M&p Warranty Issues

[TxD]

The striker broke on my new M&P9 (200rds), so I called S&W customer service to get one sent to me. The nice lady said that S&W would not send out strikers on the M&P or Sigma.

The guns must be sent in for this repair under warranty.

I then asked if I could just buy a striker outright and she said they were a controlled item.

Doesnt look like we will be getting any parts from S&W to experiment with.

Also, another M&P shooter with over 5000 rds on his gun called customer service to confirm

proper removal procedure of the striker for cleaning. He was informed that if you remove the striker from your gun, you void the warranty.

As my college educated daughters would say "What's up with that".

Edited June 27, 2006 by TxD

[j2fast]

That sounds very Springfield Armory of them, since SA won't sell certain parts either......

Edited June 27, 2006 by j2fast

[Flexmoney]

It might be helpful to let them know you are a competition shooter and not some yahoo that only put a few boxes of ammo through their gun ?

[R/T Performance]

That sounds very Springfield Armory of them, since SA won't sell certain parts either......

Thats excactly what I was thinking

[Bigbadaboom]

That sounds very Springfield Armory of them, since SA won't sell certain parts either......

You got that right.

S&W will sell the strikers and sears. I don't know who you spoke with but we were informed by an upper level sales management person that as soon as they catch up with demand and can make excess parts they will be available. All the strikers and sears they can produce are going in guns and getting shipped out as fast as they can get them made. at this time they can only fix guns in house as they come in under warranty.

I've been pretty put out by S.A. and will never buy their products again over this monopolizing issue. I've made absolutely sure that I will be able to get replacement/extra parts for the M&P prior to purchase. If I couldn't I'ld by a CZ.

A friend of mine has 4 extra M&P sears and strikers right now. Sometimes it is who you know.

[R/T Performance]

That sounds very Springfield Armory of them, since SA won't sell certain parts either......

You got that right.

S&W will sell the strikers and sears. I don't know who you spoke with but we were informed by an upper level sales management person that as soon as they catch up with demand and can make excess parts they will be available. All the strikers and sears they can produce are going in guns and getting shipped out as fast as they can get them made. at this time they can only fix guns in house as they come in under warranty.

Thats what S.A. Said origanally

[raz-0]

You know, saying we don't have enough to sell because we are ramping up pisses people off a lot less than saying they are a controlled item.

Unless they are serialized, they aren't a controlled item, you are just telling customers to go scratch and refusing to sell them.

Removing the striker voiding the warranty? Yeah, real good attitude there.

The M&P honestly looks like that wanted it to be attractive for competitive shooting. Seems to me someone missed the boat after the design and initial advertising.

If it's a matter of who you know, someone should get the reasonable people at S&W together with someone on par with glockmeister or something. Because it seems any cold call to customer service is resulting in a general tone of we don't want your business. Which really wouldn't matter if i could just type in a URL or make a phone call and get what i want form someone else.

In this case, that would seem to be the only alternative is to get a whole new gun. Which would be bad for S&W, because people likely won't be buying spare M&Ps.

[Chris Keen]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again ....................

BUY A GLOCK!

[dirtypool40]

LMAO yeah, cuz they REALLY listen to what competition shooters want in a gun.

Glock shooters of the world...bring bandaids 'cuz we won't improve our product with a 1/4" beavertail. How 'bout them sights?

The Glock is basically a reliable design, built by an engineer, not a shooter. They have made damned few "shooter feedback" improvements, like decent factory sights and a little tang so it doesn't chew on your hand.

Hmmmm, Why?

Because gunrag tactical dogmatics have told the world that it is the only gun to have, and so Glock is selling them faster then they can produce them. Hence no motivation to improve the product.

Glock hit the market with a reliable design, just as we came out of the "dark ages" of autos and shade tree worked guns that would not run. They were right place right time, and got held up as the reliable messiah to the tacti-cool.

Sorry, what were we talking about?

[Chris Keen]

Glocks are what they are. Dont like 'em? Fine. But they run like a top, are easy to repair, easy to upgrade, and accurate enough for the best shooters to win consistantly. And if you look closely, you'll see that almost everybody good replaces the factory sights. What's another $50 for good sights? I got my Glock Annual yesterday, and every single page (even the advertising) has something to do with Glock, yet they show many pics of Glocks with aftermarket sights.

At least I can bring an extra striker to the match.

[TxD]

And if you look closely, you'll see that almost everybody good replaces the factory sights. What's another $50 for good sights? I got my Glock Annual yesterday, and every single page (even the advertising) has something to do with Glock, yet they show many pics of Glocks with aftermarket sights.

At least I can bring an extra striker to the match.

Looks like you pretty much confirmed DP's point.

Glock hasn't done much to integrate shooters inputs into their product.

If so, your Glock annual wouldn't be full of aftermarket products to replace those

excellent Glock OEM parts.

By the way, I like Glocks and if they didn't draw blood from the web of my hand, I would

shoot one in Production..

On topic:

I made the orginal post in hopes that people would contact S&W and voice an opinion.

I have received feedback that this is happening.

Edited June 27, 2006 by TxD

[Rob Boudrie]

Julie Goloski now works for S&W (wordo corrected), and no doubt has the ability to relay your concerns to the people who make the decisions on such matters.

[dirtypool40]

Looks like you pretty much confirmed DP's point.

Glock hasn't done much to integrate shooters inputs into their product.

If so, your Glock annual wouldn't be full of aftermarket products to replace those

excellent Glock OEM parts.

By the way, I like Glocks and if they didn't draw blood from the web of my hand, I would

shoot one in Production..

On topic:

I made the orginal post in hopes that people would contact S&W and voice an opinion.

I have received feedback that this is happening.

I know TxD, I read that and said, "ok so....... we actually agree?"

BTT

[EricW]

What you were told is exactly contrary to what I was told S&W's parts policy would be on the M&P: that the general public would be able to procure parts to service their pistols. Clearly, someone didn't get the memo...

[TxD]

What you were told is exactly contrary to what I was told S&W's parts policy would be on the M&P: that the general public would be able to procure parts to service their pistols. Clearly, someone didn't get the memo...

Eric,

If you have any suggestions, I'll gladly pursue them.

The reality is that I have a new M&P 9 with a broken striker.

I called the S&W customer service number and the lady said that I must send in the gun.

I am now waiting for a prepaid shipping label to do that and looking forward to several weeks without the gun.

I was told that I could not get a striker sent under warranty or purchase one outright.

If you find out who got the memo, I will contact them.

By the way. You gonna have grips for these?

[EricW]

By the way. You gonna have grips for these?

I'll put this the most diplomatic way I can: yes, provided these issues get resolved first.

[Behr]

I just had a Sigma (a duty weapon) with a broken striker and S&W would not sell me a striker and I'm a certified Sigma armorer. They told me I had to send the gun in because the tang on the striker comes in different sizes and they needed to install the right one to make sure the striker would release. Strikers are the only part I cannot buy from S&W.

Sounded a little odd to me but I had to wait for the shipping label and then send it in. FWIW, three weeks and still do not have the weapon back.

I wonder if the M&P will go the same route.

I do seem to recall (is memory the first or second thing to go, I forget) that Glock parts were a little hard to come by when they were first released and then they only sold them to their trained armorers.

[raz-0]

YAY! I get to deal with S&W customer service again.

because after about 1000 rounds of dryfire, my striker sheared off just behind the "head".

That makes three that I know of.

Not too pleased at all.

At least if they won't sell me a striker, I can get the slide release put on while it is in.

I'll make sure to get the names of anyone I'm dealing with for the record.

Edited June 28, 2006 by raz-0

[trickpony]

I sure hope someone from S&W is looking at these posts... I'd buy a new M&P in 9mm tomorrow but until they get their crap together the G34 is looking better all the time (I'm not a fan of Glocks either). I don't understand how tough it is to produce a quality striker that is able to pass quality control and fit the guns without some idiot at S&W filing it to fit... I could see a different striker for the 9mm and 40 S&W but for each gun??? S&W, get real!

[Precision40]

I'd love to get an M&P, but it looks like I'll wait a couple of years till they get the buggs worked out (At Y'alls expense of course) :-P

[ampleworks]

Three strikers in one thread and they actually believe that LE agencies would purchase this piece of *something*.

SA may not be willing to sell XD parts to people but if something breaks you can get a replacement without having to get an act of congress passed. The only thing in my XD that has busted was the roll pin but I had one the next day overnight from them.

The gun was looking really nice for a while and I liked the feel of it but until this crap is cleared up, my safe will be minus one M&P.

[TxD]

Three strikers in one thread and they actually believe that LE agencies would purchase this piece of *something*.

SA may not be willing to sell XD parts to people but if something breaks you can get a replacement without having to get an act of congress passed. The only thing in my XD that has busted was the roll pin but I had one the next day overnight from them.

The gun was looking really nice for a while and I liked the feel of it but until this crap is cleared up, my safe will be minus one M&P.

Ampleworks,

Thanks for your input.

After reading your post, I called customer service at Springfield.

I was told by the nice lady that strikers for the XD were on the

"do not ship list".

You can not buy one, they will not ship you one under warranty.

For striker replacement, the gun must be shipped to SA.

I guess both S&W and SA veiw strikers differently from roll pins

which you can buy at Home Depot for about a $1.00.

Just trying to keep the XD apples compared to M&P apples.

Edited June 28, 2006 by TxD

[Rob Boudrie]

Glock now requires their armorers to sign an agreement of "professional practices" at the conclusion of the course in order to obtain the certification. This agreement requires that armorers not sell or otherwise provide parts without installing them on a customer's gun.

The big difference would appear to be the amount of "leakage" in the process at the various companies, rather than a fundamental difference in policy.

[TxD]

Glock now requires their armorers to sign an agreement of "professional practices" at the conclusion of the course in order to obtain the certification. This agreement requires that armorers not sell or otherwise provide parts without installing them on a customer's gun.

The big difference would appear to be the amount of "leakage" in the process at the various companies, rather than a fundamental difference in policy.

Bob, I agree.

Bottom line is that liability, real or perceived, is the same for all these manufacturers.

Also if Glock had come out after AL Gore invented the Internet we would see much the same kinds of posts as today.

"9 posts in a single thread of the front sight flying off. What a POS."

"The bottom of the trigger guard is bruising my knuckle. What a POS."

"This gun will never work in competition. The mags won't free fall. What a POS."

"I keep hearing about cracked frames. Yep, my buddy had one. What a POS."

"What recall? Anybody hear about a recall? Yep, they gotta recall. What a POS."

"What LE agency would buy a POS like this with all these problems?"

"Yeah, what a POS."

[Middle Man]

Glock now requires their armorers to sign an agreement of "professional practices" at the conclusion of the course in order to obtain the certification. This agreement requires that armorers not sell or otherwise provide parts without installing them on a customer's gun.

The big difference would appear to be the amount of "leakage" in the process at the various companies, rather than a fundamental difference in policy.

This is somewhat out of the realm of this discussion however Rob's idea is spot on.

To wit, "leakage" is a huge problem in the firearms industry on several levels of the supply chain. This problem not only involves parts, but also complete guns. For what amounts to one of the most regulated manufacturing industries in exsistence many large gun companies struggle to control crossover (leakage) within their different distribution channels. This leads to much price erosion and that ultimately leads to profit erosion, which can be a killer. Not to mention the liability issues involved when a company doesn't have a clear accounting of how something ended up somewhere.

Recently, several gun makers that are very active in the LE business have gone to great lengths to clean up the leakage of LE (non excise taxed) guns into the commercial channel. Similarly, a large optics company has made great efforts to keep certain high end product lines from being low ball priced in big box stores and on the internet. Conversly, some companies choose to ignore the problem and wonder why no one makes money selling their product.