OP
2001gmc
Member
I wouldn't buy a gun from them for $10 after I done paid over $400 for this one.
Shield 40 Mishap
- Thread starter 2001gmc
- Start date
I wouldn't buy a gun from them for $10 after I done paid over $400 for this one.
cowboydave
Member
I understand. I am sorry it turned out this way.
Well 2001gmc you have taught many on here a very valuable lesson. If we are ever faced with the same issue I will certainly make sure I preserve some evidence in case you need to take someone to court.
I don't like how this played out one bit, but with no evidence to back you up its hard to blame Smith at this point when Federal comes back and says it was all reloads.
This all seems very suspicious to me especially when they originally said all the ammo looked good.
I don't like how this played out one bit, but with no evidence to back you up its hard to blame Smith at this point when Federal comes back and says it was all reloads.
This all seems very suspicious to me especially when they originally said all the ammo looked good.
Rastoff
US Veteran
Wow, I'm stunned that Federal said that. Unfortunately, your only recourse at this point is legal action and we've discussed the futility of that already. If nothing else, I'd be sure to try to get the gun back from S&W.
My brother-in-law just got a 40 shield a month ago. He and I went to the range 2 weeks ago to have some fun. Now he only ran 50 rounds through his and it fired flawlessly. I fired a few rounds out of it and wasn't sure I liked it or not. Very snappy and hard to follow up your shots with it.
Now I have a 9c which is my carry weapon and love it, but I loved the thickness of his shield. As many on here have said maybe the 9mm shield is the way to go if your interested in the LCP style guns.
Your pictures do scare me quite a bit that I was really never a fan of the 40's to begin with and this just reinforces it for me.
Now I have a 9c which is my carry weapon and love it, but I loved the thickness of his shield. As many on here have said maybe the 9mm shield is the way to go if your interested in the LCP style guns.
Your pictures do scare me quite a bit that I was really never a fan of the 40's to begin with and this just reinforces it for me.
This has been an amazing thread... and tonight...it has gone off the scale in responses... I am stunned is all I can say.... but I guess not surprised. So many experts that know so much from a picture of a 17 year old box... and now this has become a conspiracy and a cover up. The ammo manufacturer confirms bad ammo. and S&W is STILL the bad guy....
WOW, JUST WOW.. HAVE AT IT BOYS, I AM OUT
WOW, JUST WOW.. HAVE AT IT BOYS, I AM OUT
Interesting you don't mention he was originally told by Federal all the ammo was fine..
But I can see the sarcasm in your post and it just isn't worth arguing.
This whole thing has been mishandled from the get go. Its now over 3 months and he finally gets told it was a hot load. Smith should have stated that from the get go in 1/2 the time they took.
And Federal should not have told him all the ammo he sent back was to spec.
Hopefully nobody else has to deal with these types of issues in the future.
Without knowing where/when the ammo came from, I suspect you don't have any recourse. Buying from a regular store is fairly safe (Though it doesn't preclude a "doctored" return.) Buying from a gun show or a flea market, all bets are off, especially if it's "old" product, or had possibly been taken in trade.
Now, I wouldn't necessarily take Federal's claim that they have to be reloads because they aren't "Federal primers" at face value. I seem to recall a report some time ago that some ammo manufacturers were not only using primers, but cases and bullets from other than their own manufacture or their normal sources due to shortages. (This was more than 10-years ago.) There is also the possibility that whoever did the inspection isn't familiar with any production differences from over 15-years ago.
And lastly, even if all the rounds were otherwise fine, and normal factory production, there is another known failure mode with the .40 S&W, and that is if the bullet gets pushed farther into the case, either by repeated chamberings or other forms of impacts/pushing, which raises the pressure dramatically. This would be fairly easy to miss when loading the magazine. At that point, whose 'fault' would it be? A careful forensic examination of the case might be able to tell if this had been the problem if you were looking for it.
As has been said, with the current reports and lack of further evidence, you're best course is probably to accept the offer by S&W, though you might want to try to negotiate a better deal based upon the long delays and the chance to finish this forum thread with a "more positive note/spin."
Now, I wouldn't necessarily take Federal's claim that they have to be reloads because they aren't "Federal primers" at face value. I seem to recall a report some time ago that some ammo manufacturers were not only using primers, but cases and bullets from other than their own manufacture or their normal sources due to shortages. (This was more than 10-years ago.) There is also the possibility that whoever did the inspection isn't familiar with any production differences from over 15-years ago.
And lastly, even if all the rounds were otherwise fine, and normal factory production, there is another known failure mode with the .40 S&W, and that is if the bullet gets pushed farther into the case, either by repeated chamberings or other forms of impacts/pushing, which raises the pressure dramatically. This would be fairly easy to miss when loading the magazine. At that point, whose 'fault' would it be? A careful forensic examination of the case might be able to tell if this had been the problem if you were looking for it.
As has been said, with the current reports and lack of further evidence, you're best course is probably to accept the offer by S&W, though you might want to try to negotiate a better deal based upon the long delays and the chance to finish this forum thread with a "more positive note/spin."
Camo-Man
Member
Wow is all I can say reading through this thread. The OP I feel for, I have a Shield 40. it has been problem free but if this were me I would be seriously pissed. First Federal said everything was fine and now its reloads sounds like a whole lot of BS to me.
Edmo
US Veteran
Kinda sucks for the OP...
He can continue to support S&W and buy their discounted gun. Keep and shoot it or just sell it to try to cut his losses. Another option is to vote with his dollar and go elsewhere for his gun needs.
Brand loyalty only goes so far if you feel the company hasn't handled your issue properly.
I've had adequate dealings with S&W when getting failed gun issues rectified, but sometimes it only takes one bad experience to turn things sour.
Good luck to the OP. let us know what you decide.
Edmo
He can continue to support S&W and buy their discounted gun. Keep and shoot it or just sell it to try to cut his losses. Another option is to vote with his dollar and go elsewhere for his gun needs.
Brand loyalty only goes so far if you feel the company hasn't handled your issue properly.
I've had adequate dealings with S&W when getting failed gun issues rectified, but sometimes it only takes one bad experience to turn things sour.
Good luck to the OP. let us know what you decide.
Edmo
OP
2001gmc
Member
You must work for Smith. You are pro Smith no matter what is said.
Almost ever post your write has sarcasm in it.
Yes 2001, I am Pro Smith. I actually live less than 10 miles from them. But, and I say a big but... I happen to try to make my admission of guilt or innocence AFTER I have seen all the evidence. Throughout this thread, there has been posters making wild claims and accusations well before all the facts have been exhibited, and when the final evidence was presented last night, it has been nothing but met with accusations of BS by many. After S&W made their decision, many here called BS... but there is hope Remington will do the same, making S&W the villain here. This court had made it's mind up that S&W was at fault, no matter what the evidence showed, now, at the end of this witch hunt, that is the verdict.
In spite of Remington, saying it was the ammo. Ok, call BS on REm if you don't like their final determination, if you think it stinks after their 1st response. If you think they are full of it, why do you think they are? Is it maybe because they don't want to take responsibility for this unfortunate situation, they don't want to spend a pittance to make it right for a customer? Shouldn't Rem want to take care of 2001 just for the good press they will receive in this thread, apparently not.... so why aren't you all attacking Remington like you have been attacking S&W?
I have merely, attempted to point out this is America, we are Americans, we have a set of laws and values we usually are brought up with. This was not how several of you here have acted. It's been guilty from the beginning, S&W is guilty, no matter what the evidence shows...
I'm not taking anything away from 2001, but this has been a one-sided case. I believe all that 2001 has presented here, but I haven't seen anything that proves S&W is at fault... but then when there is no evidence, you want to make S&W the bad guy because they didn't act the way you think they should... they didn't respond fast enough, they didn't show enough sympathy, they didn't take responsibility... and on and on and on with the BS reasons why S&W is the bad guy... yes, this thread is sad and I will stand up and say it over and over .... I have simply tried to keep an open mind and hope to see enough evidence one way or the other to make an accurate decision as to what happened here.... if S&W was guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt to be responsible for this gun blowing up.... I'd be the first to lead the charge!!!
One more thing 2001, where is the other 40 Shield, you said would be a bombshell here....
In spite of Remington, saying it was the ammo. Ok, call BS on REm if you don't like their final determination, if you think it stinks after their 1st response. If you think they are full of it, why do you think they are? Is it maybe because they don't want to take responsibility for this unfortunate situation, they don't want to spend a pittance to make it right for a customer? Shouldn't Rem want to take care of 2001 just for the good press they will receive in this thread, apparently not.... so why aren't you all attacking Remington like you have been attacking S&W?
I have merely, attempted to point out this is America, we are Americans, we have a set of laws and values we usually are brought up with. This was not how several of you here have acted. It's been guilty from the beginning, S&W is guilty, no matter what the evidence shows...
I'm not taking anything away from 2001, but this has been a one-sided case. I believe all that 2001 has presented here, but I haven't seen anything that proves S&W is at fault... but then when there is no evidence, you want to make S&W the bad guy because they didn't act the way you think they should... they didn't respond fast enough, they didn't show enough sympathy, they didn't take responsibility... and on and on and on with the BS reasons why S&W is the bad guy... yes, this thread is sad and I will stand up and say it over and over .... I have simply tried to keep an open mind and hope to see enough evidence one way or the other to make an accurate decision as to what happened here.... if S&W was guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt to be responsible for this gun blowing up.... I'd be the first to lead the charge!!!
One more thing 2001, where is the other 40 Shield, you said would be a bombshell here....
OP
2001gmc
Member
I don't think it was a ammo problem because of the problems I was having with the gun. All the FTE and accuracy is what I'm referring to. I know I should have called smith well I didnt but another guy did and what did they say just keep shooting it as I was told it would loosen up. Well I did. Guess what? I shot it 1 to many time. I'd expect a new gun to exceed well over 200 rounds down the pipe. I have a full size 9 and love it. Never had 1 issue with it. As far as the other Shield the person is waiting for smith to make a decision before posting so I'm sure it will be at least a half of year or so before you see it.
I really feel bad this has turned out this way, if I could do something that would make this better I would... if I had the power, this would have been handled much differently, but neither I nor anyone here does.. biting off my nose to spite my face has never worked for me..
OP
2001gmc
Member
Yea I hate it to. I got lots of other Smith guns and love them. Never had 1 single issue till this. I have always pushed S&W on everyone been a very big smith supporter and talk them up to everyone about how awesome there guns were. Its not just the fact they wont replace it. Its how they have handled the whole thing with me and the length of time it took. It was my first dealing with them and hopefully the last meaning hope all my guns stay defect free like they always have been.
lonejacklarry
US Veteran
2001gmc-
The FTE and accuracy problems could all be caused by bad ammo.
I think, and this is worth only what you paid for my opinion, is that the ammo was bad. Bad meaning reloads maybe by someone whom did not know what they were doing.
The key, again in my opinion, is that you do not know the history of the ammo. I think this type of thing is why no one accepts returns on ammo. I've used old name brand ammo boxes to store bulk ammo. I suspect reloaders might do the same thing. Certainly, an unscrupulous person could have done it on purpose with the intent to make a couple of bucks at a gun show or online auction. Who knows? And that is the point.
it is entirely possible that your ammo was poorly reloaded at some time and was placed in the old box you have. You've stated you have no idea of its history so it very well could be reloads.
I do think that it could have been handled differently by both companies with a more expeditious response. Each is a huge company and I have no idea what a decent respond time is. Obviously, in this day of instant gratification, two days is too long for some and for others two years is ok. Also, the current philosophy is that someone else is responsible for everything bad that occurs.
The hot heads have suggested legal action which is futile. You admit that you do not know the history of the ammo and there, sir, goes your case. I'm not trying to beat you up but sometimes it is better to walk away and try to learn from an episode.
bulldogman
Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2013
- Messages
- 196
- Reaction score
- 51
Regarding ammo, how in the world can an ammo MFG. company as large as Federal examine a box of ammo and determine it is within spec. and later do an about face and change their inspection results and say oh wait a minute we don't recognize the primers, they're reloads. This just doesn't make sense to me.
OP
2001gmc
Member
Well all the ammo fired out of this gun was Winchester white box and the last 50 was the umc Remington's. Only 3 of these federals were fired on the 3rd one blowing up.
hogwylde
US Veteran
Where in Western Mass are you? I am from Westfield.
I'm in West Springfield, right off rt 20... Dewey Street..
2 miles from Troy Industries, less than 10 miles from Savage Arms, 20 minutes from YHM, Colt 25 minutes, Stag 35 minutes...
2 miles from Troy Industries, less than 10 miles from Savage Arms, 20 minutes from YHM, Colt 25 minutes, Stag 35 minutes...
Last edited:
