there are other instances I can't think of at the moment.
 
Sorry rellascout..Your response is just the type I was hoping to avoid. Not one fact. Oh excuse me you did mention it was "...as good as other production methods and is cheaper to produce."
Come on folks there is factual information that I searched and read but I was hoping for information I hadn't yet found.
Click to expand...

What more do you need to know? The way that you are attempting to gather data although factually accurate will not yield any meaningful data. There is no objective data to be gained because we do not have access to the necessary information to create objectivity. You are attempting to give this thread a tone of objectivity and scientific method but in the end its just another meaningless MIM debate thread. Stating this part failed in this gun is a meanningless data point because we do not know enough particulars to draw any meaningful conclusions.

MIM is what it is. Do the research and you will find like most production methods there is "good MIM' and there is "bad MIM". Unless you know where X part for X manufacturer is produced, when it was produced and exactly which process, compound etc... was used saying this part failed or this one did not is meaningless.

The info you will gather while they maybe factual will yield absolutely NO VALID CONCLUSION.

In the end it is each individuals choice to purchase what they choose these types of threads have no validity.
 
Last edited:
Here Ya Go

I bought a S&W Model 60-9 and a year or so after I bought it it broke the hammer block which was a MIM part. S&W had gone to MIM hammer blocks over the stamped metal ones for whatever reason. I contacted S&W and they sent me a new hammer block free of charge. OK, I thought it was a fluke. The hammer block should not be under any bind that would break it. Dropped the new part in and around 250 rounds later ~ another broken hammer block. S&W's response was to send me a new MIM hammer block. I started research it on the internet and found this not to be an isolated problem. I guess S&W have enough of a problem with the MIM hammer blocks they finally decided to do something about it. I was talking to one of their customer service reps last year about my concerns and was told they had gone back to the stamped metal ones. They sent me one of those and I have experienced no further problems.
 
Last edited:
The manufacturers are not going to tell.

They view that sort of thing as a 'trad secret' and do not want to give anything away.

You can screw up just about any manufacturing method.

Even Ruger has made some investment cast parts that left a little to be desired.

MIM demands good QC to make good parts, but then so does machining them out of bar stock.
It is just not the SAME QC.

I have used MIM parts in satellites.

They are painfully expensive. 100% x-ray checked (and not just a single view).
Frozen, backed, subject to thermal shock, then x-rayed some more.

A very few get rejected or fail, but the vast majority pass.

None has ever failed after launch.

It would probably raise the price of even a simple gun part by a factor of 10 to 100 times.
 
The manufacturers are not going to tell.

They view that sort of thing as a 'trad secret' and do not want to give anything away.

You can screw up just about any manufacturing method.

Even Ruger has made some investment cast parts that left a little to be desired.

MIM demands good QC to make good parts, but then so does machining them out of bar stock.
It is just not the SAME QC.

I have used MIM parts in satellites.

They are painfully expensive. 100% x-ray checked (and not just a single view).
Frozen, backed, subject to thermal shock, then x-rayed some more.

A very few get rejected or fail, but the vast majority pass.

None has ever failed after launch.

It would probably raise the price of even a simple gun part by a factor of 10 to 100 times.
Click to expand...

Well stated and illustrates the problems with these types of threads. :banghead:
 
Don't waste your time listening to internet bobble heads about this MIM nonsense. Up to this point I have never had one single problem with any of my guns that contain MIM. My prized possession Kimber Eclipse Custom II has MIM parts but functions exceptionally. I'm not saying I'll never have a MIM failure but after being around guns for the better part of 40 years I've never seen a MIM related failure.

Oh wait, I'm an internet bobble head too.....lol Don't worry about it, buy what you like.
 
It is not gun related but my son's Fender Strat. (MIM) was back to Guitar Center three times in the first month. On the last trip the luthier told my him" lets replace all the pots and dress the frets, you still won't have an American Strat but you won't have to continue to bring it over". So far so good, but the luthier made it clear that the MIM is an inferior product.
 
Remember greasing wheel bearings every X miles?

Notice the value of X has steadily increased.

Bearing manufacture has gotten better and better.
 
Sorry I do not have web page links but some material strength generalizations that can easily look up.
Forged Steel.. toughest / strongest
billet steel.. strong tough
cast steel.. can be more brittle, but hard (good in places)
MIM steel.. because of the mixed polimer, (read a a few web pages) has about 80-90% strength of regular cast steel. If the steel powder and polimer is now evenly mixed can cause holes when sintered
AL.. generally about 1/3 the strength of steel.. but also 1/3 as heavy. Why many go to AL frames for lightness.

1/3 the strength of steel is still weaker than MIM at 80%.
I don't see a lot of bitching about how weak and crappy AL is for gun frames.
 
IMO the MIM reputation started in the early days of usage. Like virtually any other product, there were poor quality parts until the process/material/machinery/etc. improved. As the old cliché goes, "You never get a second chance to make a first impression." Looking at the numbers, properly cast MIM is almost as strong as milled parts.

I have seen, first hand, several failures, but it's been a number of years. I think a flawed milled part will survive longer than a similarly flawed MIM. Again, my opinion.
 
The search functions are not intuitive. I think that the more posts with newer updates the better.
 
You could always do a Mythbusters type test. Get a forged hammer and a MIM hammer and then take a....you guessed it....hammer and pound on them and see which breaks first.

I bet you will have to get out the explosives like they do at the end of every episode to see if one will break.
 
I doubt if anything other than anecdotal information is available, but look at where a manufacturer switched from a MIM part to a forged/machined part. That switch is an indication of where the manufacturer abandoned MIM in a part because of failures/returns. You won't find much out there even with that.

All that said, I have had Paras that endless people criticized for the use of MIM in parts. Those same guns that legions of internet experts claimed were subject to failure because of the MIM parts fired thousands of rounds before any sort of part failure occurred. The safety broke on by P12 carry gun leaving it without a safety. It still ran, but it had broken. This MIM part was original material with several thousand rounds down the tube. My gunsmith dropped an old takeoff 1911 safety off an ancient race gun and the ugly thing still rides on my Para.
 
It is not gun related but my son's Fender Strat. (MIM) was back to Guitar Center three times in the first month. On the last trip the luthier told my him" lets replace all the pots and dress the frets, you still won't have an American Strat but you won't have to continue to bring it over". So far so good, but the luthier made it clear that the MIM is an inferior product.
Click to expand...

Wow. ^^^ Why I normally suggest calling your gunsmith with these types of questions. Haha

In other news, I know that some have made metal injection molding out to be a major weak spot in modern pistols but I've heard more stories of pistols functioning perfectly with MIM parts. Sig, Kimber, and (if I'm not mistaken) Glock are all companies that have used MIM parts with success. Not only are the parts cheaper to produce and the parts final dimensional outcomes can be controlled more consistently.

Granted I know this may not be the bold factual truth you're looking for but honestly, I would imagine that if there was damning evidence against MIM then it would be more than prevalent information by now.
 
I'm sure S&W has data as to how many MIM parts have been sent back or replaced vs. how many they sent out. They will never share this data.

It's mainly an issue amongst the purists and people who want it as an SD weapon(very knowledgeable people that even know the MIM parts are in there)...but for the majority of people who don't have a clue they never know or care. Many even put up with the lock.

Personally I will never own a lock or an MIM gun.

The replacement $ and reputation besmirching doesn't outweigh the cost savings of using the MIM parts...and THAT's the BOTTOM LINE.
 
Most MIM failures are from faulty design, not the material. MIM can perform as well as any machined or stamped part given that it is designed well and used in the right application.

Most handgun designs have to survive a 10-20k round endurance test at the factory. If a MIM part fails sooner than the designer anticipates he must look at the design and application. If designed correctly it will survive the testing.

Remember, You could use s machined part in the wrong application, or have a flawed design, and it would fail.

Rick
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
Question About MIM Parts Breakage.....
Replies
7
Views
754
TMM
T
D
  • Locked
The 1911 and MIM
Replies
5
Views
636
rick_reno
R
S
  • Locked
1911 brands and the dreaded MIM parts debacle
2 3 4
Replies
88
Views
6K
SSN Vet
SSN Vet
BCRider
  • Locked
S&W "Hillary Holes" and MIM parts...
2 3 4
Replies
80
Views
5K
Hawk
H
km101
  • Locked
Changing out MIM parts on S&W 15-8?
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Old Fuff
O
Back
Top