Where HAS S&W QC gone?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Josey

member
Joined
Feb 11, 2003
Messages
1,475
Location
Catfish Co, KY
On the whole I would rate S&W as a 4 to 5 on a 1-10 scale just now. Granted, they will fix or replace the stinkers that leave the factory. Big deal. When you buy Performance Center custom handguns and pay the extra freight, they should work. They should work for a long time! I am seeing, hearing about and reading of several recent POJ handguns from S&W. Their Performance Center is responsible for quite a few. The SW1911 is a new venture and I could give them a pass, S&W stepped up and recalled them. That was a smart move. The THR has had several posts that bring this question to my mind. I wonder what your guess is as to the reason(s)? My quick take is simple, maybe TOO simple. Too many machines, computers and reliance on same. Tere is little to no hand inspection, step by step QC, hand fitting and polishing and a total lack of craftsmanship. It seems that S&W can and will FIX any problem but, has no inclination to invest in human craftsmen that could inspect and PREVENT QC failures.
 
I daresay that in conjuction with selling manufacturing 100, 000 plus handguns per year, a few will be "bad"...

As someone involved in manufacturing, I can give you 100 ways something can go wrong and end up in someones hands...thats what Customer Service is about...

In terms of QC, as I have observed, S&W is ahead of Ruger, Taurus, Kimber and SA....


WildbutnotasgoodasBrowningAlaska
 
The days of the old time gunsmith's at Smith & Wesson
are gone forever I'm afraid. You are right, nowdays too
much emphasis is placed on computer's, and other new
gadget's that cut the cost of production; at the expense
of producing the best possible quality product. As
an example, the recent thread on the S&W model 637
whereas the factory finish was reportedly flaking off.

I haven't bought many new S&W's; except for models
629-5, and 686-5. But I've been lucky, as these two
revolvers are sound quality firearms. Fit and finish
on these examples would rival the guns of yesteryear.
Like others, I would like to see S&W take more pride
in the QC department; and let us put these "issues"
to rest.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
I think brass is thinking make a lot of revolvers that 95% of people are happy with, or go ala Colt with the python and make $1,800 revolvers nobody buys...

Of the two I prefer Smiths current philosophy but I'd think there is a better solution- especially for the PC guns:(
 
I think they are rushing production and possibly cutting a few corners and it's coming back to bite them in the you-know-where. People may laugh, but Taurus has turned up the heat on them and they now have to hustle to stay ahead. If Ruger decides to get in on today's CCW type of handgun race the pressure will be on S&W.
They screamed out the starting blocks with their 1911s, but had to recall them. The first few M500 sold people said they were unlocking when fired and S&W pointed out operator error. Funny how you don't hear of that now and new people are still buying them everyday. Some have reported finishes aren't holding up. Others have had frames polished so to wear away needed surface areas.
They make a quality product, but QC is sleeping on some things going by as they rush to put the product on the shelves.
 
In the past year or so I've bought 3 new S&W revolvers: a second PC 66 F-comp, a second 340PD and a PC 329 carry-comp. The quality of all of these guns has been great. The PC guns lock up with NO, NONE, NADA, ZIPPO play in the cylinder, b/c gaps are nice and tight, timing is dead on, finish is spotless. The 340 PD is good but not as good as the PC guns. Of course the trigger on the 340 PD sucks - smooth but very stiff.

I wish S&W would lose the integral lock, but I thinks its a fact of modern life. I've been very happy with my recent acquisitions and look forward to the reissue of the PC L-comp.
 
The final quality control check on any new firearm is the buyer. Recently I compared two S&W revolvers, a 625 and a 629. The 625 was as good as anything I've seen while the 629 was a mess is several respects. New guns now get the same hard look as a used gun in which I might have an interest.

The problem isn't restricted just to S&W, I've seen some pretty dubious new product from Remington and Ruger.
 
Ala Dan is right, that is why I stick to older S&W's with the exception of my 637.
 
I'd be interested in hearing about internal company memos to the affect of

"we've received X number of firearms from Y batch for corrective work. This reprepsents Z% of the batch. This is what we determined to be the manufacturing problem and have taken these steps to correct the problem."

Memo follow up:
"we've had this problem with this product and took these steps to correct the problem before the product leaves the plant. Since these steps have been taken, the problem has decreased to X1 or Y1 batch, or Z1% of the batch/lot number. We've taken these further measures to correct the problem. The cost of taking these corrective measures has been offset by seeing a decrease in cost for remedial work and helped to increase our corporate image by producing a quality product on the first time around since we've been making firearms, specifically revolvers since the 1850s/1940s etc!"

I think that letting memos like that out to the gun buying public sure would be a great marketing tool. It would send the messages 1) we are listening to our customers 2) we admit to making errors and are dedicated to correcting past errors and mitigating future erros 3) quality and satisfied customers are important to us. That being said, anyone can type up a memo to that affect. Actions speak louder than words.

-Jim
 
I gotta say, the new Smitty 637 I just bought has EXCELLENT craftsmanship... the fit & finish is perfect, the trigger pull is a delight, both in SA and DA, and it is a joy to shoot... I'd say the QC on it is A-1...
 
Josey,

The THR has had several posts that bring this question to my mind. I wonder what your guess is as to the reason(s)?
Click to expand...

Remember that a person who is unhappy (and with good reason) is more likely to post with complaints, than someone who got just what they expected and is satisfied.

I've purchased several (12?, most new) S&W handguns in the last 4 years, and with one exception, they have all been great. I didn't post about the used clunker I got burned on, and I didn't post about the other steller new handguns either (other than to brag about a new toy).

I think a misleading opinion can be formed just by reading open forums.

Joe
 
I bought two new PC guns recently, satisfied with both and I am picky. Would buy PC again.

My brother bought a plain jane 686, trigger isn't as nice as the PC guns but still a fine piece of craftsmanship.

Eskimo Jim: no company is going to air their dirty laundry or the details of their manufacturing operation in public for their competitors to see. More importantly, who cares about all that nonsense if you STILL get a lemon.

What matters is your first hand experience. And mine with Smith is excellent.

Someone here wrote a thread on how to check a revolver for lock up, timing et al - suggest you use that routine when buying any revolver, even a new one.

And I must say, I've picked up (and put back!) a number of questionable Ruger's in the last year . . . . maybe someone who works in a gun store would have a better perspective on this.
 
Highland Ranger,
YOu're right about airing dirty laundry, but they could always do it 'unofficially' if you know what I mean. I'm sure that the marketing gurus could come up with something to say that quality is improving while the production people improve the quality.

You're right about first experiences speaking volumes. Once bit, twice shy is a very accurate adage.

I've been pleased with the Smith and Wesson revolvers that I've bought over the years. The revolver checkout guide that floats at the top of this forum is fantastic.

I would like to see more blued guns come out if it is possible to do so at a reasonable price.

-Jim
 
Blued firearms require the human element. I strongly suspect that what we WILL see from S&W are more coated finishes and matte black. Polishing and inspection required for bluing firearms is not a S&W strategic plan. Quick production, delivery and catching the QC as the defective arms return is. WildAlaska nailed it. If 100 out of 100,000 products are defective, a bean counter sees that as effective production and a good profit margin. The OTHER 99,899 customers were satisfied. One customer was never heard from. Wonder why? I doubt S&W cares.
 
The SW99 9mm I got this year is hands down an excellent firearms, with fantastic finish, fit, and machining. It even has smooth edges on the insides where gun writers tell us it "doesn't matter". I guess it still signifies "quality" to me. Anyway, after some extensive shooting, it's even proven to be surpisingly accurate for a combat-grade 9mm. I shoot bullseyes with it at 15 yds. all the time and it's accurate enough to keep me interested.

The only complaint I had involved the frame, which I believe is a Walther manufactured product. After the first frame cracked, Smith gave me a second one (within 7 days) and only then I realized just how rough around the edges the first one was. The trigger on the original was truly horrendous, but the new one has maybe a 2.5lb SA with crisp break, a smooth-as-silk DA pull with crisp break, and no sharp molding seams to cut my hand. Again, I lay this QC issue directly on Walther's doorstep.

I am now 100% pleased with the gun, and I am extremely picky and faithless about my guns. I almost always come around to despising them fvor one reason or another - even the Sigs I've had - but not this one. So I'd say Smith QC is doing just fine.
 
I have bought a bunch of new S&W's, all made in '01 or later, and two used items - a twenty-year safe queen 24 from the Bangor Punta era and a police trade-in 65 m '88. All of the new ones were/are perfect - and standards to compare by. The '83 vintage 24 had obvious manufacturing defects (spattered brazing remnants from the various frame mounted pins/axles rubbing against the lockwork) which rendered it a safe-sitter... it didn't have a cylinder ring when I got it! The 65 was mechanically perfect, although it looks as though it saw duty as a wheelchock. I love the 'new' S&W's... you can have the 83-vintage one - it has a poorly blued finish, too. I have something to compare that with - a 2" 10 from 1/03 and a year older Heritage 24 - great examples of what blued guns should look like.

Now, you want poor QC? See my posts, mainly on the Ruger forum, re my new Ruger 5.5" SS .45 Colt Redhawk... I called them for a return the day after I bought it new - they have had it in their shop for over three weeks now. By comparison, a fellow revolver-loon couldn't stand it - he had to go buy a 4" 625 like mine last year. He bought if from a dealer - no telling where they came from, but he found some pin-pricks in the extractor shroud - and called S&W (800# - calling Ruger is on you!). They had it picked up from his house (and delivered there as well) - he got it back quickly, albeit with a 5" barrel. He called them - back it went - and back to him with a proper 4" barrel - and chamfered charge holes/trigger job gratis apparently for his patience. We went to the range a day or so after he got it back... it had been two weeks to the day since he bought it! Yep - two trips in less than two weeks! That is service.

I am sure that some have had problems with S&W... but not me or any of my friends or acquaintances (... and I work as a part-time weekend RO - I see a lot of new 637/642's). On the other hand, I won't buy a GP-100 Ruger, no matter how badly I want one, until I find one that is nick, toolmark, and ding free - not likely anytime soon - I have rejected a few. Oddly, my BH's, Vaquero, and SRH were fine!

Stainz
 
I can't say I have ever had a bad S&W product. I even have one of thier plastic-wonder 9's, not the prettiest, accurate or refined firearm in my collection, but with about 8000 rounds through it I know it will go boom every single time I pull the trigger, not one FTF, FTE or stoppage. Guess I am a lucky one.
 
Stainz,

I was surprised to read your post because believe it or not I've never come across a Ruger that was defective in any way, nor have my communications and/or dealings with the factory been anything but satisfactory. Perhaps I've simply been fortunate in that regard, or maybe they've changed over the past few years. Let's hope your difficulties are the result of some temporary problem and not indicative of a permanent shift in their customer service attitudes.

Pure speculation, but nevertheless I wonder....are the legal fees for defending them against frivilous lawsuits (I read online where one was recently dismissed against them) drawing funds away from such departments as customer service? After all, the money has to come from somewhere. Be that as it may, we definitely need a return to sanity in this country. It's about time we stopped holding inanimate objects accountable and started putting the blame where it belongs - on the criminal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Japle
S&W QC
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
TTv2
TTv2
B
  • Locked
S&W 8 shot 357
Replies
0
Views
535
Black Snowman
B
N
  • Locked
S&W Revolver Questions
Replies
7
Views
1K
bountyhunter
B
B
  • Locked
What has happened to the QC at S&W?
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
psyshack
P
S
  • Locked
S&W Mod66 question
Replies
17
Views
726
jad0110
J
Back
Top