I am not one of those guys who runs to online forums to complain about a manufacturer or a vendor whenever I have a less-than-stellar experience, particularly when the issue could be resolved with a phone call.

Furthermore, some of the complaints I see strain credulity.

Nevertheless, I had an experience today that I felt should be shared. I popped into a local firearms emporium this morning trolling for vintage revolvers (they had none), when what should I see in the display case but a 432UC *and* a 632UC. They were priced at ~$650, so I thought I’d have a look.

Good news: I really liked the sights (which I was sure I would), and I really liked the grips (which I didn’t think I would).

I immediately decided I was going to buy one or the other, but…

Bad news: the tritium vial on the 632’s XS sight must have been cracked during installation, because it was all but dead. The 432’s sight was good-to-go, so I asked for permission to dry-fire it. The trigger was excellent, but during my second trip around the cylinder the trigger locked up in the rearmost position and would not reset. Looking from the side the firing pin was still protruding, so the hammer was fully down. No amount of cylinder-jiggling or playing with the cylinder release accomplished anything, so I handed it back to the sales clerk. He took it to their gunsmith, who was able to get the hammer to rebound and the trigger to reset by gently whacking the rear of the grips against his bench.

I assume a bit of internal debris was to blame, blocking the rebound slide (or something else), and I feel confident the problem could be resolved with disassembly and thorough cleaning, but I was unwilling to take the risk, and the clerk stated they were going to ship it back to S&W anyway.

Color me disappointed. Nobody’s perfect, and we’re talking about an exceedingly small sample size of two, but still.

I am not one of those “they don’t build them like they used to” guys, but this experience didn’t bolster my position.

__________________
Mark Lathem

See post #s 210 through 214 in this thread about the dim front sight. Apparently it was due to improper installation at the factory.

.32 H&R coming back to the J frame - Ultimate Carry by Lipsey

A shame that S&W has had such spotty QC lately, though that seems to be pervasive across the entire industry since COVID. Fingers crossed they get it back to you quickly, and get more on shelves soon. I'm still trying to find a 632 to bring home!

__________________
AKA SixToEight

It is not just the firearms industry. QA/QC and pride in one's work is missing in a lot of fields.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

It has been proven over and over again, even if you can find employees capable enough, that it is now more profitable to put a certain amount of quality control on the consumer - hopefully with warranties - rather than ensure products leave the factory without defects. Firearms, cars, homes, you name it.

*
Which is one of the reasons I do not favor hiring folks with Business degrees (especially MBAs) who do not have substantial experience in the field. The Good Idea Fairy should be beaten into submission instead of being given any consideration.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

Do these all go to Lipseys first? If they would run a little qc on them, charge an extra $50 it would be worth it. They're already dragging S&W along with this whole offering, if they would step in and be the QC and the entity you deal with they could position themselves to be the go to premium place to buy a S&W. Like I won't buy one unless it's lipseys. They could make a fortune, or they could stick their name on shoddy merch. I guess the MBAs will decide.

I had heard of the front sight issue, which is why I checked them.

The trigger problem, however, was a surprise, and an issue I found particularly concerning. I would have loved to have had the opportunity to open it up to see exactly what the source of the problem was.

__________________
Mark Lathem

That would be a great concept!!
I for one would gladly pay the differential for sound QC.
When my UC went back it took 2 weeks (which I considered reasonably fast).Customer Service was fine but kinda a hassle.
I would still recommend the UC. Much better regulated than SP101 (sights).

This is why I cracked open my 432 UC before shooting it. Mine was VERY clean inside. Virtually no manufacturing grit/debris.

I was lucky enough to get a 632-UC about a month ago! My LGD had it on a wish list on my behalf and they got one. And yes, the front XS night sight was dead upon arrival.

I quickly emailed S&W about it and I received a replacement roll pin for the front sight in a couple of days, but no sight?

I emailed them again about getting a roll pin instead of a replacement sight.

About three days later I received a new XS night sight, cool.
But, two days after that I received another replacement sight!

I now have two new sights and one new sight roll pin. Pretty good customer service on their part, huh? I’m satisfied.

Other than the sight issue, my example of the new 632-UC is all good and I’m very pleased with it.I paid $780 total out the door with taxes.

I’m looking to buy the 642-UC when I find one, but that will be in person only to perform quality control before it goes home with me!

My 432UC still at S&W for repairs, light primer stikes and not firing. I have a post here about it.

__________________
340 M&P 686 MM 432UC Inbound 😎

I got my 432UC a couple of weeks ago and it is just fine so far. Sorry to hear of all these issues.

I'm confused. This is the ULTIMATE CARRY revolver. A youtube vid said this was the product of the greatest revolver minds in America. The product manager said this was the best revolver ever made.

Think I'll hold out for a plain-jane Pentultimate Carry version.

I will not debate the effectiveness of the calibers of the M632 or M432 as they might be descent self defense calibers - I have never personally done the ballistic research on them. That said, they won't really do anything a 38 special or 9mm in the right configuration won't. 9mm and 38 special are comparatively inexpensive, available almost anywhere and quite effective in the right bullet brand & configuration. For the most part you would be looking at a semi auto in the 9mm chambering, but the guns that shoot them have come a long long way!! The large selection of Micro 9's are small, light, compact, hold 10-15 rounds and are flat easy carrying handguns. If you still favor revolvers, good ole' Chief's Special's (M60 / M36) are still available in dozen's of configurations and ammo is also readily available and effective.

These days, there is a serious push by our government to severely limit, restrict, and make ammo hard to get and expensive to purchase. The calibers that the guns you mentioned come in fall into an "odd caliber". By odd I mean it was introduced relatively recent and while some have purchased them they are not exactly what I'd call common enough to find an most stores that sell ammunition. If you do find it I would imagine that the variety is limited and the price is somewhat expensive compared to popular SD calibers. While a revolver chambered in a smaller caliber allows for a 6th round, like I mentioned above, if capacity is a concern, look into the Micro 9's. For those who can open up their mind to the new crop of SD pistols, they simply can't be beat! I was a die-hard M60 fan and carried a Chief's Spl. for 40+ years. The day I shot my friends Sig P365 was the day I changed my mind about SD guns. Try a few different brands and models as it might open up a whole new world for you. If you are still convinced you want to carry a wheel gun, a more commonly available caliber might be the way to go.

Did you post in the wrong thread or something? I'm confused. I thought this thread was about QA issues and not a semiauto vs. revolver, .32 vs. 38 special and 9mm, or 6 vs. 10-15 rounds thread. Respectfully, I'm sure that the OP is fully aware of the pros and cons of revolver and semiauto, the existence of other calibers, differences in capacity and ammo cost, and the existence of micro 9mm pistols.

OP, Did they only have those two in stock? Did they have others you could examine before you put money down?

I got my 442 UC earlier this week and yes, it has a glitch. My hand is large enough that my trigger finger naturally hits the trigger past the first joint, and this causes some lateral pressure on the trigger. The trigger will come back just far enough to drop the cylinder stop and then stop; completing the trigger press requires a whole bunch more pressure (read: yank). Moving the point of contact to the joint or pad pretty much eliminates this, and it doesn't occur shooting weak-handed.

I pulled the side plate off and hit the internals with canned air, then spray Break-Free, then canned air again to blow out the Break-Free, and it helped a little. Right now it's in my desk drawer loaded with snap caps and gets dry-fired when I think of it, and I think that's helping too.

I have a 642-2 and a 49 ND and this isn't a problem with them. Both of them have Hogue Monogrips, which have more material behind the backstrap, and that naturally puts my trigger finger at the joint. I've got a set of them on the way for the 442 and will see if that alleviates the problem. If not, then it's back to the mothership.

On the good side, the sights are awesome, the tritium vial glows, and it hits where it's aimed. The B/C gap is .005".

__________________
Regards,

Chuck

I can see a Seinfeld routine in this… “It’s the “ULTIMATE CARRY”… but I CARRY it to USE it. Shouldn’t it be “ULTIMATE USE”? Why do I want to CARRY it if I can’t USE it? Isn’t USE the most important part?”

__________________
Uvidíme se později, aligátore.

They only had the two.

Quite frankly, after that experience I probably still would have opted to go home empty-handed, regardless of how many they had in the back

__________________
Mark Lathem

I don't like to disparage companies, but I don't think I'll buy another XS sight. I bought a Standard Yellow Dot front sight for my wife's Ruger LCR .22 Magnum because XS was the only company that actually made one for that revolver. While I was installing it, the "yellow dot" actually popped off the sight and revealed the underlying white dot. I glued the yellow dot back on, but I also contacted XS Customer Service. CS told me that they knew of this problem and that my fix would not hold up. They did replace the front sight for me, but didn't include a new roll pin or threadlocker. I guess they're not too concerned with customer satisfaction. Sorry to hear about your problems with the Ultimate Carry.

Ordered one of the 642UC when they were announced...got it in a few weeks later and was a very nicely put together gun...

In one of the videos they said that they changed the trigger geometry for a better pull...unfortunately that wasn't the case with mine... Locked up WAY too early and a long overtravel after lockup... I've got several Js and they all lock up tight just before the hammer falls...

It has already gone to a new home...replaced by a 80s vintage Model 38...

Bob

I've never know this to be a problem or something to worry about. As far as I ever known, what matters is that it locks up before the hammer drops and the timing is in order. I've heard one aficionado, I don't recall who but I'm sure I can do some searching to refresh my memory, say the earlier the lock up the better. Educate me to why this and the remaining trigger travel to drop the hammer is supposed to be an issue????

The design decisions of the Ultimate Carry guns are solid and sensible. These problems all have to do with S&W's quality control practices during production/assembly as opposed to the guns themselves.

__________________
AKA SixToEight

Frailer,

Thank you for posting. It is a reminder that I have been correct to open up every new revolver to clean and re-lube it. I have no complaint against the factory's lube, although it is not the same as mine, but I certainly do not trust cleanliness, although it has almost always been proper.

When the 642 first came out, I bought one, although the sideplate cut was a bit odd (the fitting, however, was perfect). I had it immediately sent back to S&W by the dealer because it had carry-up problems. Not a really great advertisement for S&W's QC, but no Centennials had been made for a few (16?) years, so I did what I had to. They did fix the timing, and I still have it.

Either caveat emptor, or buyer beware; can't decide which.

__________________
Formerly Model520Fan

I'm still awaiting a 432UC to ever arrive at my FFL to fulfill me being on the FFL's Lipsey's-wishlist. I got on the wishlist during the "ShotShow" time period, but still waiting.

I was annoyed my FFL hasn't yet been notified of one to ship to them yet, but now I'm glad I didn't get a problem 432UC.
Hopefully, if & when it does arrive, it won't have problems.:

4/29/24 Update. Contacted by my FFL and my 432UC is now enroute and hopefully will arrive sometime next week.

__________________
66/642/640/627/586/60/638/686

I’m waiting on S&W to fix the timing issue on my 442UC. Very disappointed.

__________________
N.R.A. BENEFACTOR Member

..it was a very heavy trigger pull...it felt like the hand was still trying to rotate the cylinder after lock up.

This is pretty disappointing.

I recently purchased a 686+ and can honestly say it is the best timed S&W I have ever owned and maybe the most accurate. I am 71 and have owned a number of S&W revolvers. This experience led me to believe S&Ws QA issues were behind them. I guess I was confused.

I found a 632 UC in stock online at a gun shop and ordered it immediately. It came in a few days ago and the front sight was also dead. A call to S&W and they are sending me a new front sight

I just bought a new 648, great shooting gun and very accurate right out of the box. Big problem with FTF's probably 15% in SA and close to 50% DA. Yes the strain screw is tight. Yes I tried multiple brands of ammo.

If I had bought this gun used I would have tried a Wolff mainspring etc. But since it is brand new, off to the mothership it goes for repair. Other than that I love the gun.

__________________
Jim
Many K and N Frames

Interesting observation. On the 432 that locked up I noticed the same thing. Occasionally the trigger would hit a “wall” after the cylinder locked, and it took additional pressure to get the hammer to drop.

The gun’s price tag was hanging from a rubber band looped through the trigger guard, so at the time I assumed the problem was caused by the rubber band becoming pinched behind the trigger.

Now I’m not so sure. Some folks claim S&W revised the lock work geometry for this run. If that is indeed true, it might need further revision. Or perhaps de-revision.

__________________
Mark Lathem

I've posted before about my experiences with shoddy products from S&W and crummy CS dealing with trying to get them fixed. It is a real shame, I like the technical side of a lot of S&W offerings from the last twenty years, but the very likely outcome of having a lemon and the difficulty of getting it fixed has been able to keep me away after having to learn my lesson a few too many times. It's a shame, I'd really like to be confident in buying one of the UCs.

The current Rebate at S&W had me looking at the PERFORMANCE CENTER® MODEL 19 CARRY COMP® but I had a problem with a Model 637 that was a paperweight at best. My 686 Plus purchase a few years brought my faith back.

I wanted a new revolver and I went with Kimber.

I was rather pleased with my 686+ too.

But others from S&W recently have been duds, no pun intended.