Over the past year I've seen a lot of threads regarding Scandium Alloy Frames on Smith & Wesson Revolvers. Unfortunately, most of them are decidedly negative, with someone reporting a breakage which has occurred, and others chiming in with negative experiences of their own. Granted that this is the internet, and folks are generally more likely to accentuate their negative experiences over their positive ones, but much to my surprise, I've seen pretty much nobody expressing a positive opinion of Scandium Frames, nor any positive experiences of them, which has got me to thinking about Scandium Frames, how positively they were spoken of in the past compared to now.

As recently as 6 years ago, I recall Scanium Frame Smiths getting nothing but praise, with a few sources going as far as to claim that Scandium Alloy is as strong as Steel, as lightweight as Aluminum, yet without the high cost or potential for galling of Titanium, and that it absorbed heat unlike other metals due to its crystalline molecular structure...Yeah. Scandium was hyped as an extremely rare mineral as well as a space-age alloy.
Nowadays, folks seem to be of the opinion that Scandium Alloy is just an overpriced Aluminum Alloy, and I've even seen the opinion that Polymer is superior and that's what Smith & Wesson should make their lightweight revolvers out of now.

The question is, what changed? Is Scandium Alloy just a case of hype failing to meet expectations? Did Smith & Wesson overestimate the strength of the alloy and underengineer their Scandium Frame Revolvers? Are Scandium Frame Revolvers as prone to damage as they appear to be based on threads, or is it just a case of poor QA in a specific serial number range?

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

I suspect that the scandium hype has been caught up by really: it’s somewhat fragile and adds little benefit compared with older alloy guns.

It’s not the first time the marketing departments have hooked firearms enthusiasts.

I don't know, probably fickleness of the marketplace. I've been quite pleased with mine and they have been trouble free. 🤞

Their main claim to fame is their lightness and in that they excel.

Note, especially with Ti cylinders, some special care is needed, but follow the recommendations and you're fine. I think most of the complaints are from people who Do Not Follow The Recommendations.

__________________
SWCA #3356, SWHF#611

Love my M&P 340. Zero complaints. Zero problems.

Its just aluminum with a few maybe 3% Sc pixie dust in there for marketing. And yes, aluminum frame guns are great for carry and not for shooting much. Looking at modern polymer like P320 you can shoot that all day long and no damage to it whatsoever because the steel slide is riding on steel hooks. Far better than alu rail or alu frame guns of yesteryear.

Only downside of scandium is that it adds about 15% to the strength of the aluminum.

I bought a new 329PD not too long after they first came out. I had to send it back to the factory twice to have the top strap shield replaced due to wear. After it came back the second time, as the top strap started to get a cut in it, I put some J-B Weld in the crack and it hasn't grown since then. May be they adjusted the cylinder gap, I dunno, but The crack hasn't grown And I've put more rounds, all cast boolits thru it than I did the first two go rounds! IMHO for a hunting gun, this revolver can't be beat for light weight, and the Hi-Viz front sight is great for hunting also.

Maybe a little more than Pixie Dust...



"In a nutshell, researchers claim that scandium provides the highest increment of tensile strength per atomic percent than any other alloying element when added to aluminium."

Are Aluminium-Scandium Alloys the Future? – Aluminium Insider

__________________
SWCA #3356, SWHF#611

My 329pd is back at the mother ship now for a cracked frame. Hope it can be fixed. It's the perfect packing gun because of the light weight and plenty of power if needed. Ain't no range gun but I try to shoot it enough to stay proficient.

My scandium guns in. .357 and .44 have had no issues other then having to tighten a screw on my 329pd.

__________________
balin
NRA Life Member

Expensive Pixie Dust.

"Owing to its scarcity and limited production, scandium is one of the most expensive metals in the world.
Prices for 99.99% pure scandium have fluctuated between US$4000 and US$20,000 per kilogram over the past decade, according to Strategic-metal.com."

At those prices it better be performing.

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

You can calculate the premium per ounce. That's what it comes down to, more cost for less weight.

I think an airweight does that pretty efficiently, the airlight less so.

Bad scandium experience here, but I've also had a couple .38spl aluminum J frames crack where the barrel screws into the frame (though my understanding is that's less common recently). I think S&W assumes people won't actually use the aluminum/scandium revolvers much and as a result took the easy path of copying the steel design rather than beefing them up to be guns with any longevity. When prices get somewhat back to normal I'll probably hunt down an old 36, 640, or 49, but if I'm getting any carry revolver in something other than steel it'll probably be a Ruger LCR or similar.

My 340PD was purchased shortly after they became available, and has fired probably 4,000 rds since then.
About 50% +P and 50% standard velocity, with maybe 100 Magnum loads to convince me to not do that any more.

No signs of wear or cracks, still one of the tightest revolvers I own.

Here's a heresy- a 'smith from the S&W Performance Center (working "outside") replaced my rebound spring with something lighter to reduce the trigger pull, that plus his various polishings made for a very nice trigger. Then he looked around the room to be sure nobody was looking, then he cut a coil off the hammer spring. That was at least 2k rounds ago and no misfires with Winchester and Speer, though I'd test it with any different ammo before carrying.

Scandiums greatest asset is its light weight for easy carry. Other than that I see no point. When shooting one I was not impressed with the violent recoil of hot +P's. IMHO the standard M60 in stainless is about as light as I'd go due to the fact that I like using Buffalo Bore +P ammo in it.

To me, size and bulk are more important than the actual weight sometimes. Not that weight is unimportant, but ridiculously light is as bad as too heavy.

IMO, that light weight is a big plus when one is carrying all day. It's a horses for courses thing. I've shot them all at the range for familiarity's sake, but I wouldn't call them "range guns" for example. YMMV.

The little ones are a joy in a pocket and the bigger ones allow for multiple holstering options that just wouldn't work for me as comfortably with a heavier gun.

__________________
SWCA #3356, SWHF#611

It’s anecdotal for sure but I have an m&p 340 and it’s a tank as far as I’m concerned. I’ve shot a bit of everything out of it with no problems whatsoever.