what year did mim begin on the trigger/ hammer ?

[DonD]

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.

LOVE IT! Today we have 2 liter turbo engined cars that can savage 5.7L Corvettes of not that long ago, HP/cu" that pure race engines a decade ago probably couldn't match, all that with great driveability, mileage and tiny emissions.

Gosh, those old 1960 Chevy's had tough fenders. Right. Not long ago, one government agency tested a car w/o modern crash safety features against a new car. Big surprise, not, occupants in the old car would have died, the ones in the new car walked with minor scratches.

As steelslayer and others have said, MIM parts from quality vendors are excellent and in guns, significantly reduce the amount of expensive hand fitting needed to make the gun sales worthy.

These times are the golden years of cars and guns and it seems to be getting better still. Don

 

[jpage]

Would it be correct to say that the angled thumb-piece was introduced because of MIM technology ?

 

[steelslaver]

Would it be correct to say that the angled thumb-piece was introduced because of MIM technology ?

Only if they thought more people wanted those than the conventional type thumb piece. With MIM they could easily make most any shaped pice the wanted and once parent mold was made make thousands of the all of them totally identical.

Once the molds are made about all they have to do is fill them with the compound, super heat them to the correct temp for the correct time in a digitally controlled oven, quench and they are done. No cutters to wear out of tolerance, no machine bearings or spindles, to work out of tolerances, no need to set machine to new cutters to spec.

Everything new isn't bad. I guarantee you that airplanes have all kinds of MIM and various powder metal technology parts.

Some of the best blade steels money can buy are made using powdered metal technology. The CPM steels are way ahead of anything else. Metal is melted in a inert atmosphere iduction oven, then sprayed into an inert atmosphere to form fine beads of completely uniform steel. These are then pressed together and super headed under pressure to form billets of totally homogeneous steel. Impossible with a poured and roll forged steel.

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

Would it be correct to say that the angled thumb-piece was introduced because of MIM technology ?

Yes. Go back in this thread and read my first post. The angled thumb-piece (I like to call it the Nike latch because it looks like the Nike' shoe logo) was the first visible MIM part, and began sporadic use around 1992.

 

[medic15al]

I much prefer the original full sized latch. The angled ones have frequently caused my thumb to slip off during reloading drills at work. Just like a ramp it pushes the force away from the latch. Just my experience.

 

[muddocktor]

I much prefer the original full sized latch. The angled ones have frequently caused my thumb to slip off during reloading drills at work. Just like a ramp it pushes the force away from the latch. Just my experience.

It's even worse for lefties like myself. I use my left forefinger to work the cylinder release and with that angled junk it is harder for my forefinger to get a secure push on it. I replaced that angled release with a regular old style release on my 627 Pro.

 

[Kernel Crittenden]

S&W went to the Nike latch for reasons of speed loader clearance. I think just about everybody prefers the feel and look of the traditional style latch (which is now made MIM, of course).

 

[medic15al]

I never had trouble with either Safariland nor HKS speedloaders with the traditional style latch. MIM doesn't bother me.

If the traditional latch is preferred by most people why not use them on the new guns?

 

[k22fan]

The "Nike latch" mimicked the slope of huge after market competition thumb pieces. When "Nike latches" came out they appeared racy. It was common to replace old thumb pieces in the hope of faster reloads. Some friends did that but I never got around to it. I've used HKS and Safariland speed loaders a lot and I've never before heard anyone complain that the older latches interfere with speed loaders.

By the way, a local gun store has two new Performance Center 686s for sale that have enormous "Nike latches" that any fool can see prevent the use of speed loaders. Maybe full moon clipped .38 Short Colt Cartridges would fit between those latches and the cylinder but their cylinders were not cut for moon clips. I expect they will sit in the store display for a very long time.