I've read several posts on here about people haveing to send their revolvers back for some reason. The most common is the canted barrel. I've actually had to send my 617-6 back twice for spitting lead, shooting off, and canted barrel. Its better now, but not as good as it should be. Now, I've looked at several new S&W revolvers at shops and shows, and have come across the canted barrel several times. I've looked at Taurus's, and haven't found a canted barrel.
Quality issues with current S&W revolvers?
- Thread starter nsl
- Start date
- Status
Register to hide this ad
photoman
Member
Oy veh!
My advice for those that are demanding a 100% perfect gun... Do not buy a mass produced revolver! You will not be happy.
End of rant...
p.s. No offense intended nsl. I'm just tired of reading posts about about how crappy Smith & Wesson revolvers are.
My advice for those that are demanding a 100% perfect gun... Do not buy a mass produced revolver! You will not be happy.
End of rant...
p.s. No offense intended nsl. I'm just tired of reading posts about about how crappy Smith & Wesson revolvers are.
Erich
Member
I don't know. I feel that nsl is raising what I perceive to be an actual concern of late.
For what it's worth, I was just thinking this morning about recent S&W revolver quality control. I realized that, based on the experiences of some friends recently, I'd not recommend that a newbie buy a new S&W. My concern (not to even mention the "L-word") would be that they'd run into some problem that would be a hassle and that they'd become disheartened by having to send the gun back to get it fixed (I recently had a newbie friend buy a 617 on my advice and she had to send it back due to issues with the star on the cylinder - she's not disheartened, though, and the gun is fine after ministrations by S&W's excellent customer service).
Pretty sad when you're thinking "Ruger" when a newbie asks for a revolver recommendation.
For what it's worth, I was just thinking this morning about recent S&W revolver quality control. I realized that, based on the experiences of some friends recently, I'd not recommend that a newbie buy a new S&W. My concern (not to even mention the "L-word") would be that they'd run into some problem that would be a hassle and that they'd become disheartened by having to send the gun back to get it fixed (I recently had a newbie friend buy a 617 on my advice and she had to send it back due to issues with the star on the cylinder - she's not disheartened, though, and the gun is fine after ministrations by S&W's excellent customer service).
Pretty sad when you're thinking "Ruger" when a newbie asks for a revolver recommendation.
Dragon88
Member
My only newly purchased S&W revolver is a 642 no lock, which I haven't had a single issue with. I think there are quality issues at S&W, but the same can be said about nearly every company out there, both gun makers and otherwise. At least S&Ws are still made here in the USA and backed by a lifetime warranty. You can't say that about most things you buy these days.
If you are going to examine your new gun with a microscope and complain about the smallest thing, go spend a few grand on a custom gun. If you want a good quality revolver made here in the USA by American workers, which will be fixed for free if there is a fault, buy a S&W and enjoy it.
If you are going to examine your new gun with a microscope and complain about the smallest thing, go spend a few grand on a custom gun. If you want a good quality revolver made here in the USA by American workers, which will be fixed for free if there is a fault, buy a S&W and enjoy it.
dctex99
Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2011
- Messages
- 20
- Reaction score
- 0
So S&W is merely a "mass produced" gun
of which quality should not matter? So lets throw out their history and great guns of the past and all buy some kind of a custom made gun like YOU must have that cost a few thousand dollars????? I trust your guns all fit in your Rolls Royce...anything else is "Mass Produced"!!
of which quality should not matter? So lets throw out their history and great guns of the past and all buy some kind of a custom made gun like YOU must have that cost a few thousand dollars????? I trust your guns all fit in your Rolls Royce...anything else is "Mass Produced"!!
I have a few of the new S&W's, and in my opinion, they are about as near perfect as a factory produced gun can be. The triggers are great, and the I.L. debate is a lot of crying about nothing.
Historically, Ruger has not been a friend of gun owners' rights, so I do not buy their products.
Historically, Ruger has not been a friend of gun owners' rights, so I do not buy their products.
It also seems to me that a LOT of S&W's have top go back to the factory, sometimes more than once...
I wonder, just how much it costs S&W to have a gun shipped back, then they fix [or tryto fix] and then ship it back.
Someone had to be in the "mail room" to recieve ti, then mail it back, it has to be looked at, then taken to the person that will fix it...
This has to cost a fair amount of S&W profits...
I think it would be better just to get them right the first time.
If they need to charge a little more then do so.
I wonder, just how much it costs S&W to have a gun shipped back, then they fix [or tryto fix] and then ship it back.
Someone had to be in the "mail room" to recieve ti, then mail it back, it has to be looked at, then taken to the person that will fix it...
This has to cost a fair amount of S&W profits...
I think it would be better just to get them right the first time.
If they need to charge a little more then do so.
mike from st pete
Member
How many of each model produced per year needs warranty attention?
Now those are some figures I would like to see
Nemovir
Member
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 39
- Reaction score
- 5
Well, I don't want to bash S&W, but my experience has not been good.
I had stumbled across this forum and particularly a thread about the virtues of owning a .22lr revolver. I had already own a M41 and have been pleased with it. So I bought a M18 classic from Davidson. It shot pretty well, but the extractor came loose. Took it home and found that the extractor stem had a crack in it. Davidson has a replacement policy, so I requested another. The replacement had the same problem. Tried it again. No crack, but it spit lead and had a huge barrel to cylinder gap. I, also, found that the cylinder stop slots were being deformed by the cylinder stop. This time I email S&W and had it shipped back. They replaced the barrel and the cylinder and now all is right with the world.
That being said, I recently bought a beautiful nickel 34-1 from Bud's gun shop. Looks like it was only shot a few time and I found out why. It binds on the sixth round and I cannot eject the shells without a mallet. It's accurate though, for such a small gun.
I had stumbled across this forum and particularly a thread about the virtues of owning a .22lr revolver. I had already own a M41 and have been pleased with it. So I bought a M18 classic from Davidson. It shot pretty well, but the extractor came loose. Took it home and found that the extractor stem had a crack in it. Davidson has a replacement policy, so I requested another. The replacement had the same problem. Tried it again. No crack, but it spit lead and had a huge barrel to cylinder gap. I, also, found that the cylinder stop slots were being deformed by the cylinder stop. This time I email S&W and had it shipped back. They replaced the barrel and the cylinder and now all is right with the world.
That being said, I recently bought a beautiful nickel 34-1 from Bud's gun shop. Looks like it was only shot a few time and I found out why. It binds on the sixth round and I cannot eject the shells without a mallet. It's accurate though, for such a small gun.
PA Reb
Member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,511
- Reaction score
- 1,816
In my opinion and with all due respect sir, I believe you are missing the point with all these posts complaining about S&W's QC. They surely don't make "crappy" revolvers BUT, their quality control is definitely in the shatter! I work in a hospital (sort of like a production line
) and I have a job that I must pay very close attention to every detail in a patient's care. One little mistake on my part can and will cost a person their life. My QC has to be spot on because these people won't get a second chance if I get it wrong the first time around. Most owners of S&W revolvers don't post on this forum so just imagine how many mistakes there actually are out there that we don't hear about. If S&W would manufacture, assemble, and QC properly in the first place, the amount of these posts would decrease dramatically and we would be left with an "acceptable amount" of factory errors.No sir, S&W is the greatest out there but they definitely need to sharpen their process to continue to have their name at the top!
And by the way, my favorite motorcycle manufacturer Harley Davidson went through the same thing back in the 70s when AMF took over the company. Half descent quality went down the tubes and nearly destroyed a great American company. It took the employees and a group that wanted to bring quality back to rescue it and bring it back to where it is today. The funny thing about that era is the people that loved HD did ALOT of complaining but we continued to buy them! BECAUSE of all that complaining, we now can ride the best there is with "minimal mistakes" still being made!
Last edited:
The business I'm in deals in warranty too but I look at it as a positive thing. Parts and pieces are continually being redisigned (hopefully for the better) and if they never fail, kudo's to the dude that came up with that idea. However, many things fail due to unforseen reasons and many won't show up until, in my case, the machine's put into the field. Through warranty, the factory pays for those failures and engineering gets to do a failure analysis and see what can be done to make it better. All is good except for the hastle to call them up, wait for the authorization to show up in the mail, write up the story, box it up, meet the fed-ex driver, send it off and wait until it comes back. I'd like to say it's a small price to pay to assist the factory in making a better product but the fact remains that it's an inconvenience. Nothing more - nothing less.
photoman
Member
S&W could do that but the gun would cost twice what it does today. Are you willing to pay for that?
That's my gripe. People want high quality but they don't want to pay for it. I pay $350 for a new 642. If the paint chips on it after a few months of carry or the barrel is "canted" but it still shoots where I aim it, oh well. It's a $350 dollar gun for cryin' out loud. Seems like a good deal to me.
1 - If you go to a Ruger forum, you'll find all sorts of complaints about how Ruger's quality control is in the toilet. Canted barrels are frequently mentioned. I read at least a half dozen threads just browsing thru some old posts last night.
2 - Just picked up my Model 29 "Classic" today. Yes, it has a hole and no, purists won't like anything about it. But for the record, the barrel is NOT canted. There is a little creep in SA mode - maybe 1/64th inch, or perhaps a little less. The trigger on my Ruger Alaskan breaks cleaner.
However, the DA pull is amazing, and cocking it single action is the lightest of any gun I own. Since I shoot primarily SA, that is important to me. Small creep doesn't bother me - it feels like staging, if I pull the trigger light enough to notice it. I'd guess about 4 lbs of trigger pull would make the creep disappear. Still, I believe it would be better without. If the blueing ever wears to much, I'll send it to S&W for refinishing, and I'll include a trigger job at the time. My only concern from looking is that the barrel/cylinder gap is pretty tight. I haven't measured it, but it is noticeably less than my Alaskan and less than my 686.
All told, compared to my Ruger Alaskan - a slightly more expensive gun but very comparable - the finish on the S&W is far superior. The DA trigger is better, tho not by a lot. Cocking the revolver is much easier with the S&W, although the Ruger has no creep at all.
I haven't had a chance to shoot it, but will later this week. Overall, owning both, I'd be willing to pay $100-150 more for the S&W than the Ruger. That isn't a slam on Ruger, but it reflects my priorities about what makes me happy. As it is, I paid about $50 less for the 29.
Remember, S&W has to compete with Ruger to stay in business. They are probably not trying to build the finest possible revolver, since they would lose too much business to Ruger. Based on prices I see, S&W's business model is to charge a bit more than Ruger and provide a better finished gun. Both companies offer, IMHO, outstanding customer service.
Off topic, but this is the first N-frame I've owned in 30 years. I put a set of silver/black service stocks on it, and it fits my small hand perfectly. I wonder if that isn't why they are designed like that - back in the day when an average American male was 5'7" and 140 lbs...
2 - Just picked up my Model 29 "Classic" today. Yes, it has a hole and no, purists won't like anything about it. But for the record, the barrel is NOT canted. There is a little creep in SA mode - maybe 1/64th inch, or perhaps a little less. The trigger on my Ruger Alaskan breaks cleaner.
However, the DA pull is amazing, and cocking it single action is the lightest of any gun I own. Since I shoot primarily SA, that is important to me. Small creep doesn't bother me - it feels like staging, if I pull the trigger light enough to notice it. I'd guess about 4 lbs of trigger pull would make the creep disappear. Still, I believe it would be better without. If the blueing ever wears to much, I'll send it to S&W for refinishing, and I'll include a trigger job at the time. My only concern from looking is that the barrel/cylinder gap is pretty tight. I haven't measured it, but it is noticeably less than my Alaskan and less than my 686.
All told, compared to my Ruger Alaskan - a slightly more expensive gun but very comparable - the finish on the S&W is far superior. The DA trigger is better, tho not by a lot. Cocking the revolver is much easier with the S&W, although the Ruger has no creep at all.
I haven't had a chance to shoot it, but will later this week. Overall, owning both, I'd be willing to pay $100-150 more for the S&W than the Ruger. That isn't a slam on Ruger, but it reflects my priorities about what makes me happy. As it is, I paid about $50 less for the 29.
Remember, S&W has to compete with Ruger to stay in business. They are probably not trying to build the finest possible revolver, since they would lose too much business to Ruger. Based on prices I see, S&W's business model is to charge a bit more than Ruger and provide a better finished gun. Both companies offer, IMHO, outstanding customer service.
Off topic, but this is the first N-frame I've owned in 30 years. I put a set of silver/black service stocks on it, and it fits my small hand perfectly. I wonder if that isn't why they are designed like that - back in the day when an average American male was 5'7" and 140 lbs...
Last edited:
Or perhaps when we belly up to the gun counter to buy a new pistol, we should take matters into our own hands:
Tuco at the Gun Shop [HD] from The Good, The Bad and The Ugly - YouTube
photoman
Member
Or perhaps when we belly up to the gun counter to buy a new pistol, we should take matters into our own hands:
Tuco at the Gun Shop [HD] from The Good, The Bad and The Ugly - YouTube
Hey! Nobody ever gave me a bottle of whiskey while shopping revolvers!dwever
Member
Okay, I've posted this three times before on similar threads: I just want to mention that in all my S&W revolver (and semi-auto) purchases since 2007, I have yet to have an issue large or small.
My S&W purchases in chronological order including semi-autos:
617 10 Shot
627 PC 5" Barrel
1911 Commander Gun Site Edition
629 PC Stealth Hunter
1911 PC Melonite 1911*
627 PC 2.625" Barrel
By the same token you hear all kinds of Glock horror stories (my agency's mandated duty weapons), and I have used on duty Glock: 22 3rd Gen, 22 4th Gen, 35, and 27 with no issues either.
Don't know what to make of the forums except that with the multiplied thousands of us out there, when we get an issue we understandably share it, and so you end up with the negative perception through the distortion of only hearing the bad. Not arguing for that explanation, just saying I've thought about it. On the other hand, you've got guys like Chuck Hawks writing anecdotal articles a few years back saying S&W quality control is a joke and what they let out the door in beyond unacceptable.
*Thought initially this $2,400 1911 had a major misfeed issue, turned out, like Wilson 1911's, it just didn't like Blazer Brass.
My S&W purchases in chronological order including semi-autos:
617 10 Shot
627 PC 5" Barrel
1911 Commander Gun Site Edition
629 PC Stealth Hunter
1911 PC Melonite 1911*
627 PC 2.625" Barrel
By the same token you hear all kinds of Glock horror stories (my agency's mandated duty weapons), and I have used on duty Glock: 22 3rd Gen, 22 4th Gen, 35, and 27 with no issues either.
Don't know what to make of the forums except that with the multiplied thousands of us out there, when we get an issue we understandably share it, and so you end up with the negative perception through the distortion of only hearing the bad. Not arguing for that explanation, just saying I've thought about it. On the other hand, you've got guys like Chuck Hawks writing anecdotal articles a few years back saying S&W quality control is a joke and what they let out the door in beyond unacceptable.
*Thought initially this $2,400 1911 had a major misfeed issue, turned out, like Wilson 1911's, it just didn't like Blazer Brass.
Last edited:
I've purchased a lot of new S&W as of late. No problems to note. And if I had one, I'd just send it to S&W for repair.
I have a new Model 58 classic. Barrels a little canted, but it shoots to point of aim and is very accurate. I also have a 70's built model 28. Barrel is also slightly canted. But that also shoots to point of aim. Unless it was extreme or didn't shoot to point of aim, I don't worry about it.
I've been very pleased with the timing and lock-up on my new production S&W's. Probably more so than the older no-lock models.
Just my 2 cents.
I have a new Model 58 classic. Barrels a little canted, but it shoots to point of aim and is very accurate. I also have a 70's built model 28. Barrel is also slightly canted. But that also shoots to point of aim. Unless it was extreme or didn't shoot to point of aim, I don't worry about it.
I've been very pleased with the timing and lock-up on my new production S&W's. Probably more so than the older no-lock models.
Just my 2 cents.
Tyrod
Member
I'm a member of alot of forums arrayed among many subjects. It would appear that negative reviews or complaints, as it were, seem to stick out like a sore thumb. It's rare that a forum on any product subject has few complaints. Although I've seen some. Naturally, these negative reviews hit a nerve among those faithful product followers. And at times it seems as if the negative reviews are overwhelming.
One must take all reviews, positve or negative with a grain of salt. Some folks seem to have really high expectations and some folks are very forgiving. One of the underlying faults of reviews are that positive non-professional reviews are nearly useless in their context. Positive reviews in a forum such as this are only useful as a gross indicator to compare against negative reviews. A ratio if you will. And since no one keeps that statistic, well you get the idea.
Then you get to the subject of the qualifications of the reviewer or complainer. Alot of times you just have to read between the lines and dismiss a thread as absurd. Typically, the more a poster crows about their qualifications the less they actually have.
Outside this forum, say on a specific firearm review site, one must also take reviews with grain of salt. There are many reasons to disqualify the reviewer as unbiased. But that's a different subject.
One must take all reviews, positve or negative with a grain of salt. Some folks seem to have really high expectations and some folks are very forgiving. One of the underlying faults of reviews are that positive non-professional reviews are nearly useless in their context. Positive reviews in a forum such as this are only useful as a gross indicator to compare against negative reviews. A ratio if you will. And since no one keeps that statistic, well you get the idea.
Then you get to the subject of the qualifications of the reviewer or complainer. Alot of times you just have to read between the lines and dismiss a thread as absurd. Typically, the more a poster crows about their qualifications the less they actually have.
Outside this forum, say on a specific firearm review site, one must also take reviews with grain of salt. There are many reasons to disqualify the reviewer as unbiased. But that's a different subject.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
