Just got a brand new model 69 44 magnum. Have not even fired it yet. Was checking it out today and noticed the rear face of the barrel ( where it forms a gap with the cylinder) is all chewed up with galling and has wavy chatter marks, definitely not flat. Also when I close the cylinder I can see a distinct taper, the gap is close near the top and wider near the bottom. Seems pretty messed up, check out the pix. UPDATE: Now I have an issue with the chambers too, see post #6

Attached Images

	SW-BAD-BARREL-FACE-A.jpg (113.7 KB, 349 views)
	SW-BAD-BARREL-FACE-B.jpg (88.1 KB, 318 views)

I've seen this all to often these days. One dull tool. and the one that goes in the chuck.

Send it back have them set the barrel back and try again.

UNFORTUNATELY like many new Smiths it should have never left the Factory - but DID! It must go back for them to fix it.

A slightly different take:
Shoot it.
If it shoots the way you want ignore the cosmetic problem.
If it spits lead or won't hit a barn send it back for a new barrel.

I have a 4" 624 that shoots fairly well for a large mouth (cylinder) Smith.
It has a couple of cosmetic issues including a mis-formed firing pin bushing.
(I actually sent it back for this and they did NOTHING).
As long as it shoots safely, I leave it alone now.

__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

Well lucky for S&W I probably wont ask them to fix it. I bought this for the purpose of modifying it and am going to be re-barreling this with a heavier shroud (see THIS POST ) and possibly shortening the barrel a little so when I have it apart I can just face the end flat, I am just surprised at how bad it is.

O.K. I finally went to the range and shot this and now I have another issue with this. I have owned 2 Dan Wesson 44 Magnums and have never seen chambers this big and loose. The bullets are flopping around in there pretty bad. After firing, the cases are very bulged. The fired cases from this measure .460, fired cases from the Dan Wesson measure .458. Seems like this is a little too big and going to shorten the life of my brass a lot. Wondering if this is able to be returned, I am really that unhappy with the big chamber.

Attached Images

	44-CASE-BULGE-1.jpg (114.0 KB, 244 views)
	44-CASE-BULGE-2.jpg (127.0 KB, 209 views)

I would send it back if it were mine

Your chambers are within SAAMI specification, so S&W will not do anything about that. What appears to you to be excessive expansion is more from the cases being, probably, minimum or close to minimum, so when fired in a near maximum chamber will give the appearance of abnormal expansion. Measure your cases at the base, I will bet they are close to SAAMI minimum of .4509" which is minimum.

Just because you don't like the way it looks it doesn't mean it isn't right!

True, but seems to me to be a lot of expansion. Full length sizing is going to work this brass more than the ones from the Dan Wessons that are .002 smaller. Not sure I am even going to reload this brass, I only got PMC to try out the gun. All my other brass is Remington and Federal and I am thinking of totally starting over and getting some Starline.

I would suggest going with Starline. Per SAAMI the diameter at the base for a 44 Magnum case is 0.4569, which is only 0.0031 inch under your stated measurement. From the visual appearance of your fired cases I would guess the base diameter is 0.450 inch or less, way under the SAAMI specification for new cases. So, most of the blame for that bulging goes to PMC.

As for your measurements of the fired cases, keep in mind that if you are using calipers the potential error can be as much as +/- 0.001 inch. The error is largely dependent on how much "squeeze" was used when the caliper was zeroed and how much "squeeze" was used when the caliper was read. A variation in the force applied for the reading can easily cause a deviation of 0.0005 inch and when that deviation is stacked up you can easily see a variation of 0.001 inch even if you are being careful. It's why I prefer a micrometer with a tension clutch or ratchet on the spindle for precision measurements.

Per SAAMI your chambers should be at 0.4598 inch for the base of the case and 0.4580 at the case neck. So, if you are getting accurate measurements from your Dan Wessons it's possible the chambers are actually a bit undersize. Problem is that brass is famous for Work Hardening and one consequence of that Work Hardening is that Springback increases as the brass gets harder. So, if you were using "harder" brass in your Dan Wesson it is quite possible that the chambers in your Dan Wesson are exactly the same as in your new model 69. Using fired cases to determine chamber dimensions is just not a good or reliable means of measuring a chamber. What you need are either a 1) chamber gage set, 2) an expensive Bore Micrometer, or 3) a set of precision Pin gages of the correct diameters. Otherwise any measurements you take should be considered to have a potential error of as much as 0.003 inch in either the Plus or Minus direction.

Finally, in regards to that barrel that is completely and totally unacceptable. I know you plan on fixing this yourself. However I would like to point out that by insisting on a warranty repair you'll serve every potential S&W revolver purchaser a benefit. Because when you insist on defects like this being repaired it generates costs for S&W. Since every business I am acquainted tracks these types of costs that means that it will generate a report to Quality Control about the Defect and a request that Quality Control identify how that Defect Occured, what is being done to prevent future occurances, and why this Defect wasn't caught by the Final Inspection. Basically, every revolver sent back with a glaring defect like creates a massive stack of paperwork that the Quality Manager has to sign off on. Someday S&W might actually come to the conclusion that making faulty product is just too expensive and will start implementing Quality Control measures that actually eliminate Defects like this from being created. BTW, Statistical Process Control was implemented by Ford motor company in 1985 and it proved so benficial to Ford's bottomline that by 1988 every automotive manufacturer in the US was or had implemented some variant of Statistical Process Control. I will also note that one thing that SPC does in regards to this exact type of defect is that it defines a Tool Change Interval that eliminates tools this worn out from being used.

Thanks for your informative reply. I have been machining since the mid 80's and I have my own very small machine shop so I did use a nice Mitutoyo tenth mic to measure these so the measurements are spot on. I will have to set up a dial bore and check the actual chamber. I don't own the Dan Wessons anymore I only happen to have the old casings that I know they came from because they are the only 44 magnums I ever owned. Had one, sold it, regretted selling it so bought another one, sold that one in '02 or '03, been wanting another ever since. I figured the PMC brass was part of the problem. What you are saying about returning it for barrel work makes sense on principal but it seems like a big hassle with no real return for my time especially since I would then just take it off and machine it again.

What scooter123 didn't say, and maybe doesn't know, is that the SAAMI dimensions have specified tolerances! AND, the figure he gives is for a point .200 ahead of the base, not for the base!

If it helps clear things up for you the .44 Spl. mininum base diameter for the chamber is .4590 +.004/-.000. The maximum base diameter for the cartridge case is .457 +.000/-.006. So if you had a maximum chamber and minimum cartridge there would be a maximum case expansionof .012".

As far as sizing is concerned this is a fixed figure controlled by the sizing die. Typical sizing dies size cases closer to maximum than minimum. Say your die sizes to the maximum dimension of .4570", your cases are not going to be sized any smaller if they started at minimum diameter (.4570" -.006" = .4510") and expanded to your chamber which is .002" under maximum, than they would if they started at maximum diameter before firing! The case only gets worked "excessively" on initial firing, but the same amount when re-sized in the same die.

Try this, since you are shooting a revolver. Only size your cases as deep as the bullet seats, and if they will chamber freely in every charge hole just shoot them this way. There is often no need to full-length size revolver cases that center-fire rifle cases! If there are problems then use a Lee "Carbide Factory Crimp Die" for crimping and final sizing. The Lee die sizes the cases only to approximately maximum diameter, not to minimum as many believe! This will result in cases being sized the least possible amount.

If you are worried about excessive sizing DO NOT use a standard Carbide die to full-length size. This will excessively size the full body of the case regardless of what diameter it was as-fired. This is why Redding makes two-diameter Carbide sizing dies! They saiz cases to two diameters, neck tighter than the body, just like old-style steel dies that require lubrication do! Neck sizing and then final sizing with the Lee CFC die does exactly the same thing, but doesn't cost over $100 for the Redding die!

I read you post about the 2 step die and the Lee factory crimp die in another thread a few days ago. I saw a cutaway view of this die, what part is carbide, the crimper in the top or the ring in the bottom? Also do you know the actual inside diameter of the sizing part of it?

I did measure my chamber today. With a dial bore I am getting .4614 in the chamber just in front of the extractor (right where chamber is fully round not where the extractor cutout is). A .460 gage pin goes in every chamber the full length of the brass (i used hardened and ground professional gage pins). A .461 gage pin goes in about 1/4" deep in all cylinders. Might technically be within allowable numbers but still seems big to me. I would rather have all my chambers at the minimum and hone them out if needed than have them sloppy.

Attached Images

DIE.jpg (7.5 KB, 68 views)

Do those cases even go thru the extractor?

Call S&W & explain the problem to them. It needs to go back to them.

I had a similar looking trouble with my 657-5. The brass wouldn't even go thru the extractor. They replaced the cylinder in just a couple weeks & now everything is good.

657-5 loose chambers are bulging cases *(S&W repaired)*

Let us know what they say.

.

657-5 Bulged Cases


.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

What is the case mouth diameter after firing?. Your cases look like they were fired from a colt 45 chamber with that much brass expansion. Definitely send it back to S&W. Frank

Since the OP is in Springfield,can he drop it off,or must he go through the requesting of a return label,and shipping it down the street? I imagine that S&W ships out repaired guns,no matter how close the owner is.

Interesting. I was thinking I could just walk in there and get service. I will bring it in and have them take a look at it and if they have to ship it to an FFL that's fine I just hope there is no added expense.

About being local: I was born in Springfield and have driven by the factory thousands of times. I even picked up racks of cylinders there and drove them somewhere when I drove for a local courier service. (I wont say where, I don't know if they want that kind of info out there)

I would try and get a direct measurement of the cylinder. The brass is going to be smaller than the cylinder due to the brass springing back once its fired. The cylinder has to be larger than .4600 if the brass came out of it.

I posted actual chamber measurements with a dial bore and gage pins in post #13. Its easy to miss because it is included with a reloading die question:
"With a dial bore I am getting .4614 in the chamber just in front of the extractor (right where chamber is fully round not where the extractor cutout is). A .460 gage pin goes in every chamber the full length of the brass (I used hardened and ground professional gage pins). A .461 gage pin goes in about 1/4" deep in all cylinders."

Also I did measure the PMC brass at the base and the diameter is .452. Its starting to look more like its a brass issue. If the brass was .457 there would hardly be any visible bulge.

"Your cases look like they were fired from a colt 45 chamber with that much brass expansion."

That's what it looks like to me too! Will a .45 Colt or .45 ACP cartridge fit in the chamber?

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

Now that I have posted my actual chamber dimensions can a gunsmith or other knowledgeable person comment on whether or not this is a good chamber please. Thank you
"With a dial bore I am getting .4614 in the chamber just in front of the extractor (right where chamber is fully round not where the extractor cutout is). A .460 gage pin goes in every chamber the full length of the brass (I used hardened and ground professional gage pins). A .461 gage pin goes in about 1/4" deep in all cylinders." Thanks

http://www.saami.org/pubresources/cc...n%20Magnum.pdf

That says all there is to say.

Here is the diagram:
The diameter they show for the chamber is .4581" + .004
Your chambers are right in the middle of that range.

Attached Images

44mag.jpg (50.5 KB, 45 views)

__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

That's what I was afraid of. In my opinion its on the big side but because technically its within spec I cant get a replacement. Got some Starline brass inbound. With that and some careful case sizing im sure I can improve things a bit.

Its a side issue, but I am wondering why you have twice bought and sold a Dan Wesson in that caliber. You seem to have regretted the sale both times.

At the time (mid 80's to early 90's) I considered Dan Wesson to be superior in design to S&W: locking the cylinder in the front latch rather than the rear and the tensioned barrel system with separate shroud. Being able to interchange barrels quickly was nice too, I had a 4, 6 and 8 inch vent heavy barrel setup. S&W has caught up with the tensioned barrel system but at the time I owned my DW's they did not. I don't know of any current S&W revolvers that have the ability to rapidly change barrels. I sold the first one for funds, if I remember correctly, to get money for an HK91 pre-ban. I bought another one but then that went when in 2003 I sold all my guns after a gun related death in the family. I could not even think of shooting for a while. Then in 2007 I bought my 500 S&W Magnum which got me out of my 'dry spell'. Even though I like the DW design both my DW's suffered from somewhat inferior machining. I needed to fix issues with both including squaring up the frame face on one of them because it was so far out of square. They were Monson / Palmer ones, I heard the newer ones had much nicer machining lines, the older ones looked more hand finished and had digs and imperfections.

The 'newer' ones being those made under ownership by CZ?

Yes those are nice too but the first ones I saw that were nice were from when they first moved to Norwich NY before they were actually owned by CZ. Just seems like all the post Palmer / Monson ones have nicer machining lines although I have never owned one. I really want to eventually get a .445 Super Mag although I have also considered just making a cylinder and barrel in .445 for my 500 S&W. Now we are waaaay off topic.

My brother bought a new 69 and had to send it back for among other things rough chambers. They had to replace the cylinder and other internal parts as well. My good friend bought a new S&W in .32 H&R and had to send his back because the cylinder was riding over the frame stop when ejecting cases.
The moral of the story to me is that S&W can put out some rather crummy guns just as well as other companies.
The amount of case swelling on your gun would bother me to the level of insisting replacement . If they won't. I would sure let them know that you are unhappy with quality of the whole gun and will be spreading the word on internet forums.

Just my opinion for whats it's worth.

I was an early adopter of the 445 back when we had to make our own brass and have one of the first stainless DW 7445's (8VH) ever made.
It has a special Elgin Gates serial number.
They were very well made but have a small design flaw.
The crane is held in the frame by a teensy horse-shoe like piece of metal maybe .5" wide.
This gets hammered under fire and allows cylinder endplay to increase.
I had this fixed twice while DW was still in business and then retired it.
They gave me a couple of spare pieces but they look like they are heat treated and need hand fitting.
They are so small I have no idea how I would do that.

Knowing your skill level, you may be better off making your own adaptation for the X Frame.

Attached Images

CraneDisassembly.JPG (60.6 KB, 56 views)

__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

Attached is a PDF of the page from the ANSI/SAAMI standard 1993. Note, tolerances on the diameters for the case are +0.000 and -0.006. Tolerances for the chamber diameters are +0.004 and -0.000.

The chamber for the 44 Magnum has a slight taper which is typical for any revolver cartridge chamber I'm familiar with. In the case of the 44 Magnum the tolerance range near the extractor is 0.4602/0.4598 and lower down near the mouth of the case 0.4586/0.4582.

So, if PSD is using Minus Gage pins the results he has described indicate the chambers in his cylinder are right at specification. So, the conclusion I come to is the bulging was due to undersized brass.

Can't say the same for the condition of that barrel. If I recall correctly the model 69 features a 2 piece Tensioned barrel assembly, so setting the barrel back far enough to clean up that mess will require some careful machining at the front locking surface. Considering this is something that the warranty will cover and the lack of purchasable tools for removing these barrels I believe that it really needs to be returned for warranty work. Since this fix is simply a matter of replacing the barrel tube I would expect the turnaround time will be 2 weeks or perhaps even less.

Attached Files

ANSI-SAAMI 44 Magnum.pdf (89.4 KB, 43 views)

Interesting.
That diagram has slightly different numbers for the back of the chamber (bigger).
Not sure where I got the diagram I posted.
Could be from one of the custom T/C barrel and chambering places I frequent (Bullberry, Bellm, MGM, SSK, etc.)
Bullberry, at least, does like tight chambers.

__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

Probably right. Can remove cylinder by taking out one screw instead of taking the whole gun apart to get at that little retaining piece.

Yep.
The DW is built a lot like the Ruger Redhawk.
That box frame is incredibly strong.
It's what's inside that's a little different.
Ruger got it right.
They are fairly easy to disassemble.
Getting them back together is a learning experience.
Having learned how to pop the side on a S&W, take everything out and put it back in,
I'd rather work on a Smith any day.

Here's a pic of what maybe 500 rounds using mostly W680 will do to the throat end of a barrel.
Some of these rounds may have been grossly over pressure as well.
We didn't really know what we were doing back then (and that includes most of the writers that loaded for it originally).
That erosion and a little strap cut are the only visible signs this gun soaked up way more than it should have been asked to.
Other than the engineering problem I mentioned, this thing was really just getting warmed up.

Attached Images

	DanWessonBarrelErosion1.jpg (200.9 KB, 79 views)
	DanWesson7445TopStrapFlameCut.jpg (51.3 KB, 75 views)

__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

I used to drop off guns at the guard shack right by the entrance. They would log the gun in and give you a receipt. I believe that stopped that practice some years back.

__________________
Sure you did

I got this apart today to start working on it (thread HERE ). Now that I have the barrel out and can really look at it its really screwed up. The rifling near the forcing cone is pretty messed up. Has strange impressions in the grooves, the lands are perfect. I don't know what caused this, there are only 50 rounds through it of factory ammo. I know these are tightened by the rifling maybe the tool that goes in the grooves did this? Muzzle end of rifling is fine. Would like to post pictures but it will be real difficult to take them and have them come out good. If I can manage to get good pix I will post them.

From what little I remember from reading the latest Kuhnhausen re: the barrel tool, I think it is put in from the muzzle.
He also gripes about how they won't sell him one.
I have to believe they install the barrels the same way only using some kind of automated rig.
Your barrel may have come out of the ECM bath in that shape or been miss handled when it was cut and threaded or ?

One way to get pix of the inside of the barrel (at least an inch or 2 in) is to shine a light down one end and then take a flash pic as close in as you can get up the other end.
Now that you have the barrel free this should be easier to do than with it still attached:

Attached Images

	ForcingConeComparison1024.jpg (121.2 KB, 54 views)
	624ForcingConeCloseUp800.jpg (261.7 KB, 40 views)

__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

Are we looking at the same photos? I've never seen brass like that come out of any of my .44 Mag chambers...S&W or other wise....or any piece of brass coming out of the right caliber chamber for that matter. That like 9mm being shot in .40 S&W chamber.

To OP: I'm sorry, but you have a lemon. I disagree with about 95% of people on this site that say to send back a gun, but your case seems to be ridiculous.

Very nice pictures I will try that. Right now the barrel is dirty so once I get some bore cleaner and clean it up I will take some pix.

The chamber print puts the tolerance -.000/+.004 and my measurements put it at +.002 which is right in the middle. I am hoping its just an issue of cheap thin brass. Should have some nice Starline brass reloads ready soon so once this is put back together I will try it with the better brass and see how it looks.

Don't think it's going to matter. Doesn't your brass look like mine in post #14?

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

Well I finally got curious enough about this to break out my pin gage set.
Some 44 chamber measurements:
396-1 .459 yes .460 no
696-1 .459 yes .460 no
629-2 .460 yes .461 no
Redhawk .460 yes .461 no
DW 7445 .460 yes .461 no

I have some better pins by Meyer Gage in .0005 but only to measure 44 chamber throats and bores.
These ones are the cheaper Enco imported .250-.500 (minus) set in .001"

Looks like your chambers might be .001" bigger than anything I measured.

Want tight?
12" 445SM PacNor/Bullberry Encore: .456 yes .457 no
These are purposely chambered tight in an attempt at accuracy and brass longevity.
There is a pressure ring/ridge but it is barely visible.
The cases do extract easily unless over pressure (more than ~45 KPSI).

Another thing I noticed is that in both examples shown, the brass has expanded on one side.
I have never really seen this in any of my guns no matter the load.
It shows the effect of the cartridge laying down in the chamber and why tight chambers might be more accurate.
It also may show weak brass.

__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

Wow nice job taking all those measurements! I agree my chamber is on the big side but since it is within tolerance I doubt anything will be done about it. I still might walk in there and say something about it, not sure yet. Besides, this gun has already been modified with a different barrel. I think if I carefully size only the portion of the brass that holds the bullet, then full length sizing at crimp with the Lee Carbide Factory Crimp Die that should do the trick. I bought the die but have not loaded with it yet.

That's freaking pathetic. Id send that *** back. I LOVE S&W and have owned them my whole life. But , it seems lately that quality control has taken a big ****. I've seen it with Ruger too. They just mass produce them knowing a big fat Lemon is going to slip out.
All that being said; S&W has Great customer service and will take good care of you and your gun.

I use the Redding dual carbide dies to do just that.
For the 445 I just use an extra die lock ring and mount the die further up in the press.
This also centers the part that gets fully sized.
The main body is minimally sized.
Unless you resize at least partially those cases that are bulged on one side they are always going to be off center.
The 445 chambers are so tight, the bodies of the brass are not really resized at all.
Other 44 brass I can hardly tell there is any sizing except where the bullet goes.
I then crimp with a dedicated crimp die (also by Redding) or in a seating die with the seater pulled out.
Let us know how your strategy works out.
With reloading, there is always a way even if somewhat convoluted.

__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"