I've had a few on my 1851 Colt Navy. 
Is that old S&W revolver as reliable as you think??
- Thread starter dandyrandy
- Start date
Yup.
When I was a prison guard, I was assigned to the towers a few times. Among the weapons there were a number of .38 special M&Ps. Of course, I checked them for function. One of them wouldn't cycle every time. I got permission to bring my smithing tools and disassembled it. Wound up taking another M&P apart and swapping parts. Got both of them workings.
These were basically new, but any mechanical device can fail.
When I was a prison guard, I was assigned to the towers a few times. Among the weapons there were a number of .38 special M&Ps. Of course, I checked them for function. One of them wouldn't cycle every time. I got permission to bring my smithing tools and disassembled it. Wound up taking another M&P apart and swapping parts. Got both of them workings.
These were basically new, but any mechanical device can fail.
Last edited:
Anything that has ever been made will wear out or break if it is used enough. I have found that S&W and Colt revolvers won't break or wear out as fast as the X brand guns. Larry
StrawHat
Member
During the decade I was an assistant range office, the guys on my department were able to "break" the S&W M19 or M15 many times. The most common was the cartridge under the star but I also had to repair broken firing pins, a broken main spring and numerous loose extractor rods.
Kevin
Kevin
Arik
Member
Two that I can think of.
Model 12 that would sometimes bind when pulling the trigger in DA. You'd pull the trigger and the cylinder would start to rotate and then it would hit a wall. Hammer half way back, cylinder half way rotated and nothing could be done any further. If you released the trigger and tried again it was 50/50.
1962 model 27. Random light primer strikes
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Model 12 that would sometimes bind when pulling the trigger in DA. You'd pull the trigger and the cylinder would start to rotate and then it would hit a wall. Hammer half way back, cylinder half way rotated and nothing could be done any further. If you released the trigger and tried again it was 50/50.
1962 model 27. Random light primer strikes
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
DD357
Member
Yes as well; broken parts: K frame (hammer nose), J frame (hand), Python (pin). In all cases gun was not functional.
Three. Two S&Ws, one Colt (twice).
I had a 547 which apparently pierced a primer, and the firing pin would not retract. Completely disabled. This was at a commercial range/gunshop (A&P Arms in Va Beach). The guy behind the counter drove the case back with an appropriate rod.
My 29-2 would sometimes cycle backwards with heavy loads. So would a 37 with +P. Of course you only had to index the cylinder and pull the trigger again (and maybe have it happen again). I don't count the 37 as a failure - easy enough to avoid +P ammo.
Had a Colt Diamondback which broke a hammer nose (in a bobbed hammer). Replaced the nose. Before long, it broke again. Read Kuhnhausen, checked that gun every way from Sunday, couldn't find a reason. Put a new nose in the hammer, put a new hammer (complete) in the gun and sold it. Eventually put the bobbed hammer in an Agent, and it's still doing fine.
I had a 547 which apparently pierced a primer, and the firing pin would not retract. Completely disabled. This was at a commercial range/gunshop (A&P Arms in Va Beach). The guy behind the counter drove the case back with an appropriate rod.
My 29-2 would sometimes cycle backwards with heavy loads. So would a 37 with +P. Of course you only had to index the cylinder and pull the trigger again (and maybe have it happen again). I don't count the 37 as a failure - easy enough to avoid +P ammo.
Had a Colt Diamondback which broke a hammer nose (in a bobbed hammer). Replaced the nose. Before long, it broke again. Read Kuhnhausen, checked that gun every way from Sunday, couldn't find a reason. Put a new nose in the hammer, put a new hammer (complete) in the gun and sold it. Eventually put the bobbed hammer in an Agent, and it's still doing fine.
Anything can break. In ~50 years of shooting lots of different handguns I have had two absolute failures. Not shooter or ammo caused.
In the Army, while qualifying, had the milled steel extractor on a 1911 break into two pieces. Glad it wasn't in combat.
Years later, practicing with my EDC, a Model 60 (no dash) the revolver locked up. Totally. Thumbpiece was fully forward.
Upon disassembling it, I discovered that the milled steel bolt had snapped. Glad it wasn't in a defensive situation.
In the Army, while qualifying, had the milled steel extractor on a 1911 break into two pieces. Glad it wasn't in combat.
Years later, practicing with my EDC, a Model 60 (no dash) the revolver locked up. Totally. Thumbpiece was fully forward.
Upon disassembling it, I discovered that the milled steel bolt had snapped. Glad it wasn't in a defensive situation.
Like any mechanical device, failures happen. In my opinion, S&W, Ruger, and Colt quality historically far exceed Taurus, Rossi, Charter Arms, et al. Any of the former three are well built and consistently reliable. If you shoot enough, and watch others shoot enough, you're going to see and experience failures . . .
That I do not know. Was just shooting it and then it would not fire. Checked it out and found the hammer nose snapped off. Just a weak spot I guess.
kthom
Member
The only FTF or functions that I've ever experienced with any S&W revolver (many!) over the past 50 or so years has been ammo related, most often a primer problem or squib load (bid priced practice ammo during training and qualifications). I have known of a very few incidents where an internal part of the action ceased to function properly either due to Bubba-smithing or just plain wear and tear on revolvers that were used to fire multiple thousands of rounds during years of recruit training.
I have also seen a few incidents where either the hammer or trigger stud were broken loose from the frame, usually caused by someone operating the action under full spring tension with the sideplate removed, I think.
I actually purchased a Model 13 with a three inch barrel sight unseen that had this problem. When it arrived at my dealer, I carefully inspected it (no disassembly involved) before accepting the delivery. The action functioned with out problem both single and double action other than the action was a bit sluggish as if the innards needed a good cleaning and relubrication. The gun actually had a pretty decent and smooth operation and the external condition was very good. When I got it home and removed the sideplate, I found that the hammer stud was broken off the frame and that the pin that secured the hand and spring inside the slot in the trigger was also broken and loose in place. I was astounded to know that the action appeared to be in good condition and produced a really pretty good function. I reported the findings to the seller who was unwilling to accept any responsibility for the condition of the gun or make any adjustment for the cost. So I bought some experience and since I really liked and wanted the revolver, I sent it to S&W for repairs. They replaced the broken hammer stud as well as the complete trigger assembly and hand, timed the action and tuned it, and of course, refinished the whole thing since replacement of the hammer stud required refinishing.
The revolver is now is perfect operating condition and shoots well. The refinish was not with the same type of bluing that originally came on the revolver but it is very well done as was the polishing done prior to the rebluing. I've got the price of the gun plus about 2/3's more invested now in it, but given some of the high prices commanded in recent months for three inch S&W revolvers, my investment doesn't look quite so bad. Irregardless, I like it, don't intend to sell it, and I'm satisfied to have it as it is now. I'm still disappointed in the seller, but can't say for certain that he was aware of the problem when he sold the gun to me. I do have my suspicions, but that's another story! In any case, the revolver is now as good as new, considering that it's hard to get the same kind of a bluing job as the ones that came on those fine old revolvers.
I've never owned nor used nor seen any product, especially of a mechanical nature that have been as reliable as the S&W revolvers that were made during the 30's through the 70's and into the 80's. I prefer the older ones, and even the majority of the revolvers produced after this time have a pretty good track record over all. There have been times when quality control slipped, and none of the newer models had the individual hand's on attention of the older model during manufacture. Actually, I guess I have had one product that has been maybe more trouble free than my S&W revolvers, and that is an anvil that has been used for four generations and which I have passed along to the fifth generation.
I have also seen a few incidents where either the hammer or trigger stud were broken loose from the frame, usually caused by someone operating the action under full spring tension with the sideplate removed, I think.
I actually purchased a Model 13 with a three inch barrel sight unseen that had this problem. When it arrived at my dealer, I carefully inspected it (no disassembly involved) before accepting the delivery. The action functioned with out problem both single and double action other than the action was a bit sluggish as if the innards needed a good cleaning and relubrication. The gun actually had a pretty decent and smooth operation and the external condition was very good. When I got it home and removed the sideplate, I found that the hammer stud was broken off the frame and that the pin that secured the hand and spring inside the slot in the trigger was also broken and loose in place. I was astounded to know that the action appeared to be in good condition and produced a really pretty good function. I reported the findings to the seller who was unwilling to accept any responsibility for the condition of the gun or make any adjustment for the cost. So I bought some experience and since I really liked and wanted the revolver, I sent it to S&W for repairs. They replaced the broken hammer stud as well as the complete trigger assembly and hand, timed the action and tuned it, and of course, refinished the whole thing since replacement of the hammer stud required refinishing.
The revolver is now is perfect operating condition and shoots well. The refinish was not with the same type of bluing that originally came on the revolver but it is very well done as was the polishing done prior to the rebluing. I've got the price of the gun plus about 2/3's more invested now in it, but given some of the high prices commanded in recent months for three inch S&W revolvers, my investment doesn't look quite so bad. Irregardless, I like it, don't intend to sell it, and I'm satisfied to have it as it is now. I'm still disappointed in the seller, but can't say for certain that he was aware of the problem when he sold the gun to me. I do have my suspicions, but that's another story! In any case, the revolver is now as good as new, considering that it's hard to get the same kind of a bluing job as the ones that came on those fine old revolvers.
I've never owned nor used nor seen any product, especially of a mechanical nature that have been as reliable as the S&W revolvers that were made during the 30's through the 70's and into the 80's. I prefer the older ones, and even the majority of the revolvers produced after this time have a pretty good track record over all. There have been times when quality control slipped, and none of the newer models had the individual hand's on attention of the older model during manufacture. Actually, I guess I have had one product that has been maybe more trouble free than my S&W revolvers, and that is an anvil that has been used for four generations and which I have passed along to the fifth generation.
My only failures with revolvers have been misfires from loose strain screws or the ejector rod backing out.
One thing can be said for sure, while most auto malfunctions can be cleared in a few seconds most revolver issues totally lock the gun up until remedial action taking a lot more time can be applied
One thing can be said for sure, while most auto malfunctions can be cleared in a few seconds most revolver issues totally lock the gun up until remedial action taking a lot more time can be applied
DD357
Member
My 67 did the same thing.
I have never had a failure for any of my revolvers to fire, but I have had a few critical failures. The two critical failures involved:
- 1. A Model 27, where the extractor star separated from the ejector rod.
- 2. A Model 57, where the cylinder would not open after a period of storage.
I have had the ejector rod back out a few times over the past 30 years in bullseye matches, but it never affected the ability to shoot.
- 1. A Model 27, where the extractor star separated from the ejector rod.
- 2. A Model 57, where the cylinder would not open after a period of storage.
I have had the ejector rod back out a few times over the past 30 years in bullseye matches, but it never affected the ability to shoot.
Lee's Landing Billy
Member
Me too.........
DocB
Member
So reliable, it's scary. I got my son an old nickel 38 Special from the 1920's when he was about 15. He reloaded for it. While he had the manuals, he reloaded light 357 magnum loads. After 2 years of constantly shooting a gun that was over 60 years old, it finally became so loose and rattle-trap it's a wonder it just didn't fall apart. Never failed to fire and never blew up. . .it should have! It was stolen from him in 1986. I gave him the insurance money and he bought a brand new 686. He still has it and has killed a multitude of deer with it. That gun will probably still be shooting 500 years from now.
bmcgilvray
Member
"Is that old S&W revolver as reliable as you think?"
Yep, it is.
One of my most used Smith & Wesson revolvers has been in my possession for more than 40 years now. I still use it and abuse it as I still do with several other Smith & Wesson revolvers I've had nearly that long. They all work as expected.
Yep, it is.
One of my most used Smith & Wesson revolvers has been in my possession for more than 40 years now. I still use it and abuse it as I still do with several other Smith & Wesson revolvers I've had nearly that long. They all work as expected.
Qc Pistolero
Member
I been shooting handguns since the mid 70's.Revolvers(mostly S&W but also Dan Wessons ,Colts and Rugers)and autos(Colts,S&W,Ruger,Sigs,Walther,Unique,Beretta,Browning,Glock and maybe a few more I forgot about).All guns being mechanical things will eventually malfunction.
If we except ammo related malfunction,I must say that autos came a long way from behind to be almost as reliable as a revolver.
But when you need it,the malfunction being caused or not by inadequate ammo is still a malfunction.When it counts,give me a revolver!
Qc
If we except ammo related malfunction,I must say that autos came a long way from behind to be almost as reliable as a revolver.
But when you need it,the malfunction being caused or not by inadequate ammo is still a malfunction.When it counts,give me a revolver!
Qc
Similar threads
