S&W revolver quality (?)

[kframefansc]

I was a big fan of S&W revolvers back in the pre-lock days but I gravitated to 9 mm semi-autos. As I get older with more issues in racking slides, etc. I'm looking at going back to revolvers. Just looking for opinions from those who should know as to the quality of the newer S&W revolvers. One of my target guns would be a 686 Plus. (I think I can live with that big hole in the side of the gun now or as we used to call it "the infernal lock".)

 

[Lou_the_welder]

The last new 686+ I bought with a lock in it was the 686+ PC vented 5". It may be the most accurate 686 I have.
The lock has never given me problems. I've only shot about 3k rounds in it. But it's flawless and more accurate than me.

You're going to hear some bad reviews on some of the newer guns. But I always wonder, what is a handful of complaints, in comparison to thousands of Revolvers made by a gun company per year. Or tens of thousands.

 

[panamajack310]

I have numerous revolvers in different calibers. All of them are fun to shoot and even though I’m getting older and have arthritis in my hands, I prefer revolvers over semi autos. If you are a fan of the 9mm, S&W makes an L frame and N frame. They use moon clips so easy reloads and fast reloads. Just something to think about. And the lock is easy to get rid of and put a lock plug in its place.

 

[MSD2343]

I own two of the “Classic” models and have been very favorably impressed by their build quality and they’ve been trouble free with many thousands of rounds downrange. But, these were purchased in 2012 (Model 27-9) and 2015 (Model 36-10), so that may not say a whole lot about the revolvers Smith is building now, a decade later.

 

[Federalis]

SW lost me as a “new” customer when they started with the mim parts and goofy internal lock. I spent over 32 years in LE and have over 50 SW revolvers and 3rd Gen Autos, carrying many of both… none with locks. Never could figure out why they chose to mess with their revolvers when other major manufacturers like Colt chose to stay true to their history??

 

[bobsguns]

I was a big fan of S&W revolvers back in the pre-lock days but I gravitated to 9 mm semi-autos. As I get older with more issues in racking slides, etc. I'm looking at going back to revolvers. Just looking for opinions from those who should know as to the quality of the newer S&W revolvers. One of my target guns would be a 686 Plus. (I think I can live with that big hole in the side of the gun now or as we used to call it "the infernal lock".)

There is now a "lock delete kit" for not much $$$. Yes, it's aftermarket, but that's no big deal, IMO. I have them on several of my Smiths.

As for quality, like many mfgrs, it seems to be somewhat of a "hit or miss" sort of thing.

Many old timers decry the use of MIM parts & the two-piece barrel. I get that, I truly do. I also get I don't want to pay $1800 for a run-of-the-mill Smith revolver. So I've learned to live with a little bit of cost cutting in these inflationary times.

I know I would never buy a newly made Smith revolver without laying my hands on it first. There're all sorts of QC issues that have reared its ugly head for me to buy a pig-in-a-poke. (You kids go look that up.) A good, close inspection & maybe even a second set of eyes is almost a "must do" for me with a Smith revolver.

Having said all that, I've been very happy with my modern Smith revolver purchases. I've bought a 6" 648 (.22mag) & a 3" 19L (carry comp) in the last year or two. My other Smith purchases were all older guns.

I can also say I'm highly disappointed in my 3" Colt Python purchase. Python "accuracy" my fanny!

My .o2

 

[bobsguns]

But I always wonder, what is a handful of complaints, in comparison to thousands of Revolvers made by a gun company per year. Or tens of thousands.

I see your point. But I also remember when buying a S&W revolver almost always meant you were getting a Rolls-Royce that would shoot. With that no longer being the case, I think that's what people get upset over.

After all, if we wanted newly made guns with issues, we'd buy Colts, eh?

 

[bobsguns]

Never could figure out why they chose to mess with their revolvers when other major manufacturers like Colt chose to stay true to their history??

I can tell you why: lawsuits.

You go to a large liberal city, seat a jury on a gun case & I can certainly guarantee you a loss for the gun mfgr. Beretta lost one (I think) in the NW US because their guns didn't have a warning it would fire without the mag on it. In gun trials, stupidity gets rewarded, sadly.

Also, at the time of the gun lock Smith was owned by a British entity (can't recall their name). This was during the Clinton Admin, first term. Butch Reno & her Dept of Justice were full-on war against American gun companies.

S&W was the first & only US gun mfgr to sign an "agreement" with the Clinton Dept of Justice. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong there.) The agreement stipulated that ALL of the stocking Smith dealers HAD to lock up their ENTIRE stock of Smiths in their safes at the end of EACH business day. Not just their display guns, but the dupes that might be piled up on shelves in the back storage rooms. ALL of them.

Of course, the gun grabbing political party crowed about this mightily. Smith got boycotted heavily by the gun buying public that were politically savvy. Their stock tanked as badly as did Budweiser during their tranny fiasco with Bud Light. Shortly after, the British sold Smith & Wesson for pennies on the dollar.

The new owners told the Dept of Justice to pound sand. Shortly after, the Clinton Admin got their rear end handed to them in mid-term elections, sweeping Newt Gringrich into power, along with his "Contract With America".

After that, the entire push for firing pin ID's, guns that couldn't be fired without a shooter wearing a decoder ring to unlock it & S/N's on the base of every single bullet (yes, you read that correctly), all that died a slow death.

Oh, yes, guess what? LE were exempt from the whole decoder ring thing as were All Federal LE. Rules for thee but not me, IOW.

Smith was/is by no means the only mfgr to use the internal lock gimmick. H&K did it & I think still does. Seems like Taurus did it but I can't be positive on that as I never look at a Taurus.

This concludes today's history lesson. Talk amongst yourselves.

 

[TJm15.38]

The only S&W revolver I have with a lock is a 638-3 purchased some years ago. It's a bed-side gun that has been reliable and easy to shoot with the right ammo. Never used the lock and have no reason to get rid of it.

 

[Beju]

Never could figure out why they chose to mess with their revolvers when other major manufacturers like Colt chose to stay true to their history??

Colt's history has been living and dying by government contracts since Sam Colt was still alive.

Colt became more focused on producing M16s once they bought the rights from Armalite and got the Vietnam era contracts. Then Colt killed off their revolvers in 2005 because there was a lot more money to be made making M4s and M16A4s when the GWOT era started.

 

[Darkenfast]

The last new 686+ I bought with a lock in it was the 686+ PC vented 5". It may be the most accurate 686 I have.
The lock has never given me problems. I've only shot about 3k rounds in it. But it's flawless and more accurate than me.

You're going to hear some bad reviews on some of the newer guns. But I always wonder, what is a handful of complaints, in comparison to thousands of Revolvers made by a gun company per year. Or tens of thousands.

About a year ago, I handled and dry-fired one of these, alongside one of the new Colt Pythons. The S&W had at least the same quality trigger in DA and a much better pull in SA. The Smith was about 2/3 of the price of the Python. It had seven chambers, vice six. The rubber Hogues felt better in my highly subjective hands than the Colt's. Not sure about the standard orange plastic sight, though. I see you've replaced yours.

The QA issues at S&W, Colt, Ruger, and just about everybody else are unfortunately real. I would only buy if I could find a shop (like the one I was at), where I could test the action and really give the gun a good examination for things like B/C gap, endshake, etc. There's good info available on checking wheelguns before you buy.

I'm feeling a desire to get back into revolvers, even if I have zero need for one!

 

[stansdds]

My advice is to carefully examine any firearm before you buy. S&W's quality control issues have been documented, but QC issues are not limited to S&W, so beware. Are older revolvers better built? The bluing certainly was and you can't get nickel on a newer S&W. As for internal parts, some of those old, machined parts were absolutely fantastic, some were pretty rough and bad. The beauty of MIM is that the parts come out of the mold needing little final machining, so they tend to be very uniform. I will say that when it comes to the Model 19 and 66, the current production versions are more durable that the older ones thanks to a redesigned barrel and cylinder lock system.

 

[gunbarrel]

FWIW, I do not have any S&W revolvers with the built-in safety lock because I find them unsightly. If someone "gave* me one, I would not remove this safety feature for this reason:

Massad Ayoob Q&A - Modifying a Handgun - YouTube

 

[Model19man]

SW lost me as a “new” customer when they started with the mim parts and goofy internal lock. I spent over 32 years in LE and have over 50 SW revolvers and 3rd Gen Autos, carrying many of both… none with locks. Never could figure out why they chose to mess with their revolvers when other major manufacturers like Colt chose to stay true to their history??

Exactly. I like the "classic" versions of the S&W revolvers. I won't ever own one with the hillary hole.

 

[Hawg Rider]

My modest collection consists primarily of vintage S&W revolvers, but I do own a few "modern" S&W revolvers- all of them have the "Hillary Hole" (aka Internal Lock). I tend to ignore the lock, and all of my Smiths are great and dependable shooters. The 642-2 is one of my pocket EDCs, the 627-5 is one of my road trip guns, and the 686-6+ is just plain cool! I'm thinking of getting an internal lock plug or two (TK or elsewhere) for about $40 each, but the locks don't really bother me much. Good luck with your decision.

 

[K Harris]

Dennis Reichard who according to Massad Ayoob was probably the best Smith & Wesson revolversmith before his passing said that the current 686's were the most uniform and easiest to tune of that entire series of revolvers. I do not know if that is true or not, but considering the source, I tend to believe it. My personal experience with the new revolvers has been universally good. They do not have the charm of a revolver built when barrels were pinned and cylinders were recessed, but they are excellent sidearms nonetheless.

 

[Furrball]

Colt's history has been living and dying by government contracts since Sam Colt was still alive.

Colt became more focused on producing M16s once they bought the rights from Armalite and got the Vietnam era contracts. Then Colt killed off their revolvers in 2005 because there was a lot more money to be made making M4s and M16A4s when the GWOT era started.

Colt has gotten back into manufacturing high quality revolvers in recent years and is selling a metric butt ton of them.
That being said the Smith and Wesson Model 69 I bought last year had to go back for a warranty repair after 30 rounds.
The Warranty repair was handled very quickly and smoothly and the results were very satisfactory.
What a thread. My 2020 Colt Python is extremely accurate as is my Night Cobra.
My buddy bought a 686+ 7 shot with a 5 inch barrel about 3 years ago. It is an excellent revolver and he is very happy with it.
I think it is a very nice well made revolver myself.
My buddy put a set of the Eagle Grips, "Heritage Coke Bottle" grips on his.
It really put it over the top.
I myself came full circle about 5 years ago and got back into revolvers again.
I like the late 70's and 80's models with some of the more recent also.

 

[SWFan27]

I have a 66-8, 686+-6 and 617-6. All three have the dreaded lock. And all three are excellent revolvers that will last longer than I do. The 617 did have to go back to Smith and Wesson for warranty work, but that was a pretty smooth process, and I have no complaints.

It was shaving lead at the forcing cone and two of the ten chambers were not properly timed. S&W cut the forcing cone and replaced the ejector rod. Two of the ratchets on the original ejector rod were causing carry up issues. They also buffed out a tooling mark on the barrel I had not mentioned to them. All good now. It is a lot of fun at the range.

 

[pistolpete10]

I have numerous Hillary hole revolvers. All are/were defective in some area. All. 6 guns I think. They can usually be made into good shooters. The hole hasn't been a problem on any of them. Ignore it.
Will not buy another. Look for a good older revolver, pinned barrel. Or, be prepared to do a little work on it and possibly send in for warranty work.
QC is a thing of the past.

 

[Grayfox]

Internal lock and MIM parts aside, S&Ws QC has been lacking for years now. Seems like every time you turn around there's a new thread posted about a brand new gun that has to go back to the factory for one reason or another.
But then poor QC can be said of most anything made these days.
Current guns that I have examined just don't live up to my expectations. No way I'd buy one without a very detailed inspection. And even then I'd be wary of it.
I've been accumulating S&W revolvers for about 50 years now and I have a bunch of them. None have the lock and only one has MIM parts. Frankly, I have little to no interest in any S&W made in the current century. They just ain't what they used to be.