Current J Frame production

[Beat Trash]

I'm not qualified to work over a S&W revolver action. But many years ago, I used to shoot on our county Police Association's pistol team competing with S&W revolvers. Back then I spent a lot of time looking over the shoulder of various armors with decades of experience tuning S&W revolvers, trying to learn. I learned a lot about how those guys would work over a S&W action.

LSP972 and Chuck both are giving great advice. I remember some older "tricks" that were done to competition guns, that the smith's said they would not do to a duty gun. Cutting coils off of a a main spring would be one example. Going with lighter main springs, or contouring flat mainsprings would be another.

I installed an Apex kit into a new J-frame 642 that has MIM parts in it. While it did lighten the trigger pull some, I'm tempted to pull the Apex kit out and return the gun to stock. I've test fired the gun with the Apex kit and haven't had issues. But I think that I would feel better with the gun in a stock configuration.

When the gun was brand new, I locked up the live rounds, loaded the gun with some snap caps, and sat in front of the TV and dry fired it for a while. Smoothed out the trigger pull. For the intended usage of a J-frame 642, I can live with a trigger pull that is a couple of pounds heavier, so long as it's smooth.

[UNK]

LSP972 and Chuck both are giving great advice. I remember some older "tricks" that were done to competition guns, that the smith's said they would not do to a duty gun. Cutting coils off of a a main spring would be one example.

I absolutely agree, both of these guys have tons of experience and I am paying attention. The statement in question doesn't have to do with mainsprings. It has to do with only the trigger return spring.
Cutting springs is a no go...I got it.
I have read of people who have installed a trigger return spring with a different weight with good results. The lightest weight I have seen mentioned is 13 lbs. This would leave everything else in the revolver stock.
This is a theoretical inquiry, primarily with the point of learning about the J frame trigger, because at this point I am not planning on doing anything.

[LSP972]

I am not being argumentative..

No worries, I didn't think you were.

The problem here is that anyone can call himself a "gunsmith". To my knowledge, S&W has NEVER offered armorer training to anyone but verified LE people and a few scattered non-LE folks who worked/work at authorized service centers. Besides, all their basic-level armorer schools do is teach how the parts fit together and interact, how to strap up a cylinder; basically, how to build one. Where you learn how to diagnose problems and fix them, plus tune-up tips, is at the advanced course (offered only at the factory, AFAIK), and by working on a bunch of them.

I'm not pointing a finger at anybody specific, but just sayin'...

.

[LSP972]

I find the consistency and fit , finish, and function to be greater with the MIM parts. .

That's what Herb Belin claimed, when the MIM parts first began wide-spread integration into their revolvers and pistols.

What they (S&W) DON'T tell you is the decision to use MIM was reached after a lot of soul-searching and number crunching. Their work force was approaching a sea change; most all of the long-time, highly experienced machinists, tool makers, and fitters were looking at retirement. S&W had the choice of hiring, training, and paying (at ruinous rates; while never a "union shop", the new breed of folks were demanding union pay scales) a lot of new employees. The move to MIM reduced the need for many of these folks (except fitters), so it made for a better bottom line.

I have been told that the main advantage of MIM parts is that they are through-hardened. The old forged, case-hardened parts you had to be damned careful with; break through that case hardening with file or stone, and the part was ruined. A part that is the same hardness all the way through would definitely make whittling on trigger/hammer steps a bit less daunting, for sure.

.

[UNK]

This is from Herbs letter I posted earlier.... However the job is not yet done and the MIM parts are brought to our heat treat facility for hardening and in the case of hammers and triggers, case hardening. Depending on the particular metal alloy that was used at the start of the process we apply a heat treat process that is the same as would be used if the material were the older wrought style. Final hardness, case thickness and core hardness are for the most part identical to parts manufactured the older way.

That's what Herb Belin claimed, when the MIM parts first began wide-spread integration into their revolvers and pistols.

What they (S&W) DON'T tell you is the decision to use MIM was reached after a lot of soul-searching and number crunching. Their work force was approaching a sea change; most all of the long-time, highly experienced machinists, tool makers, and fitters were looking at retirement. S&W had the choice of hiring, training, and paying (at ruinous rates; while never a "union shop", the new breed of folks were demanding union pay scales) a lot of new employees. The move to MIM reduced the need for many of these folks (except fitters), so it made for a better bottom line.

I have been told that the main advantage of MIM parts is that they are through-hardened. The old forged, case-hardened parts you had to be damned careful with; break through that case hardening with file or stone, and the part was ruined. A part that is the same hardness all the way through would definitely make whittling on trigger/hammer steps a bit less daunting, for sure.

.

[LSP972]

The way it was explained to me, the parts come out of the final heat-treat process as ready-to-use; IOW, very little, if any, final machining to bring the part into spec.

Again, that's hearsay. All I know for sure is, the MIM parts in my example of one work fine and have held up to moderate use. I did whack the spur off of the hammer early on, with absolutely no ill effects.

.

[UNK]

What are your choices for ammo?

The way it was explained to me, the parts come out of the final heat-treat process as ready-to-use; IOW, very little, if any, final machining to bring the part into spec.

Again, that's hearsay. All I know for sure is, the MIM parts in my example of one work fine and have held up to moderate use. I did whack the spur off of the hammer early on, with absolutely no ill effects.

.

[LSP972]

What are your choices for ammo?

Speer Gold Dot 135gr +P "short barrel", or Remington 158gr LSWCHP +P (Remington because their alloy has been classically softer, offering more chance for expansion), or Winchester/Federal's version of the "FBI load" (which is the Remington load just described).

Lacking those, good old 148gr lead wadcutters.

For a practice round, I load "bunny farts" with four grains of N320 under either a 110gr JHP or 135gr cast Bayou Bullet. Much easier on my old wrists...

.

[UNK]

Thanks again for all the info. You have cleared up a lot of misconceptions for me.

Speer Gold Dot 135gr +P "short barrel", or Remington 158gr LSWCHP +P (Remington because their alloy has been classically softer, offering more chance for expansion), or Winchester/Federal's version of the "FBI load" (which is the Remington load just described).

Lacking those, good old 148gr lead wadcutters.

For a practice round, I load "bunny farts" with four grains of N320 under either a 110gr JHP or 135gr cast Bayou Bullet. Much easier on my old wrists...

.

[LSP972]

Glad to be of help.

.