Is Smith and Wesson still improving products?

[Cal44]

I'm wondering if S&W is still improving the durability of it's products.

For example, is the metallurgy of the 60-15 bought in 2015 any better than that of a 6-10 produced in 2000?

What about the internal components?

Even with MIM components, the possibility exists that S&W is improving strength and durability as it gains experience and installs more modern computer modeling technology.

I know there are some here that think innovation in design stopped about 1980, but I'm wondering. .

(And I realize that 60-10's don't have the lock, but that's not what I'm talking about).

Dave

 

[shawn mccarver]

Unless someone who answers is in R&D at S&W, I suspect every answer you get would be speculation or hearsay.

You could ask S&W, but not a "telephone answering customer service person." Finding the right person, and getting to know that person enough so that he or she trusts you enough to speak frankly is a difficult process.

Good luck with getting an answer that is not just advertising fluff.*

*I could have said "Pluff" in reference to Paul Pluff, company spokesman.

Disclaimer: The above play on words is meant to amuse, not to be a reflection on Mr. Pluff, who has been with S&W a very long time. That said, like Ken Jorgensen before him, his job is to paint S&W in the most positive light possible. And he does a very good job of it, by the way.

 

[Alk8944]

Shawn McCarvers answer is really the best you can get. However the question, and answer are quite subjective! It all depends on what you would consider to be "improved". Everyone has their own individual interpretation of this. Do you remember "It all depends on what the definition of ""is, is""???

 

[wadcutter1]

From a manufacturing perspective (my field) there have certainly been large improvements made since 2000. CNC machines are more precise, faster and easier to program. We view a 16 year old machine they same way you'd view a 16 year old car (except there is no vintage appeal for industrial machines). Finite element analysis modeling is also a lot more prevalent than it was 16 years ago, and so failures caused by unanticipated design flaws should be less likely. I'm less sure about differences in metallurgy but I'm sure they've made progress too. In short there have certainly been advancement in the last 16 years.

That being said, the goal when introducing new manufacturing technologies is almost always to save money, not improve durability.

Overall, I think S&W revolvers are as durable as they've ever been. I've personally never had a modern S&W fail on me.

 

[Rpg]

I'm a mossback: I don't think S&W' post 1980 products represent improvements.

I think the 'improvements ' have focused on reducing costs.

In most instances the 'improvements' haven't harmed functionality, but they make for products whose fit and finish is much less desireable than the older products.

 

[DonD]

I think that there is no disputing that current models are made of higher strength/quality metal than old products (where that dividing line is I don't know) and other than external polishing, are fit more precisely and consistently. Precise internal fit is where MIM shines.

Don't think that there are any major advances in metallurgy as it applies to firearms, don't think they need it. Current firearms are easily adequate to handle pressures generated by SAAMI spec ammo.

I've commented before that a S&W engineer with background on the Model 500 program speculated that it would take on the order of 130,000 psi to destroy a 500 Mag. Pretty large safety margin when most factory ammo probably doesn't exceed 52-55KSI. Don

 

[joe44va]

Look at the models 66, 69, 460 and 500.
Something has been going on in Springfield in this new millennium.
P.S. I like the old Bridgeport milling machines. I also used to make small, precision parts on a LaBlond lathe with a 10 foot bed and 36" swing. It was a real sweetheart.

 

[rwsmith]

I've satisfied myself on MIM.....

I've looked for REAL problems with MIM parts and gotten very little negative response. If they are made correctly, they are good.

I agree that nowadays most engineering changes:

1) Decrease the cost of production

2) Fix bugs

3) Actual improvements

I don't see 'dash' numbers on semis. but I know they are actively improving the design of their semi line

In addition, most complaints have been from QC issues. S&Ws policy is to let the customer inspect and find flaws. They will send a shipping label and usually fix the problem in good time if it is indeed 'out of spec'.

 

[sw282]

l recently purchased a Colt Police Positive 32NP made in 1930. Gun seems to be near NEW. 0nly detractor is where some idiot with an electro pencil put some numbers on it. lts my very first pre-war gun.. Fit and finish are absolutely AMAZING..Each cylinder is the same. Each aligns with the bore. Each cylinder locks up tight. No movement when gun is cocked..Every single letter is etched PERFECTLY and they are straight...Bluing is perfect too. Not a high shine either, almost matte.. l know nothing of the quality of pre-war metallurgy, but the workmanship is a thing of beauty..Even the trigger and hammer are hand checkered..lt IS a work of art... And this is nothing more than a rather plain jane, run of the mill police revolver of its time..

 

[frankcr]

I purchased a new 66 and it certainly has advantages over its predecessors. The use of MIM is a move forward from the old parts also. I would not question the fact that manufacturing and design has improved over the years.

 

[gc45]

I too am a Mossyback old coot who prefers older guns, however I have up'ed my limits these days to anything without the J loc, especially after shooting my post 1980 Smiths being two 617's, a 625-7, my Wife's 640 38 Spec, and my EDC 649 also in 38 Spec. All of these guns are well made IMO besides being accurate with my tuned hand loads. The J Loc IMO is an unattractive item and had Smith done something less visual, I might own one but the way they look I'll wait, maybe my prayers will be answered.

GC45

 

[steelslaver]

I think S&W is doing a pretty good job of trying to put out a high quality revolver and being competitive in price. They are doing this through using modern technologies to produce high precision parts and have them assembled by parts assemblers as opposed to using parts made with less precision installed and precision fit by highly skilled craftsmen. They obviously have been paying attention to metallurgy and testing as they have done the high pressure X frames, the magnum J frames and the light weight Scandium alloy guns as well as such things as titanium cylinders.

They have not done a great job of quality control. I would suggest that they haven't done enough to instill a sense of pride in workmanship in the assembly work force. Seems to be a problem much more common in the American work force as a whole. There is a very real problem in America in the fact that management and labor are not working together. Upper management's disregard and lack of respect for labor and labor's distrust and lack of respect for management. Lots of reasons for this but, a unless both sides are working together as US your not going to have the best possible results, both in quality and quantity of production.

 

[Hapworth]

I've looked for REAL problems with MIM parts and gotten very little negative response. If they are made correctly, they are good.

I agree that nowadays most engineering changes:

1) Decrease the cost of production

2) Fix bugs

3) Actual improvements

I don't see 'dash' numbers on semis. but I know they are actively improving the design of their semi line

In addition, most complaints have been from QC issues. S&Ws policy is to let the customer inspect and find flaws. They will send a shipping label and usually fix the problem in good time if it is indeed 'out of spec'.

I'm on board for everything you say here but with one caveat: I believe it's inaccurate to say it's S&W policy to leave QC to its customers. I agree that that appears to be the de facto reality, but don't think we know it to be official S&W policy, do we?.

 

[frankcr]

None of us knows what the target QC is at Smith or where they stack up. I tend to judge a company more on what they do when something slips through QC.

If they went back to hand fitted parts, it would affect the price of a gun. In the old days, hand labor was the rule as modern tooling had not been invented. Today it would be very expensive and require extensive training probably affecting the output of a factory also.

 

[slabside2]

Smith Wesson's QC has been going down hill for years. Cheaper parts and labor. The days craftsmanship are long gone. It's not just S+W it's most all the manufacturers. But I guess we have to roll with the punches.

 

[EK2944]

I'm guessing Smith, as well as the other manufacturers still have a lot of work to do. I just sent back a brand new 29-10 with 4 inch barrel. Bought new on Saturday and fired only 12 rounds and the front sight is rocking back and forth. I've shot too many years to know consistency will suffer in that situation.

My new Henry Small Game Rifle just sent back to the factory this week as well. Out of the box on the sandbags at 25 yds. Groups 3 to 4 inches high with a variety of ammo. Rear sight was already bottomed out from the factory so no way to lower them. They sent a taller front and it just slides right through dovetail without resistance. Just falls right out when turning rifle on side. I was expecting slightly oversize that I could lightly file and wedge in place but no that would be too easy.

It is really frustrating working hard to save then spend your hard earned on sub par quality. I used to work in manufacturing so I know that mistakes can happen but it seems this happens all to often in the gun business.

 

[chief38]

I suppose the answer to the question is based on what exactly one defines "IMPROVEMENTS" as. Personally (and I may be alone here) I really don't think the Revolvers S&W has made in the last 20 years come close to the quality of the guns they made prior to that era and the so called "improvements" to me are NOT! I have purchased many Smiths over the last 20 years and not one was a new one. My newest Smith is from 1994. Just my personal view and YMMV.

 

[rwsmith]

You're right....

I'm on board for everything you say here but with one caveat: I believe it's inaccurate to say it's S&W policy to leave QC to its customers. I agree that that appears to be the de facto reality, but don't think we know it to be official S&W policy, do we?.

Yeah, it's improper to say the S&W QC department doesn't exist, but they let an awful lot of obvious stuff out the door. I really believe that a gun that doesn't come back to the factory is a good one.

 

[jaymoore]

Look at the models 66, 69, 460 and 500.
Something has been going on in Springfield in this new millennium.
P.S. I like the old Bridgeport milling machines. I also used to make small, precision parts on a LaBlond lathe with a 10 foot bed and 36" swing. It was a real sweetheart.

Sort of like this gap bed LeBlond? Was just running it and it's big bro yesterday. Small end of that turbine shaft has max. run out of 0.0005" and a diameter tolerance of +/- 0.0005". In fact worst allowable machined diameter runout on the whole thing is a whole 0.001" and it's well over ten foot long. But it also runs at "fairly high" rpms....

We do grind some diameters on a CNC, but only because of the hard spray. The rest still gets done on old fashioned manual machines!

Dialing in the runout of a hub to the nearest 0.0001"-0.0002" to check spline runouts on the bigger LeBlond. Big hammer used correctly.

As far as churning out thousands upon thousands of firearms one can't spend much time per part. So MIM and such is a blessing. We could not afford "old school" manufacture with the large amounts of expensive "hands on" time needed to get them to run. At least for a "made in USA" product.

 

[chief38]

If I owned S&W I would offer BOTH! I have been to their plant and their old equipment is in their Museum - which could aways be resurrected. They could have a REAL VINTAGE SHOP with REAL GUNSMITHS that were interested in and capable of producing REAL VINTAGE Smiths - NOT the stuff they now call their "vintage line". If they produced them properly and of high quality I think they would have no trouble at all getting a higher price for them - no trouble at all!!

That is the ONLY true way I know of to test this theory. Since they already have the Factory and the machinery, their investment would be slight and risk low - I think it might be their most lucrative division because there are still lots of guys out their like me who would pay more for the real deal.

Since I do not own S&W and last I checked they haven't yet called me, so I doubt it will ever happen