10
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Junky firearm maker Smith and Wesson buys my beloved savage
Posted on 10/21/26 at 10:38 am
Posted on 10/21/26 at 10:38 am
Posted on 10/21/26 at 10:56 am to RobertFootball
You know, a lot of these deals just involve paper and zero metal and/or people?
Posted on 10/21/26 at 11:02 am to AlxTgr
Nobody really knows the complete details of this yet but would you want S&w anywhere near your company? I wouldn’t. They’ve never been able to make decent hunting rifles and that’s why they bought Savage.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 11:06 am to RobertFootball
Think there were some that said similar when Ruger bought Marlin. They were wrong too.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 11:10 am to RobertFootball
quote:No idea.
but would you want S&w anywhere near your company?
quote:Which means they now have a decent hunting rifle
They’ve never been able to make decent hunting rifles and that’s why they bought Savage.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 11:10 am to Clames
Actually most were in favor of that merger because of Rugers quality and customer service. That’s played out to be true. Smith & Wesson hasn’t been know for quality in many years, every gun they make is second or third fiddle to something else. We also remember how they bumblefvcked TC. Hunters aren’t out here clamoring for a S&W bolt action rifle I promise.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 12:22 pm to RobertFootball
quote:
The combined company will immediately rank as the largest commercial firearms manufacturer in the United States
How is this not bordering on becoming a monopoly? These huge corporations have figured out a loophole to being considered a monopoly.
quote:
• Sherman Antitrust Act (1890): The nation's first federal law making it illegal to form trusts, conspire to restrain trade, or monopolize industries.
• Clayton Antitrust Act (1914): Expanded the Sherman Act by explicitly banning anticompetitive mergers, price discrimination, and interlocking directorates
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:48 pm to RobertFootball
I didn't know S&W were considered junk now.
How long has this been a thing? I love mine, but it is over 10 years old. 1911
How long has this been a thing? I love mine, but it is over 10 years old. 1911
Posted on 10/21/26 at 2:02 pm to RobertFootball
quote:
Actually most were in favor of that merger because of Rugers quality and customer service
I know most were, but some certainly weren't.
quote:
Smith & Wesson hasn’t been know for quality in many years, every gun they make is second or third fiddle to something else.
The M&P series have been pretty damned solid, the issues are found in their "traditional" product lines (which Colt, Ruger, and several others have had issues with too). I think that's a big reason why Ruger is putting those products on hiatus while they homogenize manufacturing with updated tools. You look at a Korth revolver, you don't see a forging that is later machined in various cells/manual machines with a different person along the way, you see something precision CNC milled from a solid billet in as few machines as possible. Kind of like Rolex, CNC everything where a CNC does it better than a human, humans where they still do it better than a computer (final hand fitting/assembly/QC). Much like what happened with Marlin when Remington acquired them, lots of old machines that could produce quality products when the operator had many years of experience both in what they were making but in the quirks of the machine itself. When that operator retired, a new guy had a steep learning curve, probably well beyond their capacity, while also having to produce quality parts.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 2:24 pm to Sparty3131
The current revolvers are garbage. Their polymer guns are ok but they’ll always take a back seat to a Glock and HK any day. Their lever guns are ugly as hot sin.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 2:32 pm to RobertFootball
quote:
Their polymer guns are ok but they’ll always take a back seat to a Glock
At this point I'd rather a S&W pistol than Glock. The reliability gap has all but closed. You get a better trigger, better ergonomics, and better features at a lower price point with S&W.
Glock has the clear advantage in aftermarket upgrades. But you have to spend on upgrades just to get what comes in the box with S&W.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 3:44 pm to bradygolf98
If they were truly cheaper and better than Glock they’d have all the police contracts. It took Smith many years to finally get the M&p 2.0 right and it’s still not enough for an overwhelming majority of police to choose. Like I said, they’re good at playing second fiddle.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 4:35 pm to AlxTgr
quote:
You know, a lot of these deals just involve paper and zero metal and/or people?
And then again
In the bestselling book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen R. Covey tells a specific story about customer loyalty:
• The Story: A highly successful restaurant was packed every day at lunchtime specifically for its fantastic clam chowder.
• The Change: The restaurant was sold to a new owner who focused strictly on short-term profits. To cut costs, he decided to water down the chowder.
• The Outcome: For the first month, his costs went down while revenues stayed the same, making profits zoom. However, customers quickly noticed the dip in quality, lost trust, and entirely stopped coming. The business dwindled to nothing because the owner "killed the goose that laid the golden eggs"
Posted on 10/21/26 at 6:22 pm to RobertFootball
I have several Smith and Wesson revolvers. They have all been solid shooters. I can’t see any real quality difference between the smiths and my rugers. Both shoot well.
Mine are older guns, did something change?
Mine are older guns, did something change?
This post was edited on 10/21/26 at 6:24 pm
Posted on 10/21/26 at 8:43 pm to RobertFootball
their stock is up 50% this year they must be doing something right
Posted on 10/21/26 at 8:52 pm to RobertFootball
Crazy that Smith sold to safe-T hammer in 2001 for $12 million.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 9:09 pm to Clames
quote:
Think there were some that said similar when Ruger bought Marlin. They were wrong too.
I bought an 1895 when it first came out from Ruger. The firing pins fell out of the back of the gun the first time I brought it to the range. Was missing the retaining pin in the bolt.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 10:20 pm to bradygolf98
quote:
At this point I'd rather a S&W pistol than Glock. The reliability gap has all but closed. You get a better trigger, better ergonomics, and better features at a lower price point with S&W.
And I'd rather have a canik or two SAR9.
And the reliability gap is still a gap. It's why I love a 1911, but I only carry guns that have never had a single hickup.
If they do, they aren't worth trusting my life to.
Posted on 10/22/26 at 4:11 am to Shexter
quote:
How is this not bordering on becoming a monopoly?
The gun and ammo market is like 20 billion yearly. 160 million in merger cost is less than a percent of the market.
This post was edited on 10/22/26 at 2:47 pm
Posted on 10/22/26 at 7:18 am to RobertFootball
Yup, and Beretta controls Ruger now. It's sad.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News