smithra_66
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2020
- Messages
- 1,307
- Reaction score
- 2,140
You should buy OLD S&W products! Those are usually great. The new ones like you're seeing, not so much.
Don't say you'll never buy them...just buy the right era!
Would you send this gun back if you'd just received it?
- Thread starter ccjcc81
- Start date
You should buy OLD S&W products! Those are usually great. The new ones like you're seeing, not so much.
Don't say you'll never buy them...just buy the right era!
luvsmiths
Member
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2016
- Messages
- 1,135
- Reaction score
- 2,184
Hopefully they replace that barrel. Cylinder also.
Will try to keep my comments constructive. Sending it back is the right move. I don't buy guns anymore unless it is face to face and I can carefully examine them. Hopefully they can make it right for you in one trip back.
TheHobbyist
Member
OP, I guess I am mostly an outlier on this one.
I purchased one new, I don't know, maybe six months ago and it has machining marks that are 'worse' then yours, but not really a big deal overall in my opinion.
When not using a smart phone and zooming in, it looks just fine from normal length or distance. Many are made, many are sold, it's a shooter.
All that said, this is just my opinion and all others are equally valid.
I purchased one new, I don't know, maybe six months ago and it has machining marks that are 'worse' then yours, but not really a big deal overall in my opinion.
When not using a smart phone and zooming in, it looks just fine from normal length or distance. Many are made, many are sold, it's a shooter.
All that said, this is just my opinion and all others are equally valid.
I got a shipping notification today, Something should arrive Thursday. This could be good or bad news. It seems too early for S&W to have completed the work to repair the blemishes, given that they received the item less than 10 days ago and they quoted 4-6 weeks, but they're already shipping something back. Hopefully they exchanged the revolver.
If S&W decided to exchange the revolver, would they have to ship the replacement to an FFL, or could they send it straight to me?
I'll be pretty disappointed if they send the blemished revolver back to me unrepaired.
If S&W decided to exchange the revolver, would they have to ship the replacement to an FFL, or could they send it straight to me?
I'll be pretty disappointed if they send the blemished revolver back to me unrepaired.
cmj8591
Member
I say this all of the time. All you guys lamenting the "good ole days" must not have owned a lot of Bangor Punta guns. And I don't know many people willing to pay the 2 grand or so for a model 10 that is built like the ones on 1936 were. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Yes if it was another gun with different serial number it would have gone to an FFL. Your getting yours back.
A couple of months ago I spent some big bucks on a Kimber K6S. This was a big step as I've been a Smith revolver guy for fifty years. My last two Smiths within the past two years were perfect. Still I wanted to try something new.
Got it, looked perfect. Went to the range and every cylinder full there were one or two hang ups. Primer drag on the bottom of the recoil shield locking it tight.
Sent it back, received 1030 Monday morning. Notified Tuesday afternoon 1530 it was fixed and scheduled for FedEx pick up Wednesday morning. Back in my hands Friday 1115 hrs.
They replaced the cylinder, no other info. Great return service. I've since fired 500 rounds through it. Seems dependable but, I'm done with Kimber. And like others here I think I'll stick with the older stuff. It's just the modern replaceable world. I'm a geezer anyway.
Got it, looked perfect. Went to the range and every cylinder full there were one or two hang ups. Primer drag on the bottom of the recoil shield locking it tight.
Sent it back, received 1030 Monday morning. Notified Tuesday afternoon 1530 it was fixed and scheduled for FedEx pick up Wednesday morning. Back in my hands Friday 1115 hrs.
They replaced the cylinder, no other info. Great return service. I've since fired 500 rounds through it. Seems dependable but, I'm done with Kimber. And like others here I think I'll stick with the older stuff. It's just the modern replaceable world. I'm a geezer anyway.
In my experience firearm manufacturers are reluctant to fix issues with accuracy or cosmetic flaws.
Yeah, send it back, if you haven't already. You might consider sending a letter to their president or CEO explaining how much you love S&W but that how disappointed you are with the quality of your latest purchase. State that you've sent it back and mention the work order number.
ggibson511960
Member
The cylinder locking notch defect is interesting, especially as you note it is only on one notch. My take on the photo is that it was peened by the locking bolt when somebody snapped the cylinder shut Hollywood style. The trailing edge of the notch is where the bolt contacts the notch if you carefully roll the cylinder into the window.
There is more wrong with the cylinder. It has a continuous turn ring between notches. The ring starts immediately past the notch. How does this happen? Two possibilities. The first is that the gun is badly mis-timed. I've never seen one this bad as even a badly timed revolver pulls the bolt out of the notch for the first part of the cycle then drops it in prematurely, causing the ring to begin before the lead in scallop. The second possibility is that the gun was opened and closed many times improperly, rotating the cylinder backward with the bolt extended, causing the extended ring.
What has happened to this poor revolver? Is it really new? In the old days lots of new revolvers had fondling marks from would-be customers.
The incomplete roll mark on the barrel is cosmetic, but silly. It should have been rejected in house.
I am not a fan of brushed finish stainless guns. The machining marks you note on the top of the barrel shroud are the rough forging texture left when the stainless surface was brush blasted, not machined or polished. Such are stainless gun unless bright polished, a rarity in today's market. Stainless Charter Arms Bulldogs are an example of ugly brush blasted stainless finish. Nothing wrong with its serviceability, but not aesthetic like the old days of S&W deep blue or Colt's royal blue finish. Touching up a matte finished stainless gun's blemishes to match undamaged surfaces is near impossible.
There is more wrong with the cylinder. It has a continuous turn ring between notches. The ring starts immediately past the notch. How does this happen? Two possibilities. The first is that the gun is badly mis-timed. I've never seen one this bad as even a badly timed revolver pulls the bolt out of the notch for the first part of the cycle then drops it in prematurely, causing the ring to begin before the lead in scallop. The second possibility is that the gun was opened and closed many times improperly, rotating the cylinder backward with the bolt extended, causing the extended ring.
What has happened to this poor revolver? Is it really new? In the old days lots of new revolvers had fondling marks from would-be customers.
The incomplete roll mark on the barrel is cosmetic, but silly. It should have been rejected in house.
I am not a fan of brushed finish stainless guns. The machining marks you note on the top of the barrel shroud are the rough forging texture left when the stainless surface was brush blasted, not machined or polished. Such are stainless gun unless bright polished, a rarity in today's market. Stainless Charter Arms Bulldogs are an example of ugly brush blasted stainless finish. Nothing wrong with its serviceability, but not aesthetic like the old days of S&W deep blue or Colt's royal blue finish. Touching up a matte finished stainless gun's blemishes to match undamaged surfaces is near impossible.
Holding my breath until your next post.
