Caution - 629 TALO 3" frame issues

[mgschindel]

I am new to this forum and thought I would give other long-time N frame users the heads-up warning on the 629 TALO 3" limited edition revolver.

I thought it would be great to have a 3" 629, but didn't want to fork out for a nice older collectible Lew Horton 629 and just beat it up, since I planned to shoot and carry the 3" a lot. So against my own better judgment, I decided to finally try one of the newer-production 629's, despite the mim parts, the lock, all the customer service and product defect issues I read about all the time, and all the folks warning me not to do so.

So I bought a 629 3" TALO anyway. I ordered it from gunbroker, new in box, since there were none local, and none of the short barrel performance center guns locally either.

When the gun arrived at my local FFL, I thought I had looked it over pretty well, and I took it home.

When I went to try a set of round-butt combat grips on the gun, I noticed something was very wrong, and the grips sat very crooked. I put the stock crappy laminate grips back on and realized they too were GROSSLY crooked, with a big gap under the right side panel. And the right side factory grip panel itself was actually cracked up at the top, in the back by the grip frame.

That was when I realized just how brutally crooked the entire grip-frame was machined. I was literally shocked that the grip frame is nearly 1/16" too narrow, is crooked, and is way off-center by that same amount.

I am in the process of trying to get the gun replaced by S&W, due to the defective out-of-spec frame, which is not repairable. This frame should've hit the trash, and this gun never should have been built on it.

I requested a return label earlier this week, and I sent Smith my detailed pics and an emailed letter explaining the problems with the severely out-of-spec frame manufacturing defects, and have not heard back from them yet.

Meanwhile, I spoke to another gentleman at my local gun club, and he told me his own 3" TALO edition he bought earlier this year for a carry piece, was also grossly crooked in the grip frame, even more crooked than mine, and worse yet, that after 350 rounds or so, his entire gun locked up with the trigger fully back and live rounds still in the cylinder. He had to nearly rip the gun apart to get it open. He sold it almost immediately after that, and is back to carrying his trusted 1985 624 4".

First, I would warn folks to take the cheesy rubber grips off your newer 629 (any newer 629) and make sure the grip frame is not a crooked, grotesque manufacturing nightmare, especially if you live somewhere that you had to order your gun to get it and couldn't inspect it very thoroughly beforehand. This manufacturing defect is easily concealed by rubber hogue grips, or any type of grips that slip over the grip frame.

Second, I would ask other 629 TALO 3" owners if they have any issues with the grip frame being crooked on their guns, or if this is just limited to a few units.

I will try to attach pictures of what I'm talking about here with my 629 3", and just how brutally off-center and badly produced, and poorly QC'ed, the grip frame on my 629 TALO was manufactured. It has to be seen to be believed. How this got past S&W, was built into a gun, and was actually sent out the door for sale to some poor fool (me), is beyond me.

Now, I am a huge S&W collector of 30+ years, with lots of old N frames which I love and shoot in rotation every week. I have had an unshakeable and long-term love affair with N frames, from my very first days of collecting and shooting. This is my first, only, and last-ever newer regular production gun. I am disgusted beyond description. Just a heads-up to you fine folks who roll the dice and throw down your hard-earned greenbacks.

Hopefully someone will learn from my mistake, and will think twice about repeating this.

I will let everyone know if/when Smith responds and what they wind up doing about this situation.

 

[Waveform]

I can understand your disappointment but your post kinda reads like a sweeping condemnation of all new S&W revolvers. Here's a photo of mine which is the closest shot of the backstrap frame area.



I have to say mine is pretty much perfect. Fit and finish is excellent for a production gun and while I've only had the chance to shoot perhaps 100 rounds through it so far it has performed flawlessly and was surprisingly accurate right out of the box. I checked my 629 Classic 6" and it's pretty much perfect too. That one I've had long enough to shoot hundreds of rounds through and again, flawless performance.

I love my old N-frames too (27-2, 29-2) as well as other P&R Smiths I'm blessed to own. I shoot them and I enjoy them a great deal. I also enjoy my newer S&W revolvers and I can carry them in holsters when I hunt and I don't have to worry about the bluing or the nickel getting abused from field use.

I'm sorry you have issues with your 629 TALO 3". Based on what I read here and elsewhere I believe S&W will take care of it. I guess I wanted to offer my own personal experience with the same gun and let you know my experience has been the exact opposite of yours. I love mine - it's been one of the best gun purchases I've made recently.

Good luck with yours!

Wave

 

[Warren Sear]

I am perfectly happy with mine. I replaced the plywood "fishscale" stocks as soon as I got it. From my experience, they are the the most uncomfortable grips ever mounted to a revolver. The stocks on it now are Ahrend's Retro Combat Round-to-square conversions in Cordia wood.

I have had no trouble in any way with this gun. I feel more comfortable shooting magnum ammo in this gun, with its "enhanced" features, than my older N frames, MIM not withstanding. The trigger was perfect just as it came from the factory, and the action is very smooth. S&W did this one right.

 

[lhump1961]

Sorry about your 629. I would be very disappointed myself but as other have said it is the exception and I'm confident S&W will make it right. I have to admit that from the photos it looks unrepairable so I would expect a new gun. Please post when you have an update.

 

[mgschindel]

Thanks for the reply posts. I was mainly concerned that the smooth-tang 3" limited edition TALO models might have all been built on a run of defectively machined frames or something. I'm glad some of you lucked out on getting a straight frame.

I would hope mine is an extra bad lemon, but who knows. I know of two 3" TALO guns already with the bad frame, and I just want other folks to look at theirs carefully before paying for it and leaving with it, since this is too high of an incidence of such a badly made gun, two of the same model gun within 25 miles, being this out of spec, especially in a limited-run model.

It makes me wonder how many newer guns have poor machining of the grip frame, buried under a rubber one-piece monogrip. You'd never know unless you went to put an older set of two-piece wood grips on the gun.....

This is the only post-2005 revolver I ever purchased and it is the only defective Smith I have ever owned or handled. The general fitment and finishing work on this gun is very mediocre also, to be honest. If I had bought an 80's Lew Horton 629 3" I wouldn't be writing this post or be in this predicament right now. So yeah, I'm done rolling dice with my time and money, getting burned once is enough for me. Especially since my range buddy's same model of gun locked up and apparently it was out for servicing, for months. No thanks on that either. Who knows how long I'll wait or what will happen to me on this. I'm already going into week two and don't even have a return shipping label yet.

I'm not trying to comdemn anything, but I wouldn't be honest if I said I'd ever buy another newer Smith N frame, after seeing this gun, what Smith actively built out, and deliberately put out on the street. I am very put off by what this says about the current QC procedures and the employees' attitudes.

If you really think about this, someone at the Smith factory built the cylinder out and assembled the action on this brutally, visually, blatantly crooked gun. Another employee ACTUALLY bolted the wood grips to the hideously crooked frame, knowing how crooked the whole gun was. They even torqued the grips down hard, to try to hide the giant gap in the back of the grip frame, until the grip panel actually CRACKED. And then other Smith workers actually inspected it, saw it, still approved it, and put it in a box to be shipped out for sale. That's deplorable. Feel free to disagree, but if that happened in my metalshop, heads would roll. Not for making a bad part, but for deliberately and knowingly not remedying it as soon as it was obvious.

We can all agree, N frames are not price-point firearms, and Smith workers should not be knowingly putting marginal, defective guns out on the street, or hiding defective work from their bosses. Either way, the system has some issues and failures, and I won't let their internal problems or policies about marginal production fall on my wallet ever again. I am also not interested in sitting around for months wondering if I will get back a working or well-made gun. But now I am stuck, nearly $900 lighter, and in La La land, with a polished paperweight. Sure that's disappointment talking, but it's just honesty and just the facts.

If even one other Smith owner finds their gun to be crooked and out of shape and can get it replaced, or avoids buying a poorly made newer Smith from a careful inspection in the store, as a result of reading this post, and avoids the major headache I'm now stuck with, then it was worth typing out this post.

Ironically, I was actually trying to fit my own Ahrend's Corida wood grips on this gun, when the defect made itself undeniable LOL!!!

I wish everyone the very best of luck and enjoyment with their guns, both new and old. It is encouraging to see a few more posts pop up tonight where others got nice 3" TALOs. I wish my own little run at this had been much different. Whatever they send me back will be sold off promptly. With the uncertain future of this frustrating mess, which could take months, I decided to implement my own temporary solution : ) I just bought a NIB unfired 629-3 4" Woo Hoo!!!!! I'm already feeling better.

I will post up what Smith does about my defective TALO, and when....

 

[daveyc]

Wow that is really bad. Never seen that before. Give them a chance though. They will make it right

 

[buck460XVR]

Now, I am a huge S&W collector of 30+ years, with lots of old N frames which I love and shoot in rotation every week. I have had an unshakeable and long-term love affair with N frames, from my very first days of collecting and shooting.

If this is true, it's hard to believe you do not know how S&W produces their firearms......

That was when I realized just how brutally crooked the entire grip-frame was machined (or cast, or however they make these nasty buggars' frames now).

While I understand your disappointment with your new firearm(I would be too), I agree with the others to give S&W the chance to make it right. What I have seen lately is that many of those guns found on Gunbroker and other auction/internet gun sites seem to have more than the average amount of cosmetic flaws and issues. I wonder if they are actually put there because of this fact with the hope that because of the high demand and low availability of firearms that folks will accept a less than stellar firearm they can't see in person first. Seems lately, if any firearm in demand is in stock somewhere....there's a reason. I'm wonderin' if dealers would rather sell their stock firearms and let the unknowing buyer have to deal with the problem than take the time to send the firearm back to S&W in the first place. Now that doesn't give S&W an excuse to produce firearms that don't live up to their quality standards, and I believe for the most part, most folks are quite happy with their modern S&Ws. I do doubt tho that the Talos were intentionally built on frames with a known problem. Since the Talo models were all produced on the same run, any machining problems encountered at that time may certainly be evident on those guns and thus folks with those guns should take a closer look. Please keep us posted on how S&W responds to your problem.

 

[shawn mccarver]

Well, there is always a first when I read this Forum.

The frame of that revolver does not appear, at least in the pictures in Post 1, to be crooked, or bent. Instead, it simply looks to me as if the grip portion of the frame was cut off-center.

That said, it is clearly not right. I agree that S&W should replace it, as it does not seem likely that it can be repaired. I hope you will let us know what they do about it.

 

[qrachel]

Take It To The Limit, One More Time

I'm a cool-aid drinking S&W revolver fan girl! However, as I've said before and say again, "The willingness to accept such glaring and none to infrequent quality concerns as a market place of consumers is puzzling." Where's the market outrage?

I like S&W products a lot, but I offer the company no slack whatsoever when it comes to product quality, especially concerning products that have the potential to totally ruin a consumer's day if the product isn't to spec. It's only possible to do this in a sustained manner because of their customer support. One has to assume their cost trade-off of warranty costs versus 1st time quality, every time costs appears beneficial. An all too familiar value now found throughout the manufacturing world, and a practice that has been demonstrated time and again that in the long run it's economically better to "do it right the 1st time than do it over."

Whew, I don't feel any better but that's life . . . headed out now to pick up my new 629 Classic 5". ;)

TTFN,

Rachel

If

 

[mgschindel]

Well, I just got a replacement 3" TALO from Smith & Wesson, a new gun to replace the gun I sent back with the defective frame.....and....

The replacement gun they sent me, a totally different unit with a different serial number and a much earlier manufacture date, has a grip frame tang that is nearly as crooked and off-centered as the first gun I sent back to them!!

The factory grip is even cracked on that same right side, in the exact same place. It's just more of the same.

And I just looked at my Performance Center 44 mag hunter. The grip frame tang on that is also slightly crooked. Whee!!!!

I got brave and took the side plate off this second 3" 629 TALO they sent me, to see why it had a slightly gritty trigger and a sloppy cylinder lockup. Just like the first gun, when I took off the sideplate, all sorts of metal filings, bits of metal thread, and bits of hard black junk looking like welding slag, fell out, and the inside of the sideplate looks like a little kid attacked it with a torch and a grinding wheel. Better yet, there were corroded areas inside the housing I had to clean, polish the pitting out of, and oil. Plenty of jagged and crookedly cut surfaces all inside the frame. I also had to file and polish the backside of the cylinder release so it wouldn't drag on and scratch the hell out of the frame of the revolver.

I'm really glad I opened the side plate and let all the metal filings fall out. Better that than having them grind around inside the action.

Well that's that for that. I'm done. Buy a newer slapped-together Smith/Taurus/whatever these things are, at your own risk. This was your heads up to go take a look for yourself. For the money, for me, these things are a bad joke now. These simply don't compare to the earlier guns, and are a real mess. Fine for some folks who just want a "shooter", but just not for me.

On a very positive note, by contrast, the Performance Center 629 Magnum Hunter I picked up new is clean, orderly, well-fitted, and free of any debris, grime or bits of filings. The inside of the action compartment and the back of the sideplate were flawlessly polished and perfectly finished, clean enough to eat off, and the hammer and trigger are nicely and evenly hard-chromed. This is MUCH closer to what the internal action compartment of ANY average older Smith from 15+ years ago looks like. Properly made, deburred, fitted, and finished. The timing hand and cylinder stop are also properly fitted, just like any of the older guns, and are a world of difference from the junk regular production TALOs I was just inside. Of course, the grip frame is still a bit crooked. Oh well. Just looking at the internals, fitment, and finishing attention, Smith can keep their regular production slap-together messes. But I would not hesitate to buy another Performance Center gun after a careful inspection. Sorry just being honest. If more of the folks on these forums were comfortable working on the internals of their guns, they'd be seeing and realizing the same things.

I give S&W an F for the last three production guns I've looked at including two of my own 3" TALOs that are the worst-made Smiths I've ever come across. Fit is average to fair and the internal finishing is "brutal", below abysmal.

I give their customer service and warranty dep't an A+ for promptly and courteously doing the right thing, and quickly sending me a replacement gun, albeit another real ***. But they have to work with what they have, and that is what is being made there now. It's not Customer Service's fault.

And the Performance Center, I have to give them an A + for doing the best with the crappy parts they're being dealt, and for still doing a fantastic job fitting and finishing a Smith revolver as it should be.....excellent. The gunsmiths in there have to be chuckling to themselves as they close the side plate up and have to look at that twisted, mangled *** hammer block safety they have to stuff in there. It's crazy rubbish!

Sadly, not long ago....EVERY single Smith that came out of that factory and left the hands of their long-discharged fleet of talented gunsmiths WAS a "Performance Center" gun. Folks, don't hesitate to pay premiums for those "NIB" and "New Old Stock" and "Mint" or "Unfired" older pre-MIM Smiths. It's not the fact of the use of MIM parts now that is the problem, it's the other side of that equation - what that really means and why it was even done - the loss of all the gunsmiths that once made ALL the revolvers hand-fitted works of fine craftsmanship. That is the real loss. Frankly, I'm shocked at just what I saw and found inside (and outside) my second production 629 TALO today.

This is only my opinion and my isolated 30+ years of experiences with my own Smiths, so feel free to differ, but do yourself a favor and at least open up those newer guns, clean them up, correct any issues if you have the ability, and inspect for that stupid crooked grip frame tang. You just may be entitled to roll the dice and try for a better gun from the Warranty Dep't...maybe. I'll sell my junk TALO off asap, and not repeat that same mistake on another new production sled. Ever. The marriage is over. The autopsy reports are in. The king is dead. I'm off to go buy another outdated safe queen.

 

[old bear]

As others have suggested I'm sure the factory will repair or replace your NEW revolver as necessary. It's just sad that they have to do so, and do it so often.

 

[jaykellogg]

I would be on the phone to S&W's manager of quality control. IMHO, they should pull every revolver like yours out of stock and inspect them.

As someone with a lot of manufacturing experience, I can envision a production employee loading a rh grip panel in a fixture and laying the frame over it and placing a lh grip panel on top. They then grab a grip screw with one hand and a power screwdriver with the other hand. The screw is driven in place till the screwdriver torques out.

I doubt there is someone at the end of the line who inspects these guns for flaws.

It would have been nice if they had looked at the gun they sent you as a replacement, I assume that they assumed if it is in the warehouse that is is OK.

I am guessing that the depth of cut for the grip panel is not a critical measurement. Not all dimensions on a blueprint are considered "critical" and only critical get measured on a regular basis.

As I said, I would call and ask to speak to the quality manager.

 

[mgschindel]

The above are all fine suggestions for someone interested in dealing with very poor quality control, poor assembly standards, new poorly made parts, and playing the begging and praying game with a big company for weeks on end, back n forth. But life is far too short for the weeks and weeks of aggravation caused by these deliberately-designed inferior products. In the end, there is not much of a point going back and forth for months trying to get a slightly less crappy gun, especially after seeing the internals. I've now been inside two 3" 629 TALO's and a 6" 629, all standard production, all equally abysmal inside. Not to mention the crooked grip tangs.

For my greatest peace of mind, for zero waiting and hassles, and not having to run back and forth to my local fed ex, boxing up and shipping, taking photos, sending more emails, following up with calls, and going over and taking apart and inspecting and cleaning up and fixing....

Why is any of this even my problem??? My choice is to stop this from being a problem. This sled is simply gone. No more sleds will be coming in the door to hassle with and be disgusted over. For just a little more money and no hassles, I will get a far superior product I will be proud of and enjoy. This turkey, like the one before it, is simply a poorly made and assembled sled, so the proceeds from dumping it to someone who thinks that's ok, will be rolled into a mint older 3" 629, or perhaps, if I'm feeling lucky, a new 629 4" performance center V-comp.

Thanks again folks for all the support and good ideas. Stay safe, stay informed, and keep shooting and collecting those Smiths!

As a parting shot I share with you the internals of my newest Performance Center Hunter, with excellent fitment, beautifully prepped and finished action compartment, and quality hard-chromed internals. All I had to do was remove the flag portion of the internal lock (which is reversible any time in about 30 seconds), and now I have a fantastic, great shooting gun that is well-made, reliable and trustworthy for hunting and target shooting. This is no self defense or carry gun so the internal lock removal is not a "lawyer concern" on this gun. Granted, the grip frame on even this gun is a bit crooked. But acceptably so. Such is life.

VOTE with your dollars, folks! This is America, not China, and corporations need to stop treating educated American consumers like fools. But only your spending habits can accomplish that. If you wanna support "New S&W" then reward them only where due - support the fine gunsmiths and tradesmen and women of the still-solid Performance Center. If you discover that you dislike the crooked, badly made and badly fitted/finished new production line stuff being slapped together at our expense for their profit using unskilled labor and junk parts, then VOTE by not buying it. You don't have to spend money on the production rubbish they want to feed you, that "looks" like a Smith on the outside but is a very different story under the skin. Any dollars I spend WITH S&W on NEW guns from here on out will only be to support their Performance Center and the skilled craftspersons behind it, who are the real S&W now. I would like to keep those SKILLED, crucial American jobs safe, and reward that craftsmanship and hard personal effort. That's MY vote.

This PC Hunter is simply excellent. True, this gun was $350 more than the TALO, but it ALSO came with a soft case, a separate red dot hunting scope complete with quick-detach mount and extra batteries (!!!!), a custom spring kit in the internals, an action job, hand-fitment of the timing hand and cylinder stop, hard-chromed trigger and hammer set, a worked and polished forcing cone, a custom-made barrel compensator, a better front sight that is dovetailed into the barrel, a chamfered and de-horned cylinder, a custom two-tone exterior finish, etc etc etc. Are you kidding me??? That $350 difference would have cost $1200+ MORE, and several months downtime, at a reputable custom gunsmith, for these same upgrades. I at first thought the PC guns were "pricey" and had some sort of exclusive snob appeal, but I was wrong and now I understand just what a great value they actually represent - the last real Smiths, despite the Lock hole. Now I know the facts, after putting down my own cash, playing ball, and getting inside these to see what makes em tick. For me, the production guns and the performance center guns aren't even on the same planet, and I do not consider them to even be the same "brand". Why? Since the barrels, internals, internal spring kits, assembly and fitment processes, assemblers, quality inspections, finishing processes, assembly lines, tools, facilities, and of course the features of each firearm model, are ALL different from the production guns, which are more like Tauruses now.

The Performance Center shows that fortunately, you can still buy American quality, and not have to buy cheap mass-produced look-a-like junk assembled by the unskilled, at grossly inflated prices. When you buy the PC gun, you're NOT just paying more for "a similar gun". And there's no bogus concealed inflation covering up susbtituted cheapness. You're actually mostly paying for the highly valuable and highly desirable time and expertise of the last in-house trained gunsmiths that actually know how to properly build these guns, in the first place. That's the real value. And I fear that without our support, that may soon be history as well, if the profit margin of the PC shop products is as thin as I suspect it might be, which would be the final death of the real S&W, and its fine proud history of quality products.

 

[daveyc]

Very disappointing to hear. My last new S&W was purchased in 2007 and was fine. I guess things have changed since then

 

[mgschindel]

Very disappointing to hear. My last new S&W was purchased in 2007 and was fine. I guess things have changed since then

I guess the White House and S&W have both brought us their brand of "change" in the last several years. Here's a pic of just the blast shield/breech face of the SECOND, better TALO 3" they sent me back from the warranty department. This is a NIB, unfired gun that just saw two quick test rounds at the factory. This is NOT gunpowder residue. This is rough, unpolished, unfinished, with machining marks, and is mostly CORROSION. The whole inside of the frame around the cylinder is this way. Every bit of the inside of this brand new frame needs to be polished and properly finished, and oiled, to stop it from corroding further. There's even some light pitting already. And the production date says this gun is only 4 months old. The pics don't even begin to show the horrid machining marks as they look in natural light up close. This gun looks like something that would've come out of communist Russia in 1960.

And this is BEAUTIFUL compared to the disgusting, corroded, hacked-up mess of jagged metal fragments and actual rust that is inside the action compartment inside the frame, which would make most viewers puke if I posted that up.

I'll throw up a pic of the bottom frame rail from the inside of the cylinder well too. Feel sick yet? And the top strap is far worse. The poor thing is brand new, but when you swing open the cylinder, it looks like I left it in the rain for 30 years.

Sorry folks, but the finishing on these new S&W production guns is a good two notches below the current Taurus stuff. It is what it is. This is not what Smith "considers a defective gun" despite its many obvious manufacturing and blatant visible finishing defects, and it is the third new gun out of three, that is exactly this same way, sent directly to me by S&W from the warranty center AFTER a careful quality inspection of this replacement gun before sending it out to me. It's simply just what they're making over there now.

 

[mgschindel]

Hey, out of fairness let's look at a run-of-the-mill typical 90's 629 4", a gun that has been on countless hunt trips and seen over 800 rounds of 44 special and magnum loads, to see what the finishing quality looks like on THAT average 15 yr old "production" gun, even after all the abuse and years gone by....and you tell me which gun YOU'd take for $899......Which level of finish does YOUR money deserve???? The one on the post above, from the new TALO Smith assembled by monkeys who no longer properly polish and finalize the crooked defective corroded frames, or the attached pics below on this post, of a gun actually finished off by a real gunsmith on a typical day among a dozen other guns of the same kind that he worked on every day, before Smith laid him off. You decide. The quality, fitment and finishing differences between the pre-mim guns and some of the current production guns is not only shocking, it's truly pathetic. And that's nothing. Just look INSIDE if you want a real education that goes beyond the minor polishing and corrosion issues you see here that are only unsightly and skin-deep.

 

[Rpg]

Thank you for spending the time to share your experiences and for posting excellent photos!

Those things are miserable excuses for firearms.

I have no interest in owning any S&W with a three digit model number. The older revolvers are works of art compared to what has been offered more recently.

Aside from their cosmetic flaws, I don't have confidence that the newer S&W's will work!

S&W has something to look forward to nevertheless: the older generation of shooters will die off and the market increasingly won't know how flawed the current production firearms are. Time is on the side of the manufacturer.

Did you discuss the possibility of having S&W just refund the purchase price? After getting the second junker, it seems obvious that they didn't have an acceptable replacement.

 

[XAVMECH]

S&W Revolvers

I am just getting started acquiring S&W revolvers. My first was an older 625, 5-inch. What a beauty! Love the action and build quality. That said, I did purchase a 629 Talo, 3-inch a few weeks back, as well. I changed out the original fish-scale wood grips for some Ahrends for field use. This gun looked good on the inside and the grips fit very well. I've shot it with both 44 Spl and Magnum loads and it's a nice shooter for a three-incher. I have yet to try a "bear-load" in it, but plan to soon, as I will be carrying it in the field. I dislike the IL, but what can you do? Would I rather have an older N-frame without the lock? Yup! I have been fortunate to find some fine examples of earlier L-frames, and hope to find an older 624 or even 24 someday. I agree that buying a new production gun can be a ****-shoot, but I have heard more stories of S&W's good customer care than bad. I would continue to elevate your issues with their management until you receive appropriate corrective action on their part.

 

[mgschindel]

XAVMECH, good luck collecting older Smiths!! Lots of magic in that fine pursuit you've begun. I LOVE my tapered-barrel 624's and 24's and encourage you to acquire one/some. They balance so well with the light barrels and short cylinders, and are beautifully built, as well as highly accurate, just as you'd expect. They are a real joy to handle and fire, and often serve as my home defense guns. Pic attached for ya of two of my 624s mixed in with some older 4" 629s that are also constant companions.

RPG, thank you, good thoughts although I've already arranged to sell the 3" TALO for about what I have into it. No hassles, no waiting, no headaches, no emails, calls, explanations, arguments, pictures, etc. I feel lucky to be getting out of it, along with the whole "big company warranty system" hassle, and I didn't want to wait 8 weeks for MY MONEY back either. You are right that Smith simply has nothing production that I'd want. I did already find an unfired 629 V-comp performance center I can pick up for a mere $200 more than I'll get back on the TALO, if I want to go that route.... But I still have my eye on a slightly pricey older, mint 3" 629 I might just bite the bullet on, and bag.

After seeing inside the new guns, and experiencing their crooked frames, I can't believe how much more I'm suddenly willing to spend for the older guns in perfect condition LOL!!!!!!!!! The inside of those TALOs lockworks is GRUESOME, like seeing a severe burn victim lying on the side of the road covered in smouldering charr over 80+ percent of their body. I think I'll need a lot of bourbon and a good amount of time to go by, to erase that horror from my mind's eye. It's the last thing I ever expected to see when those side plates fell off.....especially after decades of routinely shooting and maintaining all my older Smiths which are things of art and beauty, inside and out. I threw in a pic of some of my most accurate long barrels for fun, to further encourage XAVMECH's bad collecting urges...he he he! My own older 5" 625 model of 1989 is in another pic for you, with some other friends including my crazy-accurate early 627, and my favorite mint condition 1956 5 screw pre-29 that to this day makes me salivate when I pull it out of the safe and handle the ridiculously sick super-thick glossy bluing and crazy case-color-hardened hammer and trigger....Insane quality forever lost. I have assault rifles to guard my collection of 5 screws. See how this collection thing spirals and takes on a life of its own? LOL!

 

[Rpg]

I can certainly understand your reluctance to get further involved in the warranty circus! It isn't as tho they wouldn't have just sold the Junkers to someone else. I was just curious whether they'd offer to buy it back or give you 'store credit' instead of trying to unload another of the same. You made the right choice to move on.

You have some beautiful revolvers! You obviously know a thing or two about acceptable quality. I've never favored the stainless steel models - on purely aesthetic grounds. Eye of the beholder stuff.

A knowledgeable Parker shotgun collector coined the phrase 'don't hunt with a gun your dog would be ashamed of '

I think my dogs would be ashamed of the revolvers Smith produced and sold you

 

[K-9]

I think an acceptable replacement would be a PC model.

I hope whoever made those Talo 629's gets fired.

 

[mgschindel]

I can certainly understand your reluctance to get further involved in the warranty circus! It isn't as tho they wouldn't have just sold the Junkers to someone else. I was just curious whether they'd offer to buy it back or give you 'store credit' instead of trying to unload another of the same. You made the right choice to move on.

You have some beautiful revolvers! You obviously know a thing or two about acceptable quality. I've never favored the stainless steel models - on purely aesthetic grounds. Eye of the beholder stuff.

A knowledgeable Parker shotgun collector coined the phrase 'don't hunt with a gun your dog would be ashamed of '

I think my dogs would be ashamed of the revolvers Smith produced and sold you

Thanks RPG. I also greatly prefer the blued guns, but the humidity, and misty salt air in the area of Florida I live, are killers on bluing. So my guns that get more outdoor abuse and are my general shooters wind up being stainless models, just out of practicality. I do nonetheless have my fair share of blued guns, couldn't help myself over the decades LOL!

WELL, there's a new snafu in the works. After more careful inspection prior to selling this replacement TALO 3" off, it now turns out the gun is so poorly made, that TWO chambers of the cylinder are out of time, and are not locking up before the hammer locks back in single action mode, by a considerable margin. A very unsafe mechanical issue. The carry-up of the timing hand is woefully inadequate and the extractor star has been very poorly cut. This is way out of spec. It is painfully clear to me that the extent of production and QC here is three monkeys on a picnic bench slapping these things together and throwing them into boxes, as fast as possible, with virtually no supervision, no inspection process, and no real firearms knowledge.

This isn't an isolated incident, it is three totally random 629 3" TALO production guns I am aware of, two of them being mine, produced many months apart from each other, all of which have been in the same deplorable state of defectively machined and defectively assembled rubbish, and from bad parts that are all sitting right on the main production line, unchecked.

$#$!@%!!!!! Now I HAVE to send the stupid thing back to S&W, AGAIN. There's just no getting away from this bad purchase and being hopelessly trapped in the woes of the miserable Warranty Shipping and Re-shipping circus. This is a disaster. All I can do is be totally honest about how unpleasant it is to be sold such insulting junkers, and to warn folks not to get suckered into this trap on the new production guns. I am SOOO sorry I ever bought this thing. Please don't share my regrets, when you have an informed decision to make as you consider laying out your cash, going forward. Please DO find a new home for a fine older pre-MIM gun, or shop for a new-production Performance Center gun, instead of the current production-run stuff. All I can do is give the heads up. Despite my best efforts, clearly this mess will go on and on for me, for some time to come. S&W is sorely letting us down now. I have so many of their products, spanning so many years, that I'm not afraid to call it what it is, and I have every right to tell this like it is. An irresponsible outrage.

 

[mgschindel]

Well, I just got bloody sick and tired of looking at and thinking about this stupid gun.

I took one of my oversized $22 new old stock N frame timing hands, and I spend the morning polishing burrs, jagged edges, and corrosion out the inside of the sideplate and action chamber, and filing, polishing and fitting my own new timing hand to this 3" TALO. The factory timing hand inside the gun had not one single filing or polishing mark on it, and was both too short and too narrow to properly engage the extractor star fully. Yep, nothing but an out-of-spec drop-in part. That's insane. In the condition this gun was sent to me, brand new, it literally could have dropped the hammer and struck the primer on a round inside a chamber that was not fully locked into battery and not lined up inside the forcing cone area. Forget just ruining your accuracy, it could've done quite a bit of damage to gun and shooter.

The action is now much improved, and most importantly, the carry-up on each chamber is now proper, so that the cylinder locks now before the hammer locks back. The action is now both smooth and more importantly, safe.

The new owner picks this gun up tomorrow morning, the cash will be in my pocket, and this whole thing is history. It was better to spend three or four hours of my own time this morning, just fix it myself, CORRECTLY, ONLY ONCE, and ditch it. I even took wet sanding material and polished the whole inside of the cylinder well, it was just so disgusting, rough, and corroded.

I figure S&W owes me about $250 of gunsmithing time and materials, to make this gun "passable". In reality, that's just about the margin they are screwing us all out of and lining their pockets with on each gun like this. Instead of THEM paying American workers to build it right, they still charge us the same money but they have screwed over American craftsmen to keep that margin for themselves, by laying those skilled workers off and hiring unskilled monkeys that just slap cheap random parts into generic conveyor belt revolvers.

The new owner of this gun knows about this thread, this gun, how I feel about it, what I had to do to right it, and he doesn't mind one bit.

Last warning, if you're not a half-decent do-it-yourself gunsmith with a stash of parts and some decent tools, do yourself a BIG favor, and look elsewhere for a revolver that is NOT a new-production S&W. Stop funding S&W's broader scheme to overcharge you for cheaply made guns, and line their pockets with the ill-gotten large margin. It's WRONG.

I thought the whole thing was overblown by my buddies who just hated the lock and the idea of mim parts. I thought "Well how bad can it really be?" I was wrong, and I owe my buddies an apology. Because the answer is, it can be brutal junk, you really roll the dice. And you may then have to spend considerable time and more money on a brand new gun replacing parts, just making it shoot safely. Good luck trying to stay out of months and months of back n forth with a huge company that sells poorly assembled junk to you on purpose now, and replaces it with more junk of the same when there is an issue that can't be just shrugged away. It is what it is. Who wants to drop between $750 and $1000, just to risk all that??? My lesson is now officially LEARNED.

Over n out.

 

[Waveform]

I've been following your posts with interest since I own the same 3" TALO 629 and even chimed in early on with an opposite experience. So in an effort to try to remain open minded and objective I got out my example tonight to see if I was looking at mine through rose-colored glasses or something.

Now I won't pretend to be any kind of expert and reading your posts I will gladly concede you know more about guns than I do. I am reluctant to take off the side plate of my Smiths but have done my own internal polishing, etc. on other guns I own. I guess I'm saying I'm somewhat handy but I know my limitations.

I removed my grips and my grip frame is centered and straight as best I can tell. My grips fit well with no gaps and certainly no cracks or splits that would suggest a poor fit. In fact the fit was was so tight I had to work to loosen up the two halves and separate them off the frame. When in place the seam between the panels is almost invisible.

The blast shield area on mine looks better than yours in the photo you posted. Not polished as well as the outer surfaces but then I don't really expect they would. Perhaps my standards are lower than yours? No visible file marks or machining marks there but just a general finish that is less polished than the visible frame and barrel. The bottom of my frame window does show some machining marks and is closer in appearance to yours. So I will concede they could have polished up the frame window a bit better. It never bothered me before but again, my standards may be lower than yours. But that made think - what does the inside of the frame window look like on my LNIB 6" nickel 29-2? So I got it out. (Any excuse to get the nickel 29-2 out...man she's pretty!) Hmmmm.... bottom of the frame window has a few machining marks too. They are much finer and less noticeable as the 629 but they are there nonetheless. Generally the finish of the frame window in the 29-2 is not nearly as nice as the polished exterior surfaces but then that kinda makes sense to me - I would assume people generally don't care as much about the cosmetics there.

After your report of the internal condition of your 629 TALO I decided to remove the side plate of mine to see if I had any issues. Now remember I'm not inclined to do this normally as the last thing I want to do is take a box of gun parts to a gunsmith and have him put it back together for me. I have taken the side plate off of a Smith before and I do have proper gunsmithing screwdrivers so I decided to give it a go.

Removed the screws (grip panels already off) and tried to delicately remove the side plate. I was impressed at how well the side plate fitment was. In places the seam is invisible to the naked eye. Gave up. (Does Brownell's sell a S&W Side Plate Removal Tool?) I wasn't going to take a chance making a scratch or gouge in my nice looking new gun just to satisfy my curiosity. I recalled the fact that I have put several hundred rounds through this gun now and had zero function issues so "if it ain't broke don't fix it" kicked in and I put the side plate screws back in, snugged them down, installed the grips panels, wiped it down and put it away.

I don't dispute any of your own experience with your 629 TALO and I certainly do not wish to debate the merits of new S&W vs old S&W. There's plenty of that here already. I love the old Smiths too. My oldest dates to 1884, I have a couple of pre-17 K-22s, a 19-3, a 27-2 and a 29-2 in my little collection. I tend to agree that the old P&R guns are the best but I have had good luck with my new revolvers too (two 629s and an X-frame.)

I guess I just wanted to weigh in again on the thread and report that after a closer look my own experience and opinion remains in the opposite camp in regards to this specific model. Strange how the same workers at the same facility can produce such different examples. Maybe my monkeys were sober that day?

Sorry your examples were such a disappointment. I still believe S&W would have eventually made it right for you as they made a pretty nice example for me. But I can understand how it may not have been worth herculean efforts to get this resolved.

 

[tgmr05]

When dealing with humans, you get errors. No one is perfect.

The internet has made things easier, and at the same time, made things more difficult. Flaws are more glaringly evident to everyone. Sometimes we lose perspective on the big picture when all we read about is the small percentage of trouble/problems. Then we get rants/tirades of how the world is ending and companies are simply worthless. This thread is a great example of that.

If smiths qc was so bad, they would be gone, period. In this day and age, of the information super highway, if smith truly stunk, EVERYONE would know it, say it, and shut them down. Not everyone is receiving sub par product, though, and the OP even acknowledges it, by the nice/acceptable pc product they have, yet still goes on a well worded tirade of the company and products as a whole.

I have a more recent 637 that exhibits the same frame tolerance problem. With rubber grips, or certain wood grips, you cannot notice it. With stiff vz grips, there is a gap, and it is noticeable. While I am not overly pleased about it, I am not going to say smith is going downhill overall. A lot of grip makers understand frame tolerance issues, and even state their production grips are based on patterns that should fit most guns, but may not fit all....

I do like my older p&r revolvers, but I like my newer stuff, too. I have been burned on older smiths, too, though, and seen errors over many years. It happens. If every single 629 talo 3 inch were sub par, along with every 629, then, yes, I could see the logic and reasoning for claiming/stating that smith was in trouble. The truth is, perfection is hard to come by, and the longer one lives, the more one sees it. It still does not make it OK, nor does it mean we should simply give up and suck it up and live it with it. Talk to smith, give them the chance to make it right, voice your concerns with them, and communicate with them. It is much easier to rant, than communicate to solve things, yet we tend to spend a lot of time and effort on complaining, and less actually working/communicating with folks to work together to fix thigs.

 

[Rpg]

It appears that S&W has the ability to make serviceable revolvers Somehow, knowing that they can do it but often don't is more disturbing than thinking that they just won't.

This all makes me wonder if the problem guns were completed on Mondays and Fridays and the functional guns in the middle of the week.

I'm still not interested in spending MY money on current production S&W's

I sure like those 2 digit model number S&Ws ( models without the '6' - fortunately, I don't live near the water).

 

[Irelander]

I had a PC gun that was actually not all that great. It was smooth as silk but the external finish was not what I expected from such a high priced and prestigious firearm. I traded it for a normal production 629-6. It is just as smooth and much nicer in my opinion than the PC gun.

Not trying to take away from what your experience has dictated. Any production item can have flaws, some greater than others. It is interesting how older S&W guns don't have nearly the amount of complaints and issues as the current production guns. Glad you were able to off-load your problematic gun without too much loss.