IMO An Incidence Of An Eye Popping Lack Of Corporate Ethics At Smith & Wesson

[mistermills357]

Any gun shooting a foot high at 15 yards is almost criminal. My Gen 3 .40, is right on the money at that distance .

 

[Telecaster]

Maybe start looking at Taurus revolvers.

*runs and hides*

 

[jtcarm]

"Corporate Ethics" is an oxymoron to begin with.

 

[Imissedagain]

Just curious as to that round's bullet being 12" high at 15 yards, so where would it have hit at 50/100/200 yards with the OEM front sight?

Thx,
RT

 

[Protocall_Design]

Maybe about right at 200. My 44 Mag with 300 gr. bullets has 54" of drop at 200. Or to say it another way, it's 54" high in the middle of the arch.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

According to my calculations, you need a front sight about .150 taller than the current one. We don't know what the one on the gun is, I'm guessing around .250. Tell us how tall it is and I will make and send you one that's .150 taller.

He never told us much in specifics: was it a new gun, what date was it made, what ammo was he shooting, not to mention the height of the take-off front sight (which would be helpful to others with a similar problem/question)?

Just multiple posts on the same subject expressing his unhappiness.

As I stated above, my 2014 model came with a (.208") front sight which was shorter than what I needed. I went with a .306" to fix my problem & is basically what he changed to to fix his problem, so by deduction he also had a ~.200" front sight installed from the factory.

Which leads me to conclude it's what S&W has always put on them & the lady at S&W was wrong in what she told him & caused his outrage.

Anybody else want to measure their factory 460 Carry front sight & tell us how tall it is?

.

 

[Imissedagain]

On a new 3.5" bought 3-4 years ago.

About 13/64"-.203" to top of front sight.
5/32"-.156" to center of green dot.

Our 8.375" 460 appears to have the same size sight as the 3.5" based on this picture.
Will measure it later today.
Might be for 200-250 yard shooting with the 200gr FTX with either gun.

 

[notsofast]

I bought a new 4" 627 8x some 12 years ago, didn't notice the slight barrel cant until I began reading this forum, it was slight but definitely there. What I could not miss was the muzzle crown that looked like someone had done this with a hammer and chisel. Can't find the pictures now but when I did post them quite a few forum members stated they could hardly believe what they were seeing. I fixed the muzzle crown myself (it came out very nice), the gun shot as accurately as I can shoot. I prefer earlier S&W's to new stuff; better craftsmanship more heart and soul

 

[ladder13]

Maybe CZ can buy them too.

 

[Imissedagain]

Same front sight on both guns.
Smith might include the taller one with the 3.5" and the shorter one as well.

How does the .310" shoot at 50/100yards?

Our main use with the 3.5" in South Florida is 100yard two hand fun Snub Bullseye competition with other non-adult calibers like 38/357/44.
But it will be nice to take it out to 200/250 yds as well.

We load our ammo with 200/230/255/275/300/340 gr.
HC, Jacketed and Barnes XPBs
4198, 2400, H110, #9, 4427 and TrailBoss.
Haven't tried Unique but loaded some for the No.1H in 458.

Back around '81, when I bought the 458 I would drop telephone books along the berm at the Sunrise Police range, walk around from 100yds to real close, quickly shoulder the Blaster and learn to shoot.
It's a 16.25" Snub as well.

When I saw the Rattler skins hanging in the trailer I asked the LT where they were found and he said, "right where you always shoot your rifles prone".

As soon as the proper fitting grips are ready we can do more than just the function tests.

A .310" should be here by mid-week.

Thx Dwever and all.

 

[H Richard]

Bean-counter mentality. Get the gun out the door and get the $$$ in.
I can almost see the final inspector looking at the gun and saying to the Supervisor, This isn't right, you can't hit anything with this; and the Supervisor saying, We don't have a correct sight, ship it as is maybe they won't notice.

 

[AveragEd]

Over the years, I have experience excellent service from Smith & Wesson. Forty or so years ago, when I was a lot younger and dumber, I distorted the chambers in a Model 19's cylinder using too-hot handloads and they replaced the cylinder - twice - before cautioning me about using those loads.

Also a long time ago, I bought an 8-3/8" Model 14 that shot too far from the point of aim for the sight to be able to compensate - like the OP's situation - when I used 110-grain loads for varmint hunting, the intended purpose for which I bought the gun. It did shoot dead-on with 148-grain wadcutter target ammo, which is obviously what their intended purpose for the gun was. They replaced the front sight at no charge and very promptly.

Ten or so years ago, I had trouble removing and reinstalling the Briley bushing in my new PC1911. Their website had a video of a PC gunsmith popping one out and back in just like a standard bushing so I called to learn what I was doing wrong. They asked for the gun to be returned and a week later, the actual gunsmith working on it called me! He acknowledged that mine was a little too tightly fit and said he could refit it but rather than possibly going too far, suggested it might be better if I allowed it to fit itself by shooting a few hundred rounds. I did and it did.

Fast forward to 2022. In November of 2021, I ordered a new Model 41 direct from S&W (I'm a media writer). I had to wait for it to be manufactured and received it in March of this year. It would not eject fired casings so after trying different brands of ammo, I sent it back. It was returned to me in a month, which I felt was quite acceptable, with notations that they had "repaired the barrel" and test-fired it satisfactorily but the condition remained. My local gunsmith in 10 minutes showed me high spots in the slide's rails and in 15 more minutes had the gun ejecting empties without fail.

As others have already posted, customer service in almost all industries has deteriorated. There used to be a saying that good help is hard to find; today, it's ANY help is hard to find so I suppose we might as well get used to the Japanese and Chinese eating our manufacturing lunch.

As a testament to the situation in this country, a client of mine in the heavy-duty truck repair field replaced a Caterpillar engine with a $23,000 factory remanufactured one (the overhaul kit for that engine was unavailable). The tech doing the install had been in the habit of applying anti-seize on the hose fittings so they were easier to assemble and disassemble and was told by the shop owner to stop doing that several months ago. A week out from the repair, the lower coolant hose came off the radiator; anti-seize is plainly visible and coolant leaks out of the cylinder head. The full extent of the damage isn't known yet but it will be in the thousands of dollars - at least $3,000 if only the cylinder head is cracked. The shop owner told me that if help wasn't so hard to find, he would fire the tech. That's a pretty sad situation.

What I want to know is how are all these people who aren't working supporting themselves and their families? The unemployment gravy train arrived at the station a year ago so that's not the answer and they have to somehow qualify for welfare and other handouts.

Ed

 

[malph]

Over the years, I have experience excellent service from Smith & Wesson. Forty or so years ago, when I was a lot younger and dumber, I distorted the chambers in a Model 19's cylinder using too-hot handloads and they replaced the cylinder - twice - before cautioning me about using those loads.

Also a long time ago, I bought an 8-3/8" Model 14 that shot too far from the point of aim for the sight to be able to compensate - like the OP's situation - when I used 110-grain loads for varmint hunting, the intended purpose for which I bought the gun. It did shoot dead-on with 148-grain wadcutter target ammo, which is obviously what their intended purpose for the gun was. They replaced the front sight at no charge and very promptly.

Ten or so years ago, I had trouble removing and reinstalling the Briley bushing in my new PC1911. Their website had a video of a PC gunsmith popping one out and back in just like a standard bushing so I called to learn what I was doing wrong. They asked for the gun to be returned and a week later, the actual gunsmith working on it called me! He acknowledged that mine was a little too tightly fit and said he could refit it but rather than possibly going too far, suggested it might be better if I allowed it to fit itself by shooting a few hundred rounds. I did and it did.

Fast forward to 2022. In November of 2021, I ordered a new Model 41 direct from S&W (I'm a media writer). I had to wait for it to be manufactured and received it in March of this year. It would not eject fired casings so after trying different brands of ammo, I sent it back. It was returned to me in a month, which I felt was quite acceptable, with notations that they had "repaired the barrel" and test-fired it satisfactorily but the condition remained. My local gunsmith in 10 minutes showed me high spots in the slide's rails and in 15 more minutes had the gun ejecting empties without fail.

As others have already posted, customer service in almost all industries has deteriorated. There used to be a saying that good help is hard to find; today, it's ANY help is hard to find so I suppose we might as well get used to the Japanese and Chinese eating our manufacturing lunch.

As a testament to the situation in this country, a client of mine in the heavy-duty truck repair field replaced a Caterpillar engine with a $23,000 factory remanufactured one (the overhaul kit for that engine was unavailable). The tech doing the install had been in the habit of applying anti-seize on the hose fittings so they were easier to assemble and disassemble and was told by the shop owner to stop doing that several months ago. A week out from the repair, the lower coolant hose came off the radiator; anti-seize is plainly visible and coolant leaks out of the cylinder head. The full extent of the damage isn't known yet but it will be in the thousands of dollars - at least $3,000 if only the cylinder head is cracked. The shop owner told me that if help wasn't so hard to find, he would fire the tech. That's a pretty sad situation.

What I want to know is how are all these people who aren't working supporting themselves and their families? The unemployment gravy train arrived at the station a year ago so that's not the answer and they have to somehow qualify for welfare and other handouts.

Ed

Smith & Wesson used to be the gold standard for customer service.

Unfortunately, that no longer seems the case.

I don't think they are worse than anyone else it's just that today they are no better than the others.

I assume this is because someone figured out there was money to be saved by doing CS differently at Smith than had been done in the past.

 

[Autonomous]

Bean-counter mentality. Get the gun out the door and get the $$$ in.
I can almost see the final inspector looking at the gun and saying to the Supervisor, This isn't right, you can't hit anything with this; and the Supervisor saying, We don't have a correct sight, ship it as is maybe they won't notice.

This is why I preach we need to send all warranty-able issues back to S&W on their dime even though it is a PITA.
How else can we get the bean counters attention? They sure seem numb to the ex-faithful buying other brands.

 

[mod57]

I take it that the OP got his gun working correctly? This thread is hard to follow what with the quoted text not being found in the original posting. Almost looks like it was edited for some reason. I see this happening quite a bit, is it me?

 

[BB57]

There are a few things going on here.

1) S&W is betting the average customer isn't going to shoot a 3.5" .460 S&W enough to notice the fact it won't shoot to point of aim. And despite betting *your* life in this case, they are correct for 95% of the shooters out there.

2) It's a business practice that has become endemic in American business. Since the 1980s businesses and CEOs have increasingly expressed the doctrine of Milton Friedman doctrine that: "The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits".

3) Over the same period of time, CEOs schooled in the Friedman doctrine have taken over most major businesses and have displaced the older CEOs. Those older CEOs usually came up through the company, or a similar company in the same industry, as engineers or production staff who understood how their product worked and what their customers needed.

The new breed of CEO is focused only on increasing share value, to the exclusion of all other factors and social considerations.

Consider the 737 Max debacle. McDonnell, a company host didn't know how to cost effectively make a competitive civilian aircraft but knew how to increase share value, acquired Douglas and ruined the merged McDonnell-Douglas company as a commercial airline aircraft company, then acquired Boeing and did the same thing to it using the same focus on share value or quality and safety, and it has had and will have lasting national economic impacts.

That's nothing new. Look at the auto industry bailout, the housing crash, and the bank bailouts that all started in the 2000's. All of those were crashes brought on by Friedman doctrine policies that placed priority on increasing share value - and knowing exactly when to jump off the bus before it goes over the cliff.

4) the government has a role in this as well and the government is driven by politicians who are either schooled in Friedman doctrine, or are owned by people and corporations who were, and they tell the government what to do and not do.

For example, the FAA allowed the 737 max to be certified, in part because of pressure from senators and representatives, but also on large part because just like corporations have been "financialized" and are now run by people trained to make excess profits rather than knowing the product and business, government is infested with people who are trained in the law, but know nothing about the programs or products they are supposed to regulate. Instead, lacking subject matter knowledge they make narrow reads of the statute and regs to allow entities like Boeing to do what ever it wants, with no appreciation of why it's a bad idea or the consequences. It's figuratively speaking the blind governing the unethical blind.


5) Friedman was arguing that a company has no social responsibility to the public or society; its only responsibility is to its shareholders.

Look at the news on any given day and you'll find stories where excess profit taking is the driving force behind it. But, that can't exist without government, and in turn public support.

The old theory was that businesses corporations would use use retained earnings to re-invest in the company in terms of improved infrastructure, manufacturing capability, R&D and higher wages to attract and retain skilled labor.

But that doesn't happen with the Friedman doctrine. Instead costs are cut, including labor costs to increase profits and those excess profits are then used to pay higher dividends and or make stock buy backs to boost share value.

6) That potential was understood long before the Friedman Doctrine. For example President Eisenhower launched us on one of our most productive and successful periods in our history using high corporate tax rates to ensure businesses and corporations had a powerful incentive to reinvest rather than take retained earnings as profits. It didn't do much for share value and the Uber rich who make money off of money. It also sharply limited the ilk we have now who do mergers and acquisitions to increase share value at the expanse of the companies, their products, employees, and the over all economy (which is far more than just the stock market).

7) So…we sit around and complain about the outcomes, and then we go vote both with our wallets when we make purchases, and our actual votes, to maintain the same hot mess of a system that creates our "financialized" businesses and corporations that take us to the cleaners.

I have not bought a new S&W in over a decade, and their labor and business practices are the reason why.

 

[pistolpete10]

Of the last half dozen or so S&W guns, exactly 1 was right except for an extra powerful mainspring, I replaced that with a Wolff standard power spring. They have absolutely no Q/A. They can't/won't repair on warranty in many cases.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

I take it that the OP got his gun working correctly? This thread is hard to follow what with the quoted text not being found in the original posting. Almost looks like it was edited for some reason. I see this happening quite a bit, is it me?

Yes, he's obviously heavily edited his original post, & deleted others, most specifically the part that S&W knowingly installed an incorrect height front sight, which was the main reason for his outrage & for multiple threads.

So why the deletions after he received so much sympathy?

It still appears to me, as I said earlier, that they've always installed a front sight ~.200" tall on the 460 Carrys (as also evidenced by Imissedagain's measurement) & that the whole basis for his outrage was incorrect.

He still hasn't provided any additional details that would help others with a similar concern.

Anybody else care to measure their factory 460 Carry front sight & let us know how tall it is?

Inquiring minds need to know.

.

 

[Racer X]

Sorry for your troubles. If in fact the CS representative was correct, that is a poor way of doing business. Knowingly putting out a substandard product is the epitome of corporate greed.

I had a 70's Husqvarna 250cc motocross bike. It was supposed to come with a 32mm carburetor. Instead, it came though with a 36mm carb that they used on their 400cc motocross. 400 jetting too. Worked fine if you were running it wide open. I took out the 400 jets and put in the 250 jets. Better, but the velocity was not right, and the low end was bad. Took forever, but I got them to give me the right carb.

Point is , same as your issue, get the product out the door, we'll deal with it later.
You have every right to be upset if this truly is the case

my '69 mid sized Buick has a number of full-sized only parts on it from the factory. Anything to get them out the door.

 

[beach elvis]

There are a few things going on here.

1) S&W is betting the average customer isn't going to shoot a 3.5" .460 S&W enough to notice the fact it won't shoot to point of aim. And despite betting *your* life in this case, they are correct for 95% of the shooters out there.

2) It's a business practice that has become endemic in American business. Since the 1980s businesses and CEOs have increasingly expressed the doctrine of Milton Friedman doctrine that: "The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits".

3) Over the same period of time, CEOs schooled in the Friedman doctrine have taken over most major businesses and have displaced the older CEOs. Those older CEOs usually came up through the company, or a similar company in the same industry, as engineers or production staff who understood how their product worked and what their customers needed.

The new breed of CEO is focused only on increasing share value, to the exclusion of all other factors and social considerations.

Consider the 737 Max debacle. McDonnell, a company host didn't know how to cost effectively make a competitive civilian aircraft but knew how to increase share value, acquired Douglas and ruined the merged McDonnell-Douglas company as a commercial airline aircraft company, then acquired Boeing and did the same thing to it using the same focus on share value or quality and safety, and it has had and will have lasting national economic impacts.

That's nothing new. Look at the auto industry bailout, the housing crash, and the bank bailouts that all started in the 2000's. All of those were crashes brought on by Friedman doctrine policies that placed priority on increasing share value - and knowing exactly when to jump off the bus before it goes over the cliff.

4) the government has a role in this as well and the government is driven by politicians who are either schooled in Friedman doctrine, or are owned by people and corporations who were, and they tell the government what to do and not do.

For example, the FAA allowed the 737 max to be certified, in part because of pressure from senators and representatives, but also on large part because just like corporations have been "financialized" and are now run by people trained to make excess profits rather than knowing the product and business, government is infested with people who are trained in the law, but know nothing about the programs or products they are supposed to regulate. Instead, lacking subject matter knowledge they make narrow reads of the statute and regs to allow entities like Boeing to do what ever it wants, with no appreciation of why it's a bad idea or the consequences. It's figuratively speaking the blind governing the unethical blind.


5) Friedman was arguing that a company has no social responsibility to the public or society; its only responsibility is to its shareholders.

Look at the news on any given day and you'll find stories where excess profit taking is the driving force behind it. But, that can't exist without government, and in turn public support.

The old theory was that businesses corporations would use use retained earnings to re-invest in the company in terms of improved infrastructure, manufacturing capability, R&D and higher wages to attract and retain skilled labor.

But that doesn't happen with the Friedman doctrine. Instead costs are cut, including labor costs to increase profits and those excess profits are then used to pay higher dividends and or make stock buy backs to boost share value.

6) That potential was understood long before the Friedman Doctrine. For example President Eisenhower launched us on one of our most productive and successful periods in our history using high corporate tax rates to ensure businesses and corporations had a powerful incentive to reinvest rather than take retained earnings as profits. It didn't do much for share value and the Uber rich who make money off of money. It also sharply limited the ilk we have now who do mergers and acquisitions to increase share value at the expanse of the companies, their products, employees, and the over all economy (which is far more than just the stock market).

7) So…we sit around and complain about the outcomes, and then we go vote both with our wallets when we make purchases, and our actual votes, to maintain the same hot mess of a system that creates our "financialized" businesses and corporations that take us to the cleaners.

I have not bought a new S&W in over a decade, and their labor and business practices are the reason why.

To sum up…

In a sad and shockingly large percent of US society, honor is dead.
Been seeing it for quite some time now.
Can only begin to be changed from ground level and of the procedure, I do not know. But regardless, prayers to all of us.