Most information here and elsewhere online is over 10 years old, so... Has anyone here actually experienced the problem that led to the recall which corresponds to the M stamp, with ANY factory ammo? If so, what is required to clear the jammed gun when it happens?

Now that local availability and prices are a bit more reasonable, I am considering buying an L-frame in shooter quality, and most likely only for the most common factory .357 rounds. Absolute 100% reliability is not a requirement. On the other hand, having this issue every dozen rounds... that would be annoying.

edit: Post 15 shows pics of the parts. See post 33 for a pic of the gun.

I had a 586 no dash set back the hammer nose bushing and broke the recoil shield firing hot, but load manual approved, hand loads. I sent it to the mother ship. They replaced the frame, and reassembled using the original parts.

__________________
"Don't Give Up the Ship"

My old man had a no dash 586 that pooped the bed back in the 80s. It swore him off the L-Frames until I started buying 'em.

__________________
GOA FL Dir. & Nat. Spokesman

That was about the time when I was in grad school, and broke most of the time. L-frames were not in my budget then, lol. I do remember when I saw the first ones, in SS, and also that some people called them "a solution to a problem that does not exist", "L stands for Lear Siegler..." etc. On the other hand, I feel like I have given it enough time now to see the reputation improve,

I cannot answer your direct question as I have not shot factory loads in my 686 no dash. I bought the gun in 1986 and had it jam with reloads using CCI500 primers, blue dot powder and 140 gr Speer bullets. Even though my loads were not maximum, the Speer manual in those days had hot blue dot loads. I sent it back to the factory for the recall and I have run many reloads with many different primer, powder and bullet formulas including the one that gave me problems. The gun has never had a problem since.

The issue is that the firing pin hole in the bushing was oversized and when shooting very hot loads the primer could "flow" back around the firing pin and lock up the gun.
This happened to a friend I was shooting with back in 1981 on his first shot with his new M686.
The fix is free and S&W will pay shipping both ways for you, so getting it fixed properly is no cost other than your revolver being away for awhile.
My suggestion is to get it done, you never know when it can happen, but normally it would when you needed it to go bang in a big way.

Just sayin...

__________________
.............SmithNut

How much effort did it take to clear the jam?

Lately, "a while" could be months!

It took several minutes of wiggling the cylinder gently to get it to free up. Since the primer had cratered back, you could not open the cylinder. At the time it happened to me I had never heard of the problem so it caught me by surprise. Shortly after it happened I read about the recall in a gun magazine (no internet forums back then) and had S&W fix it. At that time they had local factory approved gunsmiths so it was done by a local shop.

L-Frame recall.......


SMITH & WESSON
MODEL 581, 586, 681, 686, or 581-1,
586-1, 681-1, 686-1 & 686CS-1, REVOLVERS

RECALL: Reports have been received from the field where the combination of a SMITH & WESSON L-FRAME 357 MAGNUM REVOLVER and some .357 Magnum ammunition has resulted in unacceptable cylinder binding. L-frame revolvers bearing model numbers:

581, 586, 681, 686, or 581-1, 586-1,
681-1, 686-1, 686CS-1

Cylinder binding can cause a failure to fire. Mishandling a revolver while freeing the cylinder can result in accidental discharge.

Cylinder binding can result from a number of causes, including characteristics of an individual revolver or the use of ammunition, which does not conform to industry pressure specifications or is particularly fast burning. Recent developments in ammunition manufacture emphasize the production of .357 Magnum ammunition with increased velocity and greater primer sensitivity.

Although there have been very few reported incidents of cylinder binding, in view of our concern for our customer's safety and the reliability of Smith & Wesson products in all circumstances, we issue the following warning:

In a situation where a failure to fire can be critical - such as law enforcement or personal protection - do not use .357 Magnum ammunition with an L-frame revolver bearing model numbers 581, 586, 681, 686 or 581-1, 586-1, 681-1, 686-1, 686CS-1 without an "M" over the model number until you have had the revolver modified.

Those who need to use their L-frame revolver under these conditions prior to modification can safely fire .38 Special caliber ammunition.

Smith & Wesson has developed a modification to improve existing L-frame revolvers. This improvement enables them to fire all .357 Magnum ammunition, without cylinder binding. Shipments of L-frame revolvers from our factory after August 21, 1987 already include this improvement.

You can check if your revolver includes this improvement by looking at the left side of the frame when the cylinder is fully open. If your revolver has been stamped either with a "2" or higher number after the basic three-digit model number or with an "M" above the model number, your revolver includes this improvement and does not need modification. If your revolver bears the model number 581, 586, 681, 686, or 581-1, 586-1, 681-1, 686-1, 686CS-1 without an "M" over the model number, it does not include this improvement and your should have your revolver modified.

Smith & Wesson will modify your L-frame revolver free of charge to eliminate the possibility of cylinder binding with .357 Magnum ammunition. Law enforcement agencies wishing to arrange for modification of L-frame revolvers should call 800-331-0852 between 9 A.M. and 6 P.M. Eastern time (MA residents call 413-734-8244). Other users should send their revolvers to a Smith & Wesson Warranty Service Center, specifying "L-frame improvement program" and enclosing their name and return address.

One of the modifications to improve the L-frame revolver is the installation of a new hammer nose. This obsoletes all old L-frame hammer noses (part numbers 4702 and 7513) and all old L-frame hammer assemblies (part numbers 3366, 3378, 3380, 3382, 3391, 4722, 4723, 4726 and 4728) in field parts inventories. Superseded parts should never be fitted into a modified revolver as this may result in malfunction. It is essential for safety that you return these obsolete L-frame hammer noses and obsolete L-frame hammer assemblies for a free exchange to:

Smith & Wesson
Service Department
2100 Roosevelt Avenue
Springfield, MA 01101

__________________
Ret. LE, FA Instr, S&W Armorer

I had it happen to me with a 586. I was able to get it open then went ahead and sent it in for the upgrade. It too about 3 months to get the revolver back and this was pre pandemic (2018). It was simple to send it - they send you a label and pay for everything.

I bought my no-dash, no-M 586 back around '83 or '84. At the time, all I shot was factory ammo. Like many I started handloading because of the cost. My 586 hasn't been back for the upgrade and has never given me a bit of difficulty with factory or handloaded ammo. Still have it and still shoot it. Of course, it's just one gun and clearly others have had issues. YMMV.

I had problems with my 581 no dash. Sent it back in for the mod…
Haven’t really shot it since it came back…I need to dig it out of the safe.

__________________
MSG US Army

My no dash 686 was bought new by my father in September of 1981. It has an "AAB" serial prefix and he had issues with it binding with the factory Federal .357 ammo he was using at the time. It was sent back, has the M stamp and has had tens of thousands of all types of .357 and .38 through it since and is 100% reliable. I wouldn't have any hesitation to grab it if needed.

I used it to teach my sons to shoot when they were youngsters. I inherited it when my dad passed in early 1992. I have everything it came with, even his receipt.

It's always amazed me that such a small amount of clearance could make such a huge difference in the performance of these two parts. And, why didn't the K-frame .357 revolvers suffer from similar issues? I've seen many K-frame hammer noses and hammer nose bushings with larger tolerances than the early L-frames. Makes me wonder if the primer cups were actually part of the problem. (refit parts on the right in the photo)

The difference in the two parts amounts to approx .008".....with the gauge around the smaller refit parts just a bit closer between the hole and the nose.

Carter

__________________
Ret. LE, FA Instr, S&W Armorer

My 6" 686-1 was bought brand new in 1984 from a dealer in Silver Spring, Maryland, where I was stationed, and it locked up the first time I shot it, using Federal 158gr Jacketed .357. I gently tapped the cylinder open with a wood block while holding the cylinder catch forward and took it back to the dealer, who returned it to S&W. I still have the gun, now with M stamp, and have shot many thousands of rounds through it, with no more issues.

__________________
Science plus Art

Humm. It was my understanding that Federal primers from the 80s caused the recall and most say no issues since but could be wrong. With that said, I did send my no dash back in the 90s for the fix but never experienced the issue. I don't used my 586 for carry and kinda wish I never sent it back for the mod.

__________________
Shield 45, SW40VE, 586, 1000

Can I ask why? (Not trying to start an argument)

As I understand there was really only a small percentage of L frames with the problem, but Smith recalled all L frames without a dash and the dash 1s. The dash 2s all had the upgrade. A lot, and maybe the vast majority at the time were probably sent to law enforcement agencies. The hot LE 125 grain loads were the worst offenders. I'm sure they did not want an LE gun to lock up when needed most!

They went to a lot of trouble to get the LE guns updated, creating an instruction manual and a set of tools for LE armorers to update their department L frames, and ammo to test fire every gun. They may still be updating them at the factory. A few years ago, I sent two to update, shipping and work performed at no charge.

If you are concerned about this issue, just buy a -2 or higher. The L frames are solid performers!

By the way, the dash 2s and higher will not have the M stamp. Only those shipped prior to the dash 2s will have the M stamp if updated.

__________________
Richard Gillespie
FBINA 102

When they move to Texas, it could easily add months to the months

I've had some without the M stamp. When I called S&W about the upgrade, the guy on the phone gave me the impression that I was worried about nothing. I've never sent one back. Never had a problem. But, I haven't shot them a whole lot and never with "hot" loads.

__________________
'Merica!

Bad guy went to hospital and jail,
I got a lower leg cast.
It was the 80’s, and I was sent to the Firing Range to light duty.
I was given a bag of parts and an “M” stamp.
I did over 500 “ M” stamp modifications as it was a regional range.
The mods were easy and unremarkable
Lol my 581 is stamped “ MODIFIED “
Idle time is one of the the Devil’s tools.

I bought an unfired 6" 586 manufactured before the modification and called S&W about sending it back and I was told if I wasn't having any problems don't worry about it. I did have a 19-5 made in 80 that would lock up with Federal magnum loads.

OK, first off: Thank you for helping to make sure the rest of us can devote our quality time to annihilating paper targets, tomato cans, and the occasional wounded deer with our .357 hand canons. Some of us civilians DO appreciate that!

Second: 500 is a pretty good sample. Do you happen to know how many rounds the owners of those guns would have fired in a year, and among all of those 500 modified guns, were you aware of any complaints they jammed or misfired with any kind of ammo before being modified?

Bought a new 586 back in 1982 or 83. Although I never had any issues with it, I did send it in under the recall back around 1984 just to head off any future issues. They stamped the M on it and I have not had any issues.

[QUOTE

Second: 500 is a pretty good sample. Do you happen to know how many rounds the owners of those guns would have fired in a year, and among all of those 500 modified guns, were you aware of any complaints they jammed or misfired with any kind of ammo before being modified?[/QUOTE]

Ok my added brain This was the 80s.
To my memory no reported issues.
This was the time most agencies moved from ball to “ Duty “ rounds for qualification. As I was told a northern agency had a lockup and Smith responded with a recall.
My agency just ordered parts as we had several Smith trained armorers on staff.
I ran my L frame thru a 40 hr 2000 round class with no issues prior to the modification. But these were reloads

Most officers fired a 50 round qual once a year.
The offer was 50 a month availability at the range on “ your”
Time. Most didn’t use the ammo but as they didn’t those that came out had unlimited access to ammo.

I bought my no dash new in 1986(?). Never had an issue with it locking up. In 92, I sent it back because of a timing issue. They did the modification at that time.

Or less...I might even save them the shipping costs, and drop it off while I go to the grocery store......Ben

__________________
Cogito, ergo BOOM!...

I live in the Midwest (what the rest of y'all call fly-over country), and I just don't believe that quality or workmanship issues are state or region related. If you pay people enough, spend time and money to train them, and encourage pride in workmanship, not pride in cutting costs, you get better results. Any management consultant or QC engineer will tell you that.

A local company (not firearms) that I did some work for had quality issues in one part of their operation about two decades ago. Instead of punishing people for sending too many defects down the line, they reclassified that operational area a "high-skill" task, which in their convoluted management scheme automatically entitled the people who worked there to a whole additional 3 days of training per year, a stool to sit on, and about 80 cents (!) extra starting pay an hour. Problem solved within 8 weeks.

S&W has around 2,200 employees and over $1B in revenue. They are about to spend $125M to relocate. They could afford to spend some of that on a little extra training.

^^^^ this!

The L-Frame was developed to address the concerns (actual or perceived) of the rigorous use of full house Magnum loads in the K-Frame M-19's.

The incidents reported came from LE agencies, and were not numerous. Remember, at that time, S&W was battling Glock's increasing intrusion into LE sales,
and could ill afford any further reported glitches or negative publicity, so they issued the recall.

S&W did not specifically call out Federal ammo in the recall (I imagine that was done at the advice of their corporate lawyers), so they
generalized the conditions in the recall notice.

"Use of ammunition, which does not conform to industry pressure specifications or is particularly fast burning.

Recent developments in ammunition manufacture emphasize the production of .357 Magnum ammunition with increased velocity and greater primer sensitivity"

It's common knowledge that Federal has the softest primer cup for ease/reliabiity of ignition. It's for that reason that it's Jerry Miculek's choice (mentioned in several of
his Youtube channel videos) for loading the ammo that he uses in his tuned competition guns.

That "greater primer sensitivity" spells out Federal ammo, combined with a high velocity loading with a fast burning powder, and the lighter 110 and 125gr bullets, it all
resulted in the conditions that caused a problem.

Remember... that recall is over 30 years old. LE/Self-defense performance ammo has changed, I doubt that the exact same ammo that caused
the issue is even made today.

If S&W is still doing the work, the decision is of course yours to make... but I wouldn't stress out over it.

I haven't, with 2 586's and a 686 that haven't had the work done on them, and no issues encountered to date.

__________________
Conrad
SWCA #1830 SWHF #222

I bought my 686 no dash new in the mid 80's and have experienced zero issues with it.

It's a non issue for me.

Thanks for the info and for taking the time, everyone.
Found some additional information in a 10-year-old thread. I guess I did not search back far enough, lol. Apparently brought back once already, so I am just going to link it here:
586 Locked Up
For anyone else, Post #13 is where it gets interesting, with references to different ammo, primer pockets, bushings, oh my,

A couple pics to go with this thread, post-purchase. Came with the Goncalo Alves Target Stocks, Red Ramp, White outline rear sight, original box, and almost all of the papers. The gentleman who had owned it took good care of it, and I hope to do the same.



For anyone keeping track, Model 586 no-dash, s/n ABTxxxx shown in detail in the pic below, ~1983. The final cost in a private transaction was $950, including a couple boxes of .357 ammo. About $50 more than I would have had to haggle over at the LGS in my area, then pay sales tax and wait for my paperwork to clear.

Plus I got some free ammo, and for the purists, it is even period correct with date code, and a price of $10.99/box from a Red Tag sale. Time capsule from different times.

Attached Images

	20211203-132106.jpg (150.0 KB, 27 views)
	20211203-131710.jpg (110.1 KB, 55 views)

I have a no dash 686 I got in 1986 from an officer who hadn't fired it more than 100 times and for a really good deal. I ignored the recall for quite some time. In 1988 I went to firearms instructor school at the Texas DPS training facility in Austin. Most of the class we spent firing .38 specials, but there was a portion of the class where we had to shoot .357 magnum loads and the locking up issue raised its ugly head. I took the 686 to a local smith who was also a S&W warranty station. He did the "M" modification and I havent had an issue with it since

I bought a 686 no-dash in the early '80's......I think I was using CCI/Speer Lawman ammo (but I'm not sure) and it locked-up completely. I tried everything to clear it, but finally took it to a gunsmith to get it unjammed. I sent it off to S&W as soon as I learned of the recall and it fired everything I put through it after that. Wish I still had it, but I traded it in the early '90's for a shotgun. Since then I've owned several early L-frames and if they haven't already got the "M" then I send them to S&W for the fix.

JMO, but I can't see owning a firearm with a "known" potential problem that also has a "known" fix and not having the fix done .

Still have two L-frames, both are 586 no-dashes (pics below) and both have the "M".

Don

Attached Images

	fullsizeoutput_1d7.jpg (150.5 KB, 43 views)
	fullsizeoutput_1d6.jpg (79.1 KB, 40 views)

__________________
Laus Deo! <><

I've only owned two. A 686 that was made well past the recall, and now this one. Since you have sent more than one in, how long was the turnaround time?

The U.S. Customs Service CS-1 was a design flaw from a person from the National Firearms Program Staff that felt the tolerances needed to be closer. He was a Camp perry rifle shooter and thought all LEO guns needed to be match grade. (Of course he had never worked as an LEO).

The problem U.S.C.S. experienced was the fact most of the Agents and Officers shot the Federal .38 Spl. 110 gr. +P+ Treasury ammo in their .357 magnums. The unburnt powder would get build up under the extractor star and in a very short period of time (30-40 rounds) it would push the extractor star back against the cylinder effectively locking up the revolver. The CS-1's were either returned to S&W or the Armorers at the National firearms Program Staff for the repairs. When the guns came back into the field, most Agents and Officers did not carry them as they had lost confidence in the CS-1. Less than two years after the CS-1 was adopted, it was replaced by the S&W 6906 9mm pistol.

I have a 3 inch CS-1 that I got in the early 90's when they were exchanged sold before President Clinton stopped the practice. It is a "2m" stamped revolver and works like a champ.

The last L-frame I sent in for the "M" was several years ago and I had it back in about 2 weeks as I recall.

However, the turn-around time may be quite different now. I would suggest you contact S&W and question them about the current time frame.

Don

__________________
Laus Deo! <><

Bought one for Dad, 4" 586 RR, TT, TH, WO rear, haven't shot maybe a box of .38SPC and not +P's. Ser AABxxxx so early model production.
Since it's mine now, I'll just keep it as it came. I've sent SW some later model recalls, but I'm skipping this one.

__________________
Friendly Fire Isn't

I just picked up a very lightly used 686 no dash today. Can someone please share the location of the M stamp?

__________________
"Tastes just like chicken"

In the space between the serial number and the Model number on the inside of the yoke.

Attached Images

20211206-175031.jpg (110.9 KB, 41 views)

Thank you. After the wife goes to bed and I have a chance to sneak it inside, I'll know where to look now.

__________________
"Tastes just like chicken"

Ditto. I have a 586 and a 681 both ND. I fire mostly .38 Spl. as well.

When I take the dirt nap the next owner can decide.

__________________
BTDT, Got The T-Shirt

I had a 6” 686 no dash with the adjustable front sight. It did have the M stamp in the crane. I was shooting some old .357 loads that I had loaded in the 80s. The load was 15.0 grains of 2400 with a CCI 350 magnum primer. Locked her up. Finally got it opened and checked the brass. Cases appeared to be fine. After it did it again, it went to the next gun show.

I've heard some collectors think since it didn't ship with the mod then it isn't original once the mod is done. Might be a stretch but to each his/her own.

My nickel 4" no- never messed up so I never sent it back.

__________________
S&W Accumulator

I can see that, especially if you have one of the first guns shipped. Or, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" kind of thing.

Hi everybody ! First post ! I bought my 686 no dash in 2019 without reading the 4th edition of the standard catalog closely enough to see the recall. I was afraid to shoot the gun without the modification so I called S&W and mailed it back to them. It took them 10 weeks, but the gun has run just fine since then. They even fixed a rough spot the previous owner left under the ejector ! My 686 is lying by the bed right now !

Our department was the first in the area to received the 686. We traded in out model 66 revolvers along with $50 per revolver for the new ones. About A year later A complete kit containing the tools needed and new bushings and hammer noses an M stamp along with boxes of Federal 158 gr. .357 magnum ammo arrived in my mailbox at work. The instructions were quite clear and all 35 686 revolvers in my departrment were done. Never had a problem with any of them. I do remember we had some problems with the model 66 we had with the cylinders suddenly jamming. It was felt it was a problem with the primers at the time.

Call me silly but other than hunting, police duty, and ***** and grins, what need is there of shooting hot loads? All of my K, L, and N frames have shot 3.4 grains of Bullseye and 5 grains of Unique for over 30 years without damage.