New S&W quality

[NCBeagle]

I have old Smiths and new Smiths. For the most part, the "new" Smiths (last 15 years to present) have been really nice. Was a bit put off by the Model 66-8 with 2.75" barrel that shaved lead into my face but fixed the problem by reshaping the forcing cone. Overall, it has been a good experience. I want the company to do well. Hope that folks enjoy the new pistols. I do and look forward to new developments. I would still like to see a 6 shot Airweight, or maybe a DAO CSX, or maybe an Airweight K frame with a 3" barrel.

 

[mrmike7189]

I am not surprised that S&W announced that they are moving their factory out of Massachusetts. The state is so anti -gun now that they dont even care if it costs jobs and money.
The QC at the new factory.. will be better, worse or the same? Time will tell

 

[MrG5122]

One should never buy any firearm without having held in their hand and expect it to be perfect. That's on you. That being said, I have more confidence in a pre '70's S&W purchased online being more 'perfect' than anything from the present day being 'perfect'.

 

[Barr1]

I broke a promise this year I made to Smith & Wesson 20 years ago and finally brought my first one with a lock at retail new.

Initial impressions are they are very well-made Firearm but this did come out of the performance center. I have owned many different Smiths from semi auto to revolver.

Bang for the buck I still think they are the best pistol on the market and highly undervalued due to being domestic. They don't have some of the allure to the younger crowd as some of the foreign brands.

Speaking in great generalities, I do think the triggers today and the gun to gun consistency is much greater. I still prefer the qualities of the older firearms but the peak and zenith of their capability was in the 80s with the stainless series guns. Many of the old school practices but many of the newer engineering changes to lock work and materials.

 

[cmj8591]

I am not surprised that S&W announced that they are moving their factory out of Massachusetts. The state is so anti -gun now that they dont even care if it costs jobs and money.
The QC at the new factory.. will be better, worse or the same? Time will tell

They are only moving their rifle production and HQ. Revolvers will continue to be made in Springfield. They are also going to retain their forging and metallurgy in Springfield. I think you would see them get out of the forging business before they moved it. I'm not sure whet they are going to do about M&P production. The polymer frames were never made in Springfield. I would guess that they will keep the status quo until it comes time to upgrade the CNC equipment that makes the barrels and slides. Then they will move it to wherever makes the most financial sense. I think that this whole move thing has more to do with the high corporate tax rate in Mass. than it does with any possible legislation.

 

[diyj98]

I have had the same problem with Ruger Revolvers. Bought three of them, two went back. Much worse than all the Smiths I have. Also horrible is the quality of Leupold. Bought three FX handgun scopes, all have a canted reticle. Replacement takes weeks.

I haven't had any Leupold problems, but Ruger quality control has always been bad in my opinion. I currently own 10 or 12 Rugers that have no issues, but I've seen more lemons come from Ruger than about any other "decent" gun company other than Remington. I'm excluding the budget gun companies like Hi-Point, and others. I will say that Ruger customer service has always been top notch. They've fixed every issue I've ever had quickly and with no arguments.

My biggest complaint with S&W is what I'd call their budget automatic rimfires. I haven't owned a Victory, but I've been less than impressed with all their other rimfires other than the 41's. I once heard a gunsmith say that S&W just can't build a good cheap gun.

 

[Jimmy4570]

I'm sure many of you recall the late 1980's and the then new S&W president Steve Melvin and his strategy to shift gears at the old Springfield plant. He introduced CNC machinery into production and told the world that such modernization and repeatable accuracy would essentially reduce if not remove the old hands-on part fitting process whereby revolvers were assembled from parts bins. The bench hands had to find and install the best fitting yoke, extractor, hand etc etc. then pass it on to the next stage. This must have driven Melvin nuts to see so much inconsistency and people on the payroll. His vision was CNC equipment turning out identical parts with no fitting, no line of fitters and rows of time card clocks. In his perfect world there wasn't much need for dozens of QC hands not if CNC cranked out perfect parts by the bin full. The theory was better, faster quality, and reduced workforce including the high paid custom shop prima donnas.

Well in many respects the plant and production process has been upgraded and successful but in different ways than end users would prefer. Profit margins are up so the bean counters are happy and the parent company is able to siphon off a little extra cash into other ventures. A much reduced labor force and those sticky labor related problems like unions, benefit packages and management in a state that isn't easy to live with. So the money side of the equation is good but the product ain't so good. Think about the CNC process and it's not hard to fathom a machine developing a problem as simple as broken tooling, interrupted cooling, whatever and as a result filling a parts cart with hundreds of defective parts before somebody catches it and takes the machine off line. A bad operator or milling machine in a line of same is minor issue compared to a big high performance CNC machine. Do you throw these parts out or try to tweak things a bit to fulfill orders ? You know what the bean counters think. And why didn't somebody catch the problem on the first place ? Remember with CNC you don't need QC people walking around on the clock all day.

To the bean counter QC people are a waste of resources ( no value added ) since when things are going good they don't do anything. Fact is they don't do much at all until they catch a problem then they are worth the whole floor. Those little problem parts can be absorbed in the 6000 guns a day and the ever growing sales and promotional staffs. So you ask how can you ship sloppy or defective guns ? And I ask how would they know without a QC department in other words does the worker in the production line or shipping department know the difference, I doubt it. If they had a competent QC department would they have the horsepower to stop the machines to correct a problem. Does management actually want qualified QC people that could just as easily turn into ' whistle blowers '. 6000 guns a days you have to wonder how many buyers actually complain and if enough did would it trip a recall ? So the older revolvers just had more hands on them since parts uniformity was kind of hit or miss. But they were assembled as needed from bins until all the lock-work parts fit up and worked properly. In the final analysis it boils down to production cost vs profit.

Quite true. The big dirty secret you mention is the "...sales and promotional staffs..." As with Dr. Gaston's plastic wonder and the majority of the latest designs out on the market today we are witnessing no actual improvements in performance, accuracy, reliability or durability, but the triumph of marketing, convincing John Q. Public to part with his hard earned dollars to deposit into the pockets of the salesmen of whatever widget they field declaring it the best thing since sliced bread. God Bless Jerry Miculek but his public use of and promotion of S&W's latest products cannot overcome the defects that are being built into the guns, despite the purported superiority of the computer miling machines. Has anyone noticed that the absolute highest end 1911s in terms of accuracy, reliability and durability, to cite one example, are still hand fit by skilled workers? If CNC milling was all that, then hand fitting ought to be eliminated altogether. But guess what? It cannot and I doubt it ever will. Just the nature of the beast. America sent men to the moon and back multiple times using computers with less than a tenth the capability of the cheapest wireless phone available on today's market. The engineers who built the whole program were still using pencils, paper and slide rules to accomplish the great majority of all the math and mechanics. Yet today, with the massive, unimaginable electronic computing power at our fingertips, we probably couldn't make it back there if we tried. What does that tell you?

 

[DonD]

The buyers of S&W firearms have become the QC department.
Corporate S&W has chosen to eliminate their QC dept. and gamble on whether the buyer will notice or care enough to return a defective firearm for repair or replacement.

Do you know that for a fact or is that due to your impression of S&W QC or rumor? Don

 

[twodog max]

Same old same old.

 

[John_M52]

Only Smith I have bought recently is a 340PD for my wife. All of the others are "vintage." I was looking at a new M 48 Classic and thinking about a new 19, or a 586, but now I'm second-guessing based on these comments. Not sure if I would notice a short screw or some of the other issues mentioned. I bought a new 4.25 Python a year or so ago. Guess I need to get it out and look for flaws.

 

[Radny97]

Quite true. The big dirty secret you mention is the "...sales and promotional staffs..." As with Dr. Gaston's plastic wonder and the majority of the latest designs out on the market today we are witnessing no actual improvements in performance, accuracy, reliability or durability, but the triumph of marketing, convincing John Q. Public to part with his hard earned dollars to deposit into the pockets of the salesmen of whatever widget they field declaring it the best thing since sliced bread. God Bless Jerry Miculek but his public use of and promotion of S&W's latest products cannot overcome the defects that are being built into the guns, despite the purported superiority of the computer miling machines. Has anyone noticed that the absolute highest end 1911s in terms of accuracy, reliability and durability, to cite one example, are still hand fit by skilled workers? If CNC milling was all that, then hand fitting ought to be eliminated altogether. But guess what? It cannot and I doubt it ever will. Just the nature of the beast. America sent men to the moon and back multiple times using computers with less than a tenth the capability of the cheapest wireless phone available on today's market. The engineers who built the whole program were still using pencils, paper and slide rules to accomplish the great majority of all the math and mechanics. Yet today, with the massive, unimaginable electronic computing power at our fingertips, we probably couldn't make it back there if we tried. What does that tell you?

Dan Wessons are all CNC not hand fit. And they're commonly referred to as being just as good or better than a Les Baer or Wilson Combat while being about half the price. So there goes your theory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[catcus-jack]

I believe Taurus puts out a better product than Smith does, and has for several years.
This is coming from an S&W guy.

 

[Laketime]

Nothing can be as bad as what the Lear Siegler owned Smith were producing from 1986 until Thompson bought them

 

[scruffy]

I purchased a NIB M&P340 last year. It had the wrong barrel shroud and front sight installed (assembly from a .22 cal M&P43C) and it had been engraved "S&W .357 Mag".

No one can convince me S&W QC is not asleep at the wheel.

 

[Hapworth]

Dan Wessons are all CNC not hand fit. And they're commonly referred to as being just as good or better than a Les Baer or Wilson Combat while being about half the price. So there goes your theory.

Not quite. DWs make extensive use of CNC, like most every other 1911 manufacturer, but there is final fitting by hand.

 

[jim1K]

I haven't had any Leupold problems, but Ruger quality control has always been bad in my opinion. I currently own 10 or 12 Rugers that have no issues, but I've seen more lemons come from Ruger than about any other "decent" gun company other than Remington. I'm excluding the budget gun companies like Hi-Point, and others. I will say that Ruger customer service has always been top notch. They've fixed every issue I've ever had quickly and with no arguments.

My biggest complaint with S&W is what I'd call their budget automatic rimfires. I haven't owned a Victory, but I've been less than impressed with all their other rimfires other than the 41's. I once heard a gunsmith say that S&W just can't build a good cheap gun.

I just got a new 41 and the lands and grooves only went half way out the 7" barrel then a pilled up mess the rest of the way. A 1400.00 gun was key holding at 25 yds. and the trigger was terrible.
My fault for not looking at but a 1400.00 need to see if has rifling? The store didn't want me putting a spent case in to try the trigger..It also had a double stamped serial number on the last digit. So I got one sitting in a pile at S&W waiting on repairs.... Jim

 

[Paul7]

One should never buy any firearm without having held in their hand and expect it to be perfect.

Not always possible, seems like there are fewer LGSs due to internet sales, a trend not confined to firearms.

 

[cwood3]

I like an "imperfect" firearm.....keeps me busy and out the bars chasing women.

 

[biku324]

I bought a brand-new S&W M&P Shield 2.0 in 45 with thumb safety about 2 months ago. It was everything I expected and there was no leftover manufacturing crud left in it anywhere. I've run nearly 500 rounds through it thus far without any malfunction. S/N is JNP2***, and I'd guess it was made in 2020 or 2021.

No complaints from me.

 

[dave982]

I'm new here, new to Smith & Wesson, and just bought my first revolver, a 648-2. not new to guns, though.

i was slightly scared of new S&W revolvers after reading a bunch of horror stories online about QC on the new guns. then i realized, it is a product made by other humans. and humans make mistakes.

i do have a couple of nitpicks about my new gun, but nothing that impedes function, mostly cosmetics. there is a punch mark on the barrel shroud by the pin. the stainless finish on the barrel shroud is a tad irregular. the sights are off a bit, i have yet to remedy that. the "color case hardening" or whatever on the trigger and hammer look more like burn marks. (I have vintage Lufkin and Starrett machinist tools with jaw-dropping, amazingly gorgeous color case hardening. the opposite of my gun, LOL)

That all said...the gun shoots great, and fits my hand well. i put 150 rounds thru it so far, zero problems. i feel like the SA trigger spoils me compared to some other guns I have shot. nice deep indents on the brass, CCI and Federal. ejects no problem. it grouped well when i approximated sight adjustments by eye, probably could be better but I am the limiting factor. just need more range time.

i am very happy with my new purchase. and i feel like i got a good price on it @ LGS, seeing what they are going for on GB. i hope i still feel this way in a year, lol. but it's so sexy!