Is the Model 41.........

[blackemmons]

........ still the same or has the quality gone south.

At 76 I finally purchased "the best 22lr pistol ever built". A Model 41. Took it to the range and could not fire more than two consecutive rounds without having stovepipe after stovepipe. CCI Standard Velocity ammo.

So I took it back to the dealer and they replaced it. Yes... replaced it.

Took that one to the range and it was even worse. Failure to feeds, stovepipes, failure to fire, etc. I fought through 300+ rounds hoping it would "break in" but it got even worse. Buy the end, the magazines would not release unless I fought with them.

Off to SW it went and I got it back yesterday after they replaced the extractor, mag catch and safety. It says the fired it.

I fired 60+ rounds of CCI Standard Velocity from two different batches and with three different magazines and I had 3 stovepipes and 17 failures to fire. Some of these were because the empty was still in the chamber, the chamber was empty or the hammer would not drop when the trigger was pulled. Also, the slid NEVER stayed open on the last round. Therefore the dreaded dry fire.

I have 16 22lr handguns to include Rugers, Walthers, Berettas, Buckmarks and SW's(Victory, 622, M&P, 22A). Oh........ and did I mention a Taurus TX22 which has never faltered. Can't say that about the most expensive pistol I own(but wish I didn't).

So............. off to SW it went........... again.

So my question is, am I just unlucky or has the quality of these gone to $#@!? Thanks.

 

[Dave.357]

Good thing you have lifetime warranty,
Sounds like you will need it.
Sorry about your bad luck.

 

[blackemmons]

Good thing you have lifetime warranty,
Sounds like you will need it.
Sorry about your bad luck.

Ya, but at 76 that lifetime warranty won't last long.

 

[murphydog]

Sorry for your troubles. Given your description it is unlikely to be an ammo problem, but next time you get it back from the factory I'd try other brands of standard velocity .22 just to be sure. Model 41s are "supposed" to like CCI SV but maybe yours doesn't. Please let us know what happens.

 

[series guy]

Let somebody else try it out. I have the same problems with my Model 41 if I don't hold it firmly enough.

 

[blackemmons]

Sorry for your troubles. Given your description it is unlikely to be an ammo problem, but next time you get it back from the factory I'd try other brands of standard velocity .22 just to be sure. Model 41s are "supposed" to like CCI SV but maybe yours doesn't. Please let us know what happens.

You are correct. SW told me on two occasion that CCI Standard velocity was what they recommend. Thanks.

 

[blackemmons]

Let somebody else try it out. I have the same problems with my Model 41 if I don't hold it firmly enough.

I will do that when I get it back. I have never had that issue with a handgun.

I did consciously give it a firm grip because I had thought that may be a problem, but.... who knows. Thanks.

 

[Dave Lively]

I bought my 41 in the mid nineties and with CCI standard velocity the failure rate is a few percent. Not nearly as bad as what you are describing but still annoying. It runs great with CCI Minimags. I have heard that 41s are designed for standard velocity and might get beat up with high velocity ammo but after trying a few fixes I gave up and just use Minimags. I would rather chance increased wear than live with an unreliable gun. I did buy a buffer.

The majority of my failures were the type where the slide went far enough back to eject the empty but not far enough to pick up the next round. So I ended up dry firing the gun at least once every couple of magazines. I also had the occasional stovepipe.

From what you are describing I do not think you are the problem.

 

[350mag]

I have a new PC 41 and a early model 41. Both like SV and any quality target grade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Barrie]

I have a 1st year issue M41. I am fortunate to have gotten a good one for its age. It still out shoots me. I have been shooting handgun alone over 50 years now let alone other shooting types. Still enjoy it every time I shoot. I would suggest a new spring set possibly would improve its re-liability. It can really make a difference in some M41's.

 

[D Brown]

Did you try placing a drop of oil on the top round in the magazine at any point?

The reason I ask, mine did the short slide travel routine until I did the above procedure for a few magazines. Cleared the short slide travel and fail to eject immediately.

Even better, I found after three magazines treated with that one drop of oil, I no longer need to use oil at all and my Model 41 is now running 100% with basically any type or brand of .22 L.R. I care to try in it.

 

[mandkthomas]

FWIW; on my recently purchased 2019 PC model.

In retrospect seems like there was an increased level of cycling issues in the first 500 rounds or so - but like 5% - not 50%. After about 3000 rounds and 10 cleaning lube cycles, here's where I stand.

When I'm sighting-in using a rubber block (made for the purpose, and furnished by the range) on a table, I have much higher rate of cycle issues - like 30% to 40%. Holding the pistol on that block is way more firm and controlled than I could ever hold the pistol by hand (I shoot match - one handed). I'm not sure of the cause, and it runs opposite of conventional wisdom, maybe someone here can explain - but it's what I've experienced (could it be the slide spring weight is optimized for higher rates of recoil movement for one handed shooting - could that even matter?).

I have found 4 magazines that cycle ammunition with ~99% reliability. I have been through 2 additional magazines that would not feed reliably. 1 with FTE (extract and eject) about 80% of the time, the second fail to load (stove piping) the last round only 100% of the time. I'm going on my 3rd exchange to get to 5 reliable magazines for match shooting. I would not have believed that magazines would have such an impact on cycling performance, but was led to experiment by input from experts on bullseye forum - in my experience it does.

Separately, I've noticed and still experimenting with a small number of cycling issues after I've just cleaned the pistol, seems to be better if I'm more careful and thorough cleaning and lubing the chamber - but this is a minor issue compared to what you're experiencing.

I'm not sure the PC version is anything but cosmetic - I liked the grips and the scope rail...

Best of luck, and hoping you get resolution.

 

[mandkthomas]

Here's a good relevant discussion with other's experience

Shot my first bullseye shoot tonight--- Help-- Smith 41 failure to eject

 

[blackemmons]

I bought my 41 in the mid nineties and with CCI standard velocity the failure rate is a few percent. Not nearly as bad as what you are describing but still annoying. It runs great with CCI Minimags. I have heard that 41s are designed for standard velocity and might get beat up with high velocity ammo but after trying a few fixes I gave up and just use Minimags. I would rather chance increased wear than live with an unreliable gun. I did buy a buffer.

The majority of my failures were the type where the slide went far enough back to eject the empty but not far enough to pick up the next round. So I ended up dry firing the gun at least once every couple of magazines. I also had the occasional stovepipe.

From what you are describing I do not think you are the problem.

That is true. The manual says to stay away from the high powered ammo. I tried it in the first 41 they gave me but it did not make any difference. I also tried it in the one I just send back when I first got it but no difference with issues. I did not try it after it was returned from repair. When I called them after the repair they said it was "designed for standard velocity ammunition". Thanks

 

[blackemmons]

Did you try placing a drop of oil on the top round in the magazine at any point?

The reason I ask, mine did the short slide travel routine until I did the above procedure for a few magazines. Cleared the short slide travel and fail to eject immediately.

Even better, I found after three magazines treated with that one drop of oil, I no longer need to use oil at all and my Model 41 is now running 100% with basically any type or brand of .22 L.R. I care to try in it.

Did not lube it after it came back from repair. It looks like they added more lube although they tell you not to over lube it. They did replace the mag catch while they had it. Thanks.

 

[blackemmons]

FWIW; on my recently purchased 2019 PC model.

In retrospect seems like there was an increased level of cycling issues in the first 500 rounds or so - but like 5% - not 50%. After about 3000 rounds and 10 cleaning lube cycles, here's where I stand.

When I'm sighting-in using a rubber block (made for the purpose, and furnished by the range) on a table, I have much higher rate of cycle issues - like 30% to 40%. Holding the pistol on that block is way more firm and controlled than I could ever hold the pistol by hand (I shoot match - one handed). I'm not sure of the cause, and it runs opposite of conventional wisdom, maybe someone here can explain - but it's what I've experienced (could it be the slide spring weight is optimized for higher rates of recoil movement for one handed shooting - could that even matter?).

I have found 4 magazines that cycle ammunition with ~99% reliability. I have been through 2 additional magazines that would not feed reliably. 1 with FTE (extract and eject) about 80% of the time, the second fail to load (stove piping) the last round only 100% of the time. I'm going on my 3rd exchange to get to 5 reliable magazines for match shooting. I would not have believed that magazines would have such an impact on cycling performance, but was led to experiment by input from experts on bullseye forum - in my experience it does.

Separately, I've noticed and still experimenting with a small number of cycling issues after I've just cleaned the pistol, seems to be better if I'm more careful and thorough cleaning and lubing the chamber - but this is a minor issue compared to what you're experiencing.

I'm not sure the PC version is anything but cosmetic - I liked the grips and the scope rail...

Best of luck, and hoping you get resolution.

That also sounds like more issues than one should expect from a gun of this supposed quality. I was expecting it(them) to run like a top out of the box(s) for that price. If a Victory, 622, 22A and the like can do it, why shouldn't one expect the same from a gun that costs 3-4 times as much? Even the $250 Taurus TX22 didn't have ANY issues.

But then again, I have only sent back three guns in the past 5 years and they ALL were Smith and Wesson's. M&P Shield for jamming and a M&P 15-22 for key holing every round(200 of them). Upon investigation of the barrel, there was no rifling in the last 7' of the barrel. That seems like inexcusable quality control. The third one was the current 41. If you count the one I returned to the dealer it would make it four.

Thanks.

 

[blackemmons]

Here's a good relevant discussion with other's experience

Shot my first bullseye shoot tonight--- Help-- Smith 41 failure to eject

Thank you.

 

[H Richard]

I have owned 3 different Mod 41's over the past 35 years. I also owned a High Standard Victor. All three of the Mod 41's were traded off, and I shot the High Standard the entire time. I liked the 41's but the reliability and the trigger of the Victor was always much better.

 

[blackemmons]

I have owned 3 different Mod 41's over the past 35 years. I also owned a High Standard Victor. All three of the Mod 41's were traded off, and I shot the High Standard the entire time. I liked the 41's but the reliability and the trigger of the Victor was always much better.

That's what I don't understand. How did the 41 get the reputation of being the best 22lr pistol on the market for so many years? And what keeps the price up if they have issues?

Perhaps I am in a very small percentage but I don't think they have sold millions of them. Thanks.

 

[M29since14]

I’ve had older Model 41s for years and used to shoot them regularly with two friends who used newer model 41s. I don’t recall ever having a malfunction with my old 41s (that couldn’t be properly blamed on ammunition) and don’t recall my friends complaining of function problems with their newer guns. I’m really at a loss to understand your difficulties, but it doesn’t sound like they are either ammunition- or shooter-induced. One gun might be a lemon, but two in a row makes one scratch his head.

The 41’s match-quality reputation is well deserved, but I don’t doubt that there are easier pistols to shoot, notably the old High Standards. The issue seems to be that a lot of shooters find the 41 trigger difficult to manage. Other than that, I have never heard much in the way of consistent complaints about functioning. I’ve heard there used to be a few smiths who were skilled at tuning 41 triggers, though I’ve never bothered the send one of my guns out for the work. But, there’s never been any doubt in my mind that 41s were/are very capable guns. Hope S&W will get your problems squared away and gets you a pistol that works as well as mine have.