I purchased a 22a (5.5") a couple of months ago. Coincidently, two instructors at a local range each bought one within a week or two of my purchase. We have compared notes and shot each others guns and our experiences were very similar.
1. Sighting - all of the guns out of the box shot high and I mean very high. At the same time, they we very well centered horizontally. It took a lot of clicks, time and ammo to get them to shoot at where they were pointed. I should add that we didn't bench the guns, but we passed them back and forth and in the end the guns shot consistently, regardless of which of the three of us was shooting it.
2. Ammo - Out of the box, they were finicky as could be - but they had different diets. My gun, for example liked the cheapest junk out there (like thunderbolt), and just refused to fire or eject consistently anything with a jacket on it. One of the other guy's guns did just the opposite, all it would eat was jacketed ammo. And then, at about 700-1,000 rounds all three guns seemed to adjust and shoot with almost anything we put in them. I'm using jacketed target loads now without anything but very occasional problems.
3. Magazines - Each of us had the base plate of one of our two magazines pull off. In trying to reassemble them, we found that the body of the magazine had a defect so that the base could not be reattached as designed. In examining the magazine(s), they seem to be very cheaply constructed (sort of crappy looking - especially when put along side the mags from my Mark III, or even those of other S&W guns).
4. Service - About six weeks ago I called S&W about the problem I had with one of my mags. The person I spoke to was very cordial. He told me that there had been problems with some of them and that they would be sending me a free replacement - they didn't want the old mag back. He even gave me an order number. After six weeks passed, I called customer service again, they checked my order number and told me that I was in the system but the part was "back ordered". I asked if there was any estimate as to when the mag would be available and was told that they didn't know if it was even in the manufacturing cue at that time. Asking if six months was a realistic time target, I was told that they couldn't be sure. Wow, this isn't an antique gun - one would think that S&W was capable with better service. My past experience is that they provide high quality stuff and give excellent service. I can't figure this one out. I went on the internet to look for mags and they are all priced very high for the toy like thing it appears to be (low twenties to the high thirties).
I should add that now that the gun has been broken in and sighted, it is a terrific shooter - easily as good as my Mark. I am assuming that my experience is not common, but since at least two others have had the same experiences, that there may be more of us out there. I'd appreciate any feed back that anyone has to give.
1. Sighting - all of the guns out of the box shot high and I mean very high. At the same time, they we very well centered horizontally. It took a lot of clicks, time and ammo to get them to shoot at where they were pointed. I should add that we didn't bench the guns, but we passed them back and forth and in the end the guns shot consistently, regardless of which of the three of us was shooting it.
2. Ammo - Out of the box, they were finicky as could be - but they had different diets. My gun, for example liked the cheapest junk out there (like thunderbolt), and just refused to fire or eject consistently anything with a jacket on it. One of the other guy's guns did just the opposite, all it would eat was jacketed ammo. And then, at about 700-1,000 rounds all three guns seemed to adjust and shoot with almost anything we put in them. I'm using jacketed target loads now without anything but very occasional problems.
3. Magazines - Each of us had the base plate of one of our two magazines pull off. In trying to reassemble them, we found that the body of the magazine had a defect so that the base could not be reattached as designed. In examining the magazine(s), they seem to be very cheaply constructed (sort of crappy looking - especially when put along side the mags from my Mark III, or even those of other S&W guns).
4. Service - About six weeks ago I called S&W about the problem I had with one of my mags. The person I spoke to was very cordial. He told me that there had been problems with some of them and that they would be sending me a free replacement - they didn't want the old mag back. He even gave me an order number. After six weeks passed, I called customer service again, they checked my order number and told me that I was in the system but the part was "back ordered". I asked if there was any estimate as to when the mag would be available and was told that they didn't know if it was even in the manufacturing cue at that time. Asking if six months was a realistic time target, I was told that they couldn't be sure. Wow, this isn't an antique gun - one would think that S&W was capable with better service. My past experience is that they provide high quality stuff and give excellent service. I can't figure this one out. I went on the internet to look for mags and they are all priced very high for the toy like thing it appears to be (low twenties to the high thirties).
I should add that now that the gun has been broken in and sighted, it is a terrific shooter - easily as good as my Mark. I am assuming that my experience is not common, but since at least two others have had the same experiences, that there may be more of us out there. I'd appreciate any feed back that anyone has to give.
