I haven't been on this forum for awhile - being an old school LE who carried and was proficient with both revolvers and semi-autos, all the advice ad nauseam on "limp wristing" the firearm ticked me off.

I went into teaching criminal justice and fire fighting at a high school vocational school 12 years back. At the time I got rid of all my firearms. Having been involved with martial arts a good chunk of my life, I didn't think I needed defensive firearms.

A situation happened in February brought home to me the need for a firearm in the home. It was handled, but the deputy we called out strongly advised I get a gun. Since then I have been re-educating myself to firearms and firearm self-defense.

Long intro - so lets get back to the SD-9VE. I sent it back to Smith. They said nothing was wrong with it and the defects, the warped frame and the irregular milling in the muzzle were within specs.

I let a friend who is a machinist, and who does contract work for FN look at it. He said that the irregular milling was from a worn out broaching tool used to cut the rifling in the barrel. He said the warped frame probably wouldn't make a difference. He also worked on the barrel for an hour, sanding the jagged edges around the muzzle by hand. The gun works 100% better now.

A lot of people have had good luck with the SD9 VE. I didn't, and I believe Smith & Wesson dropped the ball. Why? The SD is meant to be a budget gun, capitalizing on the Smith reputation and the similarity and price difference with a Glock. The tolerances and specs aren't the same as say the M&P Shield, which I've shot and found very accurate and precise.

Long post, but one last point. I paid $575 for a Model 64 revolver. It is a beautiful gun, tight and a very accurate shooter. But, I paid more for it. I also bought a $249 Rock Island Armory M206 which is ugly and rough, but also a very accurate shooter. Despite being sold as a budget firearm, any firearm sold for self-defense should come straight out of the box with some degree of accuracy and reliability. For a manufacturer to lower their quality to do otherwise is negligent.