Bangor-Punta years at S&W

[crazyphil]

As near as I can find out, Bangor-Punta ran S&W 1965-1984.
Please advise me if you know better.

My model 10-5 was made in 1962, before B-P time.
My model 10-6 was made in 1967, during B-P time.
My model 29-3 was made in 1982, during B-P time.
my model 19-4 was made in 1977, during B-P time.
My model 67-no dash was made between 1972 & 1976, B-P time.
my model 642-1 was made in 1997, after B-P time.

Every now and then I read something questioning the quality
of guns made by S&W during those Bangor-Punta years, but
all of mine are 100% mechanically, and they are all more
accurate than I am.

Wondering what experiences you all have had with the
Bangor-Punta guns?

[Rpg]

I’ve never had a problem with bp guns manufactured before 1980.

Of course, I’ve never owned one manufactured after 1980.

I own no post 1980 Smiths.

[two-bit cowboy]

Great topic, Phil.

Just thinking about the 40 Chiefs in my hoard (steel, aluminum, and stainless steel) as I ponder your question. They span March '51 to August '98 so many company owners and configurations.

I can honestly say the quality, fit, finish, and shootability doesn't change from year to year. Even the Model 36-9, with its flat-faced hammer is flawless.

One guy's thoughts.

[jimmyj]

In those years Smith and Wesson had "Repair Centers" in various parts of the Country to "Correct" what the Factory didn't do.

[Protocall_Design]

I've seen a lot of guns from the Bangor Punta and Lear Seigler days when they were new, just out of the factory. Some were very good, some were very bad, but mostly somewhere in between, with various and sundry minor problems.

[UncleEd]

Originally Posted by Protocall_Design

I've seen a lot of guns from the Bangor Punta and Lear Seigler days when they were new, just out of the factory. Some were very good, some were very bad, but mostly somewhere in between, with various and sundry minor problems.

This but mostly under L-S.

Reportedly L-S was milking Smith for all it was worth
by cutting employees and upping production to get
every dime before selling. For the most part the guns
were pretty good but with the inevitable BUT.

[ancient-one]

I have a 19-4 that could not be better as far as fit, finish and function. No problem.

[gmborkovic]

Mr. phil, great question and have often wondered. Your year span is probably spot on. Great Thread. best.

[Willyboy]

I just checked my 15-2 with a S/N right in the middle of the 1963 range. I thought the box was a BP box, but it is pre BP. Thanks for making me check it out. I have not had any issues with my BP revolvers. Willyboy

[bmcgilvray]

I came of age during the Bangor Punta years, purchased my first new Smith & Wesson revolvers during the Bangor Punta years, have purchased used Bangor Punta revolvers. I never failed to enjoy the revolvers' actions for smoothness and consistency.

Now the 8 3/8-inch Model 17 I purchased new has the waviest polish job I've ever seen on a factory fresh Smith & Wesson. If one looks lengthwise down right side of the barrel it looks like I did the polish job with my Dremel Tool and a tiny wheel. The revolver though has given good hard service for over 40 years now and is a delight to shoot.

[ggibson511960]

I just had to have a 586 when they came out in the early 80's. Don't remember the precise year, but I'll guess 82. Fit and finish was equivalent to any other S&W's but the cylinder face was not perpendicular with the center pin axis. Crane locked up tight, but barrel-cylinder gap varied from 0.005 in. to 0.000 in., scuffing on the breach face for about 30 degrees of rotation. Gun shot O.K., but I got rid of it. The only Smith I ever sold, except a Sigma.

[Pig Hunter]

It was hit and miss like it is now. I wonder what people really thought about production after WWII? While everybody thinks it was better in the old days, maybe by now what was wrong is fixed and the NIB collectables will never be shot to find out what was wrong with them? ymmv

[banger]

For me personally, the Lear Seigler were the absolute worst.

They were more like "you do it" kits.

They sold you the revolver..... It was up to you to make it work.

To this day, I avoid them like the Plague.... Errrrr Corona virus.

Tomkins put money in... it just seemed that they did not understand the gun business...

But, I can forgive that, they were a British business.

I have ZERO good things to say about "Saf-T-hammer" guns.

They strayed from the plan.

I strayed from the fold.... (with my money).

I refuse to buy one... New or used.

[.38SuperMan]

What years did Lear Seigler own Smith?

I remember my dad talking about the various owners and the number of hands Smith passed through.

Interesting thread, most of the Smiths I own are from the BP days but have a few from the Late 80’s, 90’s and later. For the most part they’ve all been excellent. Having said that my 640 no dash isn’t finished as nicely as others but everything works as it should. Wouldn’t part with it though.

[SDH]

I think the main issue during the BP years was inconsistent finish. As described above; all the way from dished flats and rounded edges to areas with file marks that never got polished. I don't think I currently own any from that era although I was buying and shooting them at that time. I never really was a fan of brand-new guns.

[RoninPhx]

i have a model 48s&w six inch that is a bankor gun. cost me 150bucks with a holster and about 250rounds of ammo. I think the guy had a problem with it, and thought he was sticking me. wouldn't eject casings. I had the cylincers honed out, no more issues. few years ago i found a .22lr cylinder and had it fitted to the revolver. minute of popcan out to 30yards or so offhand.

[schutz5]

66-1, 585,28-2... all quite nice in all respects.

[Absalom]

Originally Posted by Pig Hunter

It was hit and miss like it is now. ...

No, I think the "Bangor-Punta effect" was definitely more significant than that.

Diversifying the company into ancillary products, ramping up production and skimping on quality control, resting too comfortably on the product's long reputation, there were a lot of suspects.

It was widely noted and discussed at the time. Below a chapter heading from one of my German books on combat handguns, printed 1984.

The author, who trained German police SWAT where S&W K-frames were very popular in the 70s and 80s when trustworthy expanding 9mm ammo was not yet widely available and proven, talks about a third or more new revolvers having to go back or needing gunsmithing before being put into service.

[PALADIN85020]

Well now, most of my modern S&Ws were shipped during the Bangor Punta era. I went through my photo album here, and where I noted shipping dates then, I jotted them down.

In no particular order, here we go:

48-3 1975
67-1 1978
52-2 1978
24-3 1984 (?)
24-3 1984 (?)
49-ND 1976
28-2 1980
41 - 1972
66-2 1983
19-3 1977
59-1976
40 -1966
10-5 - 1977
66-1 1978
15-3 1971
19-4 1980
19-3 1975
19-3 1975
25-5 1980
28-2 1967
28-2- 1968
629 ND 1981
39-2 1980
27-2 1978
61-2 1971
34-1 1981

There are probably more.

NO problems with any of them.

John

[Neversink n Klapperthal]

bought a 586 new, serial number 1100. I think S&W skipped the polishing process entirely before they blued it,but they fixed it on their dime

[44wheelman]

I bought 3 model 29-3’s in the ‘80’s. 2 were “sloppy” with their timing and lock up, the 3rd I kept, locked up tight & shot phenomenally. One of the two I didn’t keep, could be double action cycled slowly , but the cylinder wouldn’t lock up without a slight nudge. Excessive bbl gaps were common.

[deadin]

A couple of remembrances from the BP days....


First was a new S&W (I don't remember what Model) that had the front sight noticeably leaning off to one side. The gun was sent back for repair and came back with the sight leaning the other way...


The other was a new M27-? that was returned to the LGS because it wouldn't come even close to grouping. Everything looked legit, matching serial number on the barrel and butt, etc. That is until you looked down the barrel. It was a .44 barrel with a .357 cylinder.


I always wondered what happened to the .357 barrel on the .44 cylinder.........

[rockquarry]

I've bought a good share of new and used S&Ws since 1970. About 90% have been revolvers. Never bought anything polymer. With the exception of a 1970s Airweight Chief with a cracked frame, all of the guns sent back to the factory were produced after about 1990, and that's only been a few.

[Dieseltech56]

My personal choice is to stay away from 80’s era S&W. Not that the Tomkins era ended great for S&W I think the early to mid 90s guns were the best.

[falrifles]

In 1978 I bought a 6.5 inch model 29 which shot so far to the left, that there was not enough adjustment left to center it. Later on I bought a model 57 from the same era that had a rear sight that leaned visibly to the right. I bought it sight unseen from a police buddie of mine. Didn't notice it until later. Sent it to customer service. Nothing they could do. Traded it off.

[needsmostuff]

Once upon a time I was told the MIM parts controversy was invented to distract folks so they would quit complaining bout the Bangor- Punta /Lear Seigler years. It almost worked but some still complained so they started installing locks.
That did it Bangor Punta became the "good" years.

[gfors]

Originally Posted by jimmyj

In those years Smith and Wesson had "Repair Centers" in various parts of the Country to "Correct" what the Factory didn't do.

I was just looking at the papers that came with the 18-3, I bought last week. There's a list of regional Service Centers, but most noteworthy, to me, is that S&W only offered a one-year warranty, at the time.
Too soon to tell, for sure, but this 18-3. from 1977, seems mechanically perfect, and the finish is as good as any I've seen (the 85% that's still there).

[RRH]

Originally Posted by Dieseltech56

My personal choice is to stay away from 80’s era S&W. Not that the Tomkins era ended great for S&W I think the early to mid 90s guns were the best.

What years did Tomkins own S&W? Thanks.