JR47
Member
Mim parts have several levels of reliability, based on how they are manufactured. Prior to their use, many of the same parts were cast, not forged and machined, anyway.
FYI, I was active in the shooting sports 30 years ago, even 50 years ago. Back in the 1970's everyone was bemoaning the "terrible QC" of the S&W products. Yet, today, these are the "go to" guns the latest crop of "S&W is terrible" posters refer to. Colt was supposedly in the same boat in the late 70s and early 80s.
Sig will still produce guns capable of extensive use. The fact that they use MIM parts rarely affects that goal. However, there's hope for all of the nay-sayers, as there is a new technology supposed to replace MIM. After that is established, they can "forgive" the MIM parts, and begin recommending those guns as "better than" the ones with the new technology parts.
One persons opinion, no matter how often repeated, remains one persons opinion. In this entire thread, there would seem to be very few factual accounts of problems, but lots of "supposed" problems. Pretty typical of the flow here.
FYI, I was active in the shooting sports 30 years ago, even 50 years ago. Back in the 1970's everyone was bemoaning the "terrible QC" of the S&W products. Yet, today, these are the "go to" guns the latest crop of "S&W is terrible" posters refer to. Colt was supposedly in the same boat in the late 70s and early 80s.
Sig will still produce guns capable of extensive use. The fact that they use MIM parts rarely affects that goal. However, there's hope for all of the nay-sayers, as there is a new technology supposed to replace MIM. After that is established, they can "forgive" the MIM parts, and begin recommending those guns as "better than" the ones with the new technology parts.
One persons opinion, no matter how often repeated, remains one persons opinion. In this entire thread, there would seem to be very few factual accounts of problems, but lots of "supposed" problems. Pretty typical of the flow here.