Hi,
I recently purchased a used PPK/s.
The Serial Number is part of the Recall for accidental discharge.
How do I determine if this pistol was sent in for repair?
Thanks,
Marty

If your PPK/S was sent in for recall, it will have a small punch mark located on the inside of the beavertail where the hammer rests when cocked. It will look like a small, circular dent in the metal about the size of the tip of a pen.



If it hasn't been recalled, then contact Walther Arms USA because Smith & Wesson no longer produces the PPK, nor are they set up to replace parts, but Walther still honors the Lifetime Warranty on the S&W PPKs and will still do recall repairs.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

I had one that I purchased a while back and sent an email to their customer service. They responded with all of the relevant information. My PPKs was made well after the recall so I was good. However, I still felt better having the email documentation.

You can check the details on-line. I believe they put a punch stamp under the hammer to signify that a recall gun has been repaired. Please confirm with S&W to be sure.

Do the Interarms versions require the same mod?

Robert

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

No, the Interarms PPKs lack this issue because they followed the original Walther Blueprints, whereas Smith & Wesson made a few modifications to the design and the safety defect was an unforeseen consequence.

Furthermore, it's important to note that not 100% of all pre-recall Smith & Wesson manufactured PPKs had this issue, (hence why it wasn't even addressed until several years later) nor did they all develop it later on, the recall was merely an preemptive countermeasure to mitigate the risk of anyone being harmed should their PPK have a defective safety.

There are actually folks to this day who never bothered to send their S&W PPKs in for repairs because they tested theirs out strenuously, ascertained that the defect wasn't present in their examples, and just plain didn't want to have to wait for their PPK to be shipped in for "repairs" for a defect that didn't exist then risk getting it back in cosmetically worse condition, because at the time some folks had actually gotten their PPKs back with tool marks, finish wear, or other cosmetic blemishes which weren't present before, supposedly because S&W was so swamped by receiving several years worth of PPKs all at once for repairs that they were rushing to get through them all.

So even if you had a pre-recall S&W PPK, you could always test yours out to see if the safety is defective simply by taking it out to the range and manually decocking it with a live round in the chamber. If it doesn't discharge, then your PPK's safety drum is still in proper working order, so you could always wait until after the pandemic to send it in, that way you won't have to be without it in the meantime.
Heck, even if you had a confirmed detective safety, you could always just refrain from manually decocking it with a live round in the chamber and it would otherwise be perfectly safe.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

I had a new PPK/s, and I received a recall on it. I had never fired it, so I put a note in with it saying it was a new pistol and I wanted it to be returned in the condition as it was when I sent it. When I received it back it had intentionally been ruined. It had scratches and the entire right side had one huge vise mark on it. I was furious, so I called a S&W supervisor. He sent me a label to sent it back for inspection. I included a copy of my note. He called me and said when they started making them again, I would get a new gun with the recall done, so there was no dimple on it. True to his word, I got a new PPK/s a few months later. I am at a loss as to why the damage was done, other than pure evil. I hope S&W knows who damaged the pistol and fired them.

That's what you get with messing with what is proven and what works.

__________________
BTDT, Got The T-Shirt

On the contrary, they modified it because the older design didn't work flawlessly. The original design was unreliable feeding JHPs in general, bit the hand of the shooter leaving behind nasty cuts to anyone with larger hands, and had a notoriously heavy DA trigger.

If it were proven, then S&W would have spared themselves the expense of modifying the design, and left it exactly as it was.

Besides, as previously stated, the security defects weren't common, and the overall design was improved thanks to their modifications. Obviously Walther approves of Smith & Wesson's modifications as well, considering that they have been officially adopted by Walther and used in the new production Walther PPK.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

I respectfully disagree.

I had a new production PPK that left me bleeding after shooting it with the extended tang.

Now I'm a lefty, IDK if that should matter.

But the PPK/s I have doesn't bite like the 2020 PPK I had. The PPK/s in question is a low serial number 1980's production. And it feeds the defensive ammo I tried in it.

The current production PPK was traded towards a 25-2 Model of 1955 revolver 98% with all in presentation case so it's all good.

But my gut feeling is that S&W screwed up a reliable design.
.

__________________
BTDT, Got The T-Shirt