642 firing pin bushing damage?

R

RGVshooter

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
1,285
Reaction score
1,610
Location
USA
I am the original owner of the model 642-2 revolver. It was purchased new on black friday last year 2017. I probably shot around 800 rounds thru it including a handful of +P's. All factory loads that consist mostly of Monarch 158gr JSP, Federal american eagle 158gr LRN, Remington golden sabre 125gr +P and G&W box 130gr Remington FMJ's...

Look in the two photos I uploaded and you'll see pitting inside of the frame next to the firing pin bushing and what appears to be a crack along the bushing itself. Would this be considered normal wear & tear? I have already sent S&W customer service a email and included these same photos.. has anyone seen this before?


HQv7OUl.jpg


4BIJxLj.jpg
 
Register to hide this ad
Never seen a crack like that. I also am surprised by the groove worn into the recoil plate, do you flip the cylinder closed? Wonder why such a pronounced wearing.
 
That is not a crack, it is erosion from a failed primer. In other words, gas cutting. It is usually seen on the hammer nose bushing itself, but can extend into the frame. Aluminum frames are more susceptible to this than steel frames.
 
I don't know the answer but I'm interested in this story. I get that the aluminum is more susceptible to damage than the steel. Isn't that part of the reason for that steel bushing, to protect the aluminum? Wouldn't the firing pin itself show some damage or roughness? The gun in general looks very high mileage. I wonder how many miles aluminum J frames are good for. It looks more like what I'd expect to see from a range rental. But then I'd never consider putting 800 rounds of anything through an aluminum J frame. I've had my model 60 for well over 30 years and I doubt I've put 800 rounds through it but maybe. It did go through a few qualifications but the +P was rare. I don't think it was actually rated for +P but it is all stainless steel. The gun in question just looks kinda worn to me, but I'm not a big aluminum revolver person.
Best of luck and I hope it works out well.
 
"I get that the aluminum is more susceptible to damage than the steel. Isn't that part of the reason for that steel bushing, to protect the aluminum?"

No. All S&W hand ejectors have the hammer nose bushing, regardless of frame material.



"Wouldn't the firing pin itself show some damage or roughness?"

It depends on where the failure of the primer occurs. If it is in the firing pin impression, the firing pin most definitely can be damaged. In this case the failure was in the primer annulus, which will often damage the hammer nose bushing itself. In this case the gun is a .38 special. If it had been a .357 magnum with its' much higher pressure you would see gas cutting of the hammer nose bushing.
 
Alk8944 said:
That is not a crack, it is erosion from a failed primer. In other words, gas cutting. It is usually seen on the hammer nose bushing itself, but can extend into the frame. Aluminum frames are more susceptible to this than steel frames.
Click to expand...

Well that makes sense. Thank you.

I'm disappointed and I hope that a reasonable solution that makes both parties happy comes out of this. I sent the revolver back to S&W today.

I will say this. I am not happy with the amount of wear on the frame shown on the revolver after firing nearly 800 rounds. They never advertise the revolver as having a limited lifespan. I never owned/carried a snub nose revolver and wanted to learn to master the double action trigger and "wear in" the action to smooth it out. S&W advertises the 642 as rated for "continuous +P" so I assumed that it was built to last since a great majority of my rounds were 158 gr. LRN remington or Federal with a couple boxes of Golden Sabre +P's thrown in. The barrel and cylinder show no wear at all. It's the frame that's taking a beating. This will be the last aluminum alloy framed pistol I'll ever buy.
 
Last edited:
Alk8944 said:
That is not a crack, it is erosion from a failed primer. In other words, gas cutting. It is usually seen on the hammer nose bushing itself, but can extend into the frame. Aluminum frames are more susceptible to this than steel frames.
Click to expand...
Yep, this can and does happen. Usually with reloads that are tad too hot coupled with brass that was shot (cycled) a little too much (primer pocket is weakened). Of course, it can be just a bad primer.

This can happen with factory ammo, too. Back in 2000, I was firing some Hornady factory ammo in a Ruger Model 77 rifle. I tend to check my spent cases after firing, and I noticed a some "primer leakage" around the primer pockets in 2 or 3 of about 15 rounds I fired. Since the Ruger bolt is tough stainless steel and since I caught it early, there was very little evidence of the leakage on the face of the bolt.

I packed up all the spent cases and remaining ammo from that lot number (a full box and the remaining few of rounds for the trouble box) and shipped them back to Hornady. I didn't think much about it until I got a letter and check from Hornady a month later. The letter contained an analysis of the cases and ammo. Some of the cases had a micro crack in the head around the primer pocket from the "drawing" of brass during the manufacturing. The check was enough for about 3 or 4 boxes of factory ammo. Like I said, it can and does happen.

If a leaking primer can cause little tiny craters to form on the face of a stainless steel bolt, I imagine it would be pretty tough on aluminum. FWIW
 
Sorry to see this sir - and kinda scary for me since I have two 442's. That said, both of them are very low mileage. Although a lot of folks have been able to get their alu-framed J-frames into high mileage territory - I have always looked at them as shoot-a-little and carry-a-lot. I don't think S&W has ever specified any numbers - but I think 800+ is getting up in high round count territory where you might expect to see some problems pop up. As for me, I have a 60 and 640 that I can use for practice and they should hold up a lot longer. Finally, to the point, your 642 is an ideal candidate for a trip back to the mothership!!
 
I checked the tracking number and my 642 made it safely back to its birthplace.

Anyone guess what S&W is going to do? Any ideas at all?
 
RGVshooter said:
Anyone guess what S&W is going to do? Any ideas at all?
Click to expand...

No clue.

I do agree with your post about the longevity of the gun though. 800 rounds is just getting started as far as I'm concerned.

I've noticed the bluing wearing off on the 442 I picked up a couple months ago. Sure, it's holster wear, and I honestly don't care, but I would have expected the finish to hold up better. Things ain't what they used to be, that's for sure.
 
I shoot my 340PD enough to remain proficient - 25 rounds of +P .38 per month - but otherwise it just rides along. It's a .357 so I've assumed that the use of .38 ammo would have little if any effect on the longevity of the gun but your post has me thinking . . . I wonder if anyone who uses their aluminum framed revolver as I do has experienced wear like that shown in the OPs photos?
 
yep380 said:
No clue.

I do agree with your post about the longevity of the gun though. 800 rounds is just getting started as far as I'm concerned.

I've noticed the bluing wearing off on the 442 I picked up a couple months ago. Sure, it's holster wear, and I honestly don't care, but I would have expected the finish to hold up better. Things ain't what they used to be, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Can I get a pic? I have some wear on mine. But not what I would think to be excessive. It's actually not much at all....
 
ABPOS said:
Can I get a pic? I have some wear on mine. But not what I would think to be excessive. It's actually not much at all....
Click to expand...

Attached. There's some loss along the top strap edge as well, but it's hard to get a picture of it.

And, as I said before, I don't care (it's a carry gun)... but I really would have expected the finish to be more durable. I have a 586 I bought new in 1991 that has seen a bit of holster time, including some wet days in a deer stand. It's also seen way more range time than this 442 and aside from some very minor scratches that were my fault, it essentially looks brand new.
 

Attachments

  • 442_wear.JPG
    442_wear.JPG
    75.9 KB · Views: 111
I'm still waiting for a letter from S&W regarding my 642.. I sent out a email to customer service this morning inquiring on it's status. In the meantime I've been packing my 4" 686 in a Galco Master combat holster... lol... in the right belt it's not as bad as one thinks...
 
yep380 said:
Attached. There's some loss along the top strap edge as well, but it's hard to get a picture of it.

And, as I said before, I don't care (it's a carry gun)... but I really would have expected the finish to be more durable. I have a 586 I bought new in 1991 that has seen a bit of holster time, including some wet days in a deer stand. It's also seen way more range time than this 442 and aside from some very minor scratches that were my fault, it essentially looks brand new.
Click to expand...

That isn't bluing. It's a finish similar to paint. My 642 started getting pretty chewed up across the back of the grips frame and where it was rubbing the holster as well.I decided to polish it and couldn't be happier with the results. But the finish of both the 642 and 442 are notorious for not wearing well.
 
RGVshooter said:
Well that makes sense. Thank you.

I'm disappointed and I hope that a reasonable solution that makes both parties happy comes out of this. I sent the revolver back to S&W today.

I will say this. I am not happy with the amount of wear on the frame shown on the revolver after firing nearly 800 rounds. They never advertise the revolver as having a limited lifespan. I never owned/carried a snub nose revolver and wanted to learn to master the double action trigger and "wear in" the action to smooth it out. S&W advertises the 642 as rated for "continuous +P" so I assumed that it was built to last since a great majority of my rounds were 158 gr. LRN remington or Federal with a couple boxes of Golden Sabre +P's thrown in. The barrel and cylinder show no wear at all. It's the frame that's taking a beating. This will be the last aluminum alloy framed pistol I'll ever buy.
Click to expand...

I WOULD BE EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED WITH THIS REVOLVER, IF IT WAS MINE......

IMHO, S&W SHOULD REPLACE THIS REVOLVER WITH A NEW ONE ! ! !
 
F75gunslinger said:
That isn't bluing. It's a finish similar to paint. My 642 started getting pretty chewed up across the back of the grips frame and where it was rubbing the holster as well.I decided to polish it and couldn't be happier with the results. But the finish of both the 642 and 442 are notorious for not wearing well.
Click to expand...

WHAT DID YOU POLISH YOUR 642 WITH ? ? ?

DID YOU COMPLETELY REMOVE THE CLEARCOAT FINISH ? ? ?
 
RGVshooter said:
They are. I got an email this morning asking for my FFL info. They're going to send me a new revolver.
Click to expand...

Smith & Wesson are good people. 800 rounds isn't anything and that's little more than 3 months of semi-regular training schedule at my house with any new carry piece! As for the ammo you use in your new issued Revo, I'd make sure to use factory loaded, brass cased ammo to break your new carry baby in and keep an eye on the firing pin bushing/same area of damage in your returned/pictured piece. I'm betting that was a freak occurrence or a bad batch of ammo with fatigued primer pockets as someone already has stated.

And unless something has changed recently a manufacturer can send you a replacement firearm or a factory repaired firearm to your door. Springfield did it with my 1911 2 years ago. Doesn't matter much either way you are getting a new piece.
 
HamHands said:
...
And unless something has changed recently a manufacturer can send you a replacement firearm or a factory repaired firearm to your door. ...
Click to expand...

There are a few states (~10, as I recall) which do not allow a new serial numbered firearm to be sent directly back to the owner without going through an FFL.
 
No, I have to go thru a FFL to have the new serial number transfered to me. I'm in Texas.

As soon as I get the replacement I intend to sell it and most likely use those funds to purchase a new 640 revolver as my EDC. And retire the Kel Tec P32 that I've been carrying as my EDC although today for giggles I carried my 4" 686.
 
I think that's true in all states if you are getting a gun with a new serial number (one that does not show on any 4473 as having been transferred to you.) That's the only way the gubmint can keep track of all guns from the manufacturer to the consumer and track down all those criminals and eliminate gun crime and all that stuff.
 
L-2 said:
There are a few states (~10, as I recall) which do not allow a new serial numbered firearm to be sent directly back to the owner without going through an FFL.
Click to expand...

I found the list of states/US territories which require, when a manufacturer replaces a frame, i.e., a new serial number, needs to go through an FFL:

CALIFORNIA, MARYLAND, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, HAWAII, MICHIGAN, AND U.S. TERRITORIES.

I think there are four U.S. territories: Guam, Samoa, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands.

EDIT: CH4 pointed out there's another territory: the Northern Mariana Islands
 
Last edited:
If you like a DAO, concealed hammer J-frame that will likely outlive you, try a 640 or 640-1. All stainless steel, a few ounces heavier than the 642 but more comfortable and controllable to shoot and more durable. No finish to peel. The 640-1 is a .357 if that suits you, but the 640 will handle the hottest .38 Special loads with aplomb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Grimjaws
637-2 with a 642-1 hammer experiment UPDATE PICS ADDED
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
Crookedcreek
C
Borderboss
586/686 Factory firing pin bushing repair stamp
Replies
3
Views
482
BuffaloBob
B
ddeanjohnson
  • Locked
WITHDRAWN --WTS- GUN BOOKS -- MAKE AN OFFER
2
Replies
45
Views
10K
ddeanjohnson
ddeanjohnson
RM Vivas
NYPD - M&P #S812894 - How I Research The NYPD Guns
Replies
22
Views
2K
dobegrant
dobegrant
ddeanjohnson
  • Locked
WITHDRAWN -- Collection reduction: 40 guns (15 S&W + Colts, etc.)
Replies
26
Views
11K
ddeanjohnson
ddeanjohnson

Latest posts

Back
Top