Hello everyone,

I purchased a new Smith and Wesson Model 29 classic a couple of months ago. I took it to the range this weekend to sight it in, and I noticed that the barrel is canted to the left a bit. That is, looking down the sights, the barrel leans to the left a bit, the ridge on top of the barrel and the front sight lean to the left.

I called Smith and Wesson customer service today and explained that the barrel leaned to the left, in order to send it back for a warranty repair.

The customer service rep told me "that is how they adjust them, it is supposed to be that way. They adjust them that way on purpose to adjust the point of impact."

What!? I am mostly a semi-auto guy, but this sounds wrong to me. I find it odd that a revolver may come out of production with a barrel canted to the left, on purpose. I was rather surprised at the response that it was supposed to be this way, so I am doing more research to determine if it is the truth, or if I need to call SW and get them to make good on this product.

Is this canted barrel normal and acceptable? Any suggestions?

I appreciate everyone's input on this, if they have a revolver with a canted barrel, is is supposed to be that way, etc.

Thank you,

I'm not a gunsmith but something sounds very wrong with the answer you were given by S&W. If they properly fitted the barrel to the frame it should line up straight.

Why would they put adjustable sights on the revolver if this were true? Sounds like BS IMO, but wait for the experts to chime in. Just did a quick check on a 586 and a 657 and no cant at all. Don't remember any of my revolvers having a canted barrel, but all are older models.

__________________
V/R
Roger / SG

I had a M-48 back in the 80's with a canted Bbl. It shot good so I didnt let it bother me. other than that gun, all my other Smiths the bbl's are aligned properly.

Yes, “canting” a barrel will cause shots to go in that direction. A good number of my revolvers (various brands) have barrels that don’t appear to be perfectly plumb to the frame, but they‘re on target with the rear sight close to center. The majority are canted left (viewed from the rear). If the rear sight had to be cranked all the way to regulate POI or if there wasn’t enough travel, I’d worry about it.

__________________
"I also cook."

I had a similar experience with my 681, I've had it for a while and never really noticed the barrel is canted to the right.
I called SDM Fabricating in Medina Oh. figuring hes a super pistol smith and he could fix it.
He explained to me the same thing Smith told you.
I never new that was how they did it!

Wow, this is all very interesting as I have never noticed anything like that on any S&W (or any other brand for that matter) that I hve owned over the years. The explanations provided above make sense but it would drive me crazy if I owned a weapon like this especially if it was "noticeable". I'm going to have to take a closer look at all my revolvers now!

With fixed sight revolvers there were two common ways to correct windage errors.

The quick way : bend the front sight blade - especially on the thin front sights like on single actions)

The harder way : turn the barrel slightly : harder to do but at least the sight was perpendicular to the barrel.

__________________
Sceva
OGCA SWCA NRA

None of my "older" S&Ws has a "canted" barrel.
Both a 681-0 I traded for and a new 21-4 were significantly canted to the left.
I paid S&W to fix the 681 and the 21-4 was fixed on their dime (it had several other significant problems that required a new barrel be fitted)

__________________
-jwk-
US Army '72-'95

There are basically two methods to zero the sighting on a revolver that uses a notch rear sight. Note, when I say "zero" it is with the assumption that the rear sight is perfectly centered on an adjustable rear sight.

Method one is to mount the barrel with that front sight perfectly straight up. After getting the barrel perfectly aligned the gun is then placed into a frame vise and the frame is bent slightly by smacking the barrel with a lead hammer. On a gun with a swingout cylinder the frame is weak enough around the barrel mounting point that it will give a bit and bend. On a gun like the SAA that has a fixed cylinder the result of doing this is likely to be a bent barrel.

Now, I may be wrong about this, but I believe that the second method was orignally developed to "get around" the issues with that robust barrel attachment point on the Single Action Army. The second method is to "clock" the front sight by tipping it the correct amount to get the windage correct.

Frankly, I rather prefer the concept of the second method. It may not be quite as pretty if you look really close but smacking the barrel with a lead hammer in order to bend the frame seems rather extreme to me.

BTW, I don't believe that S&W hand tests each individual gun to center the sights. It's likely that they have a chart that tells them how much to clock the barrel for a particular model and if it's close in the test firing it gets boxed up. With adjustable sights, close is plenty good enough to allow the owner to tune the sighting till it's perfect.

My 681 came back with a test target fired by "Vito" and a note that the barrel was adjusted to "within specification".

Shoots to POA now, so I'm satisfied.

__________________
-jwk-
US Army '72-'95

This is all new information and very interesting.

It sounds like this could be a fix that needs to be done, or it could be just fine the way it is. It sounds like a number of folks have revolvers that are canted, and shoot just fine.

Scooter, thank you for your long response. Very informative.

Asthetically I would prefer a barrel that is exactly straight. However, it sounds like a number of revolvers out that have a canted barrel and that is not a problem so long as the revolver shoots to point of aim. And I would hate to ship it to them, and have them somehow mess it up.

Anyone have more info on how barrels are canted at the factory to adjust for windage, if it is normal?

Suggestions on what to do next...

A Leave it as is, and adjust sights for windage to shoot to point of aim, and accept that a canted barrel is okay.
B Send it back and hope they can fix it (if it is indeed broken).

And more info or ideas?

I appreicate everyone's input.

Best Regards

I would advise you to spend a bit of time shooting it from a benchrest to see if the sights will zero properly.

BTW, in benchrest shooting it's best to rest your hands on a sandbag, this will allow you to nearly duplicate your recoil management when shooting offhand. In addition, any revolver with a one piece barrel should always be shot with the barrel free of any contact with a support, supporting the barrel will impede it's "ring" and just destroy group size. The only exception to this rule are the 22 caliber revolvers, the barrel is so massive in relation to the power of the caliber that it's basically inert.

If you can get the sights to zero properly, there isn't any point in sending it in, S&W will only say it's within specification and send it back to you. As for the appearance, it's a HANDGUN, not some work of Art. It's meant to fire bullets accuratey, not become some object that you spend all your time looking at.

Yeah, I find this quest for perfection a bit baffling at times. However, I suspect that somewhere out there someone is underneath their automobile waxing the exhaust system because they ran through a puddle and if they found the muffler cocked by 1/2 a degree they'd probably want to return the whole car. Bottomline, if it bother you that much, don't look at it, just go out and shoot the gun.

That is only one in a series of inspections I perform on any revolver I am looking at for a possible purchase. Over the years, I have passed on many beautiful revolvers just for this reason alone. Older Colt Detective Specials, Agent, etc were terrible for this issue.

I preferred the old S&W "pinned" barrels. Generally speaking, they were pretty much always aligned correctly with the frame and the front sight was indexed straight up and down.

This problem was also very common with the old single actions of days gone by but.............Sorry, just something I couldn't put up with.

I have been shooting for a long time. I have owned many S&W and Colt revolvers. I have never owned one that had a canted barrel. Maybe I have just been lucky but I would consider it abnormal. I would not buy a revolver if the barrel was noticeably canted. That's just me. -Gene

Canted barrels from the factory have always been present. Less years ago, then more prevalent in the 70's and later. I used to see them frequently. In every case, the rear sight had to be adjusted quite a bit to one side or the other to compensate. Usually, the barrel wasn't turned up enough, but occasionally it would be turned too far. I corrected many of them, and preferred the ones that needed to be turned up more, for several reasons. Once corrected, the rear sight could always be used near the center of the adjustment range.

To me, a canted front sight was (and is) unacceptable. It is not a matter of "looks" or "appearance." A canted front sight has a negative effect on sight alignment and sight picture. The front sight needs to be vertical in order to have a parallel strip of light on either side of the front sight when looking through the rear. If you don't have that, precision is difficult. The top of the front sight won't be level either, and that is also a problem.

IMHO, the factory is giving the OP a snow job because they don't want to take the time and expense to do it right.

Thank you for stating exactly what I was thinking. Canting a barrel seems to be a cheap shortcut to fixing poor machining. How would you fix an older pinned and recessed revolver if the rear sight runs out of travel? You would need to fit a different barrel and retest. This is the correct way to do it.

This and many other reasons is why I won't buy a new S&W and have sold all but one of my modern Smiths.

__________________
"I'm just a dog chasing cars."

It sounds like what the Chinese do with their AK's. I have bought several American rifles where the installed scope was canted. You can get it to shoot dead on at a particular range, but inside or beyond that specific distance it's off to where ever. It may not seem like a big deal at handgun distances, but accuracy is accuracy. BTW, I have gotten some great deals on guns where all I had to do is level the crosshairs. The owners had no idea why their gun would not shoot straight outside the zero range.

If you carefully fire the gun from a sandbag rest and have to adjust the rear sight off to one side to get it to zero then S&W did NOT adjust the barrel to zero the gun. Maybe have other people fire it too just to confirm the misalignment. The gun was designed to have the barrel rib centered on the frame and the front sight vertical. Minor adjustment is done with the rear sight when the front sight is vertical.
A canted front sight, especially on a revolver with a tall front sight like a model 29, just screams poor attention to critical details at assembly. Some might say it's on the same level as having wrinkles in your duct tape but personally I would correct or sell such a gun.

I feel S&W should step-up and fix their error. A model 29 is an expensive gun designed to be used for game hunting, silhouette shooting, target shooting and self defense. Such a gun requires sights that one can align with precision to present the correct sight picture. There is no way to get a correct sight picture when the front sight is leaning to one side. I'd expect something like this from a Llama Comanche or one of the latest Rossi's to slide out of Brazil, but it is a shame on an expensive S&W.

Thanks everyone,

The point about the front sight blade needing to be straight up is a big one. In my revolver, you can see it is canted to the left, and it not straight up. So even if you adjust for the windage with the rear sight, the front sight is still slanted.

I will be contacting S&W via their on-line warranty form to send this back and have them either fix the barrel or replace the revolver, whatever it takes.

For the price paid for a brand new revolver, it needs to be manufactured correctly and with a high degree of quality and workmanship.

If anyone has any suggestions on dealing with S&W warranty program, that would be welcomed.

-Best Regards

I don't have any experience, other than I e-mailed them about my gun and they sent a response saying they'd cover the shipping cost. Most other companies need their arm twisted to do this, if they do it at all *cough* Sig *cough*

My 686 plus is 3 months old i just noticed this yesterday,not sure if this is what you mean(see pic)

Attached Images

IMG00205-20110605-1921.jpg (24.4 KB, 1123 views)

I'm no expert, but I do own 7 S&W revolvers, none have canted sights.
I just wouldn't be happy with crooked sights no matter how good the
gun shot.

__________________
NRA Life Member/Vietnam Vet

I recently purchased a used model 629-4 with the power port, and after I shot it, I noticed that the front sight was canted to the left.

The gun had the ramp front sight installed instead of the patridge sight that was originally on the gun. I think if it had the patridge sight I would have noticed it at the time of purchase. It's possible that the original owner replaced the front sight to minimize the appearance of the canted front sight.

I called S&W and was told there is an acceptable tolerance in degrees of how much they will allow the barrel to be canted. The gun performs flawlessly, however, the front sight leaning to the left is very annoying.

My intention is to take it to a local gunsmith who specializes in S&W revolvers and see if he can fix it, and if not, I intend to send it to the factory and ask them to correct the problem. Whether they will do it under warranty is another issue.

I've always had great performance from S&W products and good customer service, however, occasionally these little glitches occur.

Back in 2003 I bought a model 29 Mountain gun, and it's barrel was canted to the left. It was bad enough that to sight in at 50 yards, I had to adjust the rear sight all the way to the right. When I called Smith & Wesson and told them, the customer service rep told me handguns weren't designed to shoot that far and my expectations were unrealistic.

I probably could have handled it better, but a few bad words came out and I asked to speak with a supervisor. The supervisor agreed and shipped the gun back. It was returned with a perfectly centered front sight, and it shoots better than any other gun I own now.

The squeaky wheel....

Ok..I need to send my gun back,the fact the barrel is not square with the frame just reall bothers me,thats all i see now when i look at it(see previous post for pic)

Please bear with me. This is a subject which seems to come up far too frequently in the short time I have been following this forum. I know some of you think it is much ado about nothing, but I strongly disagree.

I get worked up each time I hear one of these crooked barrel tails. It's not a "canted" barrel, or a laterally challenged barrel, or a displaced point of impact seeking barrel, or a barrel in search of hope and change. It's a crooked S&W barrel. For shame. I hope most of the rest of you are unhappy with them, also.

Front Sight 357, the way you should deal with S&W vis a vis the warranty program is fairly and firmly, as you are doing. You paid a relatively high price for a good looking, well engineered, and correctly manufactured revolver. You apparently received one with visible and unacceptable manufacturing flaws. No, it's not "just another silly gun". I am put off by some of the well meaning proxy apologies in this thread, to the effect that a crooked barrel is O.K., if the bullets go approximately where the visibly crooked barrel points, and that there are all sorts of technical reasons why this sometimes happens in the normal and acceptable course of manufacturing, and in certain instances it is "supposed to be that way". Hog wash.

You are doing exactly what you should, sending the gun back. And if necessary, keep sending it back until they get it right, as you define it. That is the only way S&W management will conclude that it is more cost effective to do it right the first time.

We need to be sympathetic and diplomatic in dealing with the S&W warranty people. They do a good job of sorting it out, in my experience. We might get ulcers going to work every day, knowing that our job was cleaning up after assemblers who don't always do theirs.

Yes, I know, nobody's perfect and everybody makes honest mistakes, and the clock is always running. That's what an inspection staff is for.

And the inspectors DO know what "right" is, and how to use gauges and jigs. Require them to do that, not explain why a crooked barrel is good for you.

Please, the rest of you guys. Stop making excuses for quality control failures. No group knows handgun quality better than that work force. Require them to deliver it, when standards start to slip, or lose money on the transaction. My threshold of patience is low, because I've had my share of new Smiths that were not right. And I have been spoiled by dozens of new and old Smiths that are really, really, really right. That's why we are here on this forum of admirers of something special. Some of the flawed ones I've sent back, some I've fixed myself, and some I angrily ignore, if it's minor.

Maybe the old days are gone, and maybe we will not see pre-war S&W quality again, but somebody has to draw a few lines someplace, or that trademark we all love will come to mean little, except stamped on classic collectibles. We can each make a worthwhile mini-contribution by helping to keep Smith straight, when your luck of the draw gets you a less than stellar Smith.

According to some of the implied thinking I've read in this thread, all S&W needs to do is steadily rewrite their specifications so that previously unacceptable product flaws are redefined as being "within specifications", new ones arbitrarily written to fit declining standards of management's own making. What a sad state of affairs; sounds sort of like what somebody is trying to do with our Constitution, doesn't it?

I recently bought a new 649 with a .009" cylinder gap. Specification used to be around .004". Now it's .010", I am told. Performance sacrificing defect? Why no, it's "within specifications"...just new ones. Don't worry, just be happy.

Please, people. Don't let these things pass. Don't wonder what to do. I understand that some of you younger fellows have grown up in this Age of Mediocrity and passivity. You don't always feel the contrast so accutely. But try to help keep S&W an exception, an icon. Forget the whales. Save S&W. Insisting that a new faulty gun be fixed is not being picky or cranky. Call it tough love. If somebody at S&W is not willing to stay on top of quality control, they need encouragement. From you. Over and over and over, until something changes or people are replaced.

I want S&W, the real one, to survive for many more decades, building the best handguns in the world, with or without lawyer locks. The company has been through some difficult times, and was saved in recent years by guys who really put their reputations and resources on the line. Being an overly passive customer is not the way to help keep this business on track.

To see how well silence and passivity works, have a look at "your" government in Washington...trying to rewrite our national spec sheet, that pesky old Constitution, as long as nobody stops them.

And lets not forget, keep buying more S&Ws, so you can continuously monitor their quality control program. I try to do my fair share.

I would demand it and good idea. After I made my first post to your thread I finally got around to checking my barrels out. None were canted. I have zero safe queens except for a prisine Browning HP and all of my S&W's are right on in the accuracy department.

Best of luck and do believe S&W will do you right.

__________________
V/R
Roger / SG

Very well said!
I got the the shipping label to this morning,i will package it up tonight,i am going to include a the photo i posted(on high def printer paper)..also they ask me to write down the problem with the gun..any idea's on how i should word this to them?
Thanks.

I like the KISS principle. "Barrel is not in PROPER alignment with the frame and is canted to the left when it should be properly aligned. This does not allow for precise adjustments to the adjustable sights. The accuracy suffers from the improper torque applied when the barrel was attached to the frame during assembly at the factory. Your help in this rectifying this discrepency would be appreciated". JM 2 cents.

Best of luck!

__________________
V/R
Roger / SG

Gun was shipped out early evening yesterday,i included the "kiss" style note with picture inserted so they should be very clear of my concern
"sportsterguy"very well said,i used it word for word"
Thanks everybody! I will post the outcome as soon as i know!
Sorry if i high jacked this thread.

While shopping for a new $800+ (out the door price) 4" 629, I was looking at one of the latest models, the gun had absolutely the very nicest SA trigger I've ever squeezed, but there was a huge gap between the bottom lug and frame, I passed on the gun and decided I have to be able to handle the gun before purchase...I was considering ordering online to save up to $100.00, I figured what the heck it's a Smith they'll all be perfect and if not the factory will take care of it on their dime.

A "canted barrel" or a huge gap, you have to be kidding me, this might be acceptable to some but I'll pass Thank you, and S&W quality just slipped a notch in my opinion.

I'm not an expert or gunsmith, I just want what I paid for and I expect quality and pride of workmanship from Smith and Wesson, otherwise I'd just pick up a Taurus, it makes me wonder what else they over looked in quality control.

I was expecting more out of the new plant in Maine with the new equipment.

I currently own a newer M&P9c and a 442, I have no complaints both are very nice guns, in the past 50 years I've owned a few other Smiths, all were exceptionally nice firearms, this is my expectation of S&W.

Make all the excuses you want, I expect better and would be really upset if the factory doesn't bend over backwards to make it right.

A crooked front site is acceptable? What are you guy's drinking?

I've owned several handguns, mostly Smiths, and none of them, including the fixed sighted, had canted barrels. Curious to me that their employee would have said that to you originally. That simply CANNOT be their standard policy. Glad you're now happy with it.

IIRC, the proper term is "clocked".

I've had several example dating back to the late 80's. In each case I sent them back through the gunshop where I bought them.

I've had good and bad experiences but in each case I just said it's clocked, I don't like it, please make it right - I paid too much to accept anything other than a straight barrel.

Now they are all fixed and life is good.

Stick to your guns, S&W will take care of you.

If you shoot lead, ask Vito to run the 11 degree forcing cone die for you, it will shoot lead better, or so it is said.

I got to thinking about this post. I have seen a few with canted barrels but they were all 6inch and 8 3/8 barrels. I have never seen a short barrel canted. Not saying it don't happen, just never seen one.

Good for you. Please let us know if S&W fixed this Discrepency on your revolver. I'd hound them till they made it right.

__________________
V/R
Roger / SG

In a previous reply to this thread, I mentioned that I purchased a 629-4 with a 6 1/2 inch barrel with the power port. After shooting it, I noticed that the front sight was leaning to the left as a result of the barrel being turned in too far.

I decided to call Smith & Wesson customer service, and they recommended that I send the gun in for repair.

From the time I sent it to Smith & Wesson, until the time I received it back repaired, was a total of 9 days. They repaired the gun under warrenty. They told me that Smith & Wessons made from 1989 on, have a lifetime warrenty.

I was very impressed with the short amount of time it took for the repair which included the mailing time. A total of 9 days.

a barrel should never be anything but true straight...you got took!

I noticed that the barrel was canted slightly on a new 442 about 2 years ago. The gun would not shoot to POA. I called the factory. S&W said to send it in. They straightened it out. Shoots to POA now.

I've never had a S&W with a canted bbl. That wouldn't wash with me. I'd send that gun back. What in the hell does the person you spoke with think the adjustable sights are for??? This is probably OK for a troubled fixed sight gun, but not for one with adjustables. Stuff like this is exactly why I don't buy current production stuff. I've seen too much bad quality slip by their QC to be just a slip-up. They've lowered their standards. I'll stay with the older stuff.

Would the clocked barrel not also affect the lockup of the crane? One of the points of lockup is the front of the ejector rod and if it's out of position then the crane would not lock tight. There would be side to side movement.

__________________
AL
Pax Per Potens

I have a 586 "M" gun, and the barrel isn't clocked perfectly. The error is such that the rear sight blade has to be almost fully to the right for POA=POI.

Since the cylinder crane isn't locked in place on the same axis as the barrel or the crane pivot, how can alignment between the cylinder bores and the barrel NOT be affected?? I have a gun that doesn't hit consistently (about a 4" pattern at 20 yds.), and the hand is worn causing the timing to be off. I haven't owned the gun from new, but visually it doesn't appear to have seen all that much use. The timing and lockup are much worse than my pre-Model 10. I think there could be an interaction between these two problems.

Comments?

Recently it seems that S&W is shipping revolvers with the barrel overclocked. I have a 610-3 that is just slightly overclocked I purchased in 2009 and a new 625 JM text fired August 10, 2011 that required adjusting the rear sight 2 clicks shy of it's leftmost limit to zero the sighting.

IMO the front latch has enough "slop" between the latch and ejector rod that a barrel would have to be VERY VERY out of alignment for it to have any effect on lockup. I've checked my 625 to see if the front latch might bind up the ejector or fail to latch and it's just doesn't happen, it latches in like all my other S&W revolvers.

I expect that if you look closely at your 586 you'll find the yoke is fully closed when your front latch locks in. So, in that respect your cocked barrel isn't an issue. However, with your rear sight at it's limit of travel I would have it corrected on any gun covered under the warranty. Unfortunately, in your case the warranty won't apply, so you'll have to decide if you want to pay a gunsmith to do this.

Does anyone know the specified torque of the barrel?

Also, anyone know a specified "end shake" limit? This gun measures about .0035", so it seems like a .002" spacer/bushing would be a good thing to add. The max clearance between the barrel and cylinder is .008", and that won't change any with the addition of the bushing, if I understand correctly.

I think I see the problem with this 586! There are no extractor pins in the cylinder! Without them, the action of the hand against the extractor face is poorly transmitted to the cylinder. There is quite a bit of radial clearance between the ejector rod and the cylinder.

I see that Numrich lists the pins as "out of stock". And Brownells doesn't show them at all. Anybody got a source for these? I imagine they are just (small) dowel pins - anyone have the dimensions?

Let me see if I understand this:

Smith & Wesson purposely turns the barrels too far to the left to get the revolver to shoot to POI.

That is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard!!!

Poor quality control does not happen...it is lazy workmanship!!!!!!!!

I would insist on them taking it back and making it right.

The oldest American gun company putting out poor quality products is not to be condoned!

The last date on this thread is almost a year old, but I hope those folks who have taken the time to make such ardent and spirited comments are still monitoring this issue.

My brand new 617-6 10 shot (~$800) came with a canted barrel. I shot 230 MiniMags through it but was not able to sight it in to my satisfaction - rear sight was adjusted max.

The rear sight blade was loose, it spit a lot of lead, and some extraction was difficult. I sent it back to the factory and got the following comments:

Replaced rear sight. (Yea!)
Cut forcing cone. (Probably Yea!)
Replaced cylinder. (Yea ?)
Adjusted barrel alignment. (Whiskey Tango Foxtrot) Look at the photos of my newly repaired and realigned S&W revolver.

I really want to love this gun, but it is getting harder all the time. Now I have to wrangle with Customer Service again and probably listen to the "within spec" chatter that many of you have experienced. I will call Customer Service on Monday - and let you know what happens. Thanks to your comments on this forum I won't feel like the only one who will not tolerate a crooked barrel.

What has happened to American excellence in manufacture? Has the pursuit of profit eaten all of our pride?

Attached Images

	617 cant top 2.jpg (33.0 KB, 632 views)
	617 cant top.jpg (53.7 KB, 676 views)
	617 cant front.jpg (20.9 KB, 677 views)

You forgot the lead babbitt way used by S&W and its armorers for decades! It is painful to watch, but really works!

I have a new 686 plus 3" that has a canted barrel. It will be going back to S&W. Why do they allow this stuff out of the factory?

I got a Model 36 with a severly canted barrel.Off it went to S+W where there were vice marks and a note on the gun saying it was adjusted to factory specs.When test firing after 25 rounds the barrel recanted so badly I couldn't engage the ejector rod into the frame.Off it went again and it came back with the same adjusted to specs letter.When I called I asked what exactly they did to the gun.The Customer service rep said "This time they changed the barrel".NIce to know they didn't do this the first time.Anyway this time the gun was fixed....Mike