|
|
 |
|
04-16-2009, 06:52 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,095
Likes: 0
Liked 385 Times in 222 Posts
|
|
A few years ago I was at the Glock facility in Smyrna while visiting a brother-in-law who lives a few miles away. They told me that the aluminum cased Blazer is cheapo stuff and they use it to test fire their guns, since "if a gun shoots Blazer, it will fire ANYTHING." Being Berdan primed and aluminum cased, I guess it does have some unusual "quirks."
That said, I have never tried any of that stuff in my older 625s with the hammer mounted firing pins. But my -4s all fire regular CCI primers with or without moonclips. S&W seems to be having ignition and reliability problems with their later production .45 ACP revolvers. I have not and will not own one of these so I don't know if it's because owners try to lighten the springs or the strain screws loosen. Maybe the frame mounted firing pins have something to do with it. The more experienced revolversmiths will tell you that there are all kinds of frame mounted firing pins floating around out there, many of them different lengths and made of different material. This serves to further muddy the waters.
I took a long look at this revolver and liked the concept but came up with numerous reasons to NOT buy one. In my opinion it is poor execution of a potentially good product. I see too many shortcuts with this revolver to make it a viable choice, and considering that its intended purpose is as a defense gun, the overall package is not acceptable to me.
Oh, and it's funny how the pre-production sample tested in the March/April '08 American Handgunner functioned perfectly with or without moonclips for over 5000 rounds. Either that was a nice piece of fiction or S&W cheapened the production model. I'm inclined to go with the latter.
Dave Sinko
|
04-16-2009, 09:49 AM
|
 |
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 924
Likes: 402
Liked 680 Times in 250 Posts
|
|
I agree I am going to sell mine
__________________
Len
|
04-16-2009, 09:50 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Northeastern Kentucky
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
I just want mine back in my hands!
|
11-29-2009, 06:38 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVBob
...Anyway I emailed Smith & Wesson the question with attached picture, and the response was that this is normal and there is nothing that needs to be done. |
I agree with S&W! I have had alot of S&W revolvers over the years; I currently have three, one being an S&W Model 325 Thunder Ranch. On all of the S&W revolvers that I have and do have, and on my S&W Model 325 Thunder Ranch, I too have experienced this “scuffing.”
It is normal and it is just the parts fitting together!
|
11-29-2009, 06:49 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sinko
I took a long look at this revolver and liked the concept but came up with numerous reasons to NOT buy one. In my opinion it is poor execution of a potentially good product. I see too many shortcuts with this revolver to make it a viable choice, and considering that its intended purpose is as a defense gun, the overall package is not acceptable to me.
Dave Sinko
|
Like what shortcuts? Why is it a poor execution fo a potentially good product?
|
11-30-2009, 06:27 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Grangeville, Idaho
Posts: 314
Likes: 12
Liked 47 Times in 27 Posts
|
|
Does anyone know if S&W had some kind of problem(s) producing the 325 Thunder Ranch? It seemed to me like it was an awfully long time between the time the gun was announced and the time the guns were actually available. They had been making the 325PD for some time before they made the 325 Thunder Ranch, but the two guns are quite different. I'm wondering if there were some production problems with them.
|
01-09-2010, 07:46 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Palmetto, Florida
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Careby - what ever happened to your 325TR?
|
01-11-2010, 11:32 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
Got mine back today after about 3 weeks. Had to send it in as the barrel was loose in the shroud after the first 12 rounds (New in Bag). SO... I'll shoot it on Wed and see if it works better now 
Also put a new Hi-Viz Red sight on the front. Love that quick-change front sight
James
__________________
Texas DPS LTC Instructor
|
01-13-2010, 11:58 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
Shot it today, other than the sights being off, it works like it should now
Fixed to my satisfaction.
James
__________________
Texas DPS LTC Instructor
|
11-30-2012, 01:58 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
325 TR...a little dissapointed!
I just picked up my new 325 TR yesterday, and haven't fired it yet.
In the gun shop I noticed that it did not have the Thunder Ranch logo on the right side of the frame, nor does it have any reference to Thunder Ranch on the gun. I assumed that's the way it is now, and wasn't too bothered by that, but when talking to the S&W Rep about the Light Rail not fitting properly (the main reason for the call) I mentioned the missing logo. He said it should be there, and I would have to return the gun for repair. Huh!!! How in the world would QC miss that?
I went way out on the limb...financially, to buy this gun, and without firing a round it has to go back.
|
|
|
|
Tags
|
442, 45acp, bodyguard, concealed, detent, ejector, extractor, glock, gunsmith, hornady, horvath, lock, model 625, performance center, primer, round butt, shroud, sig arms, smith and wesson, starline, tactical, winchester  |
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
