Weird Sigma Discovery?

[Fastbolt]

I haven't had time to read through all of this thread, so please excuse me if I'm wasting bandwidth and repeating something already said ...

The fiber insert in the trigger spring is intended to dampen harmonics experienced by the trigger spring during recoil. The spring will last significantly longer with the fiber insert inside the spring.

Way back when I attended a Sigma Series armorer class this was briefly discussed. We were told that the harmonic forces experienced by the small spring could weaken and eventually cause failure of the spring, although the use of the fiber insert helped mitigate the potential for this to occur and extended the service life of the spring.

We were warned that if the pistol were submerged or otherwise treated so that the fiber insert became soaked and liquid-laden that it might slip out of the spring at some point. In that case the spring would have to be replaced with a new one (which came with the fiber insert already installed). One of the instructors did mention that if this were to occur in field conditions where access to a new spring & fiber insert were delayed that wadding up a the filter from a cigarette would probably allow for use until proper maintenance and parts replacement was possible.

The M&P trigger spring is of the same design (since it has proven itself in extended testing in the Sigma series and during R&D of the M&P pistols series).

The last spare trigger springs I received for a M&P parts order came with the fiber inserts installed in the coil spring.

FWIW, in the M&P armorer class we were told that it's recommended to replace the trigger spring (and striker spring) every 5,000 rounds.

Inserting the trigger pin through the front closed coil of the spring can be a bit tricky. Armorers can use a 'slave pin' of a type originally used in the Sigma Series armorer class, or a pin punch and a third hand.

The open spring coil end is located toward the rear and the 'open part' of the coil faces upward when installed in the trigger bar.

Personally, I avoid introducing excessive solvent/CLP to the area of the trigger spring when cleaning my M&P's to avoid having the fiber insert become needlessly soaked.

A bit of trivia which may, or may not, be interesting to anyone is that in my last Glock armorer class it was implied that it might be prudent to start replacing the trigger spring periodically. Armorers also received a written update that they should inspect the trigger springs in their in-service Glocks.

The revised manual page insert said to check for:

Broken or missing springs.
Springs with coils that are bent, crimped or stretched.
Hooks on springs which show any signs of stress marks.
Springs which are not the current version (grey finish).
Springs which are not installed in the proper "S" configuration.

Back to the Sigma (and M&P) trigger spring & insert ...

I was initially a bit taken aback by the 'low-tech' spring fiber insert when I first saw it in the Sigma Series armorer class. Then in my first Colt AR armorer class I was told that the small plastic insert in the AR extractor spring served a similar purpose of dampening harmonics ... and saw how the plastic part became distorted and mangled.

The use of a fiber insert which wasn't easily mangled, and which actually increased the potential service life of a spring in a working gun, didn't seem like such a bad idea after that ...

It might also be helpful to consider that the trigger spring in the Sigma & M&P are located closer to the 'trigger end' of the gun, which is where it might be possible for more recoil forces to be transmitted to the spring ... and then the idea of a dampening insert seems like a good idea.

There are always compromises and tradeoffs with different firearm designs.

The trigger spring of the M&P and Sigma is easier to install and remove than that used in the 99 series, for example. Installing the open coil at the 'front end' of the trigger spring in the sear housing block's hole is a bit less easy.

Just don't submerge a Sigma or M&P pistol without making sure the insert doesn't slip out of the spring, and give it a chance to dry out, if possible. If the insert slips out and the spring might not last as long as it would have with the insert present to dampen vibration and mitigate recoil harmonics.

 

[Fastbolt]

out of random curiosity I broke down my SW99 and it doesn't have the dampener but that is probibly because it was made by walther

Or, it could be because the trigger spring in the 99 series is located at the far end of the action, with one end hooked over the projection at the rear of the trigger bar instead of being captured within a hole and the other end is already 'hooked' into a plastic part which may help dampen things a little ...

Just a thought.

Never thought to ask during the armorer classes for the SW99/P99.

 

[Lee in Quartzsite]

Fastbolt...quick questions. I have owned both a Glock and Sigma pistol, and they seemed almost identical in construction...at least from what I have seen and can remember. Does the Glock trigger spring have the same material, and if not, why? Would a Glock spring work in a Sigma?? How different are the Sigma and M&P springs?

 

[Fastbolt]

I don't know the metallurgical and manufacturing specs on the various springs.

The same part number is listed for the trigger return spring in a couple of the 9mm/.40 S&W Sigma Series pistols as is listed for the M&P 9mm/.40 S&W. The M&P 45, however, uses a different part number for the trigger return spring, so presumably a different spec spring is used.

All I was able learn at the last Glock armorer class about their trigger return spring is that the specifications have been changed at least once, with the example offered that at least one change involved the way they were hardened.

The Glock armorer update said that the grey colored (painted) springs are the current ones that should be in use, as opposed to any unpainted/plain steel springs. They didn't offer a reason why. (Nor is it really necessary, though, to know the exact reason if your primary concern is simply to keep weapons in normal working condition using parts which meet the specifications of the manufacturer.)

I don't know if the trigger springs for the various guns ... Sigma, Glock, M&P, 99 series ... are anywhere close to being similar in gauge, coil dimension & number of windings, temper, material, etc. I've never bothered to compare them, oddly enough, but just keep them separate and labeled, available for use for repair purpose. As long as I can get the springs intended for use by the various manufacturers I have no interest in experimenting with others.

I satisfied my natural curiosity to experiment with springs in the form of recoil springs some time ago.

Sorry I don't have the answer to your questions.

Why a spring is made the way it is, and how the same use/performance specs may (or may not) be met by springs which may be made to different specs is something I leave to the folks who understand such things.

I'm mostly just a parts replacement kind of guy as an armorer.

 

[Titan]

Let me make sure I understand this...

Countless users are beside themselves with dread over the possibility that their S&W IL will fail them at a critical moment and cost them or someone else their lives.

Yet...

S&W builds a gun with a lifetime warrantee, in which they DESIGN IN the need for a piece of fabric inside a spring in order to, by their own statement, EXTEND ITS life.

They provide ZERO (to me anyway) warnings about the existence of this part, or the need to maintain the gun in a manner that would keep the piece of fabric dry in order to avoid premature failure of the spring.

(I assume that it makes a difference in how the 'part' performs whether it is cean or completely gunked up).

Since I have no awareness of the part or how to properly maintain it to avoid failure of the spring...

I'm carrying a firearm with a spring that could fail AT ANY TIME.


IF IT FAILS, I was expected by the factory (prior to this thread), to figure out what went wrong and replace the spring (hopefully, I'm not DEAD at that point).



My opinion of S&W has dropped through the floor over this, as has my confidence in relying on a Sigma or M&P to defend my life.


As far as I'm concerned, I'll take my chances with the IL on one of my revolvers. At least all of the parts are made of METAL.


IMHO, S&W is staring (at a minimum) at a massive return/maintenance problem down the road involving EVERY Sigma and M&P owner, and could bear some liability for this lousy design decision.


Another massive plus for carrying a revolver for self defense versus a semi-auto.

Lots of rounds and multiple mags are only benefits if the gun will fire.
.

 

[Fastbolt]

Well, if you want to look at it that way, any spring can fail at any time without warning.

S&W engineers apparently decided they could use the concept of dampening the stresses commonly transmitted to this particular small spring and help mitigate the effect of recoil vibration and harmonics on it. Seems like a decent extra bit of insurance to help promote a useful service life.

We expect a lot from small and rather inexpensive springs.

Look at the extractor spring design in the Colt AR bolt. The density of the inserts have been revised and changed quite a number of times over the years, with the color of the insert commonly identifying the model of AR in which its intended to be used. Remember when the blue ones were intended for rifles and the black ones were intended for carbines? If you buy an extra power extractor spring from one major maker the spring will come with a warning to make sure the original plastic insert is also used in the new spring. I asked why and was told that the shock of recoil forces will cause failure of the spring more quickly without the insert to help dampen the vibration and force transmitted to the spring.

While I was originally surprised and perplexed why a bit of fiber material would be used in a modern semiauto pistol when I first learned of it in an armorer class, as I learned more about the reasoning for it I decided that it was a pretty nifty idea and wondered why more manufacturers didn't adopt something similar. Of course, having seen how bits of loose plastic coming off a deteriorating shock buffer in 1911's could cause some functioning issues, I started to wonder if the use of fiber material, like in the Sigma trigger return spring, might not be a better solution than attempting to use a plastic insert in that spring, all things considered. Maybe the engineers at S&W knew what they were doing, after all.

If you look at how thick and tightly packed the fiber insert is in the trigger return spring you'll notice that it seems pretty well suited for its intended function.

Having listened to different armorer instructors discuss preventive maintenance replacement of various parts (such as trigger springs & trigger return springs) in different makes of pistols, I don't see much of an issue with replacing them on well-used service guns periodically. The 5,000 round count recommended in the armorer class will probably never be reached by most ordinary owners of pistols.

FWIW, I've fired more than 2,600+ rounds through my M&P 45 and the fiber insert in the trigger return spring is a bit dark with powder fouling, but that's it. I don't 'wash it', soak it, expose it to excessive amounts of solvents/CLP while cleaning, try to lubricate it (it's not one of the recommended lubrication points, after all), nor do I poke or prod it. I leave it alone to do its intended function.

The research and testing that has gone into the use of this insert in this spring, and the many years in which it has been successfully used in the Sigma Series, would seem to me to imply that there's not much potential for a "massive return/maintenance problem down the road involving EVERY Sigma and M&P owner" ...

Just my thoughts ...

 

[Fastbolt]

Lee in Quartzsite,

I just came in from the bench where I had the chance to compare trigger/trigger return springs from Glock, 99 & M&P pistols. They're all different in length, coil diameter, coils, shape and how the end coils are formed.

Interestingly enough, looking at the M&P (Sigma) trigger return springs, I notice that the rear three coils are narrower than the rest of the spring body, sort of squeezing the fiber insert and presumably to help prevent shifting of the fiber insert rearward from out of the spring. The front of the spring body as the end coil looped and and sticking back into the center of the fiber insert, preventing forward movement.

Naturally, the ways things go, I also had the chance to realize that my remaining spare Glock trigger spring, although new/unused, is of the older type, recognizable by lacking the light grey paint color.

Oh well, I've been meaning to replenish my supply of Glock spare parts, anyway, since I've used most of what I had on hand repairing Glocks belonging to other folks at my former agency doing preventive maintenance on mine.

 

[conn ak]

I wouldn't suffer an anxiety attack over this. As I posted earlier, I've never heard of this particular spring failing in any Sigma. I've owned a 9F for quite awhile now and I always spray aerosol nitro solvent in that area to remove carbon. Until the original poster, I was unaware of this damping device. I clean my 40VE the same way and my 9VE before I sold it. When I hear of spring failure, I'll worry about it. Until then, no problem. Sounds like a fix that will prolong the life of the spring, the damping material. All springs will wear out, the damping device probably prolongs the life of the spring. Someone once told me that if the pin falls out of the Sigma trigger near the lower trigger joint, the trigger cannot function to fire a round. Okay, when has anyone lost the pin in the trigger joint on a Sigma?

 

[Titan]

Fastbolt,

You're missing a fairly enormous point in this discussion.

If the piece of fabric is such a '...nifty...' idea, then....

why not inform the consuming public so they can properly maintain their gun and prevent damaging the 'part' and completely neutralizing the 'beneficial effect'?


To have such a part that is CLEARLY susceptible to being washed out (if the gun is dunk cleaned), or diminished in its usefulness (because it is oversaturated/gunked up by cleaning), WITHOUT informing the consumer about its existence and how to avoid damaging/neutralizing it, is absurd.

The only conclusion one can draw is that they're not terribly proud of the 'solution' to spring dampening, and would rather have people just not be aware of it.

.

 

[Titan]

I wouldn't suffer an anxiety attack over this. As I posted earlier, I've never heard of this particular spring failing in any Sigma. I've owned a 9F for quite awhile now and I always spray aerosol nitro solvent in that area to remove carbon. Until the original poster, I was unaware of this damping device. I clean my 40VE the same way and my 9VE before I sold it. When I hear of spring failure, I'll worry about it. Until then, no problem. Sounds like a fix that will prolong the life of the spring, the damping material. All springs will wear out, the damping device probably prolongs the life of the spring. Someone once told me that if the pin falls out of the Sigma trigger near the lower trigger joint, the trigger cannot function to fire a round. Okay, when has anyone lost the pin in the trigger joint on a Sigma?

We're talking about a firearms manufacturer using the equivalent of the 'top of a Q-tip' as a part in a firearm you risk your life on, to 'prevent premature spring failure'.


Unless you can tell me that every semi-auto manufacturer out there uses a similar method, or routinely uses little cotton balls in their manufacturing process, I'm going to have to view this as a REALLY bad idea.

Not informing the public about the part and how to properly care for it, is an even worse idea.



If the part is important, people should be aware of it and how to prevent it from washing out or being diminished in effectiveness.

If none of that is important to S&W (no notification/instruction), then the part isn't very important and shouldn't be there.
.

.

 

[bamabiker]

S&W has found a use for that fuzz that collects in your belly button.

 

[conn ak]

We're talking about a firearms manufacturer using the equivalent of the 'top of a Q-tip' as a part in a firearm you risk your life on, to 'prevent premature spring failure'.


Unless you can tell me that every semi-auto manufacturer out there uses a similar method, or routinely uses little cotton balls in their manufacturing process, I'm going to have to view this as a REALLY bad idea.

Not informing the public about the part and how to properly care for it, is an even worse idea.



If the part is important, people should be aware of it and how to prevent it from washing out or being diminished in effectiveness.

If none of that is important to S&W (no notification/instruction), then the part isn't very important and shouldn't be there.
.

.

Understood, but as I said, I've been routinely spraying nitro solvent in that area all along and I venture to say that I shoot at least 4 times a week adding up many rounds with no failure. The damping device (which I was unaware even existed) in both my 9F and 40VE are charcoal black, but function business as usual. How old is the 9F I bought used? I've put literally thousands of reloads through it with no problems. I don't think the damping device can be washed out, mine appears to be "captured" by the twist loops at each end. It's not an entirely comfortable revelation, this Q-tip fix, but I've never heard of a failure. Maybe I'll remove the device from my 9F to test the impact on the spring life. I don't know about you, but I plan on purchasing a few spring/damper assemblies from S&W for the 9F and 40VE. Not a pleasant revelation, but it is what it is, i.e., a spring that appears to be doing the job with no problems. Can't hurt to replace it though, especially in the old 9F I bought for $150.

 

[cshoff]

We're talking about a firearms manufacturer using the equivalent of the 'top of a Q-tip' as a part in a firearm you risk your life on, to 'prevent premature spring failure'.


Unless you can tell me that every semi-auto manufacturer out there uses a similar method, or routinely uses little cotton balls in their manufacturing process, I'm going to have to view this as a REALLY bad idea.

Not informing the public about the part and how to properly care for it, is an even worse idea.



If the part is important, people should be aware of it and how to prevent it from washing out or being diminished in effectiveness.

If none of that is important to S&W (no notification/instruction), then the part isn't very important and shouldn't be there.
.

.

Those guns, and many others from most any other manufacturer, also contain, *GASP*, parts made of plastic and parts made of steel that is merely thousandths of an inch thick!

You act as though it is some great surprise to find out that guns contain parts that will eventually wear out and break.

If you would take a look at the actual part, you would see that it would indeed take some real effort to remove the felt-like material. Certainly not something that is going to happen with normal use, or by "dunking", or by spraying with a pressurized cleaning solvent. Furthermore, as has been pointed out in this thread, there are some of us with many thousands of rounds through our guns and many dozens of repeated cleanings and it simply hasn't been an issue.

When you get right down to it, all of us who make the decision to trust our lives to a handgun from any manufacturer are placing that trust on a system of small, cheap, and relatively fragile parts. We are counting on those parts to perform as designed when needed. I don't care what kind of gun or what brand of gun you choose to carry, any of them can suffer from a failure at any time. It's the nature of the beast.

 

[Fastbolt]

Titan, I'm not missing the point. I just don't see it from the same perspective.

The owner's manual doesn't specifically warn folks to avoid exposing the striker channel to excessive solvent and oil, either, and that must remain dry or else it can lead to light strikes in striker fired pistols.

On the other hand, the present manual is filled with numerous precautionary warnings against all manner of other things. Things like not using "handloaded ammunition which has not been subjected to internal ballistic pressure testing", and, "As a rule of thumb, if you would be comfortable applying the solvent of your choice to the finish of your automobile, it will probably be safe for use on your firearm".

The fiber insert doesn't seem to easily slip out of the spring.

While the instructor in that original armorer class I attended back in the 90's said that it might be possible for one to slip out under some exigent circumstances (since we were asking about "What-if's?"), the only time I've ever heard of one coming out was when someone intentionally removed it. It doesn't seem to be something you hear about happening on its own. The coil end pushing against the middle of the front of the insert and the 3 smaller, tighter wound coils at the rear of the spring seem to work as intended in containing the fiber insert.

Also, FWIW, back when it was being discussed in the early armorer class there wasn't any specific warning given that the insert would lose its efficacy when wet, only that if it became heavier after absorbing liquid that it might make it more likely for it to come out of the spring if the gun was being handled a lot before it dried.

When I attended the M&P armorer class there was no discussion of any special care that need be taken when cleaning the M&P frame in regard to the trigger return spring and its insert (other than the correct orientation of the spring when installing one). Neither the original nor the revised M&P Pistol Armorer Manuals list any special precautions regarding the trigger return spring (or its fiber insert) aside from the recommendation that the trigger return spring (along with the recoil and magazine springs) be replaced every 5 years or after every 5,000 rounds, whichever comes first. There aren't any potential problems listed associated with the trigger return spring in the Troubleshooting part of the M&P armorer manual, either.

The armorer manual Maintenance section recommends that the pistol be completely disassembled and cleaned by a qualified armorer once a year (pretty common recommendation), with the note that the sear housing assembly block should never be disassembled for regular cleaning (similar to what is said in the SW99 armorer manual about not disassembling the sear housing block). It goes on to say that the frame, slide and all component parts can be cleaned with a good solvent. It includes the precaution to "READ THE LABEL". (Their capitalization.) "Do not use a solvent that could be hazardous to your health or detrimental to the frame polymer material".

It also says "NOTE: Carburetor, engine or brake cleaner are not recommended for cleaning Smith & Wesson firearms".

The use of the fiber insert in the M&P and Sigma Series trigger return springs just doesn't cause me any undue concern. I like it being there, as a matter of fact. I just don't give it much thought.

It's not like S&W just took one end of a Q-tip and shoved it inside a completely open spring at the last minute.

Frankly, I'm still a bit surprised that at least a couple of other manufacturers haven't adopted a similar design in their pistols which use similar springs. I can think of a couple of other designs which have had 'trigger springs' fail and eventually break because of weakening and wear caused by continued exposure to recoil forces.

Of course, then it would start adding to the cost. After all, Glock charges armorers $1 for the trigger spring (and most aftermarket sources at least double the price to $2-$2.49) and S&W lists their trigger return springs with the fiber insert for $1.62 retail (although armorers receive a 26% discount).

 

[Lee in Quartzsite]

Fastbolt...thanks for the info. This has been an interesting discussion. I guess the best thing to do is just keep an eye on the spring and try not to get it too gunked up when cleaning the pistol. I have found that I am carrying my 642 more anyway, especially since I finally removed the Internal Lock. I watched this video...did the job in 20 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVPYgohVCNM

 

[Titan]

Those guns, and many others from most any other manufacturer, also contain, *GASP*, parts made of plastic and parts made of steel that is merely thousandths of an inch thick!

You act as though it is some great surprise to find out that guns contain parts that will eventually wear out and break.

If you would take a look at the actual part, you would see that it would indeed take some real effort to remove the felt-like material. Certainly not something that is going to happen with normal use, or by "dunking", or by spraying with a pressurized cleaning solvent. Furthermore, as has been pointed out in this thread, there are some of us with many thousands of rounds through our guns and many dozens of repeated cleanings and it simply hasn't been an issue.

When you get right down to it, all of us who make the decision to trust our lives to a handgun from any manufacturer are placing that trust on a system of small, cheap, and relatively fragile parts. We are counting on those parts to perform as designed when needed. I don't care what kind of gun or what brand of gun you choose to carry, any of them can suffer from a failure at any time. It's the nature of the beast.

I understand you point, but will simply repeat that if it doesn't matter whether it's 'light and fluffy' or soaked in gunk from many cleanings, I have a hard time believing that it's doing what it's supposed to do (effectively dampening the spring and extending its life).

I just think it sounds like a compete 'Rube Goldberg' solution to what may or may not be a problem.

The fact that the existence of the 'part' is undocumented sounds like S&W is embarrassed about the need as well.

I STILL don't know if one of these that has gotten 'gunked up' should be replaced or not.


I aslo wasn't making a point that there are no parts in a gun that can fail. I WAS pointing out that this part and it's role in 'extending the life of the spring' would seem to be at least a big a risk to malfunction as any potential IL freeze-up on a revolver and there are folks that are completely stressed out over that issue.
.

 

[cshoff]

I understand you point, but will simply repeat that if it doesn't matter whether it's 'light and fluffy' or soaked in gunk from many cleanings, I have a hard time believing that it's doing what it's supposed to do (effectively dampening the spring and extending its life).

I just think it sounds like a compete 'Rube Goldberg' solution to what may or may not be a problem.

The fact that the existence of the 'part' is undocumented sounds like S&W is embarrassed about the need as well.

I STILL don't know if one of these that has gotten 'gunked up' should be replaced or not.


I aslo wasn't making a point that there are no parts in a gun that can fail. I WAS pointing out that this part and it's role in 'extending the life of the spring' would seem to be at least a big a risk to malfunction as any potential IL freeze-up on a revolver and there are folks that are completely stressed out over that issue.
.

I just fail to see how it's any more significant than any of the other parts in guns that routinely fail during the normal course of use. Over the past year, I have had to replace small parts in a number of different handguns; guns from Glock, Taurus, Ruger, Bersa, and Para Ordnance - all well manufactured handguns and all of them utilizing small, relatively fragile parts in their mechanical systems. During that same time frame, I've not replaced any parts in either of my two Sigmas, and they have been subject to at least as much, if not more, use. Now, I'm not trying to say that all of those guns are junk and the Sigma is great, I'm simply pointing out that parts break over time for various reasons.

The fact that there are still plenty of original F series Sigmas out there that still contain the original springs and dampeners has to account for something. If these parts were subject to an extrodinarily high failure rate, I suspect all of us here on the S&W Forums would have heard plenty about it by now. My guess is that S&W hasn't made a big deal out of special care and maintenance procedures for the part because, quite frankly, it's just not a big deal. It's likely that the dampener doesn't require any special care or consideration. I highly doubt there is any malicious intentions on their part over this issue.

 

[KY-CCDW]

The fact that there are still plenty of original F series Sigmas out there that still contain the original springs and dampeners has to account for something. If these parts were subject to an extrodinarily high failure rate, I suspect all of us here on the S&W Forums would have heard plenty about it by now. My guess is that S&W hasn't made a big deal out of special care and maintenance procedures for the part because, quite frankly, it's just not a big deal. It's likely that the dampener doesn't require any special care or consideration. I highly doubt there is any malicious intentions on their part over this issue.

+1

I've had my SW9V for about 9 or 10 years. Shot maybe 3000 rounds through it, mostly by my students in CCDW classes. I've had NO ISSUES with the felt insert or the spring. I did buy a replacement set of springs from Wolff, which also claim to improve the trigger, but I haven't installed them yet. The springs did NOT come with a new felt dampener. Bought a Sigma repair video on this board too, but haven't needed it.

Interesting note on the Wolff replacement springs. On the package it states: FOR COMPETITION USE ONLY. Apparently the lighter spring tensions MIGHT cause ammo with hard primers to fail to fire.

The ONLY thing I've had happen to my Sigma, was when I was shooting Russian mil-surp ammo that was lacquer-coated. I shot so much that the hot chamber melted some of the lacquer and a round could not be ejected. Seems I took a break from shooting and left the round in the hot chamber a bit too long.

Its a PLASTIC gun, and some of you guys are in a fuss over a spring dampener? Come on....

 

[BrianE]

I checked my M&P9 last night and have it in there... It was charcoal looking... very small and hard to see. Havent had an issue yet... Oh well.

 

[Titan]

I just fail to see how it's any more significant than any of the other parts in guns that routinely fail during the normal course of use. Over the past year, I have had to replace small parts in a number of different handguns; guns from Glock, Taurus, Ruger, Bersa, and Para Ordnance - all well manufactured handguns and all of them utilizing small, relatively fragile parts in their mechanical systems. During that same time frame, I've not replaced any parts in either of my two Sigmas, and they have been subject to at least as much, if not more, use. Now, I'm not trying to say that all of those guns are junk and the Sigma is great, I'm simply pointing out that parts break over time for various reasons.

The fact that there are still plenty of original F series Sigmas out there that still contain the original springs and dampeners has to account for something. If these parts were subject to an extrodinarily high failure rate, I suspect all of us here on the S&W Forums would have heard plenty about it by now. My guess is that S&W hasn't made a big deal out of special care and maintenance procedures for the part because, quite frankly, it's just not a big deal. It's likely that the dampener doesn't require any special care or consideration. I highly doubt there is any malicious intentions on their part over this issue.

I think I made my position fairly clear.

It seems that 'critiquing' S&W's actions regarding Sigmas, is to Sigma owners, like criticizing pit bulls is to pit bull owners.

I surrender.
.