where S&W get the bad rep from

Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
2,754
Likes
213
Location
Granite State
Feedback: 19 / 1 / 0
some time ago when i just got into shooting/owning guns i overheard on few occasions about s&w being not very good quality. at the time i didn't have much experience with any guns and understandably those words left an imprint in my brain, and ever since i feel somewhat stand-off-ish towards S&W, although initially i loved how M&p looks and feel an wanted to get it as my first handgun. now i'm hearing the opposite - S&w is good/great quality.
maybe what i've heard was a BS and i took it at face value due to lack of personal experience but damage was already done. any thoughts on where bad rep might come from?
 
I am new to shooting civilian, but I have the same experience with Glock. First person I talked to swore they would never own a Glock for x/y/z, and now I do not want one. I think all it takes is for you to talk to the guy who had issues with a particular gun to get a bad mindset about a particular brand. Could have been he had a used gun by S&W that was not maintained and it FTF'd on him repeatedly, or any of the thousands of issues bad maintenance can cause, and the first instinct is to blame the gun rather than taking responsibility for operator error.

I have been wrong before, YMMV.
 
I have a S&W 908 and I love it. It is a single stack 9mm with a 3.5" barrel. Great carry gun. I have put alot or rounds through it as did my friend who owned it before me. The gun as never had one FTF of FTE. I couldn't ask for a more reliable firearm.
 
Ownership was changed a couple of times IIRC, and now they are great again. YMMV

Get what you are comfortable with and try them all before you buy. Many members are very generous with their toys and time.
 
I think most of the issues with S&W go back a ways. Between the argeement with Pres Clinton and the association with the original Crime Bill (basically, S&W made an agreement with the Devil in order to get a leg up in government contracting) and issue they had with their Second/Third generation semi's ("Gun of the Week"), many people developed a bad taste for S&W. That taste continues even with the new management/ownership and with new products.

Everyone has their own opinion, you just need experience to form your own.

Aloha
 
any thoughts on where bad rep might come from?

S&W has made some absolutely excellent guns - their M&P pistol series, their AR15, 1911s and pretty much all their revolvers are decent quality guns. But, S&W doesn't always get it right - the Sigma wasn't exactly a great gun, and even the S&W person I talked to told me he expected the service live of a .380 Sigma to be around 300 rounds.

S&W does well with their "lifetime service" plan. Unlike some other companies (including some generally regarded as "higher end"), you won't hear S&W using the term "Acceptable service life" if you shoot your alloy frame gun to the point where the frame cracks - they'll just repair it (assuming it was bought after they added the "lifetime" plan).
 
For one thing, they now use Metal Injection Molding for some of their revolver parts.

They are sacrificing quality so that they can speed up the manufacturing process which is always a bad thing.
 
For one thing, they now use Metal Injection Molding for some of their revolver parts.

Good point - I forgot about that. Unfortunately, the nature of the beast is that you get this sort of thing except at the very highest end, and it's not limited to S&W.
 
From a friend of a friend who works there... I know... Anyway, it was stated that as the rush to buy guns increased, production increased as did the rush to get product to market. This, in turn, let to less attentive QC and fewer 'finishing' steps in manufacture.

From my own observation; my sister bought a new Walther PPK-S. Every edge on the thing was like a razor blade and there was a huge burr on the muzzle. My friend bought a new M&P40 in which the striker broke four times while dry firing. He also bought a new Performance Center .357 (not sure of the model) on which the barrel kept loosening. After being returned several times it was determined that the frame was cracked. He no longer owns any S&W products.

I had a S&W 1911 for a while and it never felt 'right'. I replaced it with a Sig 1911 GSR and thought, Oh, that's how it's suppose to feel. My Ithaca 1911 that I cobbled together with mostly war time manufactured parts has better fit than that Smith.

Perhaps things have change in the past few years... I don't know but, I find myself still shying away from S&W's new products.

I'd like to buy a Smith sometime but if I do it will be and old one.
 
Last edited:
I think their core quality is great, some of the peripheral stuff not so good. My M&P 9mm, front sight fell off in under 50 rounds. My new 1911DK, the emblem in the grip fell off, the ball detent wasn’t drilled deep enough to firmly position the safety, the slide lock would engage automatically when shooting. My new 625JM feel a bit rough, unlike the older smith which in my opinion were smooth out of the box.
 
I am new to shooting civilian, but I have the same experience with Glock. First person I talked to swore they would never own a Glock for x/y/z, and now I do not want one. I think all it takes is for you to talk to the guy who had issues with a particular gun to get a bad mindset about a particular brand. Could have been he had a used gun by S&W that was not maintained and it FTF'd on him repeatedly, or any of the thousands of issues bad maintenance can cause, and the first instinct is to blame the gun rather than taking responsibility for operator error.

I have been wrong before, YMMV.

A lot of validity in this response.

Back when I joined the PD (late 1970s), S&W was having QC issues and I wasn't impressed with them, so with my Chief's permission I ordered (paid for) and carried a Colt revolver instead. Eventually S&W squared away their QC issues . . . until they created the Sigma (aka Stigma) which was a disaster! Mine broke 5 parts after 2 mags of factory ammo (it was a brand new gun), S&W repaired it and I sold it. I'll never look at another Sigma again! Ron Glidden told me (much later) that he outfitted his PD with them and they were a disaster and shortly thereafter got rid of them as well. The M&P came along and all I can say is that it is a great gun, shoots well and fits my hand well (which the Glock does not) . . . after a "mandatory trigger job". My only criticism of the M&P (and I've said it to the S&W people giving us factory tours in the past) is the trigger (OOB even non-MA guns have "random" trigger pulls, almost always terrible).

Parts can and will break on any gun . . . no gun is "perfection" regardless of advertising hype. Two of our three Glocks have had serious breakages and were repaired. I take no issue with that. The Glocks just don't fit our hands well so they are not a favorite. I use them for training so students can try both the Glock and M&P and decide for themselves what fits THEIR HAND best and they can shoot well.

No one gun/model is best for all and run away from any instructor or gun dealer telling you otherwise!
 
Pinned and recessed is how I like my S&Ws. I don't care for their newer stuff. But, its probably just as good at times.
 
i have a new S&W m&p 40 and i love it never had a problem with it i have about 800 rounds in it
i also have a S&W m&p ar-15 and have not had a problem with it either
 
I think most of the issues with S&W go back a ways. Between the argeement with Pres Clinton and the association with the original Crime Bill (basically, S&W made an agreement with the Devil in order to get a leg up in government contracting) and issue they had with their Second/Third generation semi's ("Gun of the Week"), many people developed a bad taste for S&W. That taste continues even with the new management/ownership and with new products.

Everyone has their own opinion, you just need experience to form your own.

Aloha

Yeah a while back they were owned by some British company and were sell outs. They got slammed for it, and the company lost value. The Brits sold Smith to a US company, and the world was made right again.[grin]
 
Smith and Wesson is an iconic American Company whose history is fascinating, IMO. Owned by the Wesson family until 1964 it was taken over (hostile take over)by the conglomerate Bangor-Punta. Quality control eroded. Then they were purchased by Lear-Siegler. The problem then was they never really saw Glock coming. Steve Melvin who was at CEO at the time improved quality control significantly, but didn't know how to respond to Glock. The Third Gen of semi-auto pistols were created at this time with so many variations, there was actually a whiz wheel that was issued to dealers where you could look up all the variations. (these whiz wheels are worth some money today). Eventually they were sold to a British firm, Tompkins limited which made their money in the plumbing fixture business. The Sigma was an ill fated attempt to compete with Glock, so much so that they agreed to pay a royalty on every Sigma sold to Glock. They then formed a strategic alliance with Walther and marketed a version of the Model 99 which never caught on with American Law Enforcement. In 2001 Thompkins sold S&W at a loss to the Saf T Hammer corporation who invested in new designs and there very successful M&P line.

In 2000 S&W cut a deal with the Clinton administration where they cut a deal regarding the installation of safety devices and also putting some controls into their dealership network that were intrusive. This resulted in a massive boycott by the shooting public. There hope was to obtain government contracts and that never materialized. The new owners began winning back the American shooting public.

Considering that in the 1970's 80 percent of all firearms issued to LE worldwide (except for the Soviet Bloc and Chinese) were S&W, they really wanted to regain this market and appear to be succeeding with the M&P line.

S&W has made some of the best handguns ever developed and were responsible for the .357 Magnum, .41 Magnum and .44 Magnum and now the .500 S&W. The first American made DA auto, the M39 led the way in the adoption of the semi-auto by American LE.

The majority of guns in my collection are S&W and I am a S&W stockholder. I love the tradition and history associated with the company, but quality control has been an issue from time to time. The lifetime warranty program is good. Three of the last four new S&W handguns that I have purchased (starting in 2006) have been sent back to the factory for warranty service for the following reasons:

M22 "Thunder Ranch" .45 ACP Revolver: Pin holding the front sight worked its way out, had to be replaced.

M22 "Model of 1917" .45 ACP Revolver in the Classic series: I ordered it nickel plated, The plating was so bad that it came off in chunks. It was re-plated and I have had no further problems or issues with the finish.

Model 642 Stainless Airweight Centennial: Purchased brand new at FS Gun Shop in May of this year (wanted a hammerless J, have a 637), it had a huge gouge under the crown of the barrel left there in the manufacturing process. In my haste to purchase the gun, I didn't look it over minutely at the store. My bad there. Barrel was replaced.

In each case, the guns were returned (I usually just drive down to Springfield and drop them off at the guard shack). to the factory and sent back to me within two weeks with all corrections made. If anything S&W always manages to redeem itself.

I currently have a S&W firearm on order at a local gun shop. It will be interesting to see if it has any issues or not.
 
Last edited:
Are there patents on their older products, or can other companies copy them and make "clones"? It would be nice if some small company could revive an older design and produce some using high quality materials and parts, with a good finish and great service. Ditto for guns like the H&R breaktop.
 
I've 6 S&W pistols and like them a lot. of the 6 2 are semi autos (1911 and an M&P) 2 625s,a 610 and a pre lock 617. They are great guns and I've never had a problem with them. Now some here are not happy with MIM parts and you have that right to be unhappy on that point,but if S&W went back to the way their guns were originally made the price tags on them would be unafordable by the common working stiff. I would love to have a Colt SA Army,but my budget won't allow for a $2K gun,same goes for the Python beautiful gun but not made today because it's price would be beyond most people's budget.
 
Are there patents on their older products, or can other companies copy them and make "clones"? It would be nice if some small company could revive an older design and produce some using high quality materials and parts, with a good finish and great service. Ditto for guns like the H&R breaktop.

The problem is that trying to re-create an older Smith revolver would be very cost-prohibitive. A lot of the allure of old Smiths is the hand-fitting that used to take place... which was no problem when labor was relatively cheap. Not to mention that there are still lots of older Smiths in great condition kicking around in stores. The more common Smiths (Model 10, 19, 28, etc.) were produced in vast quantities and are easy to find... heck, S&W has the "list" price of their Classics Series Model 10 at $719, and you can find older ones in great shape for $400, easy.
 
I own 27 S&W handguns and I can tell you from experience they are great guns. The only issues I have ever had with a S&W was a pair of 22-A target pistols I bought for my father and myself. I purchased them new at the same time and had to send each of them back to the Holton ME plant to be worked on due to ftf 4 times each! I attribute that to the fact that the 22s is a very inexpensive gun and the same attention may not be given to it production. I'm not condoning that but it is what it is... Overall, S&W is by far my favorite manufacturer of hand guns. I have had the random firing pin wear out but I have always been well taken care of and usually have my gun back in a matter of days.
 
MIM parts aren't inherently inferior to machined or cast parts, but they have to be done correctly. Most current S&W guns are well-made and robust by today's standards. The exceptions would be the PPKs made in Maine that have such a rough finish, burrs, etc., and some of the revolvers with two-piece barrels. The barrel pieces can separate, with part being launching downrange. I have seen this happen twice, and have heard of more.
 
I own a 4506 and a 457. Both are fantastic 3rd gen semi-autos. Strong, reliable, perform flawlessly. I bought
a M&P 45 (which I traded for the 4506) but it never worked for me.
 
I had a Sigma as my first gun. What a frustrating intro to the world of firearms. I had a PPK from the Houlton plant. I wanted to love it, but the manufacturing was sooo rough and after two mags through it it would malf. like crazy. And it wouldn't feed JHP (I used to have to carry with CorBon Pow'r'Ball ammo). How S&W effed up a seventy or eighty year old design I don't know. My third S&W was a 65-3 .357 mag 3". Great gun all around, just not for me so it went to a good home with another member of this forum. My fourth is a 442. Great carry gun. I'd only sell it if funds allowed for a 340 or 360.
 
Delta, what an intro to shooting! I'm glad you stuck with it in spite of your first experience.

I've owned a German PPK/s since the late S and it's a great gun and shot everything I fed it without problems.

In the S I spotted the stainless US version PPK/s in The Gun Room (Shrewsbury) and wanted to buy it as an "investment". Whoever I dealt with there (don't think it was John) REFUSED to sell it to me under those circumstances. He told me that it was nowhere near as good as my German version and it would not make a good investment. I never liked that shop under that management but have to admit that he did me a great favor and I did take his advice with no regrets.
 
I've owned the following S&W handguns, all of recent (1980s and newer) manufacture:

65-5
65-8
64-5
637-1
629-4
M&P9
M&P9c
915

and each and every one of them have been outstanding, quality firearms
 
I think it just depends on who you talk to and what they're currently experiencing. I grew up hating Glocks and still do because my dad had one that was a jammomatic 20 years ago, If you talked to me this time last year, I hated springfield because they had a known problem with their slides on the fullsize XD's that they fixed on the XDm's but never bothered to fix or update on the fullsizes. My manager had a S&W bodyguard 380 semiauto that was a complete hunk of crap (sent in for repair 3 times because it didn't go bang when the trigger was pulled) My first SR9c had light primer strikes. Ask me every six months who I think makes a junk gun and I usually have a different answer based on which one is giving me problems. Even though I've finally realized that they will all give you problems and you're better off learning how to fix them and trust your fixes. I now have an SR40c with a heavy striker spring, an LCP that I tear down every week and check over and an M&P that has had every pin and piece removed and replaced. Now I just have to find an XDs :)

I've yet to have a gun that didn't give me a problem at some point, I don't really consider any of them junk anymore. You just have to get out and put 1000 rounds through all of them and then replace the one or two junk or plastic parts that they put in to save a couple bucks.
 
MIM parts aren't inherently inferior to machined or cast parts, but they have to be done correctly

I respectfully dissent on the part about not being "inferior to machined parts". A VERY small difference in density can make a huge difference in strength, and a part machined from 4140 or 4340 steel and properly heat treated is definitely going to be better than an MIM part. This is one reason why "cost is no object" custom builders tend to favor the machined parts.

What is, however, debatable is if that "betterness" makes any functional difference. An argument can be made that a part that is strong enough to wear well, and not break, is "good enouogh" even if another part is "stronger".

Funny thing - you never hear the manufacturer of machined hardened steel parts having to explain that their approach is "as good as MIM".
 
Hate to disagree with all the Sigma haters out there but that later versions where pretty good. I picked up a sigma 40VE this past Xmass as a first handgun. I actualy LOVE the harder trigger pull (10-14 lbs) because it forces me to shoot right, not just easy shooting. I am somewhere near the 700 rds line right now and have NEVER had FFL ad the only stove pipeing I've had are with shot shells.

no problems with anything breaking either... also it is half the price of a G19...
 
Back
Top Bottom