smith&wesson quality control

I

ianjbs

Inactive
Is it true that smith&wesson has had quality control issues? Are they currently making a good revolver? How does quality compare to older models? Also, some replies to this question mention that smith&wesson has given in to anti-gun forces. What did they do? I'd rather not support such behavior.
 
Last edited:
Smith&Wesson's quality is as good as any other gun company. The only problem with them is they are giving in to the antis.
 
I like the older Smiths better, however the QC on the new revolvers is good. I have a new 629MG and an old 29-2. The action on the 29-2 is awesome, and the quality is better but nothing to bitch about. My new 624jm is great and better in quality and action than my M66. So go figure... ;)
 
I would have agreed, but then something strange happens and I have to wonder. Specifically, the problems with the Model 647 K-frame .17HMR. There have been reports of some that only shoot shotgun patterns. S&W has exchanged the 647's that won't shoot for another model because they don't have the parts to fix them.

:confused:

I hope the one my dad bought keeps working. Then again, maybe he'd like to have something different. Who knows, he's happy with it so far.

John
Member www.vcdl.org
NRA Life
 
Starting in the early 1990s I watched with growing disgust as S&W's QC started to slip. Around 1995-97 was the worst.

There's nothing quite so special as picking up a brand new supposed top quality handgun that costs close to $700 and finding that:

1. The barrel is overtorqued to the point that the front sight is canted 10 or so degrees to the right.

2. Because the barrel is overtorqued, there's a pressure ring in the barrel.

The installation of CNC machinery at S&W was heralded as the greatest leap forward in QC since ancient man started using wood forms to make mud bricks.

Unfortunately, S&W screwed the pooch badly.

I was still seeing handguns with pressure rings in the barrel and overtorqued barrels as recently as 3 or 4 years ago.

I gave up in complete disgust and for the past couple of years haven't even bothered to look.
 
Compared with other new revolvers on the dealer's rack, today's S&W quality is quite good.

Smith & Wesson gets a bad quality control rap because they will never again make revolvers of the quality produced in the late 1930's through mid-50's. Even the 1960's and 70's guns are hard to match in quality today. I do have to say that S&W has made some real pigs in recent years. They have made cost cutting and legally inspired design changes that have alienated their customer base. There is no need to mention The Deal. The change in the guns themselves was enough.

People want to compare a new off the shelf S&W with a Registered Magnum. You can't do that. The RM is essentially a hand built gun. Even the lowest cost S&W from this time period exceeds the new guns in quality, just because of the artisans S&W once employed to hand fit all of thier guns. I recently bought a post war Military & Police which has very little usage. It's fit and finish exceeds S&W Performance Shop guns of today. This M&P was a bottom of the line gun from 1946 that is fitted better than a top of the line gun today. The men who built guns back then retired without replacements, and their craft was lost at S&W.

It's not that S&W's quality is poor now. It is that S&W's quality was at one time unsurpassed.
 
>>search terms agreement and S&W.<<<

Also remember, this agreement to sign on the CLinton gun ban was when the Limeys owned S&W and its something Tompkins and Allen did when they were in charge. S&W is under new ownership now.

I like to think of the Limey era S&Ws as T&As not S&Ws.
 
It's not that S&W's quality is poor now. It is that S&W's quality was at one time unsurpassed.
Click to expand...

There it is in a nutshell

Sort of like the situation with pre 64 Model 70s, Sakos etc

WildgrumblyAlaska
 
Xavier,

Take a SPECIFIC look at my first message in this thread.

Can you tell me how a front sight being off register by 10 or so degrees is simply a case of sour grapes caused by my desire to see guns made to 1920s specifications?

Can you tell me how the barrel being screwed so tightly into the frame that it's deformed is a case of sour grapes?

Colt has been screwing its revolver barrels into the frame, without the benefit of a pin, for over 100 years. Maybe S&W should have checked with them how to do the job right?
 
Can you tell me how a front sight being off register by 10 or so degrees is simply a case of sour grapes caused by my desire to see guns made to 1920s specifications?
Click to expand...
Nope. :)
Can you tell me how the barrel being screwed so tightly into the frame that it's deformed is a case of sour grapes?
Click to expand...
Nope. :D

We are in agreement Mike, but I think we are talking about different things. I was addressing ianjbs' post, not yours.
 
Just for balance and not to argue with Mike, I have seen well over 200 brand new S&Ws per year for the past 10 years and as best I can recall not one has ever gone back for service due to QC flaw

Wild2000isasmallsampleAlaska
 
Alaska,

I find it hard to believe that you weren't finding any in the mid to late 1990s.

The shop I worked for routinely sent back several month, mainly for barrels that were improperly screwed into the frame boss, but for other problems as well.

One came through with a very peculiar trigger pull, so we pulled the side plate.

It was LOADED with polishing compound and metal chips.
 
Much as I hope nobody will notice, I do agree with Mike Irwin on this.
S&W is capable of putting out a well-done revolver, but QC appears to be getting a bit erratic, and that's not just a matter of comparing them to the classics of previous years.
As I've mentioned before, I had two examples of a recent special N-Frame model that were both returned to the factory unfired. Both had barrels with the front sights canted, both failed a No-Go gauge in their forcing cones, one had a muzzle crown that wouldn't initially let a range rod through it & then showed a barrel constriction toward the rear probably formed from over tightening, both had engraved rings in the cylinders from edges left sharp on the bolt stops that should have been addressed, one had to have its cylinder forced shut to close it & that one also had a gap between the two grip panels in front nearly wide enough to let a dime in.
That's poor quality control per se, and not just a matter of comparing poorly to the former standards of the days of hand fitting and attention to detail.
Conversely, the sample of the current .41 Mag Mountain Gun I have here shows none of those problems, and has endeared itself so much I'll be keeping it. With some adjustments to fit personal preferences, it should be a pretty good gun.
Note these are issues totally aside from the MIM question, which is another matter entirely.
I'm just addressing how the things are put together.
Denis
 
Earlier this week I bought a NIB SW M66, with a 2 & 1/2" barrel. This may come as a suprise to some, but I can't find a dam thing wrong with it! Ditto my other Smiths. If there's a lemon out there looking for a home, it usually ends up with me. Not my SW's and not my Colt's. I must be doing something wrong... ;)
 
Well Mike like I said, I started here in 96 and havent seen one yet....

We have sent S&Ws back, mostly for damage casued by bad smithing or abuse, but QC,,,is OK

WildblahfeelingAlaska
 
Also, some replies to this question mention that smith&wesson has given in to anti-gun forces. What did they do? I'd rather not support such behavior.
Click to expand...
This question has been bounced around just about every gun forum I've visited. I'm not sure who did what to whom. To be honest, I could care less. My goodness, don't you think all firearm companies have done something shady. They sure aren't going to call you on the phone and get your advice. It all trickles downhill. Maybe someone here has been to a corporate meeting or is on the board. I hope you don't believe everything in print. If you have any doubts about the product, don't buy it. Many companies make quality firearms.
 
In the last 8 years alone I've bought at least a dozen S&W production and Performance Center revolvers. Unlike revolvers from competitors every one of the S&W's has been high quality, reliable and accurate (some almost supernaturally so). Only thing I have to do with most of 'em is a trigger job (darn lawyers) and perhaps a new grip. I've found during a long life that there are always folks who say things against the king of the hill. When it comes to DA revolvers, S&W is the King! Dennis
 
"To be honest, I could care less. My goodness, don't you think all firearm companies have done something shady."

That's very, very sad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top