Forged vs MIM revisted.

Cal44 · Jul 31, 2014

The general statement is often made that triggers that have a solid back are forged and those with hollow back are MIM.

Likewise, a hammer with the firing pin on the hammer is forged, and if the firing pin is on the frame, then the hammer is MIM.

I have a 627 Performance Center snub made around 2010.

It has a solid trigger with a screw in the back.

But has a frame mounted firing pin and no firing pin on the hammer.

Does this mean it has a forged trigger and a MIM hammer?

What about the other internal parts I can't see?

Is there a law that says S&W can't make a forged hammer designed for a gun with frame mounted firing pin?

rwsmith · Jul 31, 2014

I don't think....

...I don't think there is a civil law or compatibility issue with mixing MIM and forged parts or whether the pin is mounted to the hammer or the frame. It's a design and manufacturing decision.

colt_saa · Jul 31, 2014

That general hammer statement is absolutely incorrect.

Smith and Wesson has used frame mounted firing pins and forged hammers for many, many decades. Just look at the models 17, 18, 34, 40, 42, 48, 63, 547, 640, 642 and a host of others I am forgetting about.

Additionally, most general rules about Smith and Wessons refer the production side of the company and not the Performance Center.

Lastly, the only thing you can be 100% sure of is that ALL Smith and Wesson rules have exception

Traditionally, Performance Center revolvers have a forged hammer and trigger. However at some point Smith and Wesson will run out of forged parts and will have to decide to make more or go MIM on the PC firearms.

BTW, that should not be a screw in the back of the trigger. The trigger stops the PC uses are not adjustable, it should be a roll pin trimmed to proper length.

Also to further confuse things, just because a trigger does not have a hollow back does not mean it is forged. There is no reason a MIM trigger could not have a solid back.

Cal44 · Jul 31, 2014

colt_saa said:
BTW, that should not be a screw in the back of the trigger. The trigger stops the PC uses are not adjustable, it should be a roll pin trimmed to proper length.

Also to further confuse things, just because a trigger does not have a hollow back does not mean it is forged. There is no reason a MIM trigger could not have a solid back.

You are right. It's just a pin. It looked like an allen key screw, but looking at it closer it's a non-adjustable pin.

I suspect a manufacturer can make just about any shaped part with MIM so I'm sure they could make a solid backed trigger if they wanted to.

The Performance Center doesn't really need to ever run out of forged parts because it wouldn't be hard to subcontract out small volume part manufacturing to a third party if they needed to.

Culina · Jul 31, 2014

I was under the impression that S&W switched to MIM just before they started added the lock. I have a 629-5 and it is MIM, but no lock.

dla · Jul 31, 2014

Where did you get the idea that S&W was using ANY forged parts in modern revolvers? They switched to MIM years ago and I'm glad they did (better accuracy, stronger, cheaper, etc.)

rwsmith · Jul 31, 2014

Thanks............

dla said:
Where did you get the idea that S&W was using ANY forged parts in modern revolvers? They switched to MIM years ago and I'm glad they did (better accuracy, stronger, cheaper, etc.)

Thanks. I've been waging a war saying that there ain't a dang thing wrong with MIM parts. I like the image of a blacksmith beating a glowing part on an anvil but that's not the best way today.

S&WIowegan · Jul 31, 2014

The use of MIM action parts preceded the internal lock by several years...mid-to late 90s time frame. The IL wasn't installed until the early 2000s.

I am a competitive revolver shooter and use 625s, 627s, 686SSR and a 325PD in matches regularly. All have MIM internals and absolutely none of the MIM parts in my guns have failed yet!

toasted · Jul 31, 2014

Uh oh! Here we go again.

I really tried to not get caught up in this AGAIN. As in my original post intended in humor I tried not to actively participate in another of the classic debates:

Ford versus Chevy
Harley versus Honda
North versus South
MIM versus Forged

I just couldn't do it. I am going to furnish a couple of links that offer facts versus opinions on the subject of MIM, Powdered Metal Technology:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_injection_molding

http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/engines-drivetrain/1510sc-howards/

Those that choose to read what is offed on these links will probably find it interesting reading, I did.

I offer words one of my professors once shared;

To those that believe strongly in something
no explanation is necessary
To those that don't
no explanation is possible.

Sorry if I have added fuel to the fire.

stantheman86 · Aug 1, 2014

I own them all, from a .38 M&P made in 1919 to a 64-8 made in 2003.....and everything in between , probably at least one from each decade from 1900 to 2000....all shoot straight and go bang when I pull the trigger

williamlayton · Aug 1, 2014

Well, in the original language---
I digress.
Blessings

VictorLouis · Aug 1, 2014

I'm sure it's easy for the PC to have plated some of the MIM hammers so as to match the triggers. If you look at MIM and forged counterparts a/b, you'll find more recesses, ribs, grooves, and ridges in the MIM to add rigity/strength to the final part. When you look at a hollow-back MIM trigger, think of the cross-section of an I-beam, LOL.

Seriously, may years back, I mod on another forum reported having seen a broken J-frame trigger. That's thee ONE, and ONLY, time I've seen of a broken MIM from S&W. You can't say the same for the 1911 crowd, an of the MIM parts made for those........

skeete · Aug 2, 2014

Manufacturer's use MIM parts ONLY to cut costs and save money, meaning more profit.

People can have there own opinions on this but this is my opinion.

skeete · Aug 2, 2014

dla said:
Where did you get the idea that S&W was using ANY forged parts in modern revolvers? They switched to MIM years ago and I'm glad they did (better accuracy, stronger, cheaper, etc.)

Sir, you are mis-informed. Old Pythons and S&W's are every bit as accurate as the new ones just they will last way longer. You are right about being cheaper and making more profit for the company. They are not stronger as they are about 99 to 98% as dense as forged parts, meaning MIM parts have LESS metal. Do you want less mental in your parts?

chief38 · Aug 2, 2014

Smith has been using MIM parts for quite some time now and they have proven them to stand up well. To those who buy new production Smiths there is no choice as that's about all they do now days.

That said, I prefer good ole forged parts and that is all I own. The newest Smith I own was made in 1994!

Don't only go by me because I don't like change (unless of course it is for a markable improvement) for the most part. I see the older Smiths as being a higher quality and built to higher specs and standards, but then that's what I grew up with. If you are younger and grew up with the more modern versions you could also make a case that the older ones I favor are antiquated and old fashion.

But PERFORMANCE wise, the MIM does seem to be perfectly OK.

Mike McLellan · Aug 2, 2014

I happen to know that forged parts are now manufactured in a re-furbished Yugo automobile factory in Bosnia. They take a little longer to produce, but the excellent quality control is still at the level it was when the last Yugo rolled off of the assembly line. You have my word on that!

Forged vs MIM revisted.

Cal44

Well-known member

rwsmith

Well-known member

colt_saa

Well-known member

Cal44

Well-known member

Culina

Well-known member

dla

Well-known member

rwsmith

Well-known member

S&WIowegan

US Veteran

toasted

Well-known member

stantheman86

US Veteran

williamlayton

Well-known member

VictorLouis

Well-known member

skeete

Well-known member

skeete

Well-known member

chief38

Well-known member

Mike McLellan

Well-known member

Similar threads

Latest posts