Dare I Start Another Canted Barrel Thread?

[blujax01]

Scooter, have you tried de-caf?

What you say is absolutely true - a bit harshly stated maybe but true. My M64 is the trifecta for the haters: two piece barrel, IL and MIM. And I wouldn't trust my life to anything else.

 

[PA Reb]

PA Reb, I've worked in the Automotive industry since 1982 and can tell you that if you subject any auto on the market to the scrutiny that you apparently subject your revolvers to you would be riding horses. Take a close look at the paint on a Mercedes S class and you'll see orange peel. An 80 thousand dollar car and nobody ever seems to complain about a paint job you could get at Earl Shieb.

As for a 700 dollar revolver being cheap, it is cheap when you compare it to the price of almost any other commodity. I can remember when a new small car could be purchased for under 2000 dollars, remember paying 17.9 cents for a gallon of gas, and remember paying less than 2 bucks for a box of 38 spl. Now a small car costs 20 grand, gas is nearly 4 dollars a gallon, and last time I bought 38 spl. it cost 19 dollars a box. You want a real shocker, the new Honda Gold Wing is a 24 THOUSAND DOLLAR motorcycle.

To be blunt, I'm no lottery winner and spending 700 dollars on anything is a bit of a pinch for my wallet. However, when you consider the cost of anything today, 700 dollars for a handgun is actually a bit of a bargain when you consider the value you receive. It's also far far below the threshold price for a truly custom built gun, just look at the prices for a Freedom Arms revolver.

Smith & Wesson revolvers are Production Revolvers and they aren't going to be perfect. Get over it, if they were perfect we couldn't afford them. In terms of value we get guns that work very well and have the potential to last longer than amost any other production product on the market if properly maintained. For the price, that's all I expect.

BTW, bit of a rant here. It happens that one of my revolvers is the model 620. That one doesn't have a canted barrel because the BARREL SHROUD is keyed to the frame. It will also shoot a 1/2 inch groups at 50 yards because of the TENSIONED BARREL. You know what gripes me, what gripes me is that the 620 never saw the development it deserved because of people complaining about the "cost cutting" 2 piece barrels. Now, mount a scope on your "perfect" 686 and go out and see what it can do at 50 yards. Work up your best shooting load for it and it won't come close to what my 620 can do shooting off the shelf commercial ammo. S&W tried to produce a better revolver that didn't have the assembly issues of the older one piece barrels and most didn't want to have anything to do with them. As a result, in order to get a tensioned barrel the price has gone upscale and they are only offered in the Scandium frames, which I find to be too light. Now the only way I can get a steel framed 357 Magnum with a tensioned barrel is by looking for a Dan Wesson, which are NOT cheap at over a grand and quite a bit heavier than a 6 inch model 620 would be.

Point is S&W tried to offer a better product and it wasn't "acceptable" because it was different. If you want perfectly fitted 686's, you'll have to pay for it, IMO as much in relative terms as the Colt Python did back when it was being made. So, make your choice, pay 1200-1500 bucks so that every 686 is perfectly hand fitted or pay about 700 bucks for a 686 that shoots straight. Personally, I'll take the cheaper option and hope that someday S&W will re-think their dropping the 620.

I really do see your point but respectfully disagree with it. I'm not trying to be hard nosed or snotty - just disagree with you (and others it seems) on this particular subject.

Honda Gold Wings costing $24,000.00! I wouldn't know about that because as far as I'm concerned, Hondas are junk (sorry about that if you own one). I do however have two H.D.s that are valued alot higher than $24K, a mean dirt bike, and a Big Dog K-9 chopper valued at around $40K (a real babe magnet!) or so now. I ride them all BUT, if one single bolt was cross threaded or if something were twisted out of line "even just a little" when I bought them new, they would be back in a factory shop faster than an Alabama snipe! My point is that given the high prices paid for modern day revolvers (S&W included), they should be as close to perfect as possible. Mistakes happen during manufacture that can't be helped but to make guns that have a VISIBLE cant in the barrel to make them hit POA, is ridiculous in my view. I feel that if every part is manufactured properly something like this shouldn't happen or, at the very least, not be blatantly visible to the naked eye. It seems that most pass that test but there are those that don't which should be corrected and made right by the maker. That is of course the opinion of a guy that once tore down a whole wall of newly installed paneling because he couldn't get the ornamental division lines to line up with the molding around a door (true story with good outcomes when I did it right the second time)! I believe there is a medical term which describes this type of perfection behavior - anal something or another !

So, be cool man - I respect your opinion, I really do!

 

[ExMachina1]

If the front sight is visibly canted than yes, it would bother me and I would try to get it fixed.

My experience is that usually, the people who tell you not to let it bother you either: a) don't own a gun with the same kind of problem or b) don't shoot it enough to care.

Here's a semi-related story: I have a brand new, fixed-sight S&W that shot several inches to the right of the point of aim @25 yards. The general "wisdom" here was that I was expecting too much from a fixed sight gun and should be happy with what I had. Fortunately a couple folks here recognized that it was in fact a problem and that S&W could easily fix it for me. So I contacted S&W and ya know what?--they fixed it with no questions asked!

Now, my problem was different from yours in that I couldn't see that the alignment was off by just looking at the sights. And in a way, I see my issue as less of a problem than yours because at least I could get a repeatable sight picture (and then apply Kentucky windage). In your case, I'm having a hard time imagining how one could ever get a good sight picture with the front sight noticably off of vertical and the top of the blade off of horizontal. If I had the problem you had I'd be very insistant on getting it fixed, since a good sight picture is right up there with a good trigger in being able to realize the fullest potential of a handgun's accuracy.

 

[scooter123]

Don't ever take a close look at the chrome plating on your Harley's, you won't like what you see. One year I was at Americade and was asked to participate in a quality survey on some new Harley's they had on display for that purpose. When I pointed out to the HD people that the marks from the belt sander were visible in the chrome plating on the rear belt drive cover they were rather embarassed and were further embarassed when I pointed out the same flaw on every single bike they had on display. My brother has a 2005 or 6 Softtail Classic that had the triple tree replaced at 1500 miles due to a recall that I don't know the specifics of, just remember him complaining about having to take it in so early.

As for Honda's being junk, I have one of the early V4's, which were notorious for grinding up the cam lobes. In 1999 I put new rockers and cams in it and added an external top end oiling kit to protect the new parts. So I can understand your view and could even be inclined to support it because Honda flat out dropped the ball when they designed the top end oiling system on the early V4's and did all they could to "hide" the problem. However, in addition to his Harley my brother has a mint 1980 GL1100 and a 1999 Valkarie Interstate which have been absolutely superb.

BTW, there is one Harley that I really wanted to buy but they dropped it from production before I had the cash saved up for it. In one way, that's a good thing, that cash saw me through when the economy tanked in 2008 and if I had purchased that Street Rod it would have been real touch and go about paying the mortgage.

Point is, it really doesn't matter what brand you look at, if you look closely enough in the right areas you will find flaws. I happened to look at the belt guards closely because it happens with my experince in Automotive I knew what to look for, prepping steel for chrome plating can be royal PITA. The simple truth is that today you won't get total perfection in a manufactured product unless you are willing to step up and pay a hefty premium for that perfection.

 

[PhilOhio]

The only real question here is whether you, the original purchaser of a brand new and expensive product, are satisfied with paying a high price for a factory second.

I wouldn't. But I also try to avoid the lengthy hassle of sending it back and forth for warranty repair. It may be fixed the first time and it may not be fixed quite right ever. So when I can, I try to do it myself if, and only if, it is within my realm of experience and ability. But I am pretty well equipped and have built quite a few guns. There isn't much that I can't fix.

The context: I just spent three days repairing a brand new, special ordered, expensive S&W .380 PPK that was completely, totally nonfunctional as a weapon to defend oneself. (Bought it in January and had no time to test it until July.) Weak hammer fall would only fire a CCI primer about 60% of the time. The lawyer-engineered firing pin return spring was far too long and stiff. It had to be shortened to a minimal 15/16" before the gun would fire (almost) 100% of the time. If you loaded them one at a time, that is, because...

Two or three major machining problems caused 45 degree feed jams about 60 - 70% of the time. There was a sharp edge where the feed ramp met the chamber wall, a common problem. It had to be properly radiused with a diamond cutter. This is strictly a hand job, and S&W is trying to eliminate all hand work. That doesn't work.

There were several chamfer cuts and radiuses skipped in machining the slide face, so cartridge rims could not slide smoothly upward during the extremely violent and fast bolt cycle necessary when using a very stiff slide spring on an unlocked blowback design with full power (but not "hot") .380 loads. I fixed all this, and the gun now works.

S&W is not following the original Walther drawings in making the slide. To cut costs, they have completely skipped the cuts necessary to eliminate the razor sharp edges on the lower left and right front of the slide. Sooner or later, they will cut the user, if he doesn't finish the manufacturing job and remove them. I sent S&W a polite, tactful, supportive E-mail suggesting that they eliminate the sharp edges and follow the Walther design, if for no other reason than to avoid customer complaints and frivolous lawsuits. They did not have the courtesy to acknowledge the E-mail or thank a devoted S&W fan for the suggestion.

Within a week of buying the new PPK, I bought a new 649 also, with The Lock. It sure worked well, locking up on me twice during firing of the first ten .38 Special cartridges. Fixing that was easier, by removing the lock and installing a filler button.

None of this fits my strong positively biased idea of what S&W always has been and should continue to be.

Something is very, very wrong. And that distresses me.

We don't make it better by swallowing this telephonic customer service B.S. about how crooked barrels are not only normal, but they are good for us. When the S&W customer service guy explained how he had been a barrel fitter for ten years and how crooked barrels are normal and O.K., if you can hit the target, that explains EVERYTHING about how this trash gets out the door!

Anybody want to buy some Florida swamp land to build your five story dream house?

I'm a lifelong motorcycle rider and sometimes builder. This reminds me of the dark days when Harley-Davidson was owned by AMF. Quality and reputation slid into the can. The company nearly went down the drain. Employees and loyal fanatics got their rears in gear and bought/rescued what was left of the company. Now it is more healthy than it has ever been.

Something similar happened to S&W a few years ago, and we all applauded the rebound. But I sense that not all has been sweetness, roses, and success since then. The well reported product quality problems need to be addressed rather quickly and decisively, if the company is going to get through these already difficult economic times. There are just too many of these bad gun reports, and I personally experienced two of them this year. Well, three, if you count the used 617 I bought, unloaded by some unhappy original purchaser at a gun show because that was easier than sending it back to the factory under warranty, so they could finish reaming the chambers so all cartridges would fit.

Where does all this end?

I anybody awake up there in Houlton or Springfield?

 

[lfurr]

Wow, so this has turned into quite a thread. Unfortunately, I am back to square one....about half of you say it's crazy and half say it's normal. But hey, I still learned a lot.

Scooter123 - thanks for the tips on how I can take my gun to the range and do some testing. I suppose if I get positve results, I will have no need to send it back to S&W (other than for aesthetic reasons, in which case it would look better and fire worse - probably doesn't make too much sense to go that route).

To those who say they would send the gun back if it were a visible cant...well, if it weren't visible, I wouldn't know about it. So yes, it is certainly visible. Not sure how many degrees, won't even wager a guess, but suffice it to say it is visible. I mean it's not like the thing is sitting in the 1 o'clock position or anyting crazy like that, but it is definitely visible. Looks just like the pics I saw of someone else's 686P on this forum (if any of you have seen them). But as someone else mentioned, when other people look at the gun they don't even notice. But if I point it out, it's easy to see.

Oh well, anyway, I'll head to the range again and eventually make a decision. I'll continue to check this thread occasionally to see if anyone else responds. Thanks again, I am learning an awful lot.

 

[Nightowl]

, "we straighten the barrel because they ask us to, then the gun doesn't shoot straight, but if that's what they want us to do, then we do it".

I really have a hard time believing that merely moving a clocked barrel so that it is squared up and the front sight is verticle would adversly affect accuracy. Anybody else concerned about that statement?

 

[Wayne M]

The only barrel this is acceptable on is a fixed sight barrel and even then it's probably going to be an end user adjustment. On adjustable sight guns you quite naturally adjust the point of impact with the rear sight. I had extensive shooting experience with an overindexted barrel and the rear sight STILL needed adjusted so that trash about them setting it up to shoot straight at the factory is just that......trash(and it appears to me the Smith guy has just admitted the barrel is not installed properly)! The forcing cone/cylinder relationship has nothing to do with the barrel indexing problem unless the rear of the barrel is not cut square. Buying Smiths since 1968 I can tell you that this has only become common practice in about the last three to four years. Look at the older guns, they may be off a hairline but not to the extent they turn them out now. Send it back or trade it off, it's not the way it's supposed to be.

 

[PhilOhio]

, "we straighten the barrel because they ask us to, then the gun doesn't shoot straight, but if that's what they want us to do, then we do it".

I really have a hard time believing that merely moving a clocked barrel so that it is squared up and the front sight is verticle would adversly affect accuracy. Anybody else concerned about that statement?

Right on, Richard. I'm also concerned about that company rep statement because it is false. Years ago I sent back a new Model 63 with a barrel that pointed way off to the right. They somehow changed or straightened it, and the gun shoots where you aim it. For the Smith guy to pretend otherwise is absurd. There is nothing mysterious or magical about correct alignment of bore and sight line on a handgun. This has all been worked out, at S&W, about 160 years ago. Maybe the assumption is that modern buyers are stupid, and will believe anything you tell them if it comes from the factory.

What in the world is going on at Smith and Wesson????? Are there any heroes still in management roles?

 

[Sportsterguy]

Thanks for the back up sir. 1-2 degrees is hard to spot with the naked eye for me BUT when you can visually spot a canted barrel when lining up the sights thats a totally different story. E-mailed C&S (may take a few days for a response) and going to call JD here on Monday. Grew up watching that big guy, and he is one big man, shooting groundhogs with his wildcats when I was a kid back in the hills of Eastern Ohio. Didn't know what he was doing except for blowing them up with his wildcats from long distances which was amazing when you're used to shooting them with .22 LR's from 50 yards on a long shot.

Here is the info I received from Dan at Cylinder & Slide concerning a canted barrel that I promised to pass onto you all. Can't reach J.D. Jones but know he'll state the same.

"Mr. C.,

The barrel should not be canted. It should be centered. We can repair this
for you. This would be order # RSA008. Regulate barrel to correct windage impact. Cost $ 110.51. There will also be a test fire fee of
$38.00 after the project is finished. This fee is $ 38.00


If you have any further questions, please ask."

Dan

C&S is a stand up company and does fantstic work. Had a BHP and a Colt Commander worked over by them and the service is great and so are their gunsmiths. The so called GS's mentioned in this thread are wrong if they think a twisted barrel is good enough for a quality revolver. I'll never own one and I'm sticking to my guns on this one!

Regards all,

Roger

 

[scooter123]

Just to clarify things a bit, historically there have been two methods used to "regulate the barrel" to correct the Point of Impact. Note, historically this normally applies to revolvers with a fixed rear sight but it can also be used to adjust the POI with an adjustable target sight centered in it's range of adjustment.

Method One was to rotate the barrel to shift the front sight either right or left. Since the sight is offset from the centerline of the barrel, tipping the sight slighty will shift it in a horizontal direction relative to the rear sight.

BTW, back when the west was being settled many didn't have the tools to do this, so it was not uncommon to see revolvers with the front sight bent to accomplish the same thing. Basically a cowboy or farmer would put the barrel on a stump and either hit the sight blade with a rock or hammer.

The second method for regulating the sights was mainly done in a factory setting. What was done in this case is that the frame of the gun was clamped in a frame vise and the barrel was struck with a Babbit metal hammer to bend the frame slightly. Then a bit of additional fitting was done to correct for any mis-alignment that may have been caused by bending the frame. Now, as you might expect bending the frame wasn't very effective at getting the gun to shoot perfectly to the sights, it's kind of hard to "calibrate" a smack with a hammer. However, it was a workable method to get the gun to shoot within specification, which in the 1880's probably meant within 3 or 4 inches of the sight at best.

Now, here is what I speculate was likely a pretty common practice during this period by people who wanted their SAA to shoot dead on to the sights. First, Colt would build the gun and test fire it. If the sights were fairly well regulated it got packed up and shipped. If it wasn't well regulated it was sent to the "barrel Fitter", meaning the guy with that Babbit metal hammer. Then if it shot within specification it got packed and shipped, if it didn't, it got sent back for another calibrated smack. Now it gets to the store selling the gun and is sold to a customer. If he is fortunate, he lives close to a town with a gunsmith, because it's probably going to need a bit more tuning in order for it to shoot dead on to the sights. That gunsmith will then spend a bit of time and ammo cocking the barrel until it shoots dead on. One advantage to cocking the barrel is that it is a lot easier to do this in measured increments. Now, if that purchaser didn't live close to a town with a gunsmith, then he'll take the gun home and put it on a stump and bend the sight blade until it was "good enough". Keep in mind during this period a working farmer or ranch hand didn't have any need for a pretty gun, he needed a gun that would put meet in the pot, kill coyotes or mountain lions, or provide a means of defense. BTW, most ranch hands didn't carry revolvers to defend themselves from Indians or other Cowboys, they carried revolvers to defend themselves and their horse from aggressive Longhorn cattle. If you've ever been knocked heels over head by a bull calf, you'll understand that a full grown range steer or bull with a set of sharp horns could be a very dangerous opponent capable of killing a horse or a cowboy.

As for the perfect appearence versus perfect function debate that has errupted, I've always felt that function carried far more value than appearance. So, I'm inclined to let minor appearance issues slide as long as I get perfect function.

 

[PhilOhio]

Scooter123, guys,

100+ years ago, they did not have CNC and the precision manufacturing capability we have today. So there were such things done with hammer and eyeball. What an art it was. Today that is rarely necessary, if everybody is doing his job in at least a half-way professional manner. Barrels can easily be made and bored with extreme precision; and threaded; and inserted in frames made the same way; consistently and by the thousands. Today, the most important skill required is that of monitoring machines, checking on them and people, and seeing that all this precision is implemented at something close to its capability. I've had to supervise some of that quality control in bygone years, in the OEM auto parts supplier industry. So I know what is excusable and what is not.

What has been going on at S&W is in the "not" category. I hope it is corrected, before the image and reputation damage goes too far. Or maybe it already has.

Do a web search on reliability and customer comments on some recent S&W models, especially the PPK series, made under license from Walther. See what you find. And see what time span these postings cover. It tells you how much time S&W management has had to respond to readily available feedback from their market, and how they have or have not done that.

Then you can look into your crystal ball and ponder whither goeth the company. I certainly wish them well, and hope they take the reactions of their customers seriously.

 

[Wayne M]

Ruger and Taurus(oh my!) don't seem to have this problem. Maybe someone could send the S&W "gunsmiths" the phone number for THEIR gunsmiths and this "canted front sight with the rear of the barrel sticking out past the edge of the frame" problem could get solved.

 

[PA Reb]

Scooter123 said; ".... I've always felt that function carried far more value than appearance. So, I'm inclined to let minor appearance issues slide as long as I get perfect function."

To me, that statement says it all Scooter123. If "appearance" has to suffer to make "function" correct, then "function" wasn't right in the first place. That equates to something being amiss with the manufacturing process. NO precision made instrument should have to be twisted, turned, or hammered in order to make it function properly in accordance with its original design, period !

 

[youngda9]

Ruger and Taurus(oh my!) don't seem to have this problem.

Go over to Ruger Double Action - Ruger Forum and you can read all about canted barrels on SP101s and GP100s. Do a search and you'll see many threads.

Seems to be especially a problem with the SP101s.
New SP101 with crooked barrel - Ruger Forum

 

[18DAI]

As evidenced in a few of the posts throughout this thread, some people are willing to pay more and accept less.

That a bunch of revolvers with clocked barrels gets out the door, no longer surprises me. That some make excuses for said revolvers getting out the door.....is becoming less surprising too. That a few say this is normal and OK is bizarre, to me.

Quality will continue to decline. Why shouldn't it? Obviously there are those who will gratefully accept, and willingly pay an exhorbitant price, for any junk that S&W pushes out the door.

But hey, just pound it on a stump, or TLAR (that looks about right) it. Who knows, you might hit something!

 

[PhilOhio]

I really prefer to look at this from a historical perspective. We are going through some difficult times, as American citizens and as loyal S&W fanciers. S&W has made some of the best handguns ever, and that includes not so long ago. There's no reason why it can't/won't return to what I think is the norm for that company. It's a people problem, and people are the easiest part of any commercial equation to change.

In the last few months, I've come to really admire the S&W all stainless 3rd generation guns, and have acquired a few made around 1990. I'm impressed with the engineering, quality control, functionality, and esthetic appeal. That infrastructure is still pretty much in place, and can be dusted off and implemented again.

Just think, in the year 2050 there may be a premium paid for S&Ws with crooked barrels which were built during the darkest years of S&W's history, if close examination proves that the screw-up has not been faked to increase value. And if only we could get a recorded telephone conversation of the S&W customer service guy explaining how, if they straighten the barrel, the gun will be ruined and it will probably be inaccurate.

If I've learned anything in accumulating guns over about 60+ years, it is that with firearms, as with everything else, tastes and trends change. I hate plastic guns sold for the same prices as real guns. And I hate alloy guns made from the same materials which used to be used for the poorer quality toy cap guns. Lots of people on this board are learning why that is a bad idea. So I'm waiting for S&W to resume the emphasis on good guns, which work, don't break easily, are reliable, and are sold for a fair price. I think it will happen, because it is a good way to stay in business and because a lot of brand-loyal customers want it. If not? Well, I guess they could go the way of Colt. Abandon a loyal private customer base, stop almost all production of handguns for commercial sale, claim that emphasis will be on more lucrative government contracts, and eventually have those contracts become casualties to foreign competitors making it better and cheaper. You call the process "Oops!"

 

[lfurr]

Hey, OP here....I can't tell you all how helpful this thread has been. I still haven't made up my mind on weather or not to send it back to S&W, but I will let you know after I hit the range one more time.

I know I need to get some pics up here so that you guys can see if I'm making too big a deal out of it, but on the Ruger forum mentioned above, I saw some pics of SP101's where guys were complaining...and their guns were not quite as "bad" as mine.

More to follow............

 

[Sportsterguy]

Hey, OP here....I can't tell you all how helpful this thread has been. I still haven't made up my mind on weather or not to send it back to S&W, but I will let you know after I hit the range one more time.

I know I need to get some pics up here so that you guys can see if I'm making too big a deal out of it, but on the Ruger forum mentioned above, I saw some pics of SP101's where guys were complaining...and their guns were not quite as "bad" as mine.

More to follow............

Sir,

You have read my post with a reply from Cylinder & Slide and their take on a canted barrel. It ain't right and these folks know their stuff. Plain and simple it's crappy workmanship and lack of quality control!
Isn't anyway on Gods green earth that I would own one. Have 2 fixed sighted Smiths, an old snub 36 and a very nice 58. Both of them barrels are right on as I forgot to check them when I checked the adjustables.

I received an e-mail from Mr. JD Jones after asking him if a offset barrel is ok cranked onto a S&W revolver over the phone. He owns SSK Industries, home of the SSK Hand Cannons and is a gunsmith and hunter extrodinaire. I'll let ya all read and make your own decisions but I'm sticking with my older model S&W's until they can get their stuff together.

SSK History … | SSK Industries

Here is a copy of the e-mail with his take on the topic that I editted for everyones info:

"I remember. Glad you are still in the game. Yes the FS should be
vertical. However its isn't unusual for a bit of cant to be induced in
fixed sighted revolvers to get them to shoot where the sights look.
Adjustable sights--No Cant. Come see us! JD"

----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 6:32 PM
Subject: Smith & wesson revolver


JD,

This is Roger, originally from Bergholz. You used to hunt on Bob
**** property out in Richmond and out my way off of Timothy Ridge when I was a kid. Bobs son, Bobby and my brother (all blondies) used to watch ya shoot G-Hogs from long ways away. I bought one of your .375 JDJ barrels for my Contender years ago and it's still going strong along with the Leupold 2x scope. Contender has taken many a deer and shoots like a dream. I also stopped by your shop when I was home from Kodiak, Alaska while in the Coast Guard and jumping out of helicopters. We had a nice long talk about the .375 and a .223 barrel for the Contender and I thank you still for your time and generosity. Don't know if you remember me or not, but was a pleasure meeting you.

I have a Q for you JD. Should a S&W's revolvers barrel be canted, right or
left coming from the factory? This question has came up and I believe they should be nice and straight for proper sight adjustments. If I'm paying $700.00 + for a revolver I would demand it. If you could please answer my question I may have a few fellas in need of your gunsmithing services.

Thank you sir and keep them groundhogs' at bay!

Sincerely,

Roger

 

[ExMachina1]

Hey, OP here....I can't tell you all how helpful this thread has been. I still haven't made up my mind on weather or not to send it back to S&W

far be it from me to tell a stranger what to do...but just so you know, this is how easy S&W makes it to get problems like yours fixed for free

1)Go to S&W website and submit a claim
2)Wait for email from S&W (3-5 days); email will have a FedEx shipping label attached
3)Print out shipping label
4)Box up gun and drop off @ FedEx
5)Wait (my gun was gone for a total of 7 days)
6)FedEx will deliver your gun back to your house.

So again, not telling you what to do...just sayin'