Maching, fit and finish quality of S&W autos?

[heekma]

Hello,

I'm a recent convert to S&W autos, but not new to firearms in general.

I've owned handguns from just about every quality manufacturer, both U.S. made and foreign. Fit and finish varied from each-some were consistently good, others less so. Some companies had good years and bad with regards to fit and finish.

When it comes to S&W autos however, I've found every one I've owned or inspected to be consistently great in terms of overall fit and finish. It's one of the things that made me a fan-accuracy and reliability notwithstanding.

Tooling or chatter marks are virtually non-existant, even on the inside of the frames and slides. The first time I broke down my 5906 I honestly marveled at the machining and finish of the inside of the gun. I thought to myself, "Dang! That is just flat out impressive."

I've always held SIG and Beretta in high regard in terms of consistent fit and finish, but I feel S&W is even better. My 5906 and 4506 are the slickest feeling guns I've ever owned. That title was previously held by my Beretta 92 INOX.

Have I just been lucky enough to not own or handle a bad example? I get the strong feeling that's not the case.

What do you folks have to say on the matter?

Best,

Heekma

 

[fighter62]

Hello,

I'm a recent convert to S&W autos, but not new to firearms in general.

I've owned handguns from just about every quality manufacturer, both U.S. made and foreign. Fit and finish varied from each-some were consistently good, others less so. Some companies had good years and bad with regards to fit and finish.

When it comes to S&W autos however, I've found every one I've owned or inspected to be consistently great in terms of overall fit and finish. It's one of the things that made me a fan-accuracy and reliability notwithstanding.

Tooling or chatter marks are virtually non-existant, even on the inside of the frames and slides. The first time I broke down my 5906 I honestly marveled at the machining and finish of the inside of the gun. I thought to myself, "Dang! That is just flat out impressive."

I've always held SIG and Beretta in high regard in terms of consistent fit and finish, but I feel S&W is even better. My 5906 and 4506 are the slickest feeling guns I've ever owned. That title was previously held by my Beretta 92 INOX.

Have I just been lucky enough to not own or handle a bad example? I get the strong feeling that's not the case.

What do you folks have to say on the matter?

Best,

Heekma

Ok. I onwed (and sold due to their weigth) 2 4506-1's.
Just bought a beautiful 3914

Smith wesson GEN3 pistols are great. S&W model 41's and 52's are also great.

Beretta and SIG pistols in 9mm are VERY good. They are well tested in combat all over the world.

Are they better than S&W gen3 for a CCW user in the US?

Not really .

I am very happy with S&W GEN3 pistols and with Beretta 92 and SIG P226 in 9mm.

From what I see, all of them have only one real threat -GLOCK.(Glocks in 9MM)

 

[amazingflapjack]

AMEN!!!!!!

 

[Martya]

Funny, I read a post this morning that mentioned reading on some social site (Youbook? Facetube?) about the poor quality of S&W. Then you post that everything is fine.... boring!!....
Sheesh, what good are forums if you can't say something bad about something.


I like S&W - I have 2 revolvers and 2 semi-autos. My M&P45FS was returned just after purchase for a trigger bar fix, and my 642 had the frame replaced (dunno why). But my EDC 4513TSW and my M&P45 FS have both performed flawlessly. In the past 2 years I have had no FTF or FTE using just about every brand of ammo. Now, my targets seem to have a mind of their own, but that is for another post.



How tough is it to be good? A very brief, very general, quality assurance comment (working from old memories) -
If S&W is operating at a 6 Sigma level, their components are 99.99966% good parts. Or, another way, for each batch of 1,000,000 parts (a million springs, a million slide locks, a million thumb safeties, a million trigger bars, etc.), there could be roughly 3.4 bad parts in each batch of each part. Assuming there are 50 parts in each assembled M&P, then in a batch of one million assembled guns there are 50 x 3.4 = 170 opportunities for a bad part to be assembled into a gun. (assumes two or more parts didn't come together into one gun.)

Most companies advertise if they are running under the Six Sigma banner; I have not seen anything like that from S&W. S&W may be even better that this; I don't know, and they certainly won't make public, their actual defect levels.

If S&W were only at 4 Sigma level - many companies wish they could achieve this level - then (IIRC) roughly 13 parts per million would be bad, or 50 x 13 = 650 guns per million assembled would have bad parts in them.

To protect the customer they likely have some sort of inspection at the end. They likely find the most obvious ones, it is the random one or two per million that pass their final inspection that later have issues that they have to deal with.


The above is all theoretical, for demonstration purposes only. Do not try this at home.


Stuff I used to get paid to do.

 

[blujax01]

...
If S&W were only at 4 Sigma level - many companies wish they could achieve this level - then (IIRC) roughly 13 parts per million would be bad, or 50 x 13 = 650 guns per million assembled would have bad parts in them.

...

Or put another way, about 1 in 1500?

I've been Q1'd, and Q Plus'd.
ISO 9000'd, 5 S'd and 6 Sigma'd.
I've Ishikawa'd, Histogram'd and Pareto'd.
I've FISH!'d and Moved My Cheese.

Yet I still can't figure out if that train leaving Boston will beat the one from New York...

 

[heekma]

So...

You folks are agreeing with my assessment on S&W's consistent quality...or you are not?

Best,

Heekma

 

[blujax01]

Sorry for the derailment.

Yes, I agree. I have both a 3954 and a 5906 TSW. Fine machines, both. And I hear very little about issues with the 3rd Gen's at all.

Now the BG380 is a whole 'nother can of worms ...

 

[GaryS]

For the OP, yes all of my 3rd Gen semis are well built and reliable. Even my "value line" 457 is a high quality firearm.

Most companies advertise if they are running under the Six Sigma banner; I have not seen anything like that from S&W. S&W may be even better that this; I don't know, and they certainly won't make public, their actual defect levels.

I don't know what level they are at, but the last time I was there, it seemed that they were working under Six Sigma principles.

 

[oldman45]

I am the proud owner of several S&W handguns built between 1973-2010.

There is not a bad one in the bunch. Each was well designed, properly assembled and none of them have any rattles, slack or ill fitting.

Their finish is almost perfection. In order for something to be perfect, it has to be compared to something else. The S&W finish is as good as brand I have ever owned in any gun and better than many other brands.

I notice some of those complaining about a S&W gun does not own one. Many of those suggesting buying a Springfield 1911 has never owned, shot or held a S&W but will say how much better the Springfield is. S&W makes their guns in the US with proud US labor. I cannot be happier with mine.

 

[firescout]

I bought a new 908 in '99 for under $400. I was really impressed with the fit and finish for that price. Several years ago, I completely stripped the pistol internals and polished up the trigger/mainspring bearing surfaces. That resulted in a significantly smoother and lighter feeling trigger pull.

I did own a Glock 17 over ten years ago. It functioned and handled well, but the grip was a little 'chunky' for my liking. But the 59 series and Beretta 92 are that way for me, too.

 

[lawman90]

Ok. I onwed (and sold due to their weigth) 2 4506-1's.
Just bought a beautiful 3914

Smith wesson GEN3 pistols are great. S&W model 41's and 52's are also great.

Beretta and SIG pistols in 9mm are VERY good. They are well tested in combat all over the world.

Are they better than S&W gen3 for a CCW user in the US?

Not really .

I am very happy with S&W GEN3 pistols and with Beretta 92 and SIG P226 in 9mm.

From what I see, all of them have only one real threat -GLOCK.(Glocks in 9MM)

I've never had a single issue with my SIG P226 in .40 S&W, it's just an all-around excellent design. I carry it way more than my 3rd gens though, but only because it would be easier to replace should it get damaged, confiscated or lost somehow.

 

[oliveview]

While my 4506 and 6906 are some of my favorite center-fire pistols to shoot, and utterly reliable, I would NOT characterize their fit & finish as being all that exemplary. They are both absolute rattle boxes, and there are various examples of machining marks where there shouldn't be. The actions are okay, but only because they each have thousands of rounds through, and I've smoothed things out further, myself. But still only just okay. If I compare those guns to Smith revolvers from that same era, there is simply no comparison. The revolvers are substantially more refined and better-finished.

Beretta (and most Italian arms) are sweet, but they have seriously poor machining characteristics on the insides of their guns. Although, racking the slides on my older Beretta 92 models stills feels glassy smooth and refined, when compared to the 3rd gen Smiths.

Don't even talk about the German arms from that or almost any other era. They are models of refinement and attention to detail. My HK P7M8 is like a work of art, and there isn't a machine mark or odd fit on the entire gun. Same, too, with my older Sigs.