what year did mim begin on the trigger/ hammer ?

[John1125]

On the revolvers , what year did smith go to the mim parts ?

I know this has been covered a number of times but bear with an old man who is behind most of the time


Thanks , Kirk

Oh and to add , I'm not all that opposed to mim if no work is needed to make things work (stoning of the sear surfaces)

 

[sturtyboy]

1997 seems to me.

 

[rogerwnuss]

I remember the days when all we had to complain about was non pinned barrels ��

 

[g8rb8]

Yes. Late 1990's. 1997-1998 was the change to MIM parts.

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

Its not what you asked about, but I know angled thumb piece was the first visible part that was MIM and you start to see it on some J-frames as early as 1992. Then sporadically on N, L, and K-frames all thru the early to mid 90's. By 1997 the angled thumb piece was nearly universal.

I suspect, or would not be surprised to learn, that other MIM parts were being used internally at the same time. Things like the rebound slide and the bolt. Those are two little complicated parts that I bet are a pain to machine and fab conventionally. They scream for MIM.

 

[John1125]

Its not what you asked about, but I know angled thumb piece was the first visible part that was MIM and you start to see it on some J-frames as early as 1992. Then sporadically on N, L, and K-frames all thru the early to mid 90's. By 1997 the angled thumb piece was nearly universal.

I suspect, or would not be surprised to learn, that other MIM parts were being used internally at the same time. Things like the rebound slide and the bolt. Those are two little complicated parts that I bet are a pain to machine and fab conventionally. They scream for MIM.

I would agree about the bolt and rebound slide . And parts of that nature would be a great candidate for MIM and in fact may be more accurate than conventional fab.

The only concern that I have is for the sear surfaces , if work is to be done things do not stay as they are due to the hardness issue . If MIM parts are only hard a few thou. thick you get down into soft metal that wears quickly . At least that has been my experience with 1911 parts . Now I also realize that most all smith revolvers do not need any tuning , or at least the ones from 30-50 years ago.

So all this may in fact be a moot point . Now the external lock is another matter, I simply cannot live with that .

Kirk

 

[WR Moore]

Now I also realize that most all smith revolvers do not need any tuning , or at least the ones from 30-50 years ago.
Kirk

Myth, absolute myth. I still recall a guy's grandfathers /great grandfathers model 10, with original box (tan with blue lettering). Bluing of a depth you could fall into.....and no forcing cone. Yes, the action needed work to remove toolmarks & burrs. BTW, the case hardened hammers & triggers have only surface hardness several thousandths deep. Cut through the case and you have soft steel or at least softer steel. Somewhere along the line they may have gone to through hardened alloys.

Nothing in an action polishing requires going through any surface hardening. All you should be doing is deburring and maybe removing some tool marks.

OTOH, the S&W MIM triggers I put over travel screws in were harder than the hinges of heck and that hardness went deep. Like everything else, there are good examples and bad.

 

[steelslaver]

A mim trigger/hammers should be hard all the way through, which is not at all true about the older case hardened hammer/triggers. But, in any case the need to take off enough to get through any surface hardening is 0 unless sears were some how damaged, either by some how slamming hammer while cocked or a heavy handed idiot working on them. Wearing out a sear would take some serious shooting and then the amount to set it right should be really tiny.

 

[John1125]

I picked up this model 10 just a while back :

model 10 restore

Now the sear looked and felt terrible . It had a round approach as it came to a point . That one took a little work to get it to feel right . Now I was told that the gun (or read that the gun was Canadian police and it did have import marks so maybe so) and I was assuming that the sear had been tuned by a dept. armorer.

My point is that if others work on the sear surfaces sometimes a man has to deal with their work .That model 10 was dated at around 94 . It still shoots well and the trigger feels great although I have not put that many through the gun.
I'm sure that I went more than a couple thou. deep on the correct angle so we'll see how it does as time goes on .

thanks for the input ,

Kirk

 

[S&WsRsweet]

A mim trigger/hammers should be hard all the way through, which is not at all true about the older case hardened hammer/triggers. But, in any case the need to take off enough to get through any surface hardening is 0 unless sears were some how damaged, either by some how slamming hammer while cocked or a heavy handed idiot working on them. Wearing out a sear would take some serious shooting and then the amount to set it right should be really tiny.

I've seen this mans custom work on the forum and if says it you can write it in stone uhh ahh well you can write it in steel well I can't but you can believe he can write it in steel . Just kidding steelslaver as always your input is appreciated as I have been wondering about the MIM parts myself so thanks for weighing in .

 

[slabside2]

I know this statement will piss off some but MIM parts are junk. Do they work sure until they don't....oh yea and there ugly too.

 

[steelslaver]

I know this statement will piss off some but MIM parts are junk.

I might be one of the some>

Explain please.
Is it because they all fit precisely without hand fitting?

Because they are hard all the away through unlike older parts that were only hard skin deep via case hardening?

Because YOU can somehow prove they have a higher failure rate than forged parts?

Or is it that you just hate something you don't really understand and have a fear or distrust of any change?

Guys like you cursed those new newfangled radial tires when they started coming out. They blew up, came apart, ran you off the road, etc etc. While running 3 or more times farther than bias ply. Cursed new fangled technology anyway.

Computer controlled cars. Bad Manard bad. Despite the fact they don't need the points adjusted, spark plugs last forever, and get way better gas mileage with those computers and that stupid fuel injection instead of carbs that needed adjustment. Worse yet they contain some MIM parts. Why they only run 2-300,000 miles with only basic care when those terrific old manufacture cars made it 100,000 miles with a tune and grease job every 10,000 miles, usually!

Heck an 1969 Road Runner with a 426 Hemi could blown up way faster than a new one and be left way behind doing it.

While I will be the first to admit that S&W may have some manufacturing problems, MIM PARTS AREN'T WHY.

 

[medic15al]

I would agree about the bolt and rebound slide . And parts of that nature would be a great candidate for MIM and in fact may be more accurate than conventional fab.

The only concern that I have is for the sear surfaces , if work is to be done things do not stay as they are due to the hardness issue . If MIM parts are only hard a few thou. thick you get down into soft metal that wears quickly . At least that has been my experience with 1911 parts . Now I also realize that most all smith revolvers do not need any tuning , or at least the ones from 30-50 years ago.

So all this may in fact be a moot point . Now the external lock is another matter, I simply cannot live with that .

Kirk

It is the lines of the J, K, and L frames with the lock that is a eyesore for me. Is it the lock or the frame mounted firing pin needing that contour?

 

[colt_saa]

I know this statement will piss off some but MIM parts are junk.

Is ALL MIM Junk?

How did you come to that conclusion?

Forged is prettier than MIM

MIM has been around for several decades now. MIM is used in many fields.

I would much prefer to have a well made MIM part than a poorly made and fitted Forged part any day of the week. Smith and Wesson's MIM parts are nice quality

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

I'm glad Smith & Wesson uses MIM and has made other changes necessary to stay profitable and to keep thousands of hard working blue collar Americans employed. I'm glad they didn't follow the advice of the MIM trolls who would rather see S&W go bankrupt like so many others gun companies destroying the jobs and lives of thousands of American workers and their families.

 

[k22fan]

My memory of the 1990s, which is not good enough to recall specific years, is that cylinder release thumb pieces were the first externally visible part to be phased in. Next came MIM triggers which are interchangeable with forged triggers. Last came MIM hammers along with frames that have firing pins separate from the MIM hammers.

 

[ladder13]

MIM trolls, lol, I like that.

 

[raljr1]

I have worked in manufacturing since Jesus was in swaddling clothes, and have machined tens of thousands of mim parts for use in high temperature harsh environments. I can assure you they are every bit as good and reliable for this application as a forged part.

 

[muddocktor]

I think some of the folk here equate mim with sintered steel parts. The sintered steel parts (like Colt used in some of their revolvers) would quickly wear if you did any amount of stoning and wore off the hardened surface layer. I believe steelslaver when he says mim is hard all the way through and not just surface hardened.

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

MIM trolls, lol, I like that.

Let me be the first to say....

"Don't feed the MIM trolls."​