I've achieved a truce with the takedown screw backing out by simply tightening really really tight. I just wonder if it will wear out from putting that much torque on it. We'll see. You can call it a design issue or not, propose solutions like Loctite or not, but either way I don't like it. I'm not going to change my mind about that.
A few days ago I put about 150 rounds through it, switching off between the 2 mags. After a while, if I loaded 10 rounds, the second one failed to feed and was deformed in the bargain (bullet bent down from the case mouth). This happened every time after shooting a few dozen rounds. Upon examination I discovered that the mag follower was semi-stuck with a full mag. It was pushing up very slowly. Fed the first round because it was already at the top, but failed the second because the mag has to feed the round as fast as the bolt is cycling, and it wasn't even close. This did not occur if I only loaded 5 or 6, so that's what I did for the rest of the range outing.
When I got home I cleaned the mags thoroughly and oiled them. On my latest range trip I didn't have the problem. OK, gotta oil the mags. It's a polymer follower in a plated steel body. Shouldn't need lubrication. Compared to Ruger .22mags, these things feel cheap and flimsy. They don't take down for cleaning like a proper mag: you have to stick something in the slots and pull the spring away from the baseplate. Cheap.
On the plus side, the gun feels good in the hand, is nice and muzzle heavy as a target pistol should be, trigger isn't bad, shoots reasonably well, and the mag release is where it should be.
By and large I'm a big fan of S&W, mostly their revolvers. I was excited by the idea of this pistol, as it seemed like it would be easy to clean and I liked the way it looks. So far, I have to say I'm kind of disappointed. My old (bought it used in '96) Ruger MK II bull barrel target pistol is a better gun.
