669 frame failure - pictures!

[AreWeNotMen?]

This event occurred back in 2002, but I wanted to post it here just as an FYI. I was at the range for some practice, and after a few dozen rounds through my 669, I felt something touch my hand as I was beginning to set it down. I look down to see a chunk of metal laying on the bench, and a hole in the side of my gun!

Pic A shows the damage on the left side; Pic B shows a through-and-through crack on the right side (at the left tip of Post-It) that just hadn't fallen out yet.

I wasn't hurt, but it did freak me out a bit and shake my confidence in the gun. I did send it back to S&W and they replaced the frame, but with a blank 6906 which they stamped Mod 669 and my original SN. The only real differences from my 669 frame are a rounded v. squared-off trigger guard and a one v. 3-piece grip.

Did I learn anything from this? Yes - to check my weapons every time for any abnormalities (I'd guess the cracks happened over several sessions, not all at once the day of the failure), and that S&W provided good service and backed their product.

Regards.

 

[Fastbolt]

Nice pictures. Thanks for posting them.

This is something you don't see or hear about very often, but it can happen with an aluminum alloy frame (and not just with S&W pistols).

One way to try and reduce the potential is to keep the aluminum frames properly lubricated (reduce friction, heat, galling, etc) and to replace the recoil spring periodically (especially if you use higher pressure, harder recoiling loads).

While the recommendation to S&W LE armorers is to replace the recoil (and mag) springs either every 5 years of service or every 5,000 rounds fired, I tend to lean a bit more toward the conservative side of things when it involves the faster cycling compact pistols, myself.

I used to shoot quite a bit with a couple of issued 6906's, one of which I estimated was used to fire upwards of 45+K rounds, and the other one only several thousand. I was mostly using 147gr training ammo for most practice back then, but I did run some of the issued 127gr +P+ loads though them, as well as some 124gr +P I was using (before it later became an issued load).

I liked to replace the recoil springs in my well-used guns about every 2,500 - 3,000 rounds. I do the same thing with my personal 3913, FWIW. Recoil springs are relatively inexpensive from the factory (especially if you buy them a dozen or more at a time, to save on future shipping costs ).

And, as you pointed out, checking your gun for any visible issues each time you clean it is a good practice.

 

[Fastbolt]

Something else I could have mentioned in my previous post ...

Back about 87-88 when some of the 2nd gen 9's (459's) in use by a fed agency were observed to suffer frame cracks out at 10K (or more) rounds ... (as well as some alloy-framed guns made by another major maker) ... the major gun companies who wanted to provide service weapons for American LE users realized they'd probably have to make pistols that went far beyond the 5K service life expectations (at that time) of military-spec alloy pistols.

The result was that we started seeing some improvements and some more durable alloy guns.

S&W continued to make gradual changes in their alloy service pistols throughout the 3rd gen production, and on into the TSW guns being made for LE orders. When I've noticed some occasional changes in machining and production in recent TSW's, and sometimes called and asked about them, I've been told the changes are simply continuing refinements and improvements being made by the engineers.

FWIW, if I had to choose between a late 2nd gen 669, an early 3rd gen 6906 and a late production 3rd gen 6906, I'd go with the late production model.

I'd still maintain it well, though, meaning cleaning/lubrication/inspection and periodic replacement of the recoil spring.

 

[AreWeNotMen?]

FWIW, if I had to choose between a late 2nd gen 669, an early 3rd gen 6906 and a late production 3rd gen 6906, I'd go with the late production model.

So, what dates differentiate early and late production 3rd gen 6906's?

 

[Fastbolt]

By late production I basically mean after rounded trigger guards, MIM, slide dovetails for low mount Novak's, wide-cut breech faces & wide barrel tabs were introduced.

S&W was making some incremental improvements to various parts and manufacturing methods. I remember talking to a tech and discussing how the narrow slot cut under the extractor recess in the 3rd gen 9/.40 slides had changed at one point. It used to be that recoil could cause thin metal flakes to break off and fall away, or leave a curved hairline crack in the thin metal that wasn't cutaway (not considered a problem, BTW). This sort of thing happened in a couple of other spots in the slide, too. He said the newer CNC machining and laser cutting methods were allowing cuts and machining that they could never do using the older equipment (some of which was hand operated). The parts received from vendors were seeing improvements in production, too.

The late 90's and after 2000 saw some excellent quality 3rd gen guns being produced, especially as the TSW model line was developed and became a regular production series.

Don't get me wrong, as I'd have no qualms once again carrying an early 3rd gen 6906 (the ones I used hard and carried for work were from the earliest of the 3rd gen guns), but if I could choose, I'd pick a later production model (to go along with my late production 3913 ).

 

[AreWeNotMen?]

Good info Fastbolt. I'm sure you are right in that evolution in this series has improved the product. I tend to develop an emotional attachment to most of my firearms, so I will likely hang on to this one. Other than the frame issue, it's never given me any grief, and I trust it when I choose to carry a 9mm concealed. Plus, since we live where we live (CA), it's 12+1 capacity can't be replaced.