S&W Using MIM Barrels in Bodyguards!!!!

[birch]

I just bought a Smith Bodyguard .380 to use as my primary concealed carry pistol. I made this decision after trying to carry every pistol/revolver known to man. Anything other than a thin little pocket gun felt like I was carrying a brick. I originally bought a Sig 238, but my wife liked it so much that it didnt remain in my pocket for too long.

I decided on the bodyguard because it had a safety, a last round hold open feature, and allowed double strikes without racking the slide.

Soooo, I began the 100 round break in, and had a failure to feed in my second magazine. I didnt get too worried, but decided that I would do a throat and chamber polish before I wasted any more ammo. I started to do a detailed strip and noticed a small ridge on the barrel hood. My first thought, although it was hard to digest, was that this was in fact a mold break line, and this was a MIM barrel! I called S and W and sure enough, they said that the new bodyguard .380s are being manufactured with a new and state of the art engineering process called MIM. She began to go into details, but I interrupted her and asked if there were any more of the old style barrels that I could exchange with the state of the art barrel that I had bought. She told me that there were no "old" style barrels left. She said that if the pistol was malfunctioning, she would send a shipping label to me and I could mail the gun back to Smith for an inspection.

If I get one more FTF or stovepipe, it will go back.

I was just wondering if anyone on here has done an inspection to see if Smith is using MIM on other barrels besided the bodyguard. If they are, I plan on sending a nice little letter to Smith and Wesson describing exactly how I feel about their state of the art technology. I can understand using MIM on close tolerance parts like sears and hammers, but I cannot believe they think it is a good idea to cut corners on barrels.

If there was a failure of a barrel while firing, wouldnt the MIM act as a grenade and fracture in many places? I hope someone with a better engineering mind will chime in here. I don't have a degree in metalurgy, but from everything I have read about MIM, the metal is like a very tight matrix of molecules--more like a crystal than a hodge podge of molecular chains like a forging.

Is smith using MIM on other model barrels?

[EMC45]

MIMed barrels?!?!?!? That sounds bad.

[birch]

Yup, if I could figure out how to post pictures, you still would not believe it.

There is a distinct line on top of the barrel shroud that looks like pure hell. If I were Smith and Wesson designers, I would at the very least direct workers to polish the mold part flush. I can't say for sure, but I would guess that the slide will have a nice little groove where the slide rides up over the hood. This might even lead to poor ejection eventually. I cant imagine why that ridge would not add a considerable amount of friction between the slide and barrel hood being that it is focused on a small area and not spread out over a much greater area.

It would also be interesting to know how much money Smith saved per unit by MIMing the barrel and not spending much time getting rid of the mold marks.

By the way there are many other mold marks on other parts of the barrel. I might have to spend some more time this evening trying to post pictures so everyone can understand the ********* barrel I am holding in my hands.

[birch]

Another thing I noticed.

There is a nice little ring around the chamber. I can only guess that there was a tolerance set for chambering and rifleing. On this particular barrel, you can see where the chamber reamer took off more on one side of the chamber than the other. The mold part line was taken out on the right, but no on the left. I imagine that when the barrel cooled, one side shrank more than the other. I am sure the designers allowed for this. Again, a little polishing and the part line would not even be noticeable.

I am more than upset about this cheapo move by Smith designers. Hell, my father in law bought the little Taurus .380 pocket gun, and I am sure they actually used a solid piece of steel to make/machine their barrels. I cannot believe this ****!!!

[HATCH]

thats the main reason I like to buy old guns not new guns...

[birch]

99% of my collection is 25 years and older. Unfortunatly, the Colt Mustang is the only "old" gun that I could put in my pocket, and for some reason, I can't bring myself to pocket carry an old gun like that. It just seems wrong to destroy a piece of history even thought the primary reason for the Mustang was pocket carry. I even bought a Colt Cobra to try out and even though it was a nice fit, It was too nice to carry.

This is the reason I went to modern polymer. I could drop the thing in the river while salmon fishing and not feel even a remote sense of sadness for doing so.

[birch]

The main reason I started this thread was to see if Smith and Wesson is using MIM on any other models besides my .380 bodyguard. If they have adopted this technique for other firearms, I will probably never look at another Smith again--old or new.

I looked in the manual that came with the gun, and they really stress the importance of using the correct ammo--I mean three pages of warnings! They do say that the use of +P is permitted although it may prematurely age the gun. The use of +P+ is prohibited, and handloads-----they are a no, no.

[birch]

Exactly what they say,

"+P+ ammunition must not be used in Smith and Wesson firearms. This marking on the ammunition designates that it exceeds established industry stnadars, but he designation does not represent defined pressure limits and therefore such ammunition may vary significantly as to the pressures generated and could be DANGEROUS."

If you were refering to the use of handloads being a no, no---Yes, 99 percent of manufacturers have this in their literature. My point refers to my first post. If a MIM barrel decides to let go, will it be like a grenade?

If Smith lovers have a hard time reading this post, I understand. However, I am not letting Smith and Wesson get away with this. The way I see it--If people become aware of the cheap, cheap, cheap way Smith is manufacturing their guns, maybe they will stop doing it. Hopefully, you will not let your love of the company and their firearms get in the way of the truth. I hope the word gets out about this and has negative impact on the company bottom line.

MIM barrels are NOT A GOOD IDEA and represent everything I cannot stand about modern production techniques.

[birch]

I am not going to comment on anything but the MIM barrel. The pro's and con's of the ergonomics can be debated somewhere else.

Also, Rob, you edited your post and added a whole bunch that was not in the original post. I am not saying you are or are not a Smith lover, but I will say that even though no MIM barrels have been reported to blow up, corporate shortcuts are getting out of hand. Whether it works or does not work is not my concern. My concern is with Smith taking shortcuts too far. Even if the MIM stuff is perfect, there is still no excuse for them not taking a few extra minutes to clean up their guns. A mold mark should not be part of a firearms overall presentation.

I am not saying the bodyguard is a fine firearm. However, I paid a pretty penny for this little gun. It was not cheap! This is where my concern lies. If I had known about the MIM barrel and poor finishing before I bought the gun, I would have given ruger and Taurus a chance--Or, i would have bought another sig 238.

[MarkP]

Is Ruger doing this on their 10/22's?

I picked up a new one off the rack and it sure looked like a parting line on the top of the bbl. Also looked like the cross section of the bbl was somewhat elliptical. Finish was very rough as well it looked as NO secondary machining opperations were performed.

[birch]

Rob--go somewhere else. I am sure the little Smiths you have on your avatar picture are fine firearms. I am also sure there are other posts where you can discuss how perfect they are.

[Piedmont]

It makes you wonder if Smiff went or will go to those MIM barrels in the Shield and M&P autos. I quit buying their revolvers when they went to the lock, but the autos were still on the table.

[EMC45]

Get a KelTec. I am very happy with my second P3AT. It beats the Bodyguard in size too.

[birch]

I agree mike.

I am not against MIM for certain parts. In fact, I had a beautiful Colt MKIII Trooper that was one of the finest guns I have ever owned. It had a trigger that would rival any old Colt (Python included). When Colt started using the MIM for their internal lockwork, they were simply trying to compete with Smith and Wesson in production/cost production possibility curves. They succeeded! I also think the old Smiths are true works of art. In fact, a model 66, 19, and both the k-22 and k-38 masterpieces are all on my must have list.

I am just wondering if Smith is going to use MIM barrels on their other general production guns like the M and P line. I had a M and P .40 compact, but didnt think to look at the barrel.

If someone owns one of the new Smith pistols, could you check to see if there are mold marks on the barrel?

[Rick Hodges]

I have a new S&W M&P Shield 40.....no mold marks.......if it was MIM it was very well polished. I doubt they would use it in a .40 that runs at twice the pressure of a .380 but you never know.

[birch]

Is the 64 two piece barrel like the Dan Wesson? Can it be adjusted (functional), or is it just a way to cut costs?

[dubber123]

MIM is basically just a cast part. Ruger has been casting tons of things forever. AMT used cast barrels for as long as they were in business. If a cast barrel in .380 bothers you, I'm guessing you wouldn't want to shoot my Automag in .45 Win mag with it's cast barrel. I've shot it a bunch, mostly handloads, and none were in the "plinker" category. I wouldn't worry in the least.

[birch]

If I remember correctly forged is different than cast, and cast is different than MIM. Is the automag a MIM barrel?

MIM is different than investment casting. I believe investment casting still involves pouring liquid metal in a mold/form that is a near duplicate of the part being molded.

MIM involves the use of powdered metal with a binder. The entire form is heated until the binder (usually a polymer) is burned off and the metal melts to form one piece of metal. It actually shrink from the original size when the binder is burned off.

I may be mistaken in this description, but I don't think the automag barrels are MIM. This is much different than an investment mold/part.

Maybe someone who knows precisely the difference can chime in here with a better explanation.

Again, I am not saying that my barrel is going to explode with the next high pressure handload. I am just annoyed that Smith and Wesson has decided to cut corners while supposedly lesser manufacturers are building highquality barrels the old fashioned way.

[FergusonTO35]

Get a KelTec. I am very happy with my second P3AT. It beats the Bodyguard in size too.

Yep! I love my Kel-Tec P-32 and PF-9. They are my main carry guns, and both a fed an exclusive diet of reloads with cast boolits. The PF-9 is on my side in a IWB holster as I write this.

[NoZombies]

Believe it or not, the crystalline structure of MIM parts more closely resemble the of a forged part than an investment cast part does, all things being equal.

That's not to say I would want a cast or MIM barrel, but the metallurgical science backs up the idea.