Ok so, I have a 686+ Pro Series. It is my first revolver/handgun and I am new to shooting. If you're a veteran to buying quality firearms, tell me how you would have felt. My barrel is slightly canted. My thumbpiece nut(which I've already replaced with a new nut S&W sent me) is loose and needs loc tite. And, my strain screw came loose after 300 rounds to the point of not firing. It also wasn't loc tited. Is it just because I'm a new gun owner that I didn't send it back or am I just over analyzing it? I mean, it was $850...

__________________
S&W 686-6 Plus Pro Series

Sometimes, the vast amount of information available on the internet is a curse. VERY few things in life are “perfect”, especially if you look close enough. I’ve read dozens of rants on the forum about canted barrels and relatively minor cosmetic imperfections. While I’m sure Smith & Wesson could improve on these points, I doubt they couldn’t do it at a price customers would be willing to pay. In today’s world, $850 for a high end revolver (made in the USA) isn’t out of line. Back in the late 1960’s, a top end S&W cost about $125 and those Bangor Punta guns were far from perfect. If you made $18K a year back then, you were rolling in the dough! At the time, gasoline was selling for $0.35 per gallon and a nice suburban house was $20-30K. If revolvers kept inflationary pace, they’d cost $1,250 or more.

I do have some experience collecting and shooting guns. I own more than I care to admit and countless others have passed thru my hands. Most that I’ve kept are relatively high condition American sporting arms and I can find flaws and imperfections with virtually all of them. If I focused on the flaws, I wouldn’t enjoy owning them.

Functional issues are another story; I don’t like guns that don’t work properly. If a gun can’t be sighted in, that’s a problem. If it constantly malfunctions or is inaccurate, that’s a problem too. Regarding your thumbpiece nut, I would never send it in for that and removable Loctite would be a last resort. I would clean both sets of threads with alcohol and snug the nut with a good quality properly fitting gunsmith screwdriver. I've learned to inspect and snug screws as a regular part of my cleaning and maintenance procedures.


Just an FYI, I was product design engineer for a manufacturing company (not S&W) and I'm happily married!

__________________
"I also cook."

I just posted on another thread about this, and anything mass produced is not going to be perfect.

If we demanded absolute hand fitted perfection, a new 686 would cost $2,000+. I agree a new gun should work 100% and it should have the durabilty we expect from a new S&W, but I see more and more threads about slightly canted barrels and new stainless guns with a little machining mark or a scratch........it happens, it's the nature of manufacturing. My $35,000 Dodge Magnum had a defective part in the transmission, and luckily it was covered under the warranty......

I just buy pre 2001 S&W revolvers. No canted barrels or any of the other symptoms of poor quality control and cost cutting measures.

And they don't cost anywhere near $2000 either! Regards 18DAI.

My advice is to stop buying their substandard product. They have had much trouble building the Walther ppk, a 1931 design. The double action revolver is much older than that. If they cant get it right they dont need our hard earned money.
Colt went through this some years ago. I bought a 1991 Commander in 1997 and it was the worst pistol I have ever owned. I just bought a new one to get the "100 Years of Service" rollmark and I must say it is an excellant pistol! Smith may have to feel the pinch of hard times like Colt did before they get it!!!

I own several S&W guns but I won’t buy a S&W made after May of 2001. In 2001 Saf-T-Hammer bought S&W from Tomkins. The quality of Saf-T-Hammer guns are not impressive. In 2002 Saf-T-Hammer changed its name to Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. but they didn’t change the way they made their guns.

Excellent post. We need to keep in perspective the manufacturer is not perfect and must build a product that will sell to enough people to make a profit. S&W has a pretty good track record through multiple owners and the ever changing gun laws. By all means keep their feet to the fire and let S&W know if something is wrong; they can correct the problems and we will get better firearms.

S&W is in the financial crapper right now, you find cost cutting on items being produced under these circumstances so QC is a little looser.

The world and no doubt S&W was in that same place in the 1930s.What happened?Sales slowed,time and care was put into the products by folks wanting to stay employed.Witness the Reg mag and others.
Will that scenario play out again...somehow I guess I doubt it,but I'll cross my fingers.

The thing I don't get is someone going to a gun store, inspecting a gun, buying that gun and then getting home and complaining because they bought a gun with a "canted" barrel. Am I missing something here?

__________________
Centennial Every Day

My 686 ssr also had the strain screw loosen up. It seems to be a common problem that should perhaps be addressed.
I had my LGS remove the lock, do a trigger job and stick that screw in there nice and tight....
what a nice gun it is.

I'm with 18DAI. No newer models for me and especially a model that needs a plug. May be missing out on some revolvers but my oldies but goodies don't suffer from the numerous quality control issues on the modern S&W's that I constantly read about here. I'll continue to buy the older revolvers as I truly believe they are the better product.

I'll say it again; a canted barrel has been INCORRECTLY installed! It should never have left the factory in that condition! I don't need a degree in engineering to detect a serious defect like that. The other problems are easy fixes and most folks can cure them. I hope folks from S&W read this forum as they could use the info to improve their problem weapons and further increase their sales and put out a fantastic product. I have cut and pasted numerous posts from here and sent it to them in one e-mail to make them aware they are losing potential buyers from QC issues. I was very polite but never received a respnse back. Alot like a car, once it breaks your trust level goes down and that is a serious issue if it's a self defense weapon. Love my S&W's and can only imagine there must be many more revolvers out there we've never heard about with the same problems I'm reading about on this fine forum.

JMHO

__________________
V/R
Roger / SG

Loose screws and rods you learn about pretty quickly(after your first experience). Any revolvers you buy from now one you'll tighten that stuff down before you go to the range: not Smith's responsibility in my opinion. If you ordered the revolver and the barrel came canted that's one thing, if you bought it in the store from a case just send it back and remember the lesson the next time. Close inspection can save you a lot of grief.

That's not uncommon with any product. When you're buying something, you usually are excited about the purchase and look at the item through rose-colored glasses. Later, when cleaning that gun or washing that car, defects suddenly appear.

Ed

My 2 cents: I'd bet 90+% of buyers never inspect their guns that close. And many of the rest of us don't care.

I've ordered a S&W Model 29. Maybe someday the distributor will ship it...looks like they are trying for the long side of their promised 3-7 business days. If it doesn't look like someone ran over it with a truck, I'll accept it.

Then I'll tighten any screws that need it and go shoot it. If it shoots well and the finish is good, I'll be happy. I paid less than I did for my Ruger Alaskan, that shoots great but looks like it was finished by dragging it behind a truck.

If it shoots poorly or the finish sucks, I'll ship it to S&W for fixing. I'm confident they will make it right. Then I'll shoot it until I'm too old to hold a gun. Then my kids will fight over it.

My Ruger Alaskan shoots great. Looks horrible, but shoots great. The first time I shot it, the rear sight nearly fell off. The gun shop where I got my CCW license and that did the transfer said to bring it by. A dab of red locktite, and now it just shoots and shoots.

I honestly don't care if the barrel is slightly canted if it shoots well. For $750, I don't expect a gun made by the Elves in Rivendell. I do expect, and am very confident I will find, that S&W will do whatever it takes to deliver a good shooting gun that I will enjoy for the rest of my life.

I don't know if my 686+ has a canted barrel. It shoots well. The set strain screw backed out almost all the way when shooting, so I cleaned it, applied a bit of blue locktite, and screwed it all the way in. From time to time, when cleaning, I'll check it isn't backing out.

My 60LS shoots darn well for a 2" snubbie. I haven't examined its barrel, but it carries and shoots well.

I'm happy. Happier than I would be if I had to pay 30% more for the gun...

Yeah, I think so. Not everyone knows what to look for, and things don't jump out at them. Things that seem intuitively obvious to someone who's been around revolvers for years can be virtually hidden from someone who may be new - true with many disciplines. People are introduced to or become enthusiastic about firearms at different points. When I get around someone who doesn't see the obvious with a weapon, I remember that was overwhelmingly me as a seventeen year old in the military years ago.

I'll also mention that when I bought my 'Bloodwork' 627, they were very hard to find, and I finally ended up ordering from a distributor through a dealer sight unseen, and I was very fortunate, and in some ways it has been the most satisfying hand gun I have ever owned. I'd do it again if I had to.

I'll also mention again that my four performance center purchases and two non-performance center purchases have gone out without a hitch, except for an ammo finicky 1911 (Perf Ctr 627 5", 627 2.625", 629 Stealth Hunter 7.5", Melonite 1911; non-Perf Ctr 617 and Gun Site Edition 1911).

If it shoots to POA and has no detrements causing reliability concerns, I wouldn't care if the barrel was canted. They're supposed to be tools, not collector's items. S&W makes the best revolvers out there for the money, and they're not the only gun manufacturer trying to cut costs due to the prices of labor. How many features can you get on a Ruger? Stainless or stainless for a double action, more for the single actions and large framed hunting revolvers, but they still don't have a selection like Smith and Wesson. Taurus has a few options, but they're ugly and have a bad reputation(on this forum anyway). If you like revolvers and look around at the alternatives, I'd say Smith is doing a pretty bang up job. Especially with the apparent demand for plastic double stack autos and 1911s these days. In every gun store I frequent around here, it seems like a 10 to 1 ratio of Glocks, XDs, M&Ps and 1911s to revolvers. What's really mortifying, some nice Smiths are being put in the cases as trade-ins for the above unmentionables.

Who in Connecticut do you want the Austrians to talk to when they get there?

__________________
Steve
NJ State Trooper (rtd)

With the problems Glock is having with the Gen4 guns, I say, "Please stay home!"

Bottom line to the subject is, products on the market today are sloppy, pieces of junk compared to what was being made 60-70-80 years ago. I recently bought a 1948 Military & Police snub and the quality of craftsmanship of that gun makes me want to cry when I hold it up to the new guns.

In defense of S&W, if we corrected for inflation and dollar purchasing power loss, a new gun would cost thousands of dollars compared to a 1940's revolver. Alas, nobody in today's market is willing to pay that for a production gun. Even the PC guns are only $1000 or so and most of them sit on the shelves for months before someone buys them.

__________________
Centennial Every Day

I know what you mean on the Alaskan! Brand new, first shoot at the range... 6th shot, I went to reload and noticed the rear sight pin had drifted to the point it was about to fall out!

Removed the pin, put a 'bend' in it, tapped her back in. That was about 600 rounds ago, haven't noticed since. Not the prettiest revolver of the group, but a mean *******. none-the-less.

Okay, I take it back. Geez :-)

About 20 years ago, when the Ruger Red Hawk was new a friend and I were taking his new 44 mag Ruger out for a session. After less than one cylinder full the 6" barrel went downrange. Blew off even with the front of the frame. Naturally he contacted Ruger and they had him send it in. They replaced it with a new model, and one with the integral scope rings and the rings. They did it within less than 2 weeks. Really fast. We later found out there was a series of these barrels blowing off, seems the barrel fitter when fitting (crush fit) didn't like the way the barrel lined up on several, and gave them an extra yank on the tool. Stressed the threads on the barrel enough that with the pressure of the 44 mag they let loose.

Another friend has sent back to the factory a Colt Python for locking up and cylinder wouldn't turn at all.

They all make errors, we just have to be tolerant and have them fixed. Once fixed seldom have further problems.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

Well as I said, this was my first handgun purchase. I did a lot of research and was mainly told if I could afford the S&W over the Ruged then that's what I should get. Being a novice, I assumed that meant a product I didn't need to worry about. It wasn't until after the purchase and reading up online that I really inspected what was going on. I have much better knowledge now then I did then, and yes, I was very excited. But as a brand new handgun buyer, I put most of my trust in my LGS and the Internet instead of myself ha.

__________________
S&W 686-6 Plus Pro Series

The QC of S&W sucks, plain and simple. There's no way in this world a gun should leave the factory looking like the one the OP posted pictures of. I personally won't buy another new product made by them until they fix whatever it is that's wrong internally with the company. As far as "inspecting the gun before you buy it" goes, I agree with the OP. I would have never thought to look for something like this until I read about it here. I now have two with canted barrels although not near as severe as the OP's. I also can't believe the way 75% of you defend them and turn the blame on the buyer and their inspections. Wake up S&W - Horace and Daniel are probably rolling over in their graves in disgust !

I bought my first S&W (Model 19-3 4") in 1977. Sent it back 3 times, "personal attn: FJ Longtin", a S&W service manager. Each time they reblued it, addressed the issue (I shot the snot out of it, it was my only handgun). They never did get the cant out of the barrel (which drove me nuts even though it didn't affect the accuracy). I still have a hard time figuring how they got the pin in with that barrel so far off. Sadly traded that gun long ago. And I paid $193 to Meltzer's in Garfield NJ for it, more than a week's take home for a NJ I&A PO (sort of a security guard with "authority") at the time. Joe

__________________
Keep Today Fresh

Exactly - People keep saying this barrel cant issue is only a problem on 'newer' guns. It ain't!

Funny thread, love it when the same few take their shots at S&W and whine about the QC, canted barrels, ILocks and whatever they can construe as being wrong from their view. The QC is excellent, period. S&W has far more happy customers than customers with QC problems. I can't say how many new S&W 's I've bought the last 2 years, nor how many older guns from the old school era.. The funny thing is the only ones I've had trouble with are the older non lock ones... The beauty of our 1st amendment rights.

__________________
Jack C

I don’t expect perfection but I do expect a good value for my hard earned dollars. Several of you have mentioned that the O/P’s problems were minor and not really much to worry about, as all were quick fixes. Yes, all of the problems with the exception of the canted barrel can easily be fixed, but why should the owner have to repair a new out of the box product?
I can’t help but believe most of you would not be so cavalier if this was your new car, and you had to refit the wheels and adjust the breaks, before you could drive it. With all do respect we are speaking about a dangerous and deadly weapon not a golf club or an electric drill.

Lastly the cheap price defense should never be accepted and in a perfect world never be used. The business adage of the 50’s – the 70’s, “we can make it right or we can make it affordable” is part of the problem we are now experiencing with so many jobs that have left our country.

I am now off my soap box and returning to being my normal cranky self. Have a goodnight all..

__________________
Always Stay Strong!

The easiest way to tell poor quality in a S&W is if it has the Internal Lock. If it does, it should have never left the factory as it is definitely defective.

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

We are not discussing an unsafe product. But when I buy a car, I am not surprised if I have to add air to the tires, or have an unclean windshield.

Screws can work loose while shooting. A slightly canted barrel that shoots well doesn't bother me, but if it does, S&W will fix it for you. It comes down to how much folks are willing to spend. S&W can QC things down to a gnat's rear end, but it will add to the cost - and they already cost more than Ruger.

Let me ask this question: What company is building better for less? Ruger may, if you like their designs - and I like some, dislike others. Anyone else? Anyone?

If S&W sucks, then who is better? And what does better cost? And why don't you buy from those who are building better?

You can boast about a 1965 S&W, but I'd be willing to bet there are some 1965 vintage S&Ws floating around that are pretty questionable too - and no one is obligated to fix them for you.

bsma

I would be as it’s never happened to me, and if it did I would see that the problem was resolved before I accepted the car.
And they are well worth the extra price.
No one.
For revolvers no one.

Understand I carried two Smith and Wesson revolvers to work daily for 27 years. I trusted my life to them, and I can’t think of any higher praise. I do believe that S&W is capable of reducing the number of revolvers with defects that leave the factory.

__________________
Always Stay Strong!

I had a like-new S&W .38 DA break-top with sloppy timing, the gun had maybe seen a handful of rounds and sat in someone's drawer for 100 years. It would skip a chamber once in a while in fast DA. So, a defect from 1887 was not noticed by me until 2009...........do you think S&W would have fixed it under warranty

I sold it at a loss to a collector who I told about the issues.

My point is, because of the internet it has become common to bash the new S&W revolvers for minor, inconsequential issues.You don't hear from the 1,000 people who are totally satisfied, but one person gets a new 686+ with a 1/16" cant in the barrel that doesn't affect function a bit, goes on every gun forum talking about what junk his new S&W is........ I will echo what was said above, cosmetic imperfection in mass produced S&W revolvers is not a new issue.

If you want a revolver that is perfect when first taken out of the box then buy a freedom arms. That perfection is going to cost you $2400 though. If you want a revolver that is a great value for the money and every now and then one slips through with an issue that the company is completely ready to stand behind and fix then buy a smith at $800.

Maybe Charter Arms is the same way....

I have to disagree with a lot of posters on this subject. If I am paying 800 bucks for a new gun, I expect it to have all the screws tight, the barrel put in straight and tested enough to make sure it works as it is supposed to.
I realize that mistakes slip through, but I would gladly pay another 100 bucks for a revolver if it went through one final check, by a human who knows something, to make sure all screws are tight, the barrel is straight, no scratches, etc. You could probably incur that much expense getting the gun to and from the factory, plus the fact that you have to do without your purchase for up to several weeks. If you have the problem when Smith and Wesson shuts down yearly for a period, that could increase by quite a bit.
I am bothered by the apathy when it concerns poor manufacturing, and/or crappy QC. I post regularly on a big bore rifle forum and the general concensus is that when you buy a rifle, for dangerous game that can kill you if something goes wrong, paying upwards of 2500 bucks for it, you must not shoot it before you pack it up, send it to a gunsmith to be worked on so it will feed properly, the stock won't crack when you shoot it, and other "tune up" items that need to be done. Add that additional 4-5 hundred dollars onto the purchase price, plus the up to 2 year wait for a "specialist in big bore rifles" to get it back to you. Seems the norm and perfactly normal, perfectly acceptable.
I have some questions for those who don't think a crooked barrel is wrong due to how it looks as long as it is fuctional. If you had a house built and the windows were at different levels in the same room, or crooked, your ceilings were 12 feet at one end of the room, sloping to 10 feet on the other, the tile was laid crooked, but it was perfectly able to be lived in and none of these items hurt the function, would you be happy and not complain?
And as far as it isn't a big deal how it looks as long as it functions, then why the need for ivory grips, fancy wood grips, nice checkering (when some nice deep gashes with a file would provide the same grip), engraving, nice bluing, etc.?

__________________
Have Canon, Will Travel

Same here!!!

Well, I don't want to pay an extra $100 for QC, when the large majority of guns made are fine, and those that are not get fixed. With both my Ruger and 686, the screws came loose while shooting. I tightened the strain screw in my 686, shot it, and it had backed out 1/4 turn in 100 rounds - so I put locktite on it. I have no idea how any QC inspector would catch that - unless they made the locktite at the factory. Then we would have folks complaining that S&W can't make a screw without needing to glue it in, and how the guns made 100 years ago never have a fault.

As for my house...don't look at the walls too close. Ever replace the floorboards? Want to guess how perfectly flat your floors and walls REALLY are?

I think this is the Golden Age of guns, for shooters. When I shopped for guns in my 20s, I lived in a small town. If I didn't want the 3 guns in the case, I could drive 100 miles and take a chance on finding something else. Or order based on a picture in a book. Ammo cost what the local dealers charged - no ordering from Midway back then! And don't get me started on trying to find grips for my revolver!

Need advice? Hmmm...this forum vs guys in a gun shop - who were no more reliable then than now. And in most states you can get a concealed carry permit. In four states, you can carry concealed without one!

This is an amazing time to be a shooter. And S&W is turning out well built guns, and fixing those that slip thru...

I think that the guns from "the old days" that are being touted as typical of S&W's daily output are just the creme de la creme that survived. I mean if in 1950 there were 10,000 guns made and 5000 are still around, it stands to reason that the half that didn't survive may have failed because of the defects.

Is it safe to say that the guns sold today will be half gone in 50 years? The survivors will be the ones without defect and the next generation of gunners may look back on the early 21st Century as the era when S&W made the best revolvers.

Most people now days could give a rats **s on how a job is done. Just grab all the money you can and go. Craftsmanship is all but dead. Businesses don't care about employees and employees don't really care about what they turn out. Perfection is just a facade. I'm sure S&W employees do their job no differently than you do yours. I can imagine what QC stops from getting through that you don't see.

I've bought two new 629s in the past year, one with a 6" barrel and one with a 4" barrel. I then read about canted barrels on this forum so I checked to see if the two I bought had this QC problem (no, I didn't look before I bought them as I never expected something like this). Guess what - both have canted barrels and I believe two out of two is 100%. I suppose my two will be left out of the 21st centuries best revolvers made by S&W even though they cost over $1,400.00! No sense in beating a dead horse though!

So...you are saying the Internet has inspired you to catch something that you otherwise would not have looked at?

How do the guns shoot? Can I assume you've sighted them in? Successfully? Two guns with an average cost of $700 each?

My Ruger Alaskan was over $700 new...looks like dog poop, but shoots fantastic. My Model 29 is supposed to finally arrive at the dealer on Monday...guess I'll post then on what I see. But I'll be surprised if the fit & finish isn't ahead of my Alaskan. I sure hope it shoots as well...

Avoid barrel cant and just buy and shoot Ruger Alaskans There is no way to cant the barrel, since the sights are on top of the frame extension!

I have bought 3 new S&W's in the last 3 years-M&P 9, 1911 and 686-SSR. The M&P went back to Smith twice and still wasn't right so I traded it for a Model 67 that I love.

My 686 wouldn't shoot anything less than a 10" group at 10 yards. I noticed the forcing cone had some odd looking grooves in it, called S&W and sent it in. Got it back a few weeks later with a cryptic note saying "Honed forcing cone, replaced barrel." It shoots fine now, but I agree that you shouldn't have to send it back to get it how it should have been to begin with. My 1911 wasn't perfect but was minor and I had it fixed locally.

My take on quality control at Smith (or anywhere anymore) is this: They all function, and it's a very small number of people who care about how they shoot. Most guns that are purchased are fired a few rounds, and then sit in a nightstand for the next 20 years. We here on the forum likely put more rounds through our guns on a Saturday at the range than most people will in a lifetime (80+million gun owners, 4 million NRA members). For the majority of gun buyers, the quality is fine-it goes bang when it needs to. But for those of us that shoot because we enjoy it, and try to improve our shooting skills, we notice canted barrels, scratched forcing cones and other seemingly minor imperfections that affect how our guns work.

But it's cheaper for Smith to fix the occasional gun that comes back from one of us than it is to make them all "perfect" before they leave. Problem is too many accountants making decisions. It's all about the bottom line. Most big companies would sell their mother's into white slavery if it would add a dollar to the bottom line. Before you all get upset, I am a CPA and have been for 37 years. However, there is a difference between an accountant and a bean-counter. Too many companies have bean-counters. What got this country into the economic mess we are in is that type of thinking-make it in China because it's cheaper and most people will not notice the difference. However, we on the forum do notice, and generally don't like it.

I love my Smith & Wesson revolvers, but agree that I will not buy a new one. I would like to have a nice Model 66 to go with my 67 (4", no dash, stainless sights).

My $.02, for what it's worth.

OK, like all our threads, this one has covered some ground.

I sure wish you guys would come around the next thread that starts and someone rates his gun at 100%. As we see from the minor and not so minor defects, guns don't come from Gawd in 100% condition. Even the best ones are only rarely 98%, but a lot of guns "condition wise" are barely in working condition, surely not show quality.

I think I want to debate the suggestion that the better guns are the survivors, too. Its not uncommon to find a gun that appears to be perfect or nearly so, and its 90 or so years old, and won't work. Those seem to be the ones that sit in the dresser drawer for ever. I had a great old M&P from the 19-teens. It was one of those guns you wonder how it could have survived for all that time without a mark on it. But one day I decided to really look at it. The cylinder wouldn't turn! There was interference between the bottom of the barrel and the gas ring. I just hung up. Depending on how you closed it, it might not rotate.

But I'm an old shade tree mechanic. I did what I figured needed to be done. I filed the bottom of the barrel until I had clearance. Then I used cold blue and promptly sold it.

__________________
Dick Burg

OK, I bought a new 617 around 6 weeks ago. The barrel alignment is perfect. So is everything else - 100% (after I spent about a half hour polishing it up with Mother's).

In contrast, I bought a four screw M17 in July. The barrel is canted!

Buying old and avoiding new is not always "the way"!

(These are currently my only 2 S&W revolvers, but I am sure there will be more.)

kas

In response to your questions bsms;

"So...you are saying the Internet has inspired you to catch something that you otherwise would not have looked at?"

Yes, I believe that's exactly what I said.

"How do the guns shoot? Can I assume you've sighted them in? Successfully? Two guns with an average cost of $700 each?"

They shoot just fine and yes, well over $700 each. Your point being?

"My Ruger Alaskan was over $700 new...looks like dog poop, but shoots fantastic. My Model 29 is supposed to finally arrive at the dealer on Monday...guess I'll post then on what I see. But I'll be surprised if the fit & finish isn't ahead of my Alaskan. I sure hope it shoots as well..."

I'm glad you like your "dog poop" looking Ruger Alaskan. Personally, I wouldn't own one and from your description, Ruger's QC must be worse than S&W's. When you say Model 29, do you mean a pre lock 29 or one of the new "wannabe" Classics? Either way, I hope you like it and also hope the barrel isn't on upside down. But then again, it seems like that wouldn't bother you if it shoots well.

I really could care less how you (or anyone else for that matter) feel about the look of a finished gun compared to how well it shoots. Myself and many others here believe S&W has allowed their QC to go down hill over the years and its shameful to say the least. If you don't mind a good shooting gun looking like "dog poop", go for it man and have fun. Personally, I want the best of both worlds!

I'll say it: I rate the PC 627 5", PC 629 Stealth Hunter, and particularly my most recent PC 627 2.625" as one hundred percent satisfied. Retail ca. $2,500 Melonite PC 1911 in 2008 or 2009 not as much as it was occasionally awesome if you had ammo it liked.

I have put more rounds through the PC 627 2.65" than anything but my duty Glocks, and, if you're bored, you can see me loading sixty-two 8 shot moon clips (500 rounds) for an event this weekend at Doug Wever's Photo Galleries at pbase.com. Warning, I am not a great photographer.

Just have to add my 2 cents worth. I bought a 327 Night Guard, it functions and shoots great must have been made on a tuesday? Oh well enough kidding arround, the American worker as far as I am concearned is about as concearned abou t quality control as the brazil worker. If people out there think we Americans build a better gun than others than put your money where your heart is. I personnaly think Americans build better anything better but mistakes do happen. If you want quality buy a Smith if you want a piece of junk buy a Taurus.

What you want is the best of both worlds at the same price you now pay.

My point was that Ruger & S&W are the top revolver manufacturers for their price point - around $700-800 for their 44 Mag DA revolvers. And while my 'dog poop' Alaskan shoots great, it doesn't LOOK great - so why should I expect S&W to be able to put out a refined, not a trace of cant to the barrel revolver at the same price.

If you are willing to pay more, have a nut. But you are demanding that S&W add additional QC and additional steps to ensure each gun is flawless, and to do so at a price equal to or below Ruger.

Ain't going to happen. You ought to be glad that they are willing to fine-tune, for free, revolvers that don't meet your standards.

It comes down to price. And while I like S&Ws, I also think that if Ruger can't beat the price while delivering an unrefined gun, then there is no way S&W can do so while delivering a flawless gun. They would go out of business, and then all those who hate the lock and poop on MIM could treasure their old S&W while knowing the company went broke...

That's my friend! Whatever floats yer boat !