Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40

Thread: Smith & Wesson Announces Recall on the M&P Shield EZ

  1. #21
    This is what you get when you outsource critical parts. You don’t control the process start to finish. Plus it’s easier to blame the supplier.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  2. #22
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Seminole Texas
    Wonder who the supplier is.

    Definitely not a typical hammer

    https://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/mgwi/prod/3005514
    Last edited by fixer; 11-25-2020 at 07:44 AM.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by RevolverRob View Post
    Meanwhile SIG continues to deny P320 problems...after dozens of examples have had 'unintentional discharges'.
    At least it seems none of the P320’s in these “dozens of examples” have gone full-auto...

    Quote Originally Posted by tadawson View Post
    I would argue that this has almost nothing to do with the process (as you noted, anything can go sideways) and everyhing to do with QC. Why wasn't his noticed *quickly* before anything got out?

    Probably because two bad parts in a batch of thousands is hard to catch in batch testing and standard inspection procedures. Unless they do NDT on every single part, it’s certainly possible to miss something like this, even if they did everything in house. One might argue that a broken hammer should not allow for this type of specific failure, which is as much an issue of design as anything else.

    Even a 320 with a broken striker foot won’t do that.
    Last edited by Archer1440; 11-25-2020 at 08:34 AM.

  4. #24
    I Demand Pie Lex Luthier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Northern Tier
    Quote Originally Posted by Archer1440 View Post
    At least it seems none of the P320’s in these “dozens of examples” have gone full-auto...




    Probably because two bad parts in a batch of thousands is hard to catch in batch testing and standard inspection procedures. Unless they do NDT on every single part, it’s certainly possible to miss something like this, even if they did everything in house. One might argue that a broken hammer should not allow for this type of specific failure, which is as much an issue of design as anything else.

    Even a 320 with a broken striker foot won’t do that.
    I am guessing that a design change will be in the offing if it's any sort of pattern to the failures. I like these pistols so far, and with a little further vetting, would not be averse to carrying one.
    "If I ever needed to hunt in a tuxedo, then this would be the rifle I'd take." - okie john

    "Not being able to govern events, I govern myself." - Michel De Montaigne

  5. #25
    Site Supporter farscott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Dunedin, FL, USA
    The multiple rounds being fired suggests that a grip safety is not as useful as a firing pin block that is activated by the trigger. A positive firing pin block controlled by the trigger should not allow a broken hammer to fire the weapon as the firing pin's travel is blocked until the trigger releases the safety. The grip safety may serve as a good drop safety but is not proof against part breakage. This is consistent with the experience of the Swartz firing pin safety that uses the 1911 grip safety.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Toonces View Post
    Do you dislike every manufacturing process because they are not 100% perfect, or just MIM?
    I began to dislike MIM, when the firing pin positioning pin broke in half and fell out of my P229.

  7. #27
    Deadeye Dick Clusterfrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Wokelandia
    I distrust weird guns like this one. It’s just not that easy to design a reliable and safe gun.
    "You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
    Shabbat shalom, motherf***ers! --Mordechai Jefferson Carver

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Clusterfrack View Post
    I distrust weird guns like this one. It’s just not that easy to design a reliable and safe gun.
    It sounds more like a QC/component supplier problem than a design defect. EZ's have been around for a couple of years now. I chalk the current issue up to the gun panic's massive demand leading to manufacturers being too hasty to get things out the door. It happened in 2008 and after Sandy Hook, I remember.

  9. #29
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Central Wisconsin
    Quote Originally Posted by tadawson View Post
    I would argue that this has almost nothing to do with the process (as you noted, anything can go sideways) and everything to do with QC.
    The majority of S&W customers do not want to pay for the QC that would consistently catch 2 bad pieces out of a shipment of 5,000. Some PF members might, but when it's time to vote with cash, even many PF members are tightwads. It's one of the reasons why guns like an 870 Wingmaster are no longer common. It's why the 870 Express is getting clobbered - A similar gun from a foreign manufacture with less QC is 30 bucks less at WalMart and selling like hotcakes.

    Quote Originally Posted by tadawson View Post
    Why wasn't his noticed *quickly* before anything got out?
    Quote Originally Posted by HTM View Post
    This is what you get when you outsource critical parts. You don’t control the process start to finish. Plus it’s easier to blame the supplier.
    How much manufacturing experience do you guys have? This is like when people say "Cops should shoot the gun out of the bad guys' hand", without understanding much about being a cop. I love vertical integration in manufacturing, but it's unlikely that S&W is going to become a better SME on MIM than a MIM manufacturer. So outsourcing makes sense on a process that S&W doesn't have 150 years worth of established knowledge base. If S&W made that part in house, it could (probably would) be worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by fixer View Post
    Wonder who the supplier is.

    Definitely not a typical hammer

    https://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/mgwi/prod/3005514
    It's hard to believe that something as important as the hammer can be sold by a third-party vendor for $10.49. How many companies have made profit on that part, and it's still 10 bucks? Unless MIM has advanced a long ways in the 10 years since I dealt with people in that industry, that is a horrible geometry to make in MIM. I suppose those ejector pin intentions visible on the side view could be from the die that makes the wax patterns for investment casting, but at that price I doubt it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Archer1440 View Post
    Probably because two bad parts in a batch of thousands is hard to catch in batch testing and standard inspection procedures. Unless they do NDT on every single part, it’s certainly possible to miss something like this, even if they did everything in house. One might argue that a broken hammer should not allow for this type of specific failure, which is as much an issue of design as anything else.
    Even if they did 100% NDT, based on a LOT of experience with customer returns of 100% inspected parts (or 200% or 300% inspection - 100% inspection multiple times), unless it's robotic/automated, it's still only about 90% effective. That's why when customers care, they specify and pay for automated/robotic inspection on critical parts.

    Quote Originally Posted by DonGlock26 View Post
    I began to dislike MIM, when the firing pin positioning pin broke in half and fell out of my P229.
    Are you sure that's MIM? The pics at the link show tooling marks from a lathe, and that geometry lends itself to a bar fed lathe or screw machine. It could have been made from bar, but overhardened enough to become brittle. If you still have the broken parts, send them to me and I'll section them and post pictures of the microstructure(I'm a Metallurgical Engineer).
    https://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/mgwi/prod/pin-6

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Surprise Az.
    I checked my serial number and mine is good to go. I really enjoy my EZ 9. Everything they advertise about it is true. I've lost a lot of upper body strength and couldn't rack the slide on my older automatics. With the EZ-9 I have no problems.

    I'm surprised at how light the recoil is on this gun. The magazines are a pleasure to load.

    One of their suppliers had a QC problem but that's not to say the gun is bad. I've spent a lot of money on guns in the past that broke do to poor quality control.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •