In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
SIGMA SERIES S&W
Rosie
Member Posts: 14,525 ✭✭✭
Am I correct in thinking that series didn't go over very well? If so, why? It seem like they sell for a pretty low price.
Comments
People who knew nothing at all about S&W but had been looking at Glocks bought the SIGMA and never looked back while guys (and gals) who had previous experience with S&W automatics did not care for the SIGMA at all. S&W was banking on capturing a large portion of buyers away from Glock through their brand loyalty, but it did not seem to have worked out that way and S&W guys were turned off by the SIGMA.
There is nothing wrong with the SIGMA, with the exception of the poor triggers. The first examples had triggers that we about as bad as any that I had ever experinced, and there are not many guns on this planet that I have not fired. The later triggers were better but still not as good as they should have been.
This is not saying that the SIGMA is not a good pistol, as it is, other than the trigger. It is every bit as much reliable as the Glock, and once the trigger is mastered, can provide servicable accuracy. However, S&W's current line of M&P's are barn burner's. They offer a lot of things that the SIGMA did not, but still, as of yet, have not offered a DA/SA.
Best
The aftermarket issue is an item I've never understood though, especially from S&W. You can buy extra Glock mags at pretty reasonable prices, including factory mags. S&W wants way too much for extra mags and aftermarkets just aren't out there.
BTW, I had one of the original "F" series guns. While the trigger was tough to get used to, I liked the longer barrel on it. It was an accurate weapon.
Am I correct in thinking that series didn't go over very well? If so, why? It seem like they sell for a pretty low price.
Cart. . . horse. They're inexpensive partly because they've never been popular.
The gun is basically a Glock clone. Its not identical to a Glock (ie parts won't swap between them), but its similar enough that Glock sued Smith for patent infringement when these came out and WON.
I'd say the biggest reason these have never been popular is that the stock trigger pull is just absolutely lousy. We're talking heavy (8+lb) and gritty. I've shot guns with worse triggers, but never a modern production auto from a "name" maker like Smith and Wesson!
Note that the heavy trigger pull was a DELIBERATE design choice by Smith to make these guns with no external safety, safer to carry. Lots of police agencies mandate similar-in-concept "NY-type" extra heavy weight triggers in their issue Glocks for the same reason.
There were also some issues in reliability with earlier versions, since corrected by Smith.
Other than those two issues, I don't think there is anything wrong with these guns.
Some of the grittiness of the trigger pull will improve with oridnary use, or simple repeat dry-firing. Also, the trigger pull can be considerably improved by someone who knows what they are doing (IIRC, you can swap out one of the springs for an aftermarket Glock one, and that helps a lot, plus of course, the usual polishing of trigger group contact surfaces). The design isn't conducive to a crisp "match" trigger, but apparently you can get it down to a pretty good 4-5 lb pull without all that much work. (Whether or not you "should" being a different question!).
Bottom line is, that its a "good enough" design, but one that came out of the box with a few flaws that ran into Glock's marketing juggernaut.
There are better guns out there, but I'd definitely rather have one of these with a name brand and good materials than one of the third-tier "junk" guns made with zinc-alloy parts that are in a similar, or slightly cheaper price range.