BluedRevolver
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2011
- Messages
- 38
- Reaction score
- 87
I think my take is "it depends". If the new one in question has been properly QC'd and is one of the new no-lock versions, I'd take the new one. I am cautiously optimistic about the new Model 19 Classic no-lock I picked up and shot 174 rounds through yesterday without issue. In terms of design and engineering, I think it is objectively better. Modern CNC machining eliminates the need for much of the "hand fitting" the old ones needed and parts are able to be made to much tighter tolerances. The ball detent locking of the front of the crane is superior and stronger than the older 19's locking on the end of the ejector rod. The forcing cone is beefed up, and some of the parts have been simplified and strengthened.
The wild card in this is QC. None of the above improvements matter if the QC isn't there. While I may have lucked out on mine, it remains to be seen whether Smith has really tightened up their QC over the last year as claimed.
Others have pointed out here recently that QC issues at Smith are not new. The Bangor Punta days were likewise known for it, where Smith had to have a warranty work center in every major city. So buying an old one isn't a guarantee that it won't have issues, particularly one that hasn't been shot much.
While I was mostly talking about the K Frame, much of this applies to the N Frame. If S&W's words at ShotShow mean anything, we hopefully will start seeing lockless.357 N Frames as well. If the QC is there, I think the new ones are better than the old ones.
As for MIM parts, I fly planes with MIM parts so I can't really say I inherently distrust them. What matters is if they are done right. A modern MIM part is going to be harder and stronger than the old punched-out soft steel hammers and triggers that were then given a very thin surface case hardening. Fact of the matter is that some manufacturing processes today are both better and cheaper than the old ones… but the key variable is if it was done right and proper QC procedures have been used.
The wild card in this is QC. None of the above improvements matter if the QC isn't there. While I may have lucked out on mine, it remains to be seen whether Smith has really tightened up their QC over the last year as claimed.
Others have pointed out here recently that QC issues at Smith are not new. The Bangor Punta days were likewise known for it, where Smith had to have a warranty work center in every major city. So buying an old one isn't a guarantee that it won't have issues, particularly one that hasn't been shot much.
While I was mostly talking about the K Frame, much of this applies to the N Frame. If S&W's words at ShotShow mean anything, we hopefully will start seeing lockless.357 N Frames as well. If the QC is there, I think the new ones are better than the old ones.
As for MIM parts, I fly planes with MIM parts so I can't really say I inherently distrust them. What matters is if they are done right. A modern MIM part is going to be harder and stronger than the old punched-out soft steel hammers and triggers that were then given a very thin surface case hardening. Fact of the matter is that some manufacturing processes today are both better and cheaper than the old ones… but the key variable is if it was done right and proper QC procedures have been used.
