Noticed my hammer stud has loosened/moved. Will this be repaired under warranty?

Attached Images

FSCN0547[1].jpg (61.0 KB, 317 views)

It should be. Call S&W and explain the problem, they would send you a prepaid shipping label.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

I know its possible on the steel guns, alloy. maybe?

__________________
-jwk-
US Army '72-'95

I had a 432 (essentially a 442 in 32 H&R Mag - 6 shots) that had a hammer pin that was standing a bit proud of the frame. I sent it in to S&W expecting they'd press it back into place and return the gun - which I really wanted back because it had been very hard to find. Instead they condemned the gun, said they didn't have any 32 caliber anything to replace it with, and didn't know when or if they ever would (I told 'em I'd wait if they had any production plans for the next year or so.) I had to pick something else as a replacement (I picked a 3 inch 7 shot L frame, whatever that model number is) which I sold without firing it.

My takeaway - you never know what they'll decide to fix and what to condemn.

OUCH, that hurts to read! That's amazing to me. I've been wondering if they don't make the 632 because they are worried about metal fatigue, especially from the 327, and a policy that they'd rather destroy a 632 than repair seems to support this.

I feel a bit bad posting this after your story, but I had pretty much the polar opposite experience. I broke the trigger stud on my M29-10, and called Smith. Without hesitation they sent a shipping label. I think it took about 6 weeks, but they repaired the stud and to my surprise reblued the gun for free, I think due to a problem with modern N frames prematurely damaging the bluing on the cylinder.

Before I called Smith, someone here told me to call, not email, and if they said no, hang up and call again later. Apparently, different warranty guys will give different answers. So if you don't like the answer you get, try again.

Good luck!

Actually, I've had several perfectly normal service interactions with S&W over the years. The 432 was very much an anomaly among my personal experiences. It was a 32 H&R, not a 327 Federal gun, so it wasn't going to be subject to anything beyond 38 Special stresses, if that. (The owner of Buffalo Bore has assured me that even my older 32 Long revolvers that I've had reamed to take 32H&R are strong enough for continuous use with the BB 100g JHP loads, which equal the muzzle energy of the Remington 38 Spl 158g +P FBI-Load equivalent.) So I'm not sure what the problem was with the 432 that made it non-repairable.

BTW, I thought at one time I wanted a J frame in 327 Fed, until I got a Ruger LCR in 327 - talk about a NASTY round. Extremely loud (even with muffs) and a hard kicker, so not very fast to get back on target. Not quite as bad as I remember the single 357 Mag round I put through a J frame once, but coming close. (The 327 is even a handful in an all steel Ruger Single Seven - I'm keeping that one, just for occasional grins of a small, powerful single action, but getting rid of the LCR.) A 32 H&R with 100g Buffalo Bore loads is enough (for me) for daily carry, and is both a delight to shoot and a tack driver with lesser 32 loads. Too bad S&W isn't interested in making any of them any more.

Sent the 442-1 back to S&W, will post results.

Since the 442 is a current production item you WILL get a 442 back - either yours repaired and shipped directly back to you, or a new one as a replacement that will have to go to a FFL for transfer because of the different serial number it will have. (If you do get a new one, S&W will refund any FFL transfer fee you incur in the process.)

I have no personal experience with failed hammer studs or Smith’s warranty when applied to this problem.

However, we’ve seen a number of folks reporting failures of this part along with Smith’s uncharacteristic unwillingness to honor the warranty when applied to this defect.

Seems like the frequency of reported defects in the hammer stud is much greater nowadays than in the past and that Smith is reluctant to fix this problem.

Perhaps the downturn in sales and revenue Smith has experienced since the election has Smith’s bean counters cutting the warranty parameters, hunting for ways to avoid fixing this problem.

Has anyone seen this problem with the stainless studs on scandium guns? I have only heard of this and/or breakage so far with aluminum studs.

I bought a new 442-1 (this is the no-lock version) in 7/2015.

By 11/2015 the 442-1 was broken after a few thousand rounds.

S&W told me a pin/stud was broken (unknown which pin).

By 2/2016 I had a new 442-1, replaced by S&W.

S&W later reimbursed the dealer costs involved in receiving and processing the newly received gun (at the time, this was in California and a replacement gun is processed as in a new purchase; other states can be different).

__________________
66/642/640/627/586/60/638/686

My experience was the same as L-2's. My 642-1 broke it's hammer stud. I sent it to S&W at their expense. They replaced the gun free of charge under warranty, free shipping, and they reimbursed my NICS fees.

What has me curious is that your gun's hammer stud is visible on the outside of the frame. It's not visible on mine.

That's because it's broken free. All Smiths are fitted the same. Depends on the finish work and finish if it's visible prior to this type of failure.

I was not aware the hammer stud on a 442 was aluminum (though its finish matching the exterior of the frame is a clue) My 340 hammer stud, which is plainly visible under the thumbpiece indicates a non aluminum part. I am surprised a piece such as a frame stud would be made of comparatively weak metal such as aluminum.

The hammer stud on my 642 broke earlier this year. I had posted about it in this forum. It didn't come loose from the frame like the photo in the OP. It sheared even with the inside of the frame. The pistol was 4 years old and out of warranty. S&W refused to cover it under the "life time service policy." Said it wasn't a defect in materials. It was due to normal wear and tear.

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

Ziggy, NOT saying this is what happened to yours, but that stud can be broken if the action of a revolver is fully cycled and dry fired with the sideplate off and without full release of the tension of the hammer spring. That hammer stud is captured in the corresponding blind hole in the sideplate which supports the stud on both ends during normal firing action. I think it's also possible for these studs to come loose where they are captured in the frame as well, but I also think most of the ones that are broken completely off were likely dry fired with the side plate off. You can cycle the action with the hammer spring in place, but you should hold the hammer spur with your thumb and allow the hammer to fall slowly and with that support! I make this post to be informative to all of us, including myself, since many are not aware of this possibility. These posts just brought it to mind for me.

__________________
So long ... Ken

Thanks. It's good info. On mine, it was broken when I took the side plate off. No cycling the action.

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

Did I screw up? My 442 came in today.

__________________
Time wounds all heels

I don't think so! I've owned a Model 442 since the first year they became available, I think. I've carried and shot it some, but my wife claimed it the first time she fired it. So it was entrusted to her care, but she always let me shoot it when we went to the range after she got done! We still have it, and it still gets fired at the range. It's been a very fine lightweight revolver, and it ain't goin' anywhere!

__________________
So long ... Ken

Did you buy it new, Ziggy, or was it preowned? No big deal, just curious. Even odd things sometimes come with guns from the factory! I agree with your sentiments about the factory doing nothing about it. I'd have been upset myself!!

__________________
So long ... Ken

Purchased new. When it was a couple months old (or so) the cylinder locked up. I had sent it back to S&W and they fixed it. Other than that, I just shot it. Hammer stud broke around 2,000 rounds of mostly FMJ.

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

Well, that's very interesting! No telling the cause. Won't likely ever know. Sometimes, stuff just happens. But I still agree that it stinks that the factory gave you the cold shoulder about the repair! I have a 642 made in 2012 that had at least one previous owner. I'm pretty sure his middle name was Bubba and he carried this one in a metal tool box with loose tools! Has a dark spot in the barrel but no bulge because the location is underneath the portion covered by the frame that holds the forcing cone area of the barrel. Was test fired by the LGS (their standard policy on every used gun they sell) and inspected by their in house gunsmith that I have known personally for many years. I bought a box of +p ammo and he let me fire five cylinders full of that ammo into his bullet trap. The barrel and frame were not cracked to begin with and have not cracked to date after a good bit of firing. The gun shoots as good as any other of my J frames. Because of it's issues and it's sad exterior looks, it had sat in their case for long. I decided to take a chance on it and offered a very low price. I finally bought it for what I offered and another $25, total was very low! Been shooting and carrying it ever since I bought it in 2015. It's in my front pocket right now. I said that to say this, my copy has definitely been used and probably pretty roughly. I'd think if most hammer studs on most 642's were breaking within four years of normal usage, we'd know about it.

Rotten luck for you with yours, and worse that S&W didn't stand behind it for you! I assume the factory fixed yours for you and charged you for it or is it still busted or fixed by someone else? Just curious.

__________________
So long ... Ken

They wouldn't repair it. They wanted to replace it at my cost. They "offered" me a new replacement for a higher price than what a new purchase would cost from an online retailer like Sportsman Outdoor Superstore. I said no.

They held the pistol for four weeks after they told me they wouldn't fix it. They sent the parts back last week. No gunsmith notes. Nothing. Just the parts. My next step is to file a complaint with the MA Attorney General Consumer Protection Division. Doubtful it will go anywhere, but good to get it on record.

I have another 642 that's never been a problem. I have other Smith's, revolvers and semi's, that haven't been a problem. I'm PO'd enough, if I replace it, it'll probably be with an LCR or a Charter Arms.

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

That is sad. I don't see why they wouldn't repair it.....

Am I getting confused. Wasn't it the hammer stud? I mean, it seems like you could just replace that. No? I don't really know how these things work.

Hammer studs can be replaced relatively easily on a steel framed revolver, but it requires a refinish of a blued gun since the replacement has to be exposed underneath the cylinder release on the outside of the frame and then polished down to smooth which destroys a pretty good sized area of the bluing. Only way to do it right is to refinish the complete revolver.

The alloy frame on the 642 is another story, I think? That's why the replacement is offered instead of repair, and that seems to be fairly common in this case. But I will say this, even if S&W had replaced it and charged for the work, the 642 can be bought probably more cheaply than the work would cost, based on my personal experience.

I had this work done on a blued M-13 with a 3" barrel about three years ago since I wasn't willing to make a paperweight of it. The work was very well done and the revolver is now pretty much as new, except the bluing is not the same shiny blue that was OEM. That's not being done anymore, but the gun looks very nice to me. My 3"" M-13 has appreciated in value close to enough that it's now worth about what I've got invested in it. But it's not going to be for sale in my lifetime, barring unforseen catastrophic need to do so. So I'm OK with having this done. I personally would not have it done on a 642 because of the alloy frame and the lack of any real hope for any of the cost to be recovered. The decision presented to Ziggy seems abitrary to me, but it's not too unusual in cases like this. I understand how he feels about it.

__________________
So long ... Ken

To follow up on my original post on the loose hammer stud on my 442- just heard back from S&W that my frame is "irreparable" and the firearm is to be replaced. This is very disappointing to me as the gun had only 60 rounds of +P rounds through it. Not a good experience with my first S&W aluminum frame revolver. I hope my 340 (with steel studs) proves more durable.

Weird just looked at my 642 pro series and there is no pin at all underneath the cylinder latch. Did they stop using that type of hammer pin in the newer guns?

Bummer. At least they're replacing it.

Yes replacement of the revolver is a good thing- but can this weapon be trusted as an EDC???

Titanium studs on the 340 line.. They hold up outstanding.

NO gun should be trusted until you've fired it several hundred rounds through it. When you get the new one back, do just that, and you will have your answer. All mechanical things can have problems, but the large majority don't. If your new revolver performs without issues for you, you should be as able to trust it as any other! If for some reason it doesn't work as it should, get back on the phone. Let us know how it goes.

__________________
So long ... Ken