|
|
08-20-2018, 08:32 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 1,285
Likes: 1,112
Liked 1,609 Times in 660 Posts
|
|
642 firing pin bushing damage?
I am the original owner of the model 642-2 revolver. It was purchased new on black friday last year 2017. I probably shot around 800 rounds thru it including a handful of +P's. All factory loads that consist mostly of Monarch 158gr JSP, Federal american eagle 158gr LRN, Remington golden sabre 125gr +P and G&W box 130gr Remington FMJ's...
Look in the two photos I uploaded and you'll see pitting inside of the frame next to the firing pin bushing and what appears to be a crack along the bushing itself. Would this be considered normal wear & tear? I have already sent S&W customer service a email and included these same photos.. has anyone seen this before?
|
08-20-2018, 08:45 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Maine
Posts: 587
Likes: 761
Liked 922 Times in 349 Posts
|
|
Never seen a crack like that. I also am surprised by the groove worn into the recoil plate, do you flip the cylinder closed? Wonder why such a pronounced wearing.
__________________
Bob P.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
08-20-2018, 08:58 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 1,285
Likes: 1,112
Liked 1,609 Times in 660 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefbob81
do you flip the cylinder closed
|
Flip the cylinder closed? no, never...I've always closed the cylinders on my revolvers by hand. I never seen this before on any handgun.
|
08-20-2018, 10:00 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Demon-class planet
Posts: 7,403
Likes: 29,169
Liked 8,461 Times in 3,772 Posts
|
|
Looks like another candidate for repair on the company dime.
Kaaskop49
Shield #5103
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
08-20-2018, 10:38 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 5,346
Likes: 11,606
Liked 9,019 Times in 3,193 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaaskop49
Looks like another candidate for repair on the company dime.
Kaaskop49
Shield #5103
|
Yeah, I agree with this statement too.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
08-21-2018, 09:53 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sandy Utah
Posts: 8,743
Likes: 1,590
Liked 8,897 Times in 3,548 Posts
|
|
That is not a crack, it is erosion from a failed primer. In other words, gas cutting. It is usually seen on the hammer nose bushing itself, but can extend into the frame. Aluminum frames are more susceptible to this than steel frames.
__________________
Gunsmithing since 1961
|
The Following 9 Users Like Post:
|
|
08-21-2018, 12:50 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Southern FL, East side.
Posts: 2,296
Likes: 2,331
Liked 3,028 Times in 1,260 Posts
|
|
I don't know the answer but I'm interested in this story. I get that the aluminum is more susceptible to damage than the steel. Isn't that part of the reason for that steel bushing, to protect the aluminum? Wouldn't the firing pin itself show some damage or roughness? The gun in general looks very high mileage. I wonder how many miles aluminum J frames are good for. It looks more like what I'd expect to see from a range rental. But then I'd never consider putting 800 rounds of anything through an aluminum J frame. I've had my model 60 for well over 30 years and I doubt I've put 800 rounds through it but maybe. It did go through a few qualifications but the +P was rare. I don't think it was actually rated for +P but it is all stainless steel. The gun in question just looks kinda worn to me, but I'm not a big aluminum revolver person.
Best of luck and I hope it works out well.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
08-21-2018, 12:58 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 350
Likes: 20
Liked 481 Times in 142 Posts
|
|
Aluminum frame explains the wear gouge from the cylinder latch pin.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
08-21-2018, 11:58 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sandy Utah
Posts: 8,743
Likes: 1,590
Liked 8,897 Times in 3,548 Posts
|
|
"I get that the aluminum is more susceptible to damage than the steel. Isn't that part of the reason for that steel bushing, to protect the aluminum?"
No. All S&W hand ejectors have the hammer nose bushing, regardless of frame material.
"Wouldn't the firing pin itself show some damage or roughness?"
It depends on where the failure of the primer occurs. If it is in the firing pin impression, the firing pin most definitely can be damaged. In this case the failure was in the primer annulus, which will often damage the hammer nose bushing itself. In this case the gun is a .38 special. If it had been a .357 magnum with its' much higher pressure you would see gas cutting of the hammer nose bushing.
__________________
Gunsmithing since 1961
|
08-22-2018, 12:04 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 1,285
Likes: 1,112
Liked 1,609 Times in 660 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alk8944
That is not a crack, it is erosion from a failed primer. In other words, gas cutting. It is usually seen on the hammer nose bushing itself, but can extend into the frame. Aluminum frames are more susceptible to this than steel frames.
|
Well that makes sense. Thank you.
I'm disappointed and I hope that a reasonable solution that makes both parties happy comes out of this. I sent the revolver back to S&W today.
I will say this. I am not happy with the amount of wear on the frame shown on the revolver after firing nearly 800 rounds. They never advertise the revolver as having a limited lifespan. I never owned/carried a snub nose revolver and wanted to learn to master the double action trigger and "wear in" the action to smooth it out. S&W advertises the 642 as rated for "continuous +P" so I assumed that it was built to last since a great majority of my rounds were 158 gr. LRN remington or Federal with a couple boxes of Golden Sabre +P's thrown in. The barrel and cylinder show no wear at all. It's the frame that's taking a beating. This will be the last aluminum alloy framed pistol I'll ever buy.
Last edited by RGVshooter; 08-22-2018 at 12:11 PM.
|
08-22-2018, 12:38 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 1,264
Likes: 197
Liked 797 Times in 282 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alk8944
That is not a crack, it is erosion from a failed primer. In other words, gas cutting. It is usually seen on the hammer nose bushing itself, but can extend into the frame. Aluminum frames are more susceptible to this than steel frames.
|
Yep, this can and does happen. Usually with reloads that are tad too hot coupled with brass that was shot (cycled) a little too much (primer pocket is weakened). Of course, it can be just a bad primer.
This can happen with factory ammo, too. Back in 2000, I was firing some Hornady factory ammo in a Ruger Model 77 rifle. I tend to check my spent cases after firing, and I noticed a some "primer leakage" around the primer pockets in 2 or 3 of about 15 rounds I fired. Since the Ruger bolt is tough stainless steel and since I caught it early, there was very little evidence of the leakage on the face of the bolt.
I packed up all the spent cases and remaining ammo from that lot number (a full box and the remaining few of rounds for the trouble box) and shipped them back to Hornady. I didn't think much about it until I got a letter and check from Hornady a month later. The letter contained an analysis of the cases and ammo. Some of the cases had a micro crack in the head around the primer pocket from the "drawing" of brass during the manufacturing. The check was enough for about 3 or 4 boxes of factory ammo. Like I said, it can and does happen.
If a leaking primer can cause little tiny craters to form on the face of a stainless steel bolt, I imagine it would be pretty tough on aluminum. FWIW
__________________
1st Signal Brigade, RVN '70
|
08-22-2018, 02:52 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: NOVA
Posts: 1,385
Likes: 5,609
Liked 1,381 Times in 581 Posts
|
|
Sorry to see this sir - and kinda scary for me since I have two 442's. That said, both of them are very low mileage. Although a lot of folks have been able to get their alu-framed J-frames into high mileage territory - I have always looked at them as shoot-a-little and carry-a-lot. I don't think S&W has ever specified any numbers - but I think 800+ is getting up in high round count territory where you might expect to see some problems pop up. As for me, I have a 60 and 640 that I can use for practice and they should hold up a lot longer. Finally, to the point, your 642 is an ideal candidate for a trip back to the mothership!!
|
08-27-2018, 10:31 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 1,285
Likes: 1,112
Liked 1,609 Times in 660 Posts
|
|
I checked the tracking number and my 642 made it safely back to its birthplace.
Anyone guess what S&W is going to do? Any ideas at all?
|
08-28-2018, 04:50 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 481
Likes: 593
Liked 485 Times in 223 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGVshooter
Anyone guess what S&W is going to do? Any ideas at all?
|
No clue.
I do agree with your post about the longevity of the gun though. 800 rounds is just getting started as far as I'm concerned.
I've noticed the bluing wearing off on the 442 I picked up a couple months ago. Sure, it's holster wear, and I honestly don't care, but I would have expected the finish to hold up better. Things ain't what they used to be, that's for sure.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
08-28-2018, 09:44 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Lone Tree, Colorado
Posts: 89
Likes: 209
Liked 91 Times in 47 Posts
|
|
I shoot my 340PD enough to remain proficient - 25 rounds of +P .38 per month - but otherwise it just rides along. It's a .357 so I've assumed that the use of .38 ammo would have little if any effect on the longevity of the gun but your post has me thinking . . . I wonder if anyone who uses their aluminum framed revolver as I do has experienced wear like that shown in the OPs photos?
__________________
ol' country Jim
|
08-28-2018, 02:21 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 2,066
Likes: 3,650
Liked 2,227 Times in 945 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by yep380
No clue.
I do agree with your post about the longevity of the gun though. 800 rounds is just getting started as far as I'm concerned.
I've noticed the bluing wearing off on the 442 I picked up a couple months ago. Sure, it's holster wear, and I honestly don't care, but I would have expected the finish to hold up better. Things ain't what they used to be, that's for sure.
|
Can I get a pic? I have some wear on mine. But not what I would think to be excessive. It's actually not much at all....
|
08-28-2018, 05:19 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 481
Likes: 593
Liked 485 Times in 223 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABPOS
Can I get a pic? I have some wear on mine. But not what I would think to be excessive. It's actually not much at all....
|
Attached. There's some loss along the top strap edge as well, but it's hard to get a picture of it.
And, as I said before, I don't care (it's a carry gun)... but I really would have expected the finish to be more durable. I have a 586 I bought new in 1991 that has seen a bit of holster time, including some wet days in a deer stand. It's also seen way more range time than this 442 and aside from some very minor scratches that were my fault, it essentially looks brand new.
|
09-14-2018, 02:30 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 1,285
Likes: 1,112
Liked 1,609 Times in 660 Posts
|
|
I'm still waiting for a letter from S&W regarding my 642.. I sent out a email to customer service this morning inquiring on it's status. In the meantime I've been packing my 4" 686 in a Galco Master combat holster... lol... in the right belt it's not as bad as one thinks...
|
09-14-2018, 04:30 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: South of Rochester , NY
Posts: 1,229
Likes: 77
Liked 1,342 Times in 559 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by yep380
Attached. There's some loss along the top strap edge as well, but it's hard to get a picture of it.
And, as I said before, I don't care (it's a carry gun)... but I really would have expected the finish to be more durable. I have a 586 I bought new in 1991 that has seen a bit of holster time, including some wet days in a deer stand. It's also seen way more range time than this 442 and aside from some very minor scratches that were my fault, it essentially looks brand new.
|
That isn't bluing. It's a finish similar to paint. My 642 started getting pretty chewed up across the back of the grips frame and where it was rubbing the holster as well.I decided to polish it and couldn't be happier with the results. But the finish of both the 642 and 442 are notorious for not wearing well.
__________________
1st smiles,lies.Last,gunfire.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-21-2018, 03:19 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 1,285
Likes: 1,112
Liked 1,609 Times in 660 Posts
|
|
UPDATE!
I received an email from S&W this morning. They are going to replace the frame and are requesting my FFL info so they can send a new 642 back to me.
|
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-21-2018, 04:11 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 4,189
Likes: 3,543
Liked 3,996 Times in 1,627 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGVshooter
Well that makes sense. Thank you.
I'm disappointed and I hope that a reasonable solution that makes both parties happy comes out of this. I sent the revolver back to S&W today.
I will say this. I am not happy with the amount of wear on the frame shown on the revolver after firing nearly 800 rounds. They never advertise the revolver as having a limited lifespan. I never owned/carried a snub nose revolver and wanted to learn to master the double action trigger and "wear in" the action to smooth it out. S&W advertises the 642 as rated for "continuous +P" so I assumed that it was built to last since a great majority of my rounds were 158 gr. LRN remington or Federal with a couple boxes of Golden Sabre +P's thrown in. The barrel and cylinder show no wear at all. It's the frame that's taking a beating. This will be the last aluminum alloy framed pistol I'll ever buy.
|
I WOULD BE EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED WITH THIS REVOLVER, IF IT WAS MINE......
IMHO, S&W SHOULD REPLACE THIS REVOLVER WITH A NEW ONE ! ! !
__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.
|
09-21-2018, 04:24 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 4,189
Likes: 3,543
Liked 3,996 Times in 1,627 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by F75gunslinger
That isn't bluing. It's a finish similar to paint. My 642 started getting pretty chewed up across the back of the grips frame and where it was rubbing the holster as well.I decided to polish it and couldn't be happier with the results. But the finish of both the 642 and 442 are notorious for not wearing well.
|
WHAT DID YOU POLISH YOUR 642 WITH ? ? ?
DID YOU COMPLETELY REMOVE THE CLEARCOAT FINISH ? ? ?
__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.
|
09-22-2018, 12:35 AM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 1,285
Likes: 1,112
Liked 1,609 Times in 660 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by one eye joe
I WOULD BE EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED WITH THIS REVOLVER, IF IT WAS MINE......
IMHO, S&W SHOULD REPLACE THIS REVOLVER WITH A NEW ONE ! ! !
|
They are. I got an email this morning asking for my FFL info. They're going to send me a new revolver.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-22-2018, 02:08 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 5,346
Likes: 11,606
Liked 9,019 Times in 3,193 Posts
|
|
I'm glad to hear that it is working out OK for you RGVshooter. Good luck with the replacement gun.
|
09-22-2018, 07:38 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Highlands, North Carolina
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 2,096
Liked 2,202 Times in 883 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGVshooter
They are. I got an email this morning asking for my FFL info. They're going to send me a new revolver.
|
Smith & Wesson are good people. 800 rounds isn't anything and that's little more than 3 months of semi-regular training schedule at my house with any new carry piece! As for the ammo you use in your new issued Revo, I'd make sure to use factory loaded, brass cased ammo to break your new carry baby in and keep an eye on the firing pin bushing/same area of damage in your returned/pictured piece. I'm betting that was a freak occurrence or a bad batch of ammo with fatigued primer pockets as someone already has stated.
And unless something has changed recently a manufacturer can send you a replacement firearm or a factory repaired firearm to your door. Springfield did it with my 1911 2 years ago. Doesn't matter much either way you are getting a new piece.
|
09-22-2018, 09:05 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nevada
Posts: 503
Likes: 786
Liked 289 Times in 149 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by HamHands
...
And unless something has changed recently a manufacturer can send you a replacement firearm or a factory repaired firearm to your door. ...
|
There are a few states (~10, as I recall) which do not allow a new serial numbered firearm to be sent directly back to the owner without going through an FFL.
__________________
66/642/640/627/586/60/638/686
|
09-22-2018, 07:02 PM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 1,285
Likes: 1,112
Liked 1,609 Times in 660 Posts
|
|
No, I have to go thru a FFL to have the new serial number transfered to me. I'm in Texas.
As soon as I get the replacement I intend to sell it and most likely use those funds to purchase a new 640 revolver as my EDC. And retire the Kel Tec P32 that I've been carrying as my EDC although today for giggles I carried my 4" 686.
|
09-22-2018, 07:52 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 4
Liked 1,025 Times in 510 Posts
|
|
I think that's true in all states if you are getting a gun with a new serial number (one that does not show on any 4473 as having been transferred to you.) That's the only way the gubmint can keep track of all guns from the manufacturer to the consumer and track down all those criminals and eliminate gun crime and all that stuff.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-22-2018, 08:59 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nevada
Posts: 503
Likes: 786
Liked 289 Times in 149 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-2
There are a few states (~10, as I recall) which do not allow a new serial numbered firearm to be sent directly back to the owner without going through an FFL.
|
I found the list of states/US territories which require, when a manufacturer replaces a frame, i.e., a new serial number, needs to go through an FFL:
CALIFORNIA, MARYLAND, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, HAWAII, MICHIGAN, AND U.S. TERRITORIES.
I think there are four U.S. territories: Guam, Samoa, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands.
EDIT: CH4 pointed out there's another territory: the Northern Mariana Islands
__________________
66/642/640/627/586/60/638/686
Last edited by L-2; 09-23-2018 at 07:02 PM.
Reason: add'l territory
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-22-2018, 11:36 PM
|
Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Louisville, KY, USA
Posts: 19,336
Likes: 53,737
Liked 38,387 Times in 11,802 Posts
|
|
If you like a DAO, concealed hammer J-frame that will likely outlive you, try a 640 or 640-1. All stainless steel, a few ounces heavier than the 642 but more comfortable and controllable to shoot and more durable. No finish to peel. The 640-1 is a .357 if that suits you, but the 640 will handle the hottest .38 Special loads with aplomb.
__________________
Oh well, what the hell.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-22-2018, 11:43 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 4,189
Likes: 3,543
Liked 3,996 Times in 1,627 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGVshooter
They are. I got an email this morning asking for my FFL info. They're going to send me a new revolver.
|
I'M GLAD TO READ THAT THEY ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING ! ! !
__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-22-2018, 11:49 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 4,189
Likes: 3,543
Liked 3,996 Times in 1,627 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-2
I found the list of states/US territories which require, when a manufacturer replaces a frame, i.e., a new serial number, needs to go through an FFL:
CALIFORNIA, MARYLAND, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, HAWAII, MICHIGAN, AND U.S. TERRITORIES.
I think there are four U.S. territories: Guam, Samoa, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands.
|
I AM SURPRISED TO LEARN THAT THIS IS NOT A FEDERAL REQUIREMENT FOR ALL THE STATES.....
__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.
|
09-23-2018, 06:35 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: South Central Texas
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 2,688
Liked 1,114 Times in 501 Posts
|
|
S&W Paint Jobs
Quote:
Originally Posted by F75gunslinger
That isn't bluing. It's a finish similar to paint. My 642 started getting pretty chewed up across the back of the grips frame and where it was rubbing the holster as well.I decided to polish it and couldn't be happier with the results. But the finish of both the 642 and 442 are notorious for not wearing well.
|
Boy, isn't that the truth...!
FWIW, I included an image of my 642's holster. Yes it was my daily carry. I have since re-dyed the holster black.
I also replaced the 642 Aluminum frame with a new steel frame 2in Kimber, and THAT added another round (now 6). The Kimber only weighs 23oz vs the 642's 14.4oz empty. Why Kimber?... The last image shows how my then new 642 arrived, and all of the aluminum shavings internally. This was the second new S&W purchase in ~2yr that I had to do a trigger job on to get them to function properly, hence the Kimber this go around.
|
09-23-2018, 05:58 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 4,189
Likes: 3,543
Liked 3,996 Times in 1,627 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by HorizontalMike
Boy, isn't that the truth...!
FWIW, I included an image of my 642's holster. Yes it was my daily carry. I have since re-dyed the holster black.
I also replaced the 642 Aluminum frame with a new steel frame 2in Kimber, and THAT added another round (now 6). The Kimber only weighs 23oz vs the 642's 14.4oz empty. Why Kimber?... The last image shows how my then new 642 arrived, and all of the aluminum shavings internally. This was the second new S&W purchase in ~2yr that I had to do a trigger job on to get them to function properly, hence the Kimber this go around.
|
THAT'S A SAD COMMENTARY ABOUT WHAT IMHO, IS A LACK OF PRIDE IN WORKMANSHIP AT THE FACTORY, AND A SHIFTING OF THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR QUALITY CONTROL, TO THE END USERS OF THEIR PRODUCT.....
THE VERY LAST NEW FIREARM THAT I WILL EVER PURCHASE FROM S&W, IS A CURRENT PRODUCTION 4" 617, THAT NEEDED FACTORY REPAIRS FROM THE GIT-GO.......
THAT'S A FINE LOOKING KIMBER REVOLVER. I DON'T BLAME YOU FOR JUMPING SHIP, AND I WISH YOU THE BEST OF LUCK WITH YOUR NEW GUN......
__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.
|
09-23-2018, 06:09 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Mojave Desert
Posts: 10,377
Likes: 18,079
Liked 24,281 Times in 6,869 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-2
I found the list of states/US territories which require, when a manufacturer replaces a frame, i.e., a new serial number, needs to go through an FFL:
CALIFORNIA, MARYLAND, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, HAWAII, MICHIGAN, AND U.S. TERRITORIES.
I think there are four U.S. territories: Guam, Samoa, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands.
|
There are 5. Missing is the Northern Mariana Islands.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|