RAMS
Member
Mine is a -3. No problems yet.
Discovered Cracked Frame on my 638-2
- Thread starter Dtech
- Start date
Mine is a -3. No problems yet.
Well, no e-mail response from Smith when I got home from work so I went ahead and called them. I finally got to speak to a customer service rep after a short hold time and told him what happened with my 638.
He asked me where it had cracked and when I told him under the barrel, it certainly sounded like he was familiar with the occurence because he just said "Ouch" and kindly ask me about my mailing information and phone number so he could send me a prepaid, preinsured, preprinted label to send it back to them. He also said they would go ahead and replace the frame which to me means a new gun as I can't imagine they would go through all the trouble of taking everything off the old frame and just replacing the frame. He seemed a little rushed, but was polite and helpful.
Given the other posts on here, I didn't mention anything to him regarding a no-lock frame since the customer service rep likely does not have any say on what they replace it with anyway, but I may include a letter in the box when sending it back to see what happens.
He asked me where it had cracked and when I told him under the barrel, it certainly sounded like he was familiar with the occurence because he just said "Ouch" and kindly ask me about my mailing information and phone number so he could send me a prepaid, preinsured, preprinted label to send it back to them. He also said they would go ahead and replace the frame which to me means a new gun as I can't imagine they would go through all the trouble of taking everything off the old frame and just replacing the frame. He seemed a little rushed, but was polite and helpful.
Given the other posts on here, I didn't mention anything to him regarding a no-lock frame since the customer service rep likely does not have any say on what they replace it with anyway, but I may include a letter in the box when sending it back to see what happens.
Erich
Member
They replaced my overtorqued 38-2 (cracked in the same place) with a 638 with an idiot lock. Sold it to a friend who wanted it.
smith41mag
Member
Good luck. I also sent a letter with my 442 electroless nickle asking for a Pre-Lock.
They called me back and advised me they had no pre-lock frames. I really think they do or they wouldn't being producing the 442 in black.
I was not impressed with Smith & Wesson on this matter.
I hope you have better luck.
They called me back and advised me they had no pre-lock frames. I really think they do or they wouldn't being producing the 442 in black.
I was not impressed with Smith & Wesson on this matter.
I hope you have better luck.
You would actually think that they would actually make an effort and go out of their way to produce something the way people want it. Seems like that's what most other manufacturers of any kind of consumer products tend to do.
Regardless of them either continuing to "roll over" like a nice gun manufacturer for certain government considerations or just wanting to sell locks, give the people what they want for peat sakes!
There excuse might be "well it would be a liability for us if we took the locks off now". They can't use this excuse any more thanks to the law that was passed regarding not holding firearms manufacturers liable for producing a product that is not defective (with or without a lock for that matter). Then again, I wonder what they might have to say if someone were seriously injured or killed because one of their locks malfunctioned at the wrong time?
Regardless of them either continuing to "roll over" like a nice gun manufacturer for certain government considerations or just wanting to sell locks, give the people what they want for peat sakes!
There excuse might be "well it would be a liability for us if we took the locks off now". They can't use this excuse any more thanks to the law that was passed regarding not holding firearms manufacturers liable for producing a product that is not defective (with or without a lock for that matter). Then again, I wonder what they might have to say if someone were seriously injured or killed because one of their locks malfunctioned at the wrong time?
HEADKNOCKER
Member
If There can't replace the gun with a No Lock vertion of the Airweight Bodygaurd I would insist on one of the new release 642-1 or 37-2, If They can't do that then Demand a Refund..
Good Luck & Happy to Hear You weren't Injured or Killed by that Defect..
Give them the link to this thread!!
Maybe they'll sell a few more guns if they listen up..
Gary/Hk
Good Luck & Happy to Hear You weren't Injured or Killed by that Defect..
Give them the link to this thread!!
Maybe they'll sell a few more guns if they listen up..
Gary/Hk
ArchAngelCD
Moderator, SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
It's a known problem with Airweight revolvers mad around that time. You did nothing to cause the crack, it is a problem with the barrel being incorrectly tightened. They were over-torqued which is causing the frames to crack even under light loads.
Also like said above, unfortunately S&W is going to send you a M638-3 with the lock. The only good thing about is is they will send it directly to your home without having to go through an FFL.
You will have to do what many others have already done, sell off the NIB revolver and find a no-lock to replace it!!
Also like said above, unfortunately S&W is going to send you a M638-3 with the lock. The only good thing about is is they will send it directly to your home without having to go through an FFL.
You will have to do what many others have already done, sell off the NIB revolver and find a no-lock to replace it!!
Well, I received a form letter with shipping instructions for FedEx shipping back to S&W yesterday via e-mail so off it went this afternoon, billed to and insured by S&W via Priority Overnight per their instructions. I should hopefully hear back with them soon with news about the replacement.
scott625b
Member
Looks like this is a case of understanding why they don't normally make hammers out of aluminum.
animalmother
Member
I agree that it would seem to much torque on the barrel during assembly is the likely culprit here.
rburg
Member
I'm making some assumptions here, but I think the problem started when they began using the interference fit threads on the barrels. That was the economic trade off for giving up the barrel pin. I just also assume they knew going into it that they'd have some minor frame problems and guessed a cost of doing that. It came out cheaper to replace a few out of every thousand produced than to keep doing things the old way.
Then someone noticed that it would be cheaper to make the multi-piece barrel (I refrain from calling it a 2 piece barrel becauset there are more pieces than that.) With the new barrel design, they don't have to worry about which side is "up". The sight is on the shroud, and it can up in the correct position regardless of how tight or loose the barrel and its retainer seem to be. That means they can just use a torque wrench on the barrel and the chances of breaking the frame are significantly less. And it probably costs less, too. Progress!
Then someone noticed that it would be cheaper to make the multi-piece barrel (I refrain from calling it a 2 piece barrel becauset there are more pieces than that.) With the new barrel design, they don't have to worry about which side is "up". The sight is on the shroud, and it can up in the correct position regardless of how tight or loose the barrel and its retainer seem to be. That means they can just use a torque wrench on the barrel and the chances of breaking the frame are significantly less. And it probably costs less, too. Progress!
David Kachel
Member
Is anyone else taken aback by the fact that S&W so blithely mentions having over-torqued this or that barrel?
Are we supposed to accept so readily that S&W can't be bothered to hire people at least as skilled as those in the local tire shop who don't generally over-torque our lug nuts? Is there some kind of magic involved with a torque wrench holding a pistol barrel that is not involved with one holding a lug nut?
Is this an admission by the one-time manufacturer of the finest revolvers in the world that they are now simply the manufacturer of ordinary, humdrum, maybe they'll work maybe they won't, revolvers?
Doesn't it bother ANYONE at S&W that they have fallen so far in so short a time?
Oops, we're sorry, we must have over-torqued this barrel. Oops, we're sorry, I guess we slipped when we were finishing this revolver. Oops, we're sorry, we didn't notice the burrs and the ill-fitting grips when we were putting it in the box.
This is the kind of thing you expect when you are dealing with a Brazilian or Spanish revolver manufacturer, but Smith and Wesson??!!!!
I have no doubt Mssrs. Smith and Wesson would lock the doors before they would allow this to continue one more day.
Are we supposed to accept so readily that S&W can't be bothered to hire people at least as skilled as those in the local tire shop who don't generally over-torque our lug nuts? Is there some kind of magic involved with a torque wrench holding a pistol barrel that is not involved with one holding a lug nut?
Is this an admission by the one-time manufacturer of the finest revolvers in the world that they are now simply the manufacturer of ordinary, humdrum, maybe they'll work maybe they won't, revolvers?
Doesn't it bother ANYONE at S&W that they have fallen so far in so short a time?
Oops, we're sorry, we must have over-torqued this barrel. Oops, we're sorry, I guess we slipped when we were finishing this revolver. Oops, we're sorry, we didn't notice the burrs and the ill-fitting grips when we were putting it in the box.
This is the kind of thing you expect when you are dealing with a Brazilian or Spanish revolver manufacturer, but Smith and Wesson??!!!!
I have no doubt Mssrs. Smith and Wesson would lock the doors before they would allow this to continue one more day.
Finally got a message from Smith & Wesson last week and gave them a call back. They confirmed that they were replacing the gun and asked what FFL I wanted it shipped to since they could not send it directly to me here in Florida. I ended up having to pay the transfer fee, but it's a small price to pay to receive a brand new gun.
I just picked it up yesterday after work and it is a new 638-3 which looks great except for the lock of course. I can notice some slight differences in the tone of the stainless finish on both the steel and aluminum parts from my old 638 it replaced and although I know looks don't necessarily mean much, it does appear to have a slightly different "smoothness" to the grain/metal.
We'll see how it holds up under some testing at the range, hopefully tomorrow.
I just picked it up yesterday after work and it is a new 638-3 which looks great except for the lock of course. I can notice some slight differences in the tone of the stainless finish on both the steel and aluminum parts from my old 638 it replaced and although I know looks don't necessarily mean much, it does appear to have a slightly different "smoothness" to the grain/metal.
We'll see how it holds up under some testing at the range, hopefully tomorrow.
ArchAngelCD
Moderator, SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
So it doesn't bother you that you bought a gun without a lock and because of something S&W did incorrectly you are now forced to carry a revolver with a lock?
I truly hope this never happens to me because I do not want a defective replacement for their defective product.
I truly hope this never happens to me because I do not want a defective replacement for their defective product.
The only new J frame I would buy is one of the centennials without locks. Those I've handled all seem to have a very stage-able trigger so I don't miss the SA capability. My 1st choice would be a blue Classic model 40 (all blue steel w/grip safety and no lock). I'd pay the difference as a replacement gun.
pinkymingeo
Member
Not everybody is an anti-lock fanatic. They're easy enough to disable as part of the modifications that I, for one, make to most of the guns I buy (along with grips, sights and springs). Well before the IL appeared, there were problems with cracked alloy frames. Torquing a steel barrel into an aluminum frame simply isn't the best way to do things. If you want an alloy frame, the two-piece barrel is the way to go. Superior, period.
