Rant on Smith & Wesson quality
Posted: Tue May 04, 2010 12:01 pm
This may cause some problems, but I need to share my recent experiences with 3 different Smith & Wesson handguns I've purchased over the last 2-3 years. I have an M&P 9, Pro Series 686, and Doug Koening 1911. And I have (or have had) problems with all three.
First, the 1911 because it was a minor problem. However, it should not have been a problem on a 1911 that retails for over $1,400. When I cleaned it before shooting, one of the screws on the right grip was boogered up, and was hard to remove. Would go in and out, but with difficulty. Looks like the grip screw bushing was cross-threaded at the factory. I had a gunsmith replace them, but this should not be an issue on this pistol. Wondered how it was put together at the factory, and didn't someone notice? How did it get through quality control?
Second, the Pro Series 686. I bought this because my shooting buddy has an older 686 that is a tack driver. We have a 6" gong and I can hit the gong 6 out of 6 at 25 yards, double action, fairly consistently with his. Not with the Pro Series. After some experimenting, we set up a paper target at 10 yards and was lucky to stay on the paper. Same for my buddy who is an excellent shot. Happened with .357 and .38, target handloads we used in his 686 as well as factory ammo. Started looking and noticed the forcing cone had "rings" in it that looked like machining marks. Had a gunsmith look at it and his first impression was "That's not right." I returned it to S&W, and after a month got it back with cryptic note saying "Honed forcing cone, replaced barrel." Seems to be OK now, but shouldn't have to do this with a Pro Series (supposedly better parts and careful assemble. Not the custom shop, but supposed to be a notch above the run of the mill 686. Agin, how did it get through final inspection?
Finally, the M&P 9. This thing has been a huge disappointment. While it's reliable and comfortable to shoot, the sights are WAY off. I understand this is a combat gun and it's not designed to be a target gun, and also understand the sight picture is different (dots are point of impact, and not a 6 o'clock hold). I shoot it low left. Not a little but a lot. Aim for the chest, and I'll hit him in the johnson. I've read that it takes some getting used to, jerking the trigger, anticipating recoil and all that, but it's not just me. My Glock 27 is point of aim, 3 inches off-hand at 10 yards. Everyone I've let shoot this thing (4-5 different people) says it's not right. Sunday a guy I know (who puts 10 shots with whatever he's shooting in 3-4 inches) can't hit the target. Only way to get this thing on target is hold center dot at top of rear sight. I've read S&W will replace with a lower front sight, as they had some problems, but I really wonder about the quality control, or lack thereof.
I've always liked Smith & Wesson (reputation, American made, quality) but I have baought my last one. I've given these people about $2,500 or so on 3 gunds and had problems with all of them. Don't mean to stir up a hornets nest here, but damn, this is getting old. Anyone else?
First, the 1911 because it was a minor problem. However, it should not have been a problem on a 1911 that retails for over $1,400. When I cleaned it before shooting, one of the screws on the right grip was boogered up, and was hard to remove. Would go in and out, but with difficulty. Looks like the grip screw bushing was cross-threaded at the factory. I had a gunsmith replace them, but this should not be an issue on this pistol. Wondered how it was put together at the factory, and didn't someone notice? How did it get through quality control?
Second, the Pro Series 686. I bought this because my shooting buddy has an older 686 that is a tack driver. We have a 6" gong and I can hit the gong 6 out of 6 at 25 yards, double action, fairly consistently with his. Not with the Pro Series. After some experimenting, we set up a paper target at 10 yards and was lucky to stay on the paper. Same for my buddy who is an excellent shot. Happened with .357 and .38, target handloads we used in his 686 as well as factory ammo. Started looking and noticed the forcing cone had "rings" in it that looked like machining marks. Had a gunsmith look at it and his first impression was "That's not right." I returned it to S&W, and after a month got it back with cryptic note saying "Honed forcing cone, replaced barrel." Seems to be OK now, but shouldn't have to do this with a Pro Series (supposedly better parts and careful assemble. Not the custom shop, but supposed to be a notch above the run of the mill 686. Agin, how did it get through final inspection?
Finally, the M&P 9. This thing has been a huge disappointment. While it's reliable and comfortable to shoot, the sights are WAY off. I understand this is a combat gun and it's not designed to be a target gun, and also understand the sight picture is different (dots are point of impact, and not a 6 o'clock hold). I shoot it low left. Not a little but a lot. Aim for the chest, and I'll hit him in the johnson. I've read that it takes some getting used to, jerking the trigger, anticipating recoil and all that, but it's not just me. My Glock 27 is point of aim, 3 inches off-hand at 10 yards. Everyone I've let shoot this thing (4-5 different people) says it's not right. Sunday a guy I know (who puts 10 shots with whatever he's shooting in 3-4 inches) can't hit the target. Only way to get this thing on target is hold center dot at top of rear sight. I've read S&W will replace with a lower front sight, as they had some problems, but I really wonder about the quality control, or lack thereof.
I've always liked Smith & Wesson (reputation, American made, quality) but I have baought my last one. I've given these people about $2,500 or so on 3 gunds and had problems with all of them. Don't mean to stir up a hornets nest here, but damn, this is getting old. Anyone else?