Last months I sent my 642-2 back to S&W for the 2nd time, it was a lock gun, and it would lock up while firing std. velocity factory ammo. Within a week they called and to tell me they were sending me a new 642. I requested a 442 no lock. Within 2 weeks I had the new 442. After firing 20 rounds this new, no lock gun has frozen. I cannot pull the trigger, it took a lot to get the cylinder to open to empty the revolver. This happens occasionally with dry firing as well. The gun was cleaned and lubed prior to firing. I'll be calling S&W tomorrow morning. I have no idea whats going on as far as quality control, but this is pretty sad.

I am sorry to say you are unlucky as the J frames in general are exceedingly reliable. In the late 80s, I got one in for a customer which would not, upon dry fire, allow the trigger to return forward. A call to S&W revealed that the hand was most likely hanging up on the ratchet, and that it would correct itself with a few dozen dry fires. It did, and everyone was happy.

I cannot imagine what is happening with your revolver, but at least you did not have the same problem with both revolvers.

Oh, and for those in S&W management who say there are no problems with the lock activating itself, here is ANOTHER case. Anyone up there at Springfield listening?

I had an old model 49 I regret selling. I had it for many years, worked like a swiss watch. I hope the cure for this new, not working model 442 isn't spelled RUGER

You must be the unluckiest S&W owner I've heard of :-(. I've owned three brand new S&W revolvers all with locks and a S&W semi auto (Model 41) all of them performed flawlessly.

I always say third times a charm. Hope you the best.

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

Airweights maybe? Thats an airweight model if I think right...maybe since they're so light the lock is malfunctioning. I haven't had any problems with my new model 60!! A little over 300 rounds now.

__________________
Still just a kid at heart

Check to be sure the ejector rod is screwed all the way in. Remember - -reverse threads, so turn it counterclockwise to tighten. This would not be common in a brand new gun, but your description of the problem fits the loose-rod scenario perfectly.

__________________
Pisgah

As I understand it, S&W was bought by the company that makes the internal locks. So it's now basically a lock company that sells guns with their locks in 'em. It may not look that way in their online catalog, but I'd be willing to bet that top management thinks more like lock sellers than gun sellers.

So it doesn't matter what you tell 'em about your experience with their locks, or how many other people tell 'em the same thing. A lock company is NOT going to stop selling locks.

Wow! You are so correct! Here are the details from Wikipedia.

"On 11 May 2001, Saf-T-Hammer Corporation acquired Smith & Wesson Corp. from Tomkins PLC for US$15 million, a fraction of the US$112 million originally paid by Tomkins. Saf-T-Hammer assumed US$30 million in debt, bringing the total purchase price to US$45 million.[14][15] Saf-T-Hammer, a manufacturer of gun locks and other firearms safety products, purchased the company with the intention of incorporating its line of security products into all Smith & Wesson firearms in compliance with the 2000 agreement.

The acquisition of Smith & Wesson was chiefly brokered by Saf-T-Hammer President Bob Scott, who had left Smith & Wesson in 1999 because of a disagreement with Tomkins’ policies. After the purchase, Scott became the president of Smith & Wesson to guide the 157-year-old company back to its former standing in the market.[10]

On 15 February 2002, the name of the newly formed entity was changed to Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation."

I bought a couple J frames last year.

A 642 no lock which was perfect.

A 3" 60 which had a clocked barrel with didn't impact it's ability to shoot buy was annoying to me.

I sent the 60 back and S&W fixed it quickly.

I think you are unlucky.

Dave

Interesting posts about the recent history of S&W. I had NO idea that was the situation. If that account is accurate, it does seem like the parent company is railroading the lock feature, which really isn't the way to make a product, IMO.

And what was the deal with the unbelievably low price they paid for S&W? Was it a lawsuit situation or something? At first I thought the 15 mil. was a misprint, then I saw the explanation.

The reason I buy old Smith revolvers is because it's hard to find one that doesn't function properly. It's unfortunate if there's a slip in quality. It would fly in the face of tradition at S&W.

BUT, the OP's situation does point something out - he had a lock gun fail AND a non-lock gun fail. A non-lock failure isn't any less catastrophic than a lock failure. Yet locks and lock failures are sort of thought of as evil spirits. My two lock guns have worked fine, and I'm glad to have them, even though my collection is geared towards vintage stuff.

To respond to 2 postings, it's a no lock gun, so the lock is not the problem. The ejector rod is tight. The gun was cleaned and lubed prior to the initial firing. It's since been cleaned again, and while dry firing still locks up. I failed to mention a few very light primer hits. It was not an ammo problem, the rounds went off in a 30 year old model 10. I spoke to Customer Service this morning. I immediately received a shipping label, and the promise I would have the 442 back in 3 weeks. I'll keep the forum posted. I hate the thought of 2 new S&W's being defective.

Hate to hear of all the troubles but at least it sounds like they are on the ball with customer service-I hope.

I own only two digit j frames.

Get a used M 36, 37, 38, 40, 42 or 49.

They work flawlessly.

The newer ones, not so much.

Just my opinion, of course.

As a comment on the issue of S&W being a lock company that sells guns -- that was a long time ago. S&W, was foreign owned at the time (if I recall correctly), and got in a marketing jam working with the gov't on anti-gun measures while thinking that it could make money on military and police orders alone. The public deserted them. Hence, the low price when they sold. The new owners disavowed any deal the previous guys had with the gov't. Now they make good money selling guns. Great money.

Believe it or not, millions of purchasers either don't care about the lock or who actually like the availability of it.

Cordially,

Ashlander

well ive had 2 diff j frames break on me now both got sent back and both were replaced no bs. that being said ill never buy another j frame new or old i love my k ,l,n frames but somebody cursed my j frames or something idk

Nobody produces an $800 gun for the purpose of selling $2. locks.
There are many reasons for a company to diversify, but that is not one of them.
It would be like the notion of Ford making vehicles in order to move floor mats!
It just doesn't make any economic sense.

Best,
Rick

I have several 442's. The fired cartridge envelopes date from January to April 2014. No issues with any of these revolvers. They have some of the tightest lockup of any S&W's that I've owned and I've been shooting my own Smiths since 1973. I started off with my grand dad's .32 HE in 1966. I've installed APEX long firing pins in all of mine. Firing pin strikes are nice and solid. The stock springs work best for me so I never used the APEX springs.

Gun's with issues get made every day. Rugers seem to have more that their share these days. When they set their million gun production goal they were just throwing some models together. Every manufacturer is back ordered and they're pushing them out the door as fast as possible. More than the usual amount of problem guns seem to be slipping through. Hope that Smith gets yours fixed quickly.

Best Regards,
ADP3

One of my two 642-1s began experiencing misfires early this year and when I sent it back to S&W they said it was an alignment issue. The firing pin wasn't hitting the center of the primers so some rounds would fire and some wouldn't. It was declared unrepairable and they are replacing it.

Since I already have another 642-1, I asked for my broken gun to be replaced with a 640 Pro Series. I guess the Pro shop makes one model for a while and then switches to the next model. I'm at two and a half months now and still waiting. Hopefully they will start up 640 production again soon.

OBTW, on a related note, I looked at a new model 60 at a LGS yesterday. Although not extremely bad, the barrel was slightly "clocked" and not straight with the frame. New in the box!

Edmo

__________________
TRUTH: Don't delete my posts!

As far as who acquired who, there are often advantages financially for a smaller company to technically acquire the larger one. The smaller company can even use cash reserves and assets of the larger company to pay off it's debt it incurred to buy the big company.

The management of the two companies usually merges and it ends up dominated by what was the larger one. The company I used to work for was "bought" by smaller competitors twice and then proceeded to drop most of the former smaller competitors products.

Who acquires whom is not that relevant to the look and feel of the resulting company. In the end, who acquires who is a decision made by the finance guys.

I have a 340SC Scandium AirLite with the lock and it has never locked itself, even when firing 357 magnum ammo; so I don't think it's a weight issue. Bear in mind that I never used the lock; it has been unlocked since the day I bought the gun and has always remained unlocked. Hopefully it's frozen in that position!

Update: I spoke to S&W customer service today, they received the gun on June 13, today is June 21. They found the hand and trigger to be defective, and have replaced Therese parts. They were very apologetic. This no lock 442 replaced a lock 642 that would lock upon firing with WW white box 130 gr ball ammo. They're shipping the 442 back to me today. I'll report back upon receipt,and again after test firing.

Not to derail the thread, but I believe it is inaccurate to say that S&W is now a "lock company which sells guns."

Not too long ago it was a British plumbing company selling guns.

Sorry to hear about so many problems with new Smith's. For the first time in years I bought a new Smith & Wesson revolver three or four months ago. It's a 642 no lock and carry it every day in an Uncle Mikes pocket holster. Have shot it quite a bit and have had absolutely no issues with it at all. I have to say it is a fine little gun. I'm getting old and have been shooting handguns for long time. Also ex-law enforcement - shot on a Federal law enforcement agency's PPC team for several years. I, too, am a fan of the old guns but if some of you young guys think problems with Smiths is something new, I've got some news for you. Smith has had any number of owners over the years - some better at QC than others. If you should ever think about buying one in a blue box that say "Bangor Punta" on it you better look at it real close. I don't think I ever saw one that wasn't at least a little bit out of time - NIB. Among other things. Bear with them - They'll make it right. Just my .02 worth.

Thanks for calling me a young guy, Ive been shooting for probably as many years as you, if not longer. I shot PPC ( 590 best score), IPSC, pins etc. I well know the history of S&W. My point was quality control isn't very good right now. Any mechanical object can fail, but two new ones in a row, somethings wrong with that statistic. I will say however, they have expedited replacement and repair.

The only J-frame I have with a lock was a 637, that I picked up about 5 years ago. A good # of the lock parts fell out when I had the side plate off. (go Figure) Anyway, have run at least 2k rounds thru it without any functional problems.
But the ejection rod will loosen over time, so do check that.
good luck.

I received the 442 today, 2 week turn around from S&W. Trigger and had were replaced. It was obvious the gun was fired more then just a few rounds. I sent it back pristine, it came back filthy, and Im glad they did test fire it quite a bit. I dry fired it about 100 times, it feels smooth, has a very nice trigger pull. I'll report back when I get a chance to visit the range.