I thought it was an interesting aticle.
S&W copying another bolt action. Well gosh, there's news. When was the last real innovation in bolt action rifles? How many different companies copied the 98 Mauser action for decades? Shocking.
The L-frame was a copy of the Python? Perhaps. When was the last time a revolver was truely revolutionary? The Python is a stong & good looking design with an antiquated lock work. It could probably reasonably argued that the L-frame is an improved version of the Python. My dad always preferred the looks of Colts but thought that the actions of S&Ws were a superior design. He shot and owned a number of both, I am not inclined to argue.
Bulky or not, I like N-frames and I will have one eventually.
Political sucking up. Not really new, but shameful nontheless.
Walther PPK/S - mine's a 2010 model, so I'm not familiar with the issue. That aside, how is licensing and producing Walthers with the permission and cooperation of Walther a bad thing? Ok, yeah they screwed the pooch quality wise. But the joint venture, in and of itself, is not a bad thing.

You produce millions of anything, and I bet you have some quality issues along the way. What sets a company apart is how they deal with the problem. While they aren't the heart of darkness, it appears that S&W is a bit of a mixed bag.
I still want a N-Frame though.

So, S&W waited 30 years to "copy" the Python? The underlug is the only thing copied from the Python. Also, he obviously never actually did holster an L Frame in a Python holster. They are a loose, at best, fit.

Some people just like to complain this guy appears to be one, I have owned many S&W revolvers and pistols over the years and they have all been quality guns with the exception of one and that's the Sigma but you get what you pay for. S&W is like other companies in a competitive business and they had to make a gun that could compete in the lower price handgun market, thus the Sigma. Regardless, I still plan to own and buy S&W handguns IMO there top of the line.

+1 firediver

Amen

It seems to me that he has an axe to grind. I've bought, sold or traded 23 different Smiths in the last 16 years and only one problem. An M17 that broke a firing pin. I shipped it to Smith & Wesson on their dime and had the gun back in 10 days.

Who the heck is Chuck Hawks anyway's??? I've owned three and sold one that I wish I didn't. I plan on getting a few more.

I have owned at least three S&W revolvers at a time since I was 21 years old (47 years ago) I now own six of them. None have ever failed me.

Iv never had a problem with any of my S&W revolvers, like mentioned before their customer service is great! I had a problem with my model 64 awhile and they took care of it free of charge.

I joined this forum just to reply to this thread. WHATEVER CHUCK!!! If their revolvers are such a poor "copy" of the original Colt, where can I get me a new Colt? Why are so many poor, uninformed LEO's carrying Smith's? I've owned/own over a dozen, revolvers and auto's alike, each one worked flawlessly, and shot great to boot. My oldest is a 4th model Safety Hammerless and newest 337-1 AirliteTi. BG380 if they can make enough for me to finally get my hands on one. That rambling makes me think Mr. Hawkes may have a hidden agenda. Only a bafoon would slam a company who sets the benchmark for quality production guns.

Originally Posted by tkroenlein

I joined this forum just to reply to this thread. WHATEVER CHUCK!!! If their revolvers are such a poor "copy" of the original Colt, where can I get me a new Colt? Why are so many poor, uninformed LEO's carrying Smith's? I've owned/own over a dozen, revolvers and auto's alike, each one worked flawlessly, and shot great to boot. My oldest is a 4th model Safety Hammerless and newest 337-1 AirliteTi. BG380 if they can make enough for me to finally get my hands on one. That rambling makes me think Mr. Hawkes may have a hidden agenda. Only a bafoon would slam a company who sets the benchmark for quality production guns.

I have a BG 380 that I carry everyday, you will love it. I just think Chucky has tried to procure product for review and was turned down on his reputation. What a cry baby. LOL.

Originally Posted by legionrider

S&W has been around a long time. The people who spend hard earned dollars are not stupid, nor are they easily deceived. No matter how good a PR campaign a company ran, word would circulate about these issues, and the consumer would stop buying their products. ANY manufacturing process has its high points and low points, The current recall of toyota? How about the Ford Pinto? The O-rings on the space shuttle? the point is Longevity is not driven by ad campaigns but by consumer confidence and reputation spread by word of mouth.

This is my first post, as I have come here to talk and learn about my 642CT and .380 BG, but I wanted to clarify one myth that you referred to. The booster o-rings on the shuttle that exploded were not defective. They were not designed to operate at the starting temperatures the shuttle saw that day. A very good man lost his job for blowing the whistle on Morton Thiokol and their refusal to tell NASA NOT to fly the shuttle that day. NASA was advised as part of the documentation of the product not to fly in those temperatures, but the Whitehouse, under tremendous pressure, told NASA to fly anyway. Sadly, Ronald Reagan, a great man and an American hero in my eyes, ultimately bore the responsibility for that disaster. He of course was not aware of the details, but by the nature of his position was responsible for the actions of his staff. I studied that disaster for a week during engineering school in an ethics course.

Actually, you can argue the design was defective, but it was not defective as long as it was operated above 53 degrees F, and NASA knew that and was repeatedly advised not to fly under that temperature. However, there's no publicly-accessible documentation that the part was to function at a given range. I suspect, given the fact that NASA management was crucified for the accident, that they were told that the part had only been tested down to 53 F. Why would Thiokol only test down to 53F if that was not part of the design requirements? I blame NASA, not Thiokol.

Far too many posters expect perfection in their weapons. Any mechanical device, no matter how well designed or manufactured will possibly have components that ultimately will fail early. As a former armorer, I periodically check any of my "critical" (carry or HD) weapons for early wear or failure. I do the same with my automobile. I carry S&W revolvers almost exclusively. I disassemble , clean and inspect any of them I have designated for defense purposes. I do the same with my Mossberg shotguns that are for HD. If I find unusual wear, cracks or anything else "funny" with a part, I replace it.

I am aware that not everybody has been trained as an armorer. It would behoove gun carriers to become acquainted with an armorer or gunsmith and have their weapons checked periodically. The same advice is sound for mechanics and automobiles.

The argument that this "shouldn't be necessary as the gun should be made to last" argument flies in the face of mechanical reality. SIGs and Kimbers can break down as well as Taurus and Rossis. They may not break down as often, but they possess the same potential.

I have a lot of faith in the design and workmanship of S&W, but I still check them. If a part breaks, I contact them and we work out a way to remedy the problem. I don't go around telling everybody what a "POS" they manufacture, we fix the gun.

O.K. Here's my take on Smith & Wesson revolvers:

I own maybe a dozen of so Smiths, .38 Specials, .357 Magnums, .45 Colts, and .44 Magnums. So, my experiences.

I have an early Model 29, 6" barrel, bought from a friend with maybe 1,000 rounds fired. I experienced some parts breakage, notably the trigger pivot pin. This using factory and heavy handloads. Also had the cylinder unlock when firing, and the hammer deliver a double strike on the primer. I complained to Smith about this and was told my gun needed the "endurance package" installed. I returned the gun to Smith and this was done free of charge. At the same time I had a full lug barrel installed, getting an 8 3/8" barrel. Shortly afterward I had my gunsmith cut the barrel to 6". No further problems, and having fired in excess of 10,000 round through the gun.

A second Model 29 I had fitted with 5" full lug barrel. This barrel turned in the frame, so I had my gunsmith pin the barrel. After about 8,000 rounds the barrel stub split. Smith replaced the barrel with a new one.

These two .44 Magnum revolvers are the only ones I've had break down, and for a DA revolver, Smith wins hands down with me.

In addition, I might add, I've had Colts and Rugers experience similar break down. Most of my guns have seen heavy use, most have in excess of 10,000 rounds fired, one Ruger .45 Colt Blackhawk nearing 20,000 rounds. And, yes, I keep a count of rounds fired in my log books.

Bob Wright

Hey PX think ya better go back and re-read my post I'm not knocking anyones quality, especially S&W. I own several New and old. Just saying Smith & Wessons are a little overpriced of late. jmo

Originally Posted by cwl1862

Hey PX think ya better go back and re-read my post I'm not knocking anyones quality, especially S&W. I own several New and old. Just saying Smith & Wessons are a little overpriced of late. jmo

So is everything else. The cheapest Chevy I can buy new cost $7,000 more than my Dad paid for a his three bedroom house. Don't go shopping for a Buick and expect to pay Hyundai prices! I agree that the prices for the "exotic metals super flyweights" are insane, but you can still buy the standard Stainlessss Steel and Airweights at a competitive price.

I own several models of S&W handguns and one carbine. I have only experienced one malfunction on any of the S&W firearms. It was actually a friend of mine that was firing my Sigma. He limp-wristed the pistol when firing it and it failed to feed one round. That could have happened on any pistol. The S&W products definitely show a long history of firearm manufacturing experience. They show attention to problems and the needs of gun owners. The external extractor on their 1911s is a good example of that. I cannot speak on their customer service because I have never needed to contact them for any issues. I would definitely recommend their firearms for anybody looking to pick up a quality gun in the mid price range.

I get and read about 6 different "GUN" mags . I've never heard of this Chuck guy, so he must be some "Minor nobody" who's really upset about his less than zero stature in the world. I mean really... "let's complain about things that might have occurred decades ago" When the Brit's or Bangor-Punta ran the shop. I have and do own many Smith revolvers and I shoot them alot and have since the 70s and for the most part I am pleased with their products. Others must likeways be happy or they would cease to sell enough products to stay in business( like when the brits made their deal with Bill and his gang of thugs in the 90s) So I'll keep on shooting my Smiths and Rugers and chuck can keep on crying about the unfairness of(his) life......

Revolvers require far more exacting machine work than semi-auto pistols.

When I got into shooting it was a toss up on where to get your gun: S & W or Colt.

Chief's special, or Detective's special? Five rounds or six rounds?

The quality was about the same.

Only the Python stood out.

Colt is out of the revolver business. To my mind S & W is at the top of the pile in terms of quality; followed by Ruger, and then either Charter Arms or Rossi. With the tail end carried by Taurus.

As for copying, I think you can make a case for Ruger filching ideas from all over the place. The LCP and the LC9 come to mind. I can't recall which made the first resin framed revolver. Certainly one of them copied the other.

Glock is considered the father of resin framed pistols. But is stole the idea from H & K who produced one about a decade earlier.

Certainly S & W stole the "Judge" idea from Taurus and came out with the Govenor.

Taurus seems to have the most good ideas lately but then they sabotage them with their shoddy production quality.

I think it is OK to borrow ideas if you execute very well. Certainly the Govenor will be a better quality revolver than the Judge.

How many companies have ripped off Browning's designs?

How many companies have ripped off AK47 designs?

How many companies have ripped off AR16 designs?

I'll stick with S & W for revolvers. I like the dark side. I live there.

Who the hell is he? Never heard of him! S&W Rules. Revolver and Semi's!!!!

Originally Posted by dcopper

Who the hell is he? Never heard of him! S&W Rules. Revolver and Semi's!!!!

He's a TROLL !

i don't want to get another S&W except maybe the 629
anyway these idiots put a cylinder mark on a gold engraved west point commerative class pistol all the way around
i was so ticked off
this was a case gun and the idiots fired all chambers and made a ring all around the cylinder
so much for spending $1500 for a gold engraved case gun from S&W

I have loved every S&W I have ever owned. (about 10) in fact, I could kick myself for selling most of them, but as a young man, I had to sell one to buy one. I bough a couple through our PD trade-in's and stole them. (new in the box 2.5 inch model 66 for $170) I sold the 66 for $350 and kick myself every time I think about it.

Anyway, this guy obviously has some kind of grudge. As for me, a S&W 5906 saved my life on a couple of occasions, including an on-duty shooting, so who cares what he thinks?

The author of this link obviously has an axe to grind. I have two S&W revolvers, a 629 and a 686. I'm always carrying one or the other into the back country for fly fishing. I've never had to fire one and I hope I never do. I've put a lot of rounds through both at the range and never had an issue.

Wow-old thread,but a good one.Im a Huge Smith fan and own a 686-1.If Im not mistaken those were made somewhere in the mid to late 80's?? Many many many rounds and never a problem.It is still tight and shoots better than it ever has.Anything that has moving parts will eventually need fixing/servicing and things always have a chance of breaking.What is more important to me- S&W are awesome when it comes to customer service.Though Ive never dealt with them a friend of mine has-they took care of him no questions asked.And more stories like that are well documented.Though I prefer the older S&W handguns,I wouldnt hesitate to pick up a newer one I liked it.