I think the people blaming "DEI hires" are blissfully ignorant of the high-quality work put in by those same people to compensate for the lack of investment by the (old white) ownership and management. Boeing, S&W, etc.
Quality Control
- Thread starter Winter2020
- Start date
McChemist
Member
That the CEOs are not gun guys is a salient point. Business history is replete in horror stories in technology/craft intensive industries where MBA marketing wonks (a good manager can manage anything types) are imported to fatten the bottom line and then bail leaving wreckage behind. Ford did this. They brought in a marketing whiz from Proctor and Gamble whose last assignment were Huggies. He canceled engine R&D development and Ford's brand suffered (remember the supercharged 4.9 L that melted down if floored?) tremendously. They offloaded him fairly quickly. GM is still suffering through a woke CEO. But they have drastically funded V8 development. The idea that a 6-7000 lb vehicle with a turbocharged in-line 3 cylinder is ludicrous. S&W will learn its lesson, but it will be ugly and painful.+1
I think there's several reasons for that. When Glock began to dominate the US handgun market, US gun mfgrs panicked. I'm thinking they wanted to sell MORE guns at a cheaper price, making the same profit over a larger inventory. They had to cut corners SOMEWHERE & QC is usually the first stop for that, sadly.
I think another sad thing to happen is the CEO's of Colt & Smith weren't "gun guys", just MBA-types from general industry. No difference between making a gun or a toaster, right?
Smith doesn't listen, but I contend that increasing the QC standards saves Smith more $$$. Keeps the gun(s) from coming back for warranty work, keeps the customer happy & buying more of that brand & spreads good feeling about THEIR quality. CZ & H&K get it, which why their guns have the lowest of warranty & QC issues.
For every Smith that gets test fired, I believe there should be at least two people inspecting each & every gun before it's approved. In fact, *I* would prefer three people. All should be "gun guys" rather than yanking someone off the floor & telling them to go be an inspector.
Were I owner of Smith, I would hit gun shows & hire all those old crusty curmudgeons that has a table full of old Smiths. I bet they could do better in 3-4 minutes per gun than the DEI hires could do in 10 minutes.
My .o2
What "California" trigger?
VinnieL59
Member
It is almost to the point of when you purchase a new firearm you had better prepare for the possibility of returning it to the company to correct flaws, or dishing out additional funds to have a local gunsmith do it.(if even possible) I own 2 Taurus revolvers, a model 85, which was a replacement for a "view" model that they could not fix, and a 6.5 inch Judge. The judge came with the interior filled with grindings and grinding wheel abrasive. It also had a hammer that was not completely formed. It took 2 times of sending it back before they got it right. (yes I cleaned all the gunk out of the internals myself.
But this is not new news. My S&W 4 inch model 66 delivered to me as my duty weapon in 1979 had the cylinder striking the inside top strap of the frame and had rifling that just plain stopped and restarted again. It went back twice also.
It also took S&W over 2 years to produce my model 60 that was also ordered in the fall of 1979.
I think that S&W was in new ownership about the time my Smiths were ordered.
Taurus, who knows. I'll probably never purchase another Taurus.
But this is not new news. My S&W 4 inch model 66 delivered to me as my duty weapon in 1979 had the cylinder striking the inside top strap of the frame and had rifling that just plain stopped and restarted again. It went back twice also.
It also took S&W over 2 years to produce my model 60 that was also ordered in the fall of 1979.
I think that S&W was in new ownership about the time my Smiths were ordered.
Taurus, who knows. I'll probably never purchase another Taurus.
The California trigger is a bit more complicated than just a spring. The trigger has been discussed and how to modify it over on the Colt forum. Its one of the primary reasons I have not bought the new ersatz python because if I spend the outrageous price for a new python I certainly do not want to pitch in another $250 to get their crappy trigger fixed. I might add the new Python trigger is hard to pull the entire length of its stroke compared to the original Python that had a light pull up until the end of its stroke when it stacked but this never was a hindrance to me. On the other hand I cannot stand the pull on the new ersatz model.
Wow! Thanks for your post, I felt like taking a few prosaic pills after reading this.
Doug M.
Member
A few thought, all of which are worth what you paid for them.
1) We know more about flawed products from ANY company because communication is easier. %)-odd years ago, if you got a problem product, you might tell a few people. Now, with the 'net and fora, one good gripe might be seen by 100K people in a week. That also prompts 10 or 20 people to write about their similar experiences.
2) MBAs should never be allowed to do anything more responsible than count widgets. Look at how they have damaged Boeing, which used to be a company ruled by engineers. I have seen many examples of MBA donkey behavior, like changing the specs on OTR semis to removed power steering and other "options" that are necessary. They should beaten with their clown shoes, fired, trespassed and forced to work a menial job the rest of their life (but a career janitor will be a better worker). iAd to sit through a couple classes with MBA candidates in them after our program (MPA) was combined into that college. I was dumber in the Billy Madison sense after some of them opened their cakeholes.
3) Go read and re-read the post by AverageEd about his GM dealership. That is competent leadership and management. Those employees were not expenses - they were an investment. Leadership means making sure that you hire good folks WHO CARE, and with at least the potential to be proficient, and then making darned sure that they have the various tools to be the person you want. They don't care? AMF, right now. A couple times I found typos in briefing I did, and I was horrified. If you are not horrified by that kind of low level mistake I will not want you around me.
4) The non-guy issue might be really huge. I was having a proceed done a few years ago and the doctor and her support staff were bellyaching about the new system for issuing scrubs. Even I, a non-medical person could tell it was stupid and that the person responsible must have been huffing paint with the Good Idea Fairy. The only response to that is to fire the idiot. Too many managers don't have a clue that such is only path and they have not the gumption to do it. Answer? Fire them too, then file a guardianship.
I am as nice as people let me be, but if they mess that up, that's their problem, not mine. If they up crying and incontinent, that's not a bug. It's a feature. We need a lot more Ermey, and a lot less Carnegie.
1) We know more about flawed products from ANY company because communication is easier. %)-odd years ago, if you got a problem product, you might tell a few people. Now, with the 'net and fora, one good gripe might be seen by 100K people in a week. That also prompts 10 or 20 people to write about their similar experiences.
2) MBAs should never be allowed to do anything more responsible than count widgets. Look at how they have damaged Boeing, which used to be a company ruled by engineers. I have seen many examples of MBA donkey behavior, like changing the specs on OTR semis to removed power steering and other "options" that are necessary. They should beaten with their clown shoes, fired, trespassed and forced to work a menial job the rest of their life (but a career janitor will be a better worker). iAd to sit through a couple classes with MBA candidates in them after our program (MPA) was combined into that college. I was dumber in the Billy Madison sense after some of them opened their cakeholes.
3) Go read and re-read the post by AverageEd about his GM dealership. That is competent leadership and management. Those employees were not expenses - they were an investment. Leadership means making sure that you hire good folks WHO CARE, and with at least the potential to be proficient, and then making darned sure that they have the various tools to be the person you want. They don't care? AMF, right now. A couple times I found typos in briefing I did, and I was horrified. If you are not horrified by that kind of low level mistake I will not want you around me.
4) The non-guy issue might be really huge. I was having a proceed done a few years ago and the doctor and her support staff were bellyaching about the new system for issuing scrubs. Even I, a non-medical person could tell it was stupid and that the person responsible must have been huffing paint with the Good Idea Fairy. The only response to that is to fire the idiot. Too many managers don't have a clue that such is only path and they have not the gumption to do it. Answer? Fire them too, then file a guardianship.
I am as nice as people let me be, but if they mess that up, that's their problem, not mine. If they up crying and incontinent, that's not a bug. It's a feature. We need a lot more Ermey, and a lot less Carnegie.
There's NEVER been a DEI hire worth their salt. There's plenty of examples on both the corporate & Govt levels to show that.
Nor do you (or I, for that matter) knows what the Smith workforce is made up of. Speaking of "blissfully ignorant".......................
unspellable
Member
The "California trigger" results in an overly hard pull in single action and adds a tiny bit of creep. The sear engagement is such that on pulling the hammer is raised ever so slightly. It's surmised that this is in deference to the California drop test, but not officially established as so.
javbike
Member
I have two smiths with the lock no issues at all that being said I would never buy a new smith again or in fact new any brand
sousana
Member
I've had two from Taurus, a M66 4" satin nickel and a pt92, both with over 70k rounds, no issues. Frame on the 92 cracked and Taurus sent me a brand new one. I sent the M66 in after 70k+ rounds for safety inspection and they sent me a brand new one. This was in the 80s, now I don't know, but I do have 3 Taurus Deputys, 2 SAA in 45LC and one In 357/38, no issues.
larry8
Member
I have new Taurus and S&W as well as Ruger and never sent any back. They all worked as they should, no problems. Except the Bodyguard 2 that had a really hard to operate slide. I sent it back and they sent it back to me with a note "cannot duplicate problem" but I guess that at my OLD age I don't have enough strength to do it. I put on one of the Talon Slide Grippy stuff and now all is good. My Ruger Super Redhawk and my regular Redhawk (both 44mag) have the smoothest trigger I have ever had on a gun either new or used.
The horrible SA trigger in the new Python is intentional. Since Python production stopped for many years, and then restarted with a completely new design, California considered it a "new" model and therefore it had to comply with their stringent safety standards. One of those was the "drop test" with the hammer cocked. Colt decided the way to pass the test was to design a "hook" into the SA sear, which as you note, actually causes the hammer to be cammed back in order to fire. It's horrible. The good news is that the DA pull is incredible.
zodraz
Member
The transfer bar system in the new Python satisfies the Cali drop test. The crappy trigger pull in SA is just inferior design/execution.You can't blame Cali for EVERYTHING!
Yendor357
Member
The transfer bar passed the OLD test.
That is no longer good enough.
The hammer must now also stay cocked.
Colt could have gone the route of the L frame Smiths and ruined the classic silhouette, or do the hooked hammer.
I like what Colt has done. It's not that hard to send the trigger and hammer to Mike Heffron. Then you have a gun that looks and performs good.
It's a whole lot easier to get a trigger job on a Colt than it would be to recontour the frame.
That is no longer good enough.
The hammer must now also stay cocked.
Colt could have gone the route of the L frame Smiths and ruined the classic silhouette, or do the hooked hammer.
I like what Colt has done. It's not that hard to send the trigger and hammer to Mike Heffron. Then you have a gun that looks and performs good.
It's a whole lot easier to get a trigger job on a Colt than it would be to recontour the frame.
I do my own action jobs on revolvers. I'm a retired Toolmaker, but if you have good basic mechanical skills and can follow instructions it's not hard. Jerry Miculek's has a DVD called "Trigger Job". It covers K,L,N frame trigger jobs. If you could get your hands on a copy, it's an excellent video for someone that feels they have the ability to do their own trigger jobs.
I wish I could do it for my M&P's , but I just have to pony up the cash to Apex Tactical for those. I've only had to do that for one M&P so far. Unfortunately it was the only Performance Center M&P I have and paid the extra money for. I won't make that mistake again.
I wish I could do it for my M&P's , but I just have to pony up the cash to Apex Tactical for those. I've only had to do that for one M&P so far. Unfortunately it was the only Performance Center M&P I have and paid the extra money for. I won't make that mistake again.
cmj8591
Member
I did the Mike Heffron component trigger job on this one. The SA was about 7lbs. when I brought it home. I did a little stone work and got it down to about 5lbs. before I lost my nerve. There are no replacement parts available so if I fouled it up, I would have been out of luck. The Heffron treatment got it down to just over 2. The gun is just fantastic at this point. The grips are Deer Hollow. The Altamonts that came on it just look a little too cheep on this gun to me. Don't let the crappy trigger stop you. The gun is really great.
zodraz
Member
The transfer bar system supercedes the original hammer block system,it is new to the 2020 Python,and does satisfy the Cali drop test. Look it up.
zodraz
Member
Sorry I misspoke ,the older python has a transfer bar system which was incompatible with the new lockwork,so the 2020 Python has an updated transfer bar system that DOES satisfy the drop test. This was confirmed independently by Mike Heffron.
