Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 10-10-2016, 10:39 AM
3rdgeargrndrr's Avatar
3rdgeargrndrr 3rdgeargrndrr is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 252
Likes: 130
Liked 151 Times in 81 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Invictus357 View Post
A shame you didn't wait to post about this until after Smith had at least looked at it.

Honestly, this is very common with the newer 617's. Mine has ejection problems but shoots so darn well with everything I am reluctant to change it at all. Brought home plenty of awards and meat. I load 2 or 3 at a time and count my shots
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-16-2016, 12:57 AM
usmcchet9296 usmcchet9296 is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: SoCal land of stupid gun
Posts: 74
Likes: 15
Liked 109 Times in 29 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by captainwayne View Post
Since I have a 686+Super Tuned 4", I wanted the 617 as it was very similar in size and weight, and could practice with the less expensive 22LR.
They became available at Gallery of Guns (great price at $659.99), so I bought one 2 weeks ago, heading to the range the same day.
Immediately I had several FTF's per cylinder, but they would sometimes fire the second time around. After firing, the cylinder had to be hit with the palm of my hand to open it, and the ejector rod had to be hit to eject the spent rounds. When I say hit, I mean with the edge of the table at the range. Couldn't do it with my hand. Then, after 100 rounds or so, when I tried to eject the 10 rounds, 1 or 2 were left in the cylinder, apparently pushed below the extractor itself! I tried the same ammo in a Ruger 10/45 I had, without a single FTF.
I was determined to get this right, so I took it apart, put in a spring kit, and polished every surface with FLITZ. I did not
remove metal. Back to the range, and every single issue was still happening. But the trigger job I did was awesome, feeling close to my super tuned 686+.
I just left a message with Customer Support, waiting for a reply. Does sound familiar to anyone?
Im a little late to this but let me throw in my 2 cents
I have 2 617s I use in competition a 4 inch and a 6 inch
I also had issues with shell ejecting and while I haven't reamed them out I have had no problems with CCI ammo
there shell walls are thicker and don't expend as much as say federal or winchester bulk
also I polished the chambers and that helped greatly

as for the FTF id start with tightening up the main spring (remove the grip if you don't know)
__________________
John Hermesmeyer USMC9296
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-16-2016, 06:17 AM
AzShooter's Avatar
AzShooter AzShooter is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Surprise, Az. USA
Posts: 743
Likes: 423
Liked 365 Times in 163 Posts
Default

I'm now using my 617 for Steel Challenge matches. I can shoot over 200 Federal AutoMatch or CCI Standards without having to clean the cylinder during a match.

When I'm using dirty ammo I run a brush through the gun after every stage, that's 25 rounds. Armscore is the worst offender but groups very tightly.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 11-25-2016, 08:29 PM
captainwayne captainwayne is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 25
Likes: 17
Liked 7 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Due to work overload I wasn't able to check out the repairs the factory did for over a month. The repair note that came back with the gun stated they repaired the crane, and ejector.
The gun did work better, but still had ftf's every so often, probably 4 or 5 out of 100. It became difficult to extract after 5 or 6 cylinder loads, so I sprayed it with cleaner, wiped it off and went back to shooting. k
My guess is the Winchester ammo left excessive buildup of carbon, requiring cleaning. Either I accept this as how it will be, or send it back again! Anyone else HAVE to clean their guns while at the range to keep them working?
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 11-25-2016, 09:40 PM
John Fugate John Fugate is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 126
Likes: 13
Liked 334 Times in 77 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AveragEd View Post
My two no-dash 617s just shoot and shoot without a hint of a failure of any kind, including difficult extraction. But I use only CCI MiniMags or Federal GameShok ammo with copper-washed bullets. From what I've read over the years about rimfire ammo, the cheap stuff is the cause of many of the reported problems.

Ed
The key words here are " No Dash " ,, you have two quailty firearms. These new lock guns are just sad.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #56  
Old 11-25-2016, 10:05 PM
SWWheelGun SWWheelGun is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 281
Likes: 406
Liked 525 Times in 129 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by captainwayne View Post
Anyone else HAVE to clean their guns while at the range to keep them working?
Yes, me... With my '53 super duper K22 Masterpiece. First shooting session I ended up with the spent cases stuck in the chambers after ~ 100 shots (Remington and Winchester) and the 1st CCI mini-mags cylinder load. I could not remove the cases and I stopped in fear to not bend the extractor. At home I pushed them out with a cleaning rod. Next session I went with subsonic CCI ammo and cleaned the barrel and the chambers, plus under the extractor, between shots. No lock-ups anymore but lots of misfires in DA, none in SA. So I came back home and asked here and voila, as per helpful advice received here found out that a previous owner unscrewed the strain screw to ease the trigger (it was really smooth… and weak feeling). I am planning to go again tomorrow with the screw tightened to the max and samples of all my 22 LR ammo (CCI mini-mags and subsonics, Winchester something, CCI hollow-points, Acquila jacketed, Remington cheapies, all that I have). Armed with cleaning tools and also with a screwdriver to further adjust that screw.

My story with this K22 is described here:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-han...sterpiece.html

I have a new Classic M17 Masterpiece to pick up next week from my FFL. I was hoping this will play better with current .22 LR ammo. After reading this thread I started to have some doubts. I still hope it will not be worse than this old K22.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 11-25-2016, 10:10 PM
SWWheelGun SWWheelGun is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 281
Likes: 406
Liked 525 Times in 129 Posts
Default

Oh, and you should have seen me after the last shooting session with this K22. My hands were all black from cleaning the thing and I had it on my face too. Some guy saw me at the range bathroom cleaning myself and made him laugh. Damn, .22 LR, you were supposed to be fun!! not a pain in the rear. Shooting .38 Specials out of my tiny new M36 after was a liberation, all shots worked the first try, oh my. So also I always bring a backup with me to complete the session if the 22 makes figures again.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 11-25-2016, 10:19 PM
R*E R*E is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 138
Likes: 35
Liked 72 Times in 42 Posts
Default

I have a current production 617. At first, spent shells were sticky after about 100 rounds. I used Mother's Mag to polish up the cylinders. Some 1500-2000 rounds later, and some scrubbing with a brush every few hundred rounds, it works quite nicely.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #59  
Old 11-25-2016, 10:29 PM
SWWheelGun SWWheelGun is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 281
Likes: 406
Liked 525 Times in 129 Posts
Default

Good to hear. I hope my future 17 to be like this. This K22 is a dinosaur - shipped in '53 - it got many shoots through and the cylinder chambers are already nicely polished on the inside. Gaps are visibly tighter than on newer S&W and that may have to do with it. I will work it out until I will figure out fully, is too damn nice of a gun to not perform.

This one:

Smiths and SAKs-071_3177s-jpg
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #60  
Old 11-25-2016, 11:42 PM
BillyMagg BillyMagg is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Central Obamastan
Posts: 656
Likes: 9,420
Liked 382 Times in 216 Posts
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Invictus357 View Post
A shame you didn't wait to post about this until after Smith had at least looked at it.
Sorry Bub, this is the Smith and Wesson Forum, why pray tell would you expect someone to send their new Smith and Wesson revolver back to the company before they brought their concerns/issues to this forum???

First you need to look up the definition of invictus.

Secondly you should look up the definition of forum.

a new Smith and Wesson revolver should function nearly flawlessly out of the box, it is a relatively simple mechanical device that will function reliably if the tolerances are anywhere near the specifications??

It does sound as if Smith & Wesson made substantive repairs, but the OP continues to have some issues. IMHO Smith and Wesson would be wise if they were to more faithfully test fire and QC their weapons, because in many cases, someone's life may depend on it?

As well they are not giving them away, they advertise, and boast that they are the best, they need to keep that promise to faithful S & W purchasers.

Last edited by BillyMagg; 11-25-2016 at 11:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 11-26-2016, 12:17 AM
usmcchet9296 usmcchet9296 is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: SoCal land of stupid gun
Posts: 74
Likes: 15
Liked 109 Times in 29 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by captainwayne View Post
Since I have a 686+Super Tuned 4", I wanted the 617 as it was very similar in size and weight, and could practice with the less expensive 22LR.
They became available at Gallery of Guns (great price at $659.99), so I bought one 2 weeks ago, heading to the range the same day.
Immediately I had several FTF's per cylinder, but they would sometimes fire the second time around. After firing, the cylinder had to be hit with the palm of my hand to open it, and the ejector rod had to be hit to eject the spent rounds. When I say hit, I mean with the edge of the table at the range. Couldn't do it with my hand. Then, after 100 rounds or so, when I tried to eject the 10 rounds, 1 or 2 were left in the cylinder, apparently pushed below the extractor itself! I tried the same ammo in a Ruger 10/45 I had, without a single FTF.
I was determined to get this right, so I took it apart, put in a spring kit, and polished every surface with FLITZ. I did not
remove metal. Back to the range, and every single issue was still happening. But the trigger job I did was awesome, feeling close to my super tuned 686+.
I just left a message with Customer Support, waiting for a reply. Does sound familiar to anyone?
I understand your frustration but you have to understand .22s are different from centerfires
first off FTF could mean a lot of this but first thing first tighten your hammer spring

as for ejection issues (boy that sounds wrong) you may need to ream or polish your individual cylinder chambers or look at the ammo you are shooting ....from personal experience I can tell you that bulk Winchester and Federal have thin cases that expand and are dirty so chambers get dirty fast.

I have 2 617's and these are just standard problems you run into and most of mine have been worked out so much so that in the Steel challenge and Rimfire 2-gun matches I go to I place in the top in the revolver categories
__________________
John Hermesmeyer USMC9296
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #62  
Old 11-26-2016, 12:49 AM
rwsmith's Avatar
rwsmith rwsmith is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: (outside) Charleston, SC
Posts: 21,494
Likes: 25,289
Liked 17,303 Times in 8,640 Posts
Default Getting with S&W...

Getting with S&W is the best solution. It sound slike your gun has multiple problems from manufacture.
__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Last edited by rwsmith; 11-26-2016 at 12:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 11-26-2016, 12:53 AM
rwsmith's Avatar
rwsmith rwsmith is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: (outside) Charleston, SC
Posts: 21,494
Likes: 25,289
Liked 17,303 Times in 8,640 Posts
Default I'm sure he'll fill us in....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Invictus357 View Post
A shame you didn't wait to post about this until after Smith had at least looked at it.
If he sends it off they do warranty stuff fairly quickly, so we should hear something soon. He probably thought he would hear some similar problems and how it was fixed. But it sounds more like it's an excellent model, except for THIS gun.
__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 11-26-2016, 01:25 AM
Fishinfool Fishinfool is online now
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Central PA
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 2,246
Liked 3,214 Times in 1,080 Posts
Default

I may have missed it, but I don't believe the OP ever stated if he tried experimenting with various makes of ammo in his 617. I have owned few .22 handguns or rifles that did not show a preference in function and accuracy for a particular brand or two. .22's tend to be a lot more finicky about ammo choice than centerfires.

Larry
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 11-26-2016, 01:48 AM
John Fugate John Fugate is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 126
Likes: 13
Liked 334 Times in 77 Posts
Default

I say punt .. sell it and look for a good old pre Lock 617 to replace it with , preferably an early model with no mim parts. I just don't ever see anyone being satisfied with one of these current production 617's. They just feel like junk ,, to me they have a tin can feel and the action grinds like as if it's filled with sand. Once you compare yours to a good old one , I think you will see why the old ones are in such high demand. If you choose to keep yours and continue to fight the problems,, well I do wish you good luck. It's a shame you can't expect what you should expect straight out of the box these days,, but that goes with everything. My new Chevy trucks body is as thin as paper, but at least its thicker than the new fords aluminum tin can outer shell . " You've all seen the commercial with the empty tool box ripping holes in the F-150's bed " admit Ford Fans that's just not cool, a little embarrassing you might say. Around here it's " 5 screws and Bowties - Like a Rock " Enough of my bias opinion goodnight all J.F.

Last edited by John Fugate; 11-26-2016 at 02:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 11-26-2016, 02:08 AM
John Fugate John Fugate is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 126
Likes: 13
Liked 334 Times in 77 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lunger View Post
Just my opinion , but it would go back. It is a new expensive revolver. Under warranty. Your should not have to fix your self.

I bought a 617 around 6 months ago, with different issues. Canted barrel , could not adjust sights to center.

I sent it back. They fixed the barrel,replaced rear sight even sent me the original. I swear they did something to smooth the action and trigger. All at no cost.
That is a nice ending to the story , it looks like Smith gave you great Customer Service and a trigger job on the house. I have never had anything other than stellar service from smiths CS team. On the other hand --- A Canted barrel ??? ,,, bring back the pins/ bring back the pins / bring back the pins ,,, all together now !!!

Last edited by John Fugate; 11-26-2016 at 02:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #67  
Old 11-26-2016, 09:34 AM
Wee Hooker Wee Hooker is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 3,248
Likes: 1,780
Liked 2,087 Times in 876 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capttjk1 View Post
I made the mistake of getting the new Ruger GP100 in .22LR. Gun had so many mechanical problems, Ruger decided to scrap it when I sent it in for repair. They replaced the firearm with a new revolver of a different model at my request. I still wanted to get a full size revolver in .22 so I got the 617 that I should have bought in the first place. What a high quality weapon. So far it has been extremely reliable and extremely accurate. As a fan of S&W revolvers and owning 20+ of them, I don't know what possessed me to buy the GP100 in the first place!

Send your 617 into S&W for warranty repair. They will make it right.
Thank you Sir, I think you just helped talk me me out of a GP.
i.e. Despite owning 4 S&W K frame .22's, and having a miserable experience with a Ruger Sp101 22 last year, I have been tempted to try the GP100 .22. ( Just because...) Your experience is not far off what I would suspect though.
__________________
Dave
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #68  
Old 11-26-2016, 11:34 AM
Lee's Landing Billy Lee's Landing Billy is offline
SWCA Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Battery Oaks Range, S.C.
Posts: 1,712
Likes: 5,142
Liked 2,997 Times in 1,048 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou_NC View Post
Sorry to hear about your troubles with a brand new .22LR revolver. Your situation is, unfortunately, fairly common........S&W is probably using their .22LR chamber reamers too long before replacement. A worn chamber reamer will result in an undersize chamber, it's as simple as that.

One solution is for you to use a finishing chamber reamer and complete the job yourself that S&W started for you. I've done this on numerous S&W .22LR revolvers, model 18's, 17's and 617's. All have retained every bit of their inherent accuracy, as the chamber reamer does not affect the throat of the cylinder, only the chamber portion. Check out this thread for additional information.
The tools you need are:
Brownells reamer: 513051220
Brownells Do-drill lubricant: 083007016

If you're not comfortable doing this job yourself, or don't want to undertake it, based on principle alone (totally understandable considering it's a brand new gun) then go ahead and return it to S&W, and hope they make it right.

Good luck,
Lou
Unfortunately...Lou is right. This is the only way you can be sure this gets fixed. My experience has been all the brushes and cleaning solvent in the world won't fix this problem until you do THIS.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #69  
Old 11-26-2016, 12:01 PM
STG38 STG38 is offline
SWCA Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CO
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Default Ejection Helper

I had the same problem with a 1958 K22. I reamed the chambers in the cylinder myself, following the excellent directions on this forum. The reaming solved most of the problems - it is still ammo brand dependent. I made a "ejector rod", like on single action revolvers, from a wooden stick less than 0.22 inch diameter with a handle made from a 3/4 inch diameter dowel rod. (I "borrowed" a "cuticle stick" from my wife for the stick, but they're available in the cosmetic department at WM. The cuticle stick already had a tapered end to use for a "lead-in" into the chamber.) This ejector rod allows you to push the each fired case out individually, rather than beating on the K22 ejector rod. Usually, there are only 1 or 2 stuck cases, and after you find them the rest will come out easily. Slow but effective. I highly recommend the reaming procedure and suggest that you purchase one or two gauge pins of diameter 0.2280 and 0.2290 to use to check the diameter of your chambers against the SAAMI specs before buying a reamer. Gauge pins are available for a cost of about $2 each from industrial supply houses. Also, I found that if I have a stuck bunch of fired cases in the cylinder, sometimes rotating the cylinder 180 degrees and trying again will work (ejector rod bent slightly?). Good luck.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #70  
Old 11-26-2016, 04:45 PM
AzShooter's Avatar
AzShooter AzShooter is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Surprise, Az. USA
Posts: 743
Likes: 423
Liked 365 Times in 163 Posts
Default

I've had sticky extraction problems with a few different brands of ammo. That's one thing about all .22s you have to experiment to find what the gun likes to shoot and shoots the best.

I've settled on CCI Standard Velocity and Mini Mags when I can get them. They all go off 100 per cent of the time. So do Federal Auto Match and I have about 20 boxes of those so they will last me a while until the price hopefully comes down.

I did use a Chamber Reamer on my 617 and it's helped me be able to use more brands of ammo without the sticky chambers but CCI and Federal group better.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 11-26-2016, 06:25 PM
SWWheelGun SWWheelGun is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 281
Likes: 406
Liked 525 Times in 129 Posts
Default

Follow up to my previous report with my '53 K22 Masterpiece:

Was at the range today with a well adjusted hammer spring strain screw and ran the gun through all the .22 LR ammo I had. I posted a detailed report on the main discussion thread for the problem that I had:

[solved] Misfires in DA with '53 K22 Masterpiece

I shot many hundreds of shots, mostly high velocity, some copper plated, some raw lead, and I did not have to clean that much.

Once in every hundreds of shots just in case I ran a bronze brush through the cylinder chambers and the barrel - but there was no lock up and there was no excess accumulation either at the front or the back of the cylinder (under the ejector screw). This K22 has a very narrow spacing between the cylinder and the forcing code - almost touching each other - still, not a problem.

I had cases stuck in the chambers (just for couple of kinds of ammo) and I used a bronze ejector rod to push out the stuck cases. Same as STG38 one or two cases lock up the entire cylinder. For me the cleaning rod works well because I need the same to both clean the chambers and ram the stuck cases out if/when needed (just unscrew the brush from the end).

Good luck with the 617! I have a new Classic 17 coming to me as well as mentioned, I am very curious how this one will behave - better, worse or the same, compared with this old K22.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 12-07-2016, 03:23 PM
robertleec2 robertleec2 is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Ive got the 617 and love it. Great balance,great shooting,,,ive used many dif ammo and only one brand has cause ftf. I had it for 5 years and still use it all the time,,,good luck with urs.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 12-18-2016, 05:08 PM
tiggen tiggen is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 33
Likes: 12
Liked 26 Times in 11 Posts
Default

So I just took my relatively new 617 out to shoot today, and had similar failure to fire problems in double action (Only fired a few SA, and I dont' remember it happening). Standard CCI ammo, and I put the same ammo from the same box in my Buckmark, which ran flawlessly.

I'd say it was consistently 2-3 rounds per cylinder. I kept pulling the trigger after 10, and every one of the rounds fired the second time around. Perhaps they weren't completely seated?

I came back and found a couple threads, including this one, about tightening the main spring strain screw (as well as the forward side plate screw), which I checked as I cleaned the gun. Both appeared to be properly seated. I sprayed some Hoppes up in the trigger housing while I had the grips off, too.

Finished cleaning the gun, put a few drops of lube on the cylinder stop, hand and center pin (not sure what this is called but it's the thing that moves forward when you press the cylinder release latch).

Now, the cylinder latch does not move freely. When i swing the cylinder into the frame, the cylinder latch stays forward and the action is locked (neither trigger nor hammer move). I have to physically pull the cylinder release latch backwards in order to seat it and to allow the gun to fire.

Any additional input on these issues would be helpful.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 12-18-2016, 05:27 PM
AlHunt AlHunt is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 892
Likes: 1,274
Liked 926 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiggen View Post
So I just took my relatively new 617 out to shoot today, and had similar failure to fire problems in double action (Only fired a few SA, and I dont' remember it happening). Standard CCI ammo, and I put the same ammo from the same box in my Buckmark, which ran flawlessly.

I'd say it was consistently 2-3 rounds per cylinder. I kept pulling the trigger after 10, and every one of the rounds fired the second time around. Perhaps they weren't completely seated?

I came back and found a couple threads, including this one, about tightening the main spring strain screw (as well as the forward side plate screw), which I checked as I cleaned the gun. Both appeared to be properly seated. I sprayed some Hoppes up in the trigger housing while I had the grips off, too.

Finished cleaning the gun, put a few drops of lube on the cylinder stop, hand and center pin (not sure what this is called but it's the thing that moves forward when you press the cylinder release latch).

Now, the cylinder latch does not move freely. When i swing the cylinder into the frame, the cylinder latch stays forward and the action is locked (neither trigger nor hammer move). I have to physically pull the cylinder release latch backwards in order to seat it and to allow the gun to fire.

Any additional input on these issues would be helpful.
I suggest you try this again in a new thread. This one is a few months old and won't get as much traffic as a new thread.
__________________
Freedom Is Not A "Loophole"
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 03-20-2017, 08:44 PM
casey1823 casey1823 is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 2
Likes: 1
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Thanks, I used some wooden Q-tips in my drill. The chrome cleaner worked great on the cylinders. I cut them in half and put a little polish around the tip and ran it through until it was black. Then I repeated it with a clean one. I went out and ran a 100 rounds through it. What a difference, thanks for the tip.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 03-20-2017, 09:11 PM
Blueduck Blueduck is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southeast Missouri, USA
Posts: 100
Likes: 3
Liked 74 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Sorry, sounds like you got the exact twin of one I bought many years ago. One trip back to s/w was enough. It still holds the record of most money I lost on one purchase

On trigger as above a rimfire is never going to be as good as centerfire with the same reliability, but I could just not get over the other issues. Hope you have better luck.

Last edited by Blueduck; 03-20-2017 at 09:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 03-20-2017, 10:43 PM
Cardboard_killer Cardboard_killer is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 657
Likes: 82
Liked 521 Times in 233 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiggen View Post
Now, the cylinder latch does not move freely. When i swing the cylinder into the frame, the cylinder latch stays forward and the action is locked (neither trigger nor hammer move). I have to physically pull the cylinder release latch backwards in order to seat it and to allow the gun to fire.

Any additional input on these issues would be helpful.
The latch is binding. It sounds like your side plate and/or mainspring are not properly seated and are too tight. Try taking the grips off, loosening the mainspring strain screw and ensuring the spring is properly seated in the frame, then tightening the screw. Don't over tighten it, and ensure the spring remains seated correctly in the frame as you tighten it (it will want to move to one side or the other as you tighten it). I would suspect this is the problem.

For the sideplate, don't overtighten it, especially the cylinder screw. The yoke should be captured by the screw, but the screw should not be ground into the yoke. It should be giving the yoke free play. None of the sideplate screws need to be anything but finger tight with a well fitted screw driver.

However, if you are getting light strikes after this, and it is a new gun, I recommend calling S&W for warrenty repair. If this is an older gun, I'd take it to a gunsmith and have them do a trigger job on it. They will tune it up and you'll end up with a super trigger that is 100% reliable, but it will cost a benjy.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 04-15-2017, 06:15 AM
horseboss45 horseboss45 is offline
Member
New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing! New 617, Disappointing!  
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

I am totally happy with my 617=6". Shoots everything I run thru it just fine. Going to get a 617-4" soon.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Victory trigger disappointing. What to do? gunhawk7 Smith & Wesson Semi-Auto Pistols 45 09-10-2016 11:04 PM
Another disappointing LGS.... Old Corp Firearms & Knives - Other Brands 20 08-28-2016 10:47 AM
Most disappointing add-on part for your M&P15 Vinney47 Smith & Wesson M&P15 Rifles 61 10-16-2015 04:34 PM
Disappointing LGS's Old Corp The Lounge 11 08-14-2015 10:36 AM
Disappointing M&P 15-22 Report lackejd Smith & Wesson M&P 15-22 14 12-25-2009 05:12 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:20 AM.


© S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)