Hey all!

Made an account to post about my experiences so far with a brand new 43c. I've owned a pile of Smith J-Frames, with a 351c and 43c being the most recent ones to acquire. I write for a website, and wanted to test these two revolvers out as part of an ongoing pocket gun series that I've been working on over the last two years. Both guns were purchased brand new, and had no external signs of wear.

The 351c works great, despite some glaring QC issues, however, the 43c does not work. On 2/8 of the chambers, the gun will not fire. I've been able to replicate this with live ammo, snapcaps, and no ammo. Yes, I know that you cannot dryfire the 43c, and I have not been doing so. However, I have notated the two chambers that do not work, and can replicate the issue regardless of ammo being in the gun.

I'm baffled by this issue, as my online research has not turned anything up on this specific issue. I've got a video of this, which I will link below.

https://youtu.be/DWn4MYrLpDo?si=HEjRwudjdvg3B01P

This is a shame, as this will both delay my testing of the gun, but also reinforce the mentality of Smith's bad revolver QC as of late. At least my 351c works, even if Smith forgot to put half of their logo on the gun.

Join the club lol.... Send it back. Don't "monkey around" with it. There has been A LOT, and I mean, A LOT of post pertaining to a plethora of different issues out the box with S&W J-frames lately....

I think being a publicly trades company, they care more about pushing out 2 or so million handguns a year and profits more so than they care about Q/C....

It's a new S&W, you paid for the warranty, send it back. It's sad that S&W seems to have adopted the policy of making the purchaser the QC inspector.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Mine went back thrice.
After the third trip, I took it out of the box, and got through three full cylinders without a hitch.
Next time out, 3 clicks out of eight. Disappointed to say the least.
I've named her "Sybil."

__________________
Because of the metric system?

Many, many threads here on the 43C and failures to fire.

Although the basic J frame design has been around for a long time, IMHO S&W screwed something up with the design of the 43C. Too many problems to be just a QC issue.

My thoughts exactly. And the 351s seem to run pretty well.

When I got mine back the only original part left was the frame. And I'm still not sure it's right. It's very difficult to lock up the cylinder when closing it. That gun is tighter than....well...it's tight!

__________________
Because of the metric system?

Was it like that out of the box or did it develop after the first range trip? For what its worth my 617 leads quickly with cheap bulk .22. Itll get on the front of the cylinder and forcing cone. With the cheap bulk double action becomes inoperable in short order on a few cylinders as fouling accumulates. CCI seems much cleaner and less leading. Also better ignition.

This rises to the level of INCOMPETENCE. Discontinue the model until they can produce one that actually does not malfunction about 30% of the time. I hear these reports OVER AND OVER again on the rimfire J-Frames.

Is the trigger going all the way back on the ones that don't fire, or does it stop a little short once the cylinder locks up?

If it stops short on those chambers, then those ratchets are too wide, not allowing the hand to go on past and not releasing the hammer from the trigger. You can watch this with the sideplate off, looking through the back of the hand window. You should remove the mainspring and hammer to cycle the action for this test.

__________________
protocalldesign.com

Chase, it was like this on the first cylinder. I was shooting .22 Punch, which has been extremely reliable in my other .22 revolvers and autoloaders. I can replicate the issue with the gun empty, or with snapcaps. Gun was spotlessly clean when I began shooting yesterday. Only got about 23 rounds through it before I decided to test my 351c.

It does not go to full travel. It stops short by about half an inch. I do get lockup, and it indexes properly aligned with the forcing cone.

The threads aren't just about the 43c. The new Ultimate Carry and other S&W aluminum frame J-frames seem to be problematic as well. I'm not seeing anything about the 340(PD) or steel frame J-frames, but that maybe due to the fact that S&W sells less of them.

I was actually looking to buy a 43C while S&W had the rebate that just ended yesterday. I decided because I've seen a lot of reports of light primer strikes.

Gotcha yeah sounds like you may have a timing issue going on. Just wanted to mention my 617 to ensure it wasnt something like that as once leaded on the front of the cylinder it will do it loaded or empty until brushed. Im honestly probably going to keep a SS brush in my bag just so I can plow through the rest of my bulk pack.

This is my rachet condition new in the box unfired. It is on the way back to S&W. This in on a 351c

Attached Images

IMG_3243.jpg (44.5 KB, 65 views)

I was thinking about purchasing a 43C but will hold onto my $$ for now. Thx for the heads-up.

__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)

That looks like... well... looks like poor quality control, that's most family-friendly thing I can say.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Wow, I should have caught this thread earlier before I bought my new 43C.
1) won't extract any brand MT at all without a good rap on the ejector rod,
2) the Cyl sticks badly when you try to swing it out.
3) Shoots an honest 3" left at 15'

This is easily the lowest quality SW this revolver junkie has purchased ever .
It's at the mothership now. Been there for 3 weeks.

__________________
Dave

Wee Hooker, I am sorry for your poor QC experience with your 43C. But I want to point out that normally, only bad experiences get brought up on forums. For every "bad" revolver you hear about, there were 1000 good ones that nobody bothered to complain about.

My 43C has been flawless in fit, finish and performance. My 13yo can shoot 8 rounds in a 3" circle every time from 25' (he's a much better target shooter than me). I don't mean to take away from your troubles.... But MY 43C has been excellent. The kid got his range qualification (and membership) at our gun club with it, and the few times the wife shot it it was easy and painless. This eased her mind since it normally rests in her office.

__________________
NRA Certified Shotgun Instr.

At Smith & Wesson, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

__________________
Retired LE Instructor/Armorer

My brand-new 43C went back twice: the first time to correct the fact that a ramped barrel shroud (correctly marked) had been factory-installed, not the proper flat one, the second time to deal with the excessive leading that developed now that I had a gun that didn’t shoot nearly a foot low at ten yards. Mine did have misfires at first, but after several hundred rounds, and a few cleaning sessions, that has diminished significantly. Simply put, the chambers are now smoother and the rounds chamber completely. Extraction has also improved. I think that in their quest to lighten and smooth the trigger pull, S&W has gone a little too far since 22s are so hard to ignite. Every single misfire I experienced fired on the second try, the first hit possibly using up energy seating the round.

My brand new 43C marks a new low in S&W product. Misfires, trigger stuck down, trigger locked up, and had to pound out the shells from the start. Tried 4 ammos. You know, I've been buying S&W stuff from the 1970 and I don't remember a single gun that didn't go back to them within the first 100 rounds. That's 50 years of trouble. About time I stopped buying their ****. It is dangerous to think that you can protect your life with a S&W. I'll send the gun in but if it comes back and doesn't work, I'll want my money back.

I purchased my M43c used. I ran 300 rounds through it with only 6 misfires. I rolled the cylinder agin and they went bang. I was shooting federal champion out of it. I took it to a gunsmith for trigger job. I have killed two groundhogs with it and one mole.