586 RECALL RESULTS--PICS

williamlayton · #1 08-11-2011, 09:33 AM

S&W handeled the recall work promply.
Replaced Hammer nose---very visable change---shorter & less hook.
Replaced bushing.
Blessings

Retired W4 · #2 08-11-2011, 01:31 PM

Thanks for posting those pictures. I have a 686 no dash, with out the M, and I have a shipping lable from S&W. I'm having second thoughts about sending it back to them now. Could you post a picture of the replaced bushing?

Thanks,
Tom

williamlayton · #3 08-11-2011, 02:46 PM

Can't pic the bushing.
I like the look of the new FP--the original looked way too long.
Blessings

snubbiefan · #4 08-12-2011, 12:22 PM

It is hard to get a good picture of the bushing replacement. I have already shot my mouth off enough about the way mine looks and I am not a real happy camper about it. I wish I had kept it at home. There is no way I will send it back and have them try it again. They will simply beat this one out and bang another one in. There is only a certain number of times you can do this and every time you do, some metal is compressed, or lost in the process.

If you want to have one that looks perfect....keep it at home. If you have one you shoot regularly and use for SD....have it fixed. I am sure the average gun enthusiast could look at any 586/686 and tell you if the bushing had been replaced...I know I can and I am not talking about the "M" stamped over the model number either...... which should tell you something.

SWBigBang · #5 08-12-2011, 12:57 PM

What is this 586 recall?
This is the first I heard of it.

one eye joe · #6 08-12-2011, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by williamlayton

S&W handeled the recall work promply.
Replaced Hammer nose---very visable change---shorter & less hook.
Replaced bushing.
Blessings

Did they stamp the "M" on your frame ? ?

snubbiefan · #7 08-12-2011, 03:13 PM

One-eye....they did stamp my frame and even that was not very well done. I think the repairman used all of his strength beating home the bushing and only got a lite-strike on the M.....but it's there.

Dpris · #8 08-12-2011, 03:17 PM

Firing pin & bushing recall, over 20 years ago.
Denis

one eye joe · #9 08-12-2011, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snubbiefan

One-eye....they did stamp my frame and even that was not very well done. I think the repairman used all of his strength beating home the bushing and only got a lite-strike on the M.....but it's there.

HA, snub. They didn't bother to stamp my 2 1/2" 686. I did take advantage of the 2 way free shipping to have a 7 shot cylinder fitted. I'll be @ the range tomorrow with this weapon, so I'll inspect the bushing area closely (which I have never done)and report back.

Mike, SC Hunter · #10 08-12-2011, 05:09 PM

Neither of mine have ever messed up and neither have ever been back to Smith.

shooter686 · #11 08-12-2011, 11:34 PM

I caught wind of this subject on another thread - something about primer extrusions? Looked on the SW website but nothing. Can someone tell me nature of the problem, the fix, and well - I can see its controversial whether it should be done or not. Is it really a recall, or a free "improvement"? Models and serial numbers involved?

Sorry for the dumb questions - great forum with lots of knowledge.

shooter686

one eye joe · #12 08-13-2011, 07:43 AM

Shooter686, welcome to the Forum. My understanding is that it's not a true "recall" such as what we are accustomed to in the auto industry, wherein the manufacturer notifies the owner to return the vehicle for modification. (I'm not aware if original purchasers were notified, but purchasers of used guns were not)It is not keyed to serial numbers, rather to model iterations. The weapons involved are Models 586 and 686, no dash and dash 1's. I learned of the potential problem with my no dash 686 via gun forums, as you did. I sent mine in because I carry it for SD, and it needs to be 100% reliable.

Sportsterguy · #13 08-13-2011, 08:34 AM

My 4" nickel has not been modified and has never malfunctioned with any ammo, either factory or my reloads since I bought it many years ago for cheap ($200.00) so I'm not sending it back. If I were to use it for SD I might send it back. It has a little flaking on the end of the cylinder from being stored in a holster and you can't see it till you're up close. I don't have an accurate round count but would guess a couple thousand of .38's and .357's. It's also the most accurate centerfire S&W I own.

@ william. That's a fine looking 586 you have there. My money is that baby is super accurate with the 6" tube. Great revolver!

Snapping Twig · #14 08-13-2011, 09:08 AM

Shooter686, FWIW, I had a 586 no dash I bought new in 84 that had the problem.

I sent it back and it was repaired quickly.

What would happen is the hammer would get stuck on a primer that flowed back into the hammer hole. You'd have a loaded revolver that would not fire and the cylinder was stuck closed.

Typically this was associated with the hottest loads of light 125g bullets in rounds that had softer primers. Of course it could happen to any weight bullet with a hot enough load and a soft primer, but at the time most of the gun rags were talking about ultra hot 125g JHP effectiveness in SD, so that was what was mostly showing up during the malf.

williamlayton · #15 08-13-2011, 09:14 AM

What do I know---I just buy 'em to shoot and if they don't I give 'em to somebody who knows how to fix 'em.
I don't even know where the bushing is--would someone in the know inform me of this--.
Now the hammer FP is visably different.
I did the recall because I am a big believer in Murphy.
The recall makes sense to me--from looking at the before and after FP. I could see the long hooked one puncturing the cap and sticking in it.
Blessings

bgrafsr · #16 08-13-2011, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by williamlayton

What do I know---I just buy 'em to shoot and if they don't I give 'em to somebody who knows how to fix 'em.
I don't even know where the bushing is--would someone in the know inform me of this--.
Now the hammer FP is visably different.
I did the recall because I am a big believer in Murphy.
The recall makes sense to me--from looking at the before and after FP. I could see the long hooked one puncturing the cap and sticking in it.
Blessings

The bushing is in the rear of the recoil shield (frame), and has a hole in it that the hammer nose (firing pin) goes through to strike the primer. It is an easy fix that takes about 20 minutes more or less with the proper tools and gauges. I fixed hundreds of them for law enforcement agencies, police officers, and anyone else who wanted or needed the modification done. I had a contract with S&W to do the recall work.

williamlayton · #17 08-13-2011, 11:06 AM

That is good info--thanxs.
Looking at it I can see that it has been replaced--the new one is not blued -- & not a big deal to me.
Comparing it it to my 28's and .41 mag the hole does appear to be a little larger---Now---I am sure that is an optical illusion, so I won't swear to that.
Comparing the FP protrusion with all the ones mentioned above, The 586 does not protrude---noticable--as much as the others.
HUMMMMMM.
Anywho--
Blessings

bgrafsr · #18 08-13-2011, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by williamlayton

That is good info--thanxs.
Looking at it I can see that it has been replaced--the new one is not blued -- & not a big deal to me.
Comparing it it to my 28's and .41 mag the hole does appear to be a little larger---Now---I am sure that is an optical illusion, so I won't swear to that.
Comparing the FP protrusion with all the ones mentioned above, The 586 does not protrude---noticable--as much as the others.
HUMMMMMM.
Anywho--
Blessings

The hole in the bushing is smaller than the original one in the L frame series, thus helping to prevent primer flow back into the hole.

G-Mac · #19 08-13-2011, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one eye joe

The weapons involved are Models 586 and 686, no dash and dash 1's.

If I'm not mistaken, the 581 and 681 no dash and -1 are included in this also.

When I called S&W about getting one updated (a few years ago), the guy on the phone projected the attitude that if I wasn't having problems with it, it wasn't really necessary.

This was on a 6" 586 no dash....strictly an occasional range gun.

I didn't bother sending it in and, for me, that was the right decision.

samuelrp · #20 08-13-2011, 11:48 AM

If you're using the gun for anything other than target practice, it needs to be fixed.

one eye joe · #21 08-13-2011, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by samuelrp

If you're using the gun for anything other than target practice, it needs to be fixed.

I AGREE....

one eye joe · #22 08-13-2011, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by one eye joe

HA, snub. They didn't bother to stamp my 2 1/2" 686. I did take advantage of the 2 way free shipping to have a 7 shot cylinder fitted. I'll be @ the range tomorrow with this weapon, so I'll inspect the bushing area closely (which I have never done)and report back.

Snub, I DID go to the range today and closely examine the bushing area of my 686. It looks factory PERFECT, with NO evidence of it ever being touched. My firing pin is like the short ones pictured in the thread above. If members are using 586's or 686's for range use ONLY, AND THEY HAVEN'T EXPERIENCED A LOCK UP SO FAR, I wouldn't be of the opinion that they need to send their weapons in for mods. I am glad that I did send miine.....

williamlayton · #23 08-13-2011, 04:08 PM

I did it for two reasons:
1) It was a free thing--I hardly ever pass on free things.
2) I know my luck--and Murphy intimately--he would have taken advantage of the situation to my displeasure and/or demise.

I trust Murphy's law.
Blessings

one eye joe · #24 08-13-2011, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by williamlayton

I did it for two reasons:
1) It was a free thing--I hardly ever pass on free things.
2) I know my luck--and Murphy intimately--he would have taken advantage of the situation to my displeasure and/or demise.

I trust Murphy's law.
Blessings

IMHO, YA DONE GOOD SON..........