Guillermo
member
that would be a nice step up
What's the problem with MIM parts?
- Thread starter OldCavSoldier
- Start date
- Status
that would be a nice step up
H. Faversham
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2007
- Messages
- 72
Per Guillermo:"MIM parts do NOT polish well. This is why many gunsmiths will not do 'action jobs' on MIM guns."
I've heard only one alleged gunsmith say that, and he is so respected by customers that he stands around all day with almost nothing to do. How many decent gunsmiths have nothing to do?
On the other hand, other gunsmiths I know have no problem doing fine action jobs on S&W revolvers with MIM parts, including S&W gunsmiths who polish MIM parts all the time during action jobs. The trick, I've been told is to use the hardest stone available.
It's pretty clear where a person is coming from when he says, "Smith charges plenty for revolvers of the same (or lesser) quality of Taurus...", and "Smith produces crap and people not only buy it...but pay a premium for it..."
Now, for those actually interested in why S&W went to MIM parts, here is what S&W says (from the S&W Forum).
What is MIM?
From Mr. Herb Belin of S&W -----------------------
"I have read with much interest the many comments in this forum pertaining to MIM, MIM Parts and the use of same in a S&W product. So far I have come away with several impressions and they are "people in general don't like/trust MIM parts" and "no one has said why" I will take a stab at this issue and see where it goes.
As background to our decision to use MIM in some areas of our Mfg Process we took a long hard look at our "Life Time Service
Policy". It was clear to us that any change in any of our products such as the use of MIM components had to show equivalent or better performance and durability to those components that were being replaced or the "Lifetime Service" would haunt us forever. The second consideration was to determine if the change was too radical a departure from S&W mainstream design.
For the performance and durability issues we decided that if MIM could be used for the fabrication of revolver hammers and triggers successfully this would truly be an "Acid Test". There is nothing more important to a revolvers feel than the all-important Single Action Sear that is established between the hammer and the trigger. Mechanically few places in a revolver work harder than at the point where the hammer and trigger bear against each other. If these surfaces wear or loose there "edge" the "feel" is lost. Initial testing was on these two critical parts. Over time we arrived at a point where our best shooters could not tell the difference between a revolver with the old style hammer and trigger and the new MIM components. Special attention was given to their endurance when used in our very light Magnum J frames such as the early prototype 340 & 360 Sc's. None of our revolvers work their components harder than these small magnum revolvers. Throughout this testing MIM held strong and finally we determined that this change judged on the basis of durability and feel was a good one.
The second area of concern to S&W was our customer’s reaction to this departure from the traditional. Many heated, intense discussions resulted but in the end the decision was made to move ahead with MIM.
The issue of cost was only one of the considerations in making this decision. Equally as important was the issue of part-to-part uniformity and the result of this of course is Revolver-to-Revolver consistency. We found that revolvers that used MIM hammers and triggers required almost no Fitter intervention in those areas during final assembly and final inspection and Trigger Pull Monitor rejection rates dropped markedly on finished guns. From an internal process point of view it appeared a "Winner".
Lets shift gears for a moment and talk about the MIM process. It is unclear to me as to the reason for many of the negative feelings on the forum concerning MIM. Typically when people complain and aren't specific in the reason why, the problem is often created by a departure from the "Traditional". Perhaps that is indeed what is bothering some people when they view MIM.
The term MIM stands for Metal Injection Molding. It holds some similarities to Plastic Injection Molding and many differences as well. To start we would take a finally divided metal powder. This could be stainless or carbon steel. Today even Titanium is being used in some MIM fabrications. We would mix the metal powder and a thermoplastic binder (generally a Wax) forming slurry of sorts when heated and inject this mix into a precision mold and finally form what is known as a “Green Part". This part is roughly 30% larger than the finished part it will become at the end of the process. Interestingly enough the Green Part at this stage can be snapped in two with simple finger pressure. The Green Parts are then placed in a Sintering furnace filled with dry Hydrogen gas and the temperature is brought almost to the melting point of the metal being used. Over time the "Wax" in the Green Part is evaporated, the metal fuses and the part shrinks 30% to it's final correct dimensions. At this stage of the process the MIM part has developed 98 to 99%of the density of the older wrought materials and a metallurgy that is almost identical. Dimensionally it is finished and no machining is required. However the job is not yet done and the MIM parts are brought to our Heat Treat facility for hardening and in the case of Hammers and Triggers, Case Hardening. Depending on the particular metal alloy that was used at the start of the process we apply a heat treat process that is the same as would be used if the material were the older wrought style. Final hardness, Case thickness and core hardness are for the most part identical to parts manufactured the older way.
Lets look for a moment at how we achieve dimensional precision when comparing these 2 processes. The old parts were each machined from either bar stock or a forging. Each cut and every resulting dimension was subject to machine variations, Cutter wear, operator variations etc. If every operation was done exactly right each and every time and the cutter didn't let you down you would have produced a good part but sometimes this didn’t happen resulting in a rejected gun and rework or in the worst case an unhappy customer. With MIM parts you must still machine to very high tolerances and your cutters have to be perfect and your machinist has to be highly qualified but all of this only has to come together one time. That time is when the injection mold is made. Typically a mold for this process costs S&W between 30,000 and 50,000 dollars. Once it is perfect every part it makes mirrors this perfection and you have in my view a wonderful manufacturing process.
Hopefully this description will help us all better understand the MIM process.
Please forgive the spelling errors and misplaced punctuation. I have no spell checker on this and the phone continues to ring!
Have a Great Weekend,
Herb
Additional Point.
Currently S&W is paying about $1.20/Lb for stainless steel bar stock. Raw MIM stainless steel injectable material costs $10.00/Lb."
I've heard only one alleged gunsmith say that, and he is so respected by customers that he stands around all day with almost nothing to do. How many decent gunsmiths have nothing to do?
On the other hand, other gunsmiths I know have no problem doing fine action jobs on S&W revolvers with MIM parts, including S&W gunsmiths who polish MIM parts all the time during action jobs. The trick, I've been told is to use the hardest stone available.
It's pretty clear where a person is coming from when he says, "Smith charges plenty for revolvers of the same (or lesser) quality of Taurus...", and "Smith produces crap and people not only buy it...but pay a premium for it..."
Now, for those actually interested in why S&W went to MIM parts, here is what S&W says (from the S&W Forum).
What is MIM?
From Mr. Herb Belin of S&W -----------------------
"I have read with much interest the many comments in this forum pertaining to MIM, MIM Parts and the use of same in a S&W product. So far I have come away with several impressions and they are "people in general don't like/trust MIM parts" and "no one has said why" I will take a stab at this issue and see where it goes.
As background to our decision to use MIM in some areas of our Mfg Process we took a long hard look at our "Life Time Service
Policy". It was clear to us that any change in any of our products such as the use of MIM components had to show equivalent or better performance and durability to those components that were being replaced or the "Lifetime Service" would haunt us forever. The second consideration was to determine if the change was too radical a departure from S&W mainstream design.
For the performance and durability issues we decided that if MIM could be used for the fabrication of revolver hammers and triggers successfully this would truly be an "Acid Test". There is nothing more important to a revolvers feel than the all-important Single Action Sear that is established between the hammer and the trigger. Mechanically few places in a revolver work harder than at the point where the hammer and trigger bear against each other. If these surfaces wear or loose there "edge" the "feel" is lost. Initial testing was on these two critical parts. Over time we arrived at a point where our best shooters could not tell the difference between a revolver with the old style hammer and trigger and the new MIM components. Special attention was given to their endurance when used in our very light Magnum J frames such as the early prototype 340 & 360 Sc's. None of our revolvers work their components harder than these small magnum revolvers. Throughout this testing MIM held strong and finally we determined that this change judged on the basis of durability and feel was a good one.
The second area of concern to S&W was our customer’s reaction to this departure from the traditional. Many heated, intense discussions resulted but in the end the decision was made to move ahead with MIM.
The issue of cost was only one of the considerations in making this decision. Equally as important was the issue of part-to-part uniformity and the result of this of course is Revolver-to-Revolver consistency. We found that revolvers that used MIM hammers and triggers required almost no Fitter intervention in those areas during final assembly and final inspection and Trigger Pull Monitor rejection rates dropped markedly on finished guns. From an internal process point of view it appeared a "Winner".
Lets shift gears for a moment and talk about the MIM process. It is unclear to me as to the reason for many of the negative feelings on the forum concerning MIM. Typically when people complain and aren't specific in the reason why, the problem is often created by a departure from the "Traditional". Perhaps that is indeed what is bothering some people when they view MIM.
The term MIM stands for Metal Injection Molding. It holds some similarities to Plastic Injection Molding and many differences as well. To start we would take a finally divided metal powder. This could be stainless or carbon steel. Today even Titanium is being used in some MIM fabrications. We would mix the metal powder and a thermoplastic binder (generally a Wax) forming slurry of sorts when heated and inject this mix into a precision mold and finally form what is known as a “Green Part". This part is roughly 30% larger than the finished part it will become at the end of the process. Interestingly enough the Green Part at this stage can be snapped in two with simple finger pressure. The Green Parts are then placed in a Sintering furnace filled with dry Hydrogen gas and the temperature is brought almost to the melting point of the metal being used. Over time the "Wax" in the Green Part is evaporated, the metal fuses and the part shrinks 30% to it's final correct dimensions. At this stage of the process the MIM part has developed 98 to 99%of the density of the older wrought materials and a metallurgy that is almost identical. Dimensionally it is finished and no machining is required. However the job is not yet done and the MIM parts are brought to our Heat Treat facility for hardening and in the case of Hammers and Triggers, Case Hardening. Depending on the particular metal alloy that was used at the start of the process we apply a heat treat process that is the same as would be used if the material were the older wrought style. Final hardness, Case thickness and core hardness are for the most part identical to parts manufactured the older way.
Lets look for a moment at how we achieve dimensional precision when comparing these 2 processes. The old parts were each machined from either bar stock or a forging. Each cut and every resulting dimension was subject to machine variations, Cutter wear, operator variations etc. If every operation was done exactly right each and every time and the cutter didn't let you down you would have produced a good part but sometimes this didn’t happen resulting in a rejected gun and rework or in the worst case an unhappy customer. With MIM parts you must still machine to very high tolerances and your cutters have to be perfect and your machinist has to be highly qualified but all of this only has to come together one time. That time is when the injection mold is made. Typically a mold for this process costs S&W between 30,000 and 50,000 dollars. Once it is perfect every part it makes mirrors this perfection and you have in my view a wonderful manufacturing process.
Hopefully this description will help us all better understand the MIM process.
Please forgive the spelling errors and misplaced punctuation. I have no spell checker on this and the phone continues to ring!
Have a Great Weekend,
Herb
Additional Point.
Currently S&W is paying about $1.20/Lb for stainless steel bar stock. Raw MIM stainless steel injectable material costs $10.00/Lb."
Oh, Lordy...Dave Clements is one guy. There are plenty of well-regarded gunsmiths who do fine action jobs on MIM-infested guns. Here's my tuned MIM-infested gun:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmy5mkjpUNI
Personally, I think the position taken by the "New Smiths Suck" Club is silly. Why? Because it...nay...their membership...lacks credibility. Apocryphal facts and deference to cherry-picked authorities aside, I've yet to see evidence that any of them are proficient enough that the issues they're worried about should affect their shooting one single whit.
Some of the best wheelgunners hang out on the Brian Enos revolver subforum - they'd advise members of the NSS Club to shoot more and worry less. Good advise, IMO.
oldfool
Member
nice video, McB
(gawd, how I envy hands like that !)
(gawd, how I envy hands like that !)
I think the reaction is to a combination of things in S&W's new designs.
Faversham makes a good argument for MIM. That's when it's done correctly.
My 360PD had a 16 lb DA trigger pull to start with, 11 pounds was the furthest down Jack Huntington thought was safe.
This gun listed at 1000 dollars, list price. Yes, it's light. Combine that with
the trigger pull and I'd like to see MBoreland do that coin trick with the 360PD.
Also, from a production stand point, I understand the argument for MIM a bit better now. If that's the case, why isn't the price less for S&W revolvers?
The market is currently allowing S&@ to get very high prices for guns with locks that don't work, and MIM parts. If the market slows down a bit, perhaps the prices will become more reasonable, and the features will reflect the publics wishes, not the production manager of S&@.
So: to summerize:
The last S&@ I bought, listed at 1000 dollars MSRP, came with by far the worst trigger I've ever had on any gun. And, it was rough and grity, as well as being horribly heavy.
The 'lock' that is supposed to never fail, locked the gun up while dry firing on snap caps, and had to be removed, leaving the trigger with a rather weird action.
The frame is weak enough that it has to have a small plate to try and defeat gas cutting on the top strap.
It leaves the overall impression of being a WAY overpriced, poorly designed, POS. The ONLY thing it has going for it is it's a pocket .357, and, I now can't really sell it.
On top of this, I now find out it has MIM parts.
As I said earlier, the parts in my Kimber that broke made me go out and replace every piece that I could with forged steel parts. Why? I don't like when things snap. If the MIM thumbsafety was forged, it would have bent, perhaps, not snapped off.
MIM, when it fails, really leaves a dirty taste in your mouth.
Sort of something like,
"I paid a 1000 dollars for this Kimber, near top dollar, and they put
a safety on it that snaps off, under normal use like a twig. This is something
I was going to bet my life on?"
Keep in mind that I have shot one Detonics Combatmaster for 5 years straight, every other day, 2-3 hours a day, rarely changed the springs, and had the gun run for ever, with .451 Detonics level loads.
Those of us that have had forged parts in our guns, and guns that run a REALLY long time, are not used to having such stuff happen, least of all in 1000 dollar gun range.
I still remember when you could buy a Glock for what it was worth, about 150 dollars, and, they even ran fairly reliably, and they are plastic.
By the way, at that price point, I'm never buying another Smith.
I think if more people walk away, they might get the message.
I won't miss the guns, either.
My opinions about guns have been wrong, in hindsight, before.
Perhaps I'll feel that way about S&@ when I'm dead.
There are some guns made today, at that same price point, that still have
top quality parts, and, on the used market, it's pretty incredible what is available, sometimes.
Let's try this:
A picture is worth a thousand words:
I paid the same price for these guns, which do you think represents the best quality?
This is the Kimber Custom II, after I replaced the parts with all Ed Brown forged parts:
I didn't feel real bad about this, since I figured I'd gamble on the MIM parts, and, if they broke, I'd replace them. After the slide stop broke, and, the safety, I replaced everything I could with forged.
ANY 1911 I buy in the future will have to be using forged parts. I believe JMB
designed the gun for forged parts manufacturing, and, that is the way they should be made. That limits my buying options, since most of the smaller guns are made with MIM parts that can't be replaced, like the Ultra Carry II from Kimber, etc.
I find it odd that Colt is one of the hold outs, using forged parts, and, their prices are a couple hundred under the MIM S&@, at least the last time I looked.
Finally, there is just a cheap look to the inside of the S&@ 1911's. I remember watching my gunsmith do a trigger job on a couple 1911SC
guns, a model from S&W that I considered. The internals areas of the gun are really uninspiring, and, the parts look real cheap.
So, in summary: Those of us that have had bad experiences with MIM parts,
and the new S&@ designs have a certain skepticism about how wonderful
MIM parts are.
I notice the guy never went
"When MIM goes bad. Or, you die."
Faversham makes a good argument for MIM. That's when it's done correctly.
My 360PD had a 16 lb DA trigger pull to start with, 11 pounds was the furthest down Jack Huntington thought was safe.
This gun listed at 1000 dollars, list price. Yes, it's light. Combine that with
the trigger pull and I'd like to see MBoreland do that coin trick with the 360PD.
Also, from a production stand point, I understand the argument for MIM a bit better now. If that's the case, why isn't the price less for S&W revolvers?
The market is currently allowing S&@ to get very high prices for guns with locks that don't work, and MIM parts. If the market slows down a bit, perhaps the prices will become more reasonable, and the features will reflect the publics wishes, not the production manager of S&@.
So: to summerize:
The last S&@ I bought, listed at 1000 dollars MSRP, came with by far the worst trigger I've ever had on any gun. And, it was rough and grity, as well as being horribly heavy.
The 'lock' that is supposed to never fail, locked the gun up while dry firing on snap caps, and had to be removed, leaving the trigger with a rather weird action.
The frame is weak enough that it has to have a small plate to try and defeat gas cutting on the top strap.
It leaves the overall impression of being a WAY overpriced, poorly designed, POS. The ONLY thing it has going for it is it's a pocket .357, and, I now can't really sell it.
On top of this, I now find out it has MIM parts.
As I said earlier, the parts in my Kimber that broke made me go out and replace every piece that I could with forged steel parts. Why? I don't like when things snap. If the MIM thumbsafety was forged, it would have bent, perhaps, not snapped off.
MIM, when it fails, really leaves a dirty taste in your mouth.
Sort of something like,
"I paid a 1000 dollars for this Kimber, near top dollar, and they put
a safety on it that snaps off, under normal use like a twig. This is something
I was going to bet my life on?"
Keep in mind that I have shot one Detonics Combatmaster for 5 years straight, every other day, 2-3 hours a day, rarely changed the springs, and had the gun run for ever, with .451 Detonics level loads.
Those of us that have had forged parts in our guns, and guns that run a REALLY long time, are not used to having such stuff happen, least of all in 1000 dollar gun range.
I still remember when you could buy a Glock for what it was worth, about 150 dollars, and, they even ran fairly reliably, and they are plastic.
By the way, at that price point, I'm never buying another Smith.
I think if more people walk away, they might get the message.
I won't miss the guns, either.
My opinions about guns have been wrong, in hindsight, before.
Perhaps I'll feel that way about S&@ when I'm dead.
There are some guns made today, at that same price point, that still have
top quality parts, and, on the used market, it's pretty incredible what is available, sometimes.
Let's try this:
A picture is worth a thousand words:
I paid the same price for these guns, which do you think represents the best quality?
This is the Kimber Custom II, after I replaced the parts with all Ed Brown forged parts:
I didn't feel real bad about this, since I figured I'd gamble on the MIM parts, and, if they broke, I'd replace them. After the slide stop broke, and, the safety, I replaced everything I could with forged.
ANY 1911 I buy in the future will have to be using forged parts. I believe JMB
designed the gun for forged parts manufacturing, and, that is the way they should be made. That limits my buying options, since most of the smaller guns are made with MIM parts that can't be replaced, like the Ultra Carry II from Kimber, etc.
I find it odd that Colt is one of the hold outs, using forged parts, and, their prices are a couple hundred under the MIM S&@, at least the last time I looked.
Finally, there is just a cheap look to the inside of the S&@ 1911's. I remember watching my gunsmith do a trigger job on a couple 1911SC
guns, a model from S&W that I considered. The internals areas of the gun are really uninspiring, and, the parts look real cheap.
So, in summary: Those of us that have had bad experiences with MIM parts,
and the new S&@ designs have a certain skepticism about how wonderful
MIM parts are.
I notice the guy never went
"When MIM goes bad. Or, you die."
oldfool
Member
"My 360PD had a 16 lb DA trigger pull to start with"
MIM or no MIM, ILS or no ILS, I honestly cannot relate to buying a DA revolver with a DA trigger like that; try before you buy, and walk away from rough 16# DA triggers, no matter the make/model. They can all be made better with time & money, but beginning life "better than" is always a good notion.
Many of us do have various issues with some of the measures S&W has taken to lower manufacturing costs; personally I feel like it's in large part due what their competition (re: Taurus, Charter, et.al.) too often gets away with, and too many shooters are willing to deem "acceptable".
me, I have no issues with MIM
I have no issues even with ILS, even though I think it's incredibly stupid design
(I don't shoot mega magnum ultralight guns anyway)
fitness for function (like crappy triggers, and liner barrels on 357s, aluminum frames or cylinders, and airweight magnums), that I have issues with
so... not unlike G, even if for reasons from somewhat different personal perspectives, I will stick with the vintage stuff
IMO, S&W still has quite a way to go before they arrive at the lowest common denominator of the revolver mass market, ala Taurus... but they are working harder at it than they ought
PS
I don't think McB would be much inclined to shoot a 16# DA trigger, period
and given the BIG bore SA stuff Prosser does so very very well, an airweight 357 probably feels "recoiless" to him; not so for all of us !
MIM or no MIM, ILS or no ILS, I honestly cannot relate to buying a DA revolver with a DA trigger like that; try before you buy, and walk away from rough 16# DA triggers, no matter the make/model. They can all be made better with time & money, but beginning life "better than" is always a good notion.
Many of us do have various issues with some of the measures S&W has taken to lower manufacturing costs; personally I feel like it's in large part due what their competition (re: Taurus, Charter, et.al.) too often gets away with, and too many shooters are willing to deem "acceptable".
me, I have no issues with MIM
I have no issues even with ILS, even though I think it's incredibly stupid design
(I don't shoot mega magnum ultralight guns anyway)
fitness for function (like crappy triggers, and liner barrels on 357s, aluminum frames or cylinders, and airweight magnums), that I have issues with
so... not unlike G, even if for reasons from somewhat different personal perspectives, I will stick with the vintage stuff
IMO, S&W still has quite a way to go before they arrive at the lowest common denominator of the revolver mass market, ala Taurus... but they are working harder at it than they ought
PS
I don't think McB would be much inclined to shoot a 16# DA trigger, period
and given the BIG bore SA stuff Prosser does so very very well, an airweight 357 probably feels "recoiless" to him; not so for all of us !
Last edited:
Magnumite
Member
When MIM parts fail, they fail early in their usage. Buy a MIM gun, shoot the snot out of it for a couple weeks, if it lives, you're good to go. If not, utilize the warranty and most likely that part will be good to go.
Action smoothness has more to do with finishing than in MIM usage.
The flame plate being in the gun is there to protect the frame flame cutting. The proximity of the frame to the cylinder makes frame cutting highly probably with high intensity cartridges. So Smith took a proactive step to a physical phenomenon that is unavoil able. FYI, the OLD SMITHs exhibited flame cutting of the top strap also. Read of it several times. And they didn't have MIM. LOL.
Forged parts were originally used in the 1911 because that was the best method to use for the technology available when JMB designed the 1911. He was a genius, yes, but he was still limited by the processes available at the time. And the slides were soft, frames were soft, because that is the material and metallurgies available at the time. I read so many "JMB made it that way" lines written by guys shooting 1911's with beavertail grip safeties, aluminum 3 hole triggers, closely fitted barrels, and extended safeties. And know what? JMB didn't make it that way.
My career is in one of the most technology changing industries. One keeps up or they go out of business. The ones that refused to get the required training and mind set were out of the industry or business in a matter of years. Whining and crying does no good.
Technology marches on, get used to it. One needs to keep up or become a dinosaur. Nothing stays the same. MIM parts are what are keeping many of these firearms available at a reasonable cost. Become insistent on machined parts only then buy custom - that way one commits to the higher quality they percieve with their pocketbook. Don't buy a Kimber then complain about MIM. It is like buying a house next to a drag strip then complaining about the noise.
Action smoothness has more to do with finishing than in MIM usage.
The flame plate being in the gun is there to protect the frame flame cutting. The proximity of the frame to the cylinder makes frame cutting highly probably with high intensity cartridges. So Smith took a proactive step to a physical phenomenon that is unavoil able. FYI, the OLD SMITHs exhibited flame cutting of the top strap also. Read of it several times. And they didn't have MIM. LOL.
Forged parts were originally used in the 1911 because that was the best method to use for the technology available when JMB designed the 1911. He was a genius, yes, but he was still limited by the processes available at the time. And the slides were soft, frames were soft, because that is the material and metallurgies available at the time. I read so many "JMB made it that way" lines written by guys shooting 1911's with beavertail grip safeties, aluminum 3 hole triggers, closely fitted barrels, and extended safeties. And know what? JMB didn't make it that way.
My career is in one of the most technology changing industries. One keeps up or they go out of business. The ones that refused to get the required training and mind set were out of the industry or business in a matter of years. Whining and crying does no good.
Technology marches on, get used to it. One needs to keep up or become a dinosaur. Nothing stays the same. MIM parts are what are keeping many of these firearms available at a reasonable cost. Become insistent on machined parts only then buy custom - that way one commits to the higher quality they percieve with their pocketbook. Don't buy a Kimber then complain about MIM. It is like buying a house next to a drag strip then complaining about the noise.
Guillermo
member
facts
S&W went to MIM to lower costs and enhance revenue, not improve the product
MIM parts are not as smooth as hardened and polished forged part or flash chromed
MIM parts do not "play well" with parts made of other materials
MIM parts do not hold plating well
S&W does not use MIM in upper-end guns
MIM trigger is not smooth enough for Jerry Miculek as evidenced by the JM625
observations
Most people don't care about the details
Few attempt to say that MIM is superior but rather "as good" as forged
fanboys will explain away MIM, IL crush fit barrels, failures, QC problems AND high prices...logic is irrelevant...as is reality
opinion
Smith and Wesson once upon a time made great guns and many people still treasure the name. S&W could slap their name on a Taurus Judge and many would buy it.
S&W went to MIM to lower costs and enhance revenue, not improve the product
MIM parts are not as smooth as hardened and polished forged part or flash chromed
MIM parts do not "play well" with parts made of other materials
MIM parts do not hold plating well
S&W does not use MIM in upper-end guns
MIM trigger is not smooth enough for Jerry Miculek as evidenced by the JM625
observations
Most people don't care about the details
Few attempt to say that MIM is superior but rather "as good" as forged
fanboys will explain away MIM, IL crush fit barrels, failures, QC problems AND high prices...logic is irrelevant...as is reality
opinion
Smith and Wesson once upon a time made great guns and many people still treasure the name. S&W could slap their name on a Taurus Judge and many would buy it.
BADUNAME13
Member
I completely agree.
I just know that he's pretty well respected (Atleast if you believe John Taffin)
Does good work (I know this from the several of my guns he has worked on.)
And back when all the MIM parts were BREAKING (As has already been talked about) through Normal use... since his Grandchildren are my Godchildren...
he was the only one I could ask for a 'down and dirty' on the subject.
As others have said... it's good enough (Apparently) for 'most people' but NOT for those who are high volume, or very picky.
(Don't count me in that... I have over 30 S&W's, and they are the 'pre all this *Stuff*" But I mainly shoot Glocks and AK's!)
Just putting in my $0.02 when the comment was made about NO-ONE of any worth not liking them.
YMMV
oldfool
Member
"S&W could slap their name on a Taurus Judge and many would buy it."
uhhh, actually I think they pretty much did that, not long ago, and some did buy it
NOT me... Ah-nold mebbe
but that's a whole other topic
(you reckon they have MIM and ILS on that thang ?)
uhhh, actually I think they pretty much did that, not long ago, and some did buy it
NOT me... Ah-nold mebbe
but that's a whole other topic
(you reckon they have MIM and ILS on that thang ?)
Magnumite
Member
And the debate can go on forever. I believe the point was made the application was a prime considerate for MIM application. And custom gun buyers expect forged parts. As stated before, Bill Wilson started using MIM in his custom line of guns. He stopped simply because buyers expected the machine barstock parts...performance was irrelevant.
I won't argue the different in strength between forged and MIM internals. The truth is most small parts are not forged, they are machined from barstock, with is acknowledged as superior...but is that superiority really needed in most applications MIM is used for?
I am not arguing for or against MIM or forged/barstock machined parts. What I do argue is associating MIM with inferiority of the final product. Comparing components used in custom guns is irrelevant to those used in standard production guns. See the Wilson Combat reference, and Bill Wilson is very particular about his product.
Many posters in many of these forums, as was done in the post previous to this thread, do not compare product along market lines. A base model S&W revolver is better than many others out there, in the same market line. Many of revolvers out there are comparable quality. One manufacturer uses investment casting for most components save the cylinders, springs and some stamped components....and no one ever argues those products' strength and durability. It is really a matter of features desired.
I won't argue the different in strength between forged and MIM internals. The truth is most small parts are not forged, they are machined from barstock, with is acknowledged as superior...but is that superiority really needed in most applications MIM is used for?
I am not arguing for or against MIM or forged/barstock machined parts. What I do argue is associating MIM with inferiority of the final product. Comparing components used in custom guns is irrelevant to those used in standard production guns. See the Wilson Combat reference, and Bill Wilson is very particular about his product.
Many posters in many of these forums, as was done in the post previous to this thread, do not compare product along market lines. A base model S&W revolver is better than many others out there, in the same market line. Many of revolvers out there are comparable quality. One manufacturer uses investment casting for most components save the cylinders, springs and some stamped components....and no one ever argues those products' strength and durability. It is really a matter of features desired.
Walking Dead
Member
Fact? Where do you get those facts? The only facts are how boring these MIM discussions are. People seem to create certain facts and do a really good job of believing themselves.
Guillermo
member
WD,
Go by Grant Cunningham's website and read some of his stuff about MIM. Perhaps he has deluding himself as you suggest that I have.
Of course since you find the discussion boring and yet take part one has to wonder about your motivation. Just like to argue? Fanboy? Troll?
I am always looking to learn so please be so kind so as to explain why one would take part in a conversation that they find boring.
Go by Grant Cunningham's website and read some of his stuff about MIM. Perhaps he has deluding himself as you suggest that I have.
Of course since you find the discussion boring and yet take part one has to wonder about your motivation. Just like to argue? Fanboy? Troll?
I am always looking to learn so please be so kind so as to explain why one would take part in a conversation that they find boring.
The Old Fuff, whom over time has worked on and/or examined in detail, Smith & Wesson revolvers made from the 1860's to present, has absolutely no problem with the MIM parts used in current production. 
That's because I don't presently own any revolvers that use the "new technology" parts.
Smith and Wesson went to this method of fabrication for a number of reasons, some which are never mentioned. For example the hammer had to be modified so that the internal lock would work. The necessary machining on a conventional hammer would have been expensive, but on a molded part added nothing to the cost. Also in the hammer the double-action sear and mainspring stirrup no longer have to be pinned, which lowers production costs. Some gunsmiths (but by no means all) believe that these changes have a small but noticeable negative affect on the double-action trigger pull.
I haven't a whole lot of experience with stoning or polishing MIM parts, but my early experiments with S&W revolvers didn't show any improvement over burnishing the parts through use or dry-firing. Burnishing is free, and won't in any way affect the factory warrantee. That, and the supposedly tight tolerances offered by the molded parts may be adversely affected if stoning/polishing goes too far.
I am far from convinced that "new technology" is always better, but I don't try to impose my judgments on others. Those, who for whatever reason believe that new-is-better, have the option of buying almost anything in the S&W catalog. Others can access a wide marketplace filled with older guns.
So in my view getting into an argument over this is usually a waste of bandwidth. To each his own I say...
That's because I don't presently own any revolvers that use the "new technology" parts.
Smith and Wesson went to this method of fabrication for a number of reasons, some which are never mentioned. For example the hammer had to be modified so that the internal lock would work. The necessary machining on a conventional hammer would have been expensive, but on a molded part added nothing to the cost. Also in the hammer the double-action sear and mainspring stirrup no longer have to be pinned, which lowers production costs. Some gunsmiths (but by no means all) believe that these changes have a small but noticeable negative affect on the double-action trigger pull.
I haven't a whole lot of experience with stoning or polishing MIM parts, but my early experiments with S&W revolvers didn't show any improvement over burnishing the parts through use or dry-firing. Burnishing is free, and won't in any way affect the factory warrantee. That, and the supposedly tight tolerances offered by the molded parts may be adversely affected if stoning/polishing goes too far.
I am far from convinced that "new technology" is always better, but I don't try to impose my judgments on others. Those, who for whatever reason believe that new-is-better, have the option of buying almost anything in the S&W catalog. Others can access a wide marketplace filled with older guns.
So in my view getting into an argument over this is usually a waste of bandwidth. To each his own I say...
I have a problem with relying on a theoretical 30% shrinkage rate to arrive at a finished part. I want my part to start as a piece of steel, hot forged to a rough shape. This removes voids and makes it strong. I then want a grinding wheel to contour the part and then a Bridgeport to cut the final contact surfaces. I do not want a part that starts off likeh muffin batter in a cake tin.
I will pay for the additional cost of fitting and QC, which is prolly $50 and pales in comparison to all the other BS we have to pay for.
See, its all over something trivial like $50. We're talking about a gun that will last a lifetime for 99% of the buyers.
I like to think we have taste and we demand quality and we discriminate and pride ourselves in what we own. We don't eat our Christmas dinners on paper plates with plastic forks. We don't drink champaigne out of the bottle. We don't wipe with newspaper.
This is my point. The gun industry is cheapening the experience for me. I take no pleasure in shooting a HiPoint. S&W is heading down that route.
Hell, why not make the whole gun outa MIM and dispense with machining alltogether? GSG 22's are a perfect example of this. Mold it, spray some Rustoleum on it, and throw it in a cardboard box. Who cares what it looks like. Afterall, it's just a tool. We could make everything out of MIM: Watches, forks, knives, nuts, screws, wrenches, screwdrivers, hatchets... and those swirly injection marks can be said to represent the "artistic" part of the process because no two are exactly alike. People could then pay homage to the MIMers, like they do to the custom makers right now, and flood the boards with discussions of mold lines, carrier agents, shrinkage rates, and high raw material costs.
I wanna puke.
I will pay for the additional cost of fitting and QC, which is prolly $50 and pales in comparison to all the other BS we have to pay for.
See, its all over something trivial like $50. We're talking about a gun that will last a lifetime for 99% of the buyers.
I like to think we have taste and we demand quality and we discriminate and pride ourselves in what we own. We don't eat our Christmas dinners on paper plates with plastic forks. We don't drink champaigne out of the bottle. We don't wipe with newspaper.
This is my point. The gun industry is cheapening the experience for me. I take no pleasure in shooting a HiPoint. S&W is heading down that route.
Hell, why not make the whole gun outa MIM and dispense with machining alltogether? GSG 22's are a perfect example of this. Mold it, spray some Rustoleum on it, and throw it in a cardboard box. Who cares what it looks like. Afterall, it's just a tool. We could make everything out of MIM: Watches, forks, knives, nuts, screws, wrenches, screwdrivers, hatchets... and those swirly injection marks can be said to represent the "artistic" part of the process because no two are exactly alike. People could then pay homage to the MIMers, like they do to the custom makers right now, and flood the boards with discussions of mold lines, carrier agents, shrinkage rates, and high raw material costs.
I wanna puke.
BADUNAME13
Member
I think I just DID!
Exactly. We are paying for the back-door deal with the Clintons. In the interest of safety, they put a padlock on a revolver... a stroke of brilliance. But not on a semi-auto, the subject of the AW ban, nooooooooooo. On a revolver! They should have demanded a reduction in cylinder capacity to three rounds. That way an angry citizen would have a cooling-off period inbetween trigger strokes.
Guillermo
member
that is funny stuff!!!
Aren't the new owners the patent design holder on that terrible lock?
Anyone done any research on the company that bought S&@? I don't know much about them.
As for buying a gun, like a Kimber, and not being happy with the parts:
It depends on what you pay for the gun. All of this is really about cost. S&@ is using cheaper parts, poorer design, in particular the lock, and charging more money. Taurus, while half the price of S&@ look, at least from my limited exposure, to put out a gun worth 1/4 the price of a S&@
I was looking for an accurate, tight, good frame, good barrel to build a custom on. I checked into the Kimber Custom II line. I found that the barrel and frame where near match grade, the magazines terrible, and the MIM parts questionable.
I bought the gun since for about 700 dollars, I couldn't find a comparable 1911 at the time with value in the basic components that the Custom II had.
I replaced all the Kimber MIM parts I could with Ed Brown parts, and, use Wilson mags. By the time my gunsmith had gone through the gun, I had a tack driving, reliable 1911 that will shoot .45 Super all day long, for a great value.
If I had to pay 1000 dollars for the gun, as with some of their 'customs' that come with MIM parts, and then do the same thing I would be complaining a LOT louder about the basic quality of the parts. That is my complaint about the 1911's coming out of S&@ at the current time. I would love to have a scandium commander model, but, after seeing the internals, fit and finish,
and the price, I'll pass.
Anyone done any research on the company that bought S&@? I don't know much about them.
As for buying a gun, like a Kimber, and not being happy with the parts:
It depends on what you pay for the gun. All of this is really about cost. S&@ is using cheaper parts, poorer design, in particular the lock, and charging more money. Taurus, while half the price of S&@ look, at least from my limited exposure, to put out a gun worth 1/4 the price of a S&@
I was looking for an accurate, tight, good frame, good barrel to build a custom on. I checked into the Kimber Custom II line. I found that the barrel and frame where near match grade, the magazines terrible, and the MIM parts questionable.
I bought the gun since for about 700 dollars, I couldn't find a comparable 1911 at the time with value in the basic components that the Custom II had.
I replaced all the Kimber MIM parts I could with Ed Brown parts, and, use Wilson mags. By the time my gunsmith had gone through the gun, I had a tack driving, reliable 1911 that will shoot .45 Super all day long, for a great value.
If I had to pay 1000 dollars for the gun, as with some of their 'customs' that come with MIM parts, and then do the same thing I would be complaining a LOT louder about the basic quality of the parts. That is my complaint about the 1911's coming out of S&@ at the current time. I would love to have a scandium commander model, but, after seeing the internals, fit and finish,
and the price, I'll pass.
"This is my point. The gun industry is cheapening the experience for me."
This is the oddest comment in this entire thread.
The poster of this statement berates S&W for their perceived lack of quality, when all the while he has the option to purchase a revolver and spend any amount of money he chooses to have it improved, customized, de-MIMed, or painted pink.
It's too bad that anyone feels that they are a victim of circumstances.
gd
This is the oddest comment in this entire thread.
The poster of this statement berates S&W for their perceived lack of quality, when all the while he has the option to purchase a revolver and spend any amount of money he chooses to have it improved, customized, de-MIMed, or painted pink.
It's too bad that anyone feels that they are a victim of circumstances.
gd
oldfool
Member
Prosser hit that bullseye
the people who did the Clinton deal went bankrupt rather quickly
the people who bought S&W for 10 cents on the dollar hold patent rights on the nefarious ILS, which is why it will never go away under current ownership, not because of politics or lawyers, because of where the money goes
but there is nothing theoretical about how precision MIM parts get made, love 'em or hate 'em, as has been explained
"The gun industry is cheapening the experience for me."
I can't argue with that, be it S&W or Glock or Hi-Point or Ruger
MIM I can handle, but I will just never warm up to plastic; took me a long time to just tolerate rubber grips, and I still ain't all that fond of 'em
we are all victims of circumstance, every day, like it or not
(there is a depression going on right now, in case nobody noticed, and not many of us own a gun company, much less the banking industry)
PS
"We don't eat our Christmas dinners on paper plates with plastic forks. We don't drink champaigne out of the bottle."
speak for yourself on that, friend !
shucks I don't drink champagne nohow, heck, I drink beer right out of the easy opening aluminum can, don't even bother with a frosted mug
(but I do keep a little Maker's Mark tucked away, and drink it out of milady's Waterford crystal on special occasions.. like after a days shooting some old all-steel classic revolvers)
the people who did the Clinton deal went bankrupt rather quickly
the people who bought S&W for 10 cents on the dollar hold patent rights on the nefarious ILS, which is why it will never go away under current ownership, not because of politics or lawyers, because of where the money goes
but there is nothing theoretical about how precision MIM parts get made, love 'em or hate 'em, as has been explained
"The gun industry is cheapening the experience for me."
I can't argue with that, be it S&W or Glock or Hi-Point or Ruger
MIM I can handle, but I will just never warm up to plastic; took me a long time to just tolerate rubber grips, and I still ain't all that fond of 'em
we are all victims of circumstance, every day, like it or not
(there is a depression going on right now, in case nobody noticed, and not many of us own a gun company, much less the banking industry)
PS
"We don't eat our Christmas dinners on paper plates with plastic forks. We don't drink champaigne out of the bottle."
speak for yourself on that, friend !
shucks I don't drink champagne nohow, heck, I drink beer right out of the easy opening aluminum can, don't even bother with a frosted mug
(but I do keep a little Maker's Mark tucked away, and drink it out of milady's Waterford crystal on special occasions.. like after a days shooting some old all-steel classic revolvers)
Last edited:
Guillermo
member
He OldFool...
I LOVE your taking part in this discussion and then reading your "signature"
"put your faith in god, but carry an old model S&W"
I LOVE your taking part in this discussion and then reading your "signature"
"put your faith in god, but carry an old model S&W"
oldfool
Member
never said I was buying them new MIM guns, G
just buying some of the arguments re: new tech
I think you already know all my revolvers are the old fashioned kind, built the old fashioned way
my sig line USED to read, "put your faith in god, but carry a S&W"
milday uses forged steel blades of Solingen, Germany steel, and so do I
but I do have a couple ceramic blades for the BBQ grill.. real easy to keep clean you know
(and they cost only a fraction of "her" knives do, sharp e'nuff)
just buying some of the arguments re: new tech
I think you already know all my revolvers are the old fashioned kind, built the old fashioned way
my sig line USED to read, "put your faith in god, but carry a S&W"
milday uses forged steel blades of Solingen, Germany steel, and so do I
but I do have a couple ceramic blades for the BBQ grill.. real easy to keep clean you know
(and they cost only a fraction of "her" knives do, sharp e'nuff)
Last edited:
Guillermo
member
OldFool
You seem to have good taste in revolvers.
Now we gotta work on your taste in sour mash
You seem to have good taste in revolvers.
Now we gotta work on your taste in sour mash
- Status
