Is that old S&W revolver as reliable as you think??

Wow!

While I knew revolvers could and do have failures I didn't realize it was so common and widespread. I hate to say it but there doesn't seem to be clear reliability advantage to the revolver at this point and both seem to break or fail eventually. And that's coming from a revolver fan!

Please tell me there is some reliability advantage to a revolver!
 
Last edited:
I've never had it happen to me but I've read reports of 629's jumping time when firing very heavy P+ ammo. The story is that they were never designed to work with loads that powerful. Only the cast metal pistols are made to take that much power. I saw that several places including the Buffalo Bore web site which highly suggested not firing their high pressure rounds through a S&W .44 magnum. That's OK. I don't need a cannon in my hand and if I did I'd get a big bore S&W (the real big stuff). But I've fired a bunch of S&W revolvers and never had a problem.

As for other stuff here's my list. It's not complete by any means.

Sig P220 - no failures until I hit the 15,000 round mark - replaced the recoil spring and no failures since
Taurus PT145 - 5000 rounds - zero failures
Taurus G2 - no failures
Springfield XDM 40 - lots of failures when I bought it - got it cheap for that reason - fixed for free by SA - no failures since
and at the other end of the specrum
Raven P-25 - never made it through a whole man without a failure

I've had lots of handguns over the years. Few of them have had problems. I had a sear spring break on a Tokarev. And I had a cartridge dig into the feed ramp on a Tec-9 and it wouldn't feed after that. That's about the only true problems I've ever had with any handgun.

BTW I have seen broken firing pins on S&W's. Not many but I've seen more than one. It was a long time ago on very old guns. I also saw a cylinder break something that allowed it to spin freely after it broke. That was on a break-top pistol so you know how old that was. That gun was plain old worn out.

I really don't see a lot of broken stuff. I know there's a lot of junk out there. Some of it is broke when you buy it new. Like my Raven. But most guns work pretty well. Some work real well.
 
ONLY ftf I have EVER had was a broken hammer nose (firing pin), just recently. It was my favorite late 70's model 64-3. I was a bit dismayed at the time. But, luckily, I had a spare, which I had obtained years ago....just in case. The replacement took about 10 minutes.

No idea why the original one broke....it is a rare event. Good chance it will never happen again, though.
 
I used autos for most of my employments, but "ran into" revolvers from time to time during my first 25 years, encountering them with increasing frequency after about 1978. I initially found them "amusing."
More revolvers have failed in my use than semi-autos by a large margin.
In '95 I bought two .44 Mag Vaqueros for one of our sons to use in Cowboy Action Shooting. Both experienced dead-stop jams where the hammer could not be cocked until the gun was disassembled. Couldn't see anything wrong and they worked when reassembled - for a while. I sent the first one to Ruger. It came back with a "clean bill of health," but didn't take long to jam up again.
My .45-Colt Vaqueros never missed a beat.
I purchased a Ruger Redhawk new, for one of our sons. I did not look it over. First time he fired it, lead shaved and was spit out from in front of the cylinder. We could see that the forcing cone appeared to have been reamed out with a hacksaw blade. Barrel replaced.
I had purchased two S&W 327 TRR8 revolvers. Each was "stolen" by our Charming Children so I bought a third.
Son #3 found it and I figured it was gone for good. I hadn't even fired it.
He brings it into my office and says "Look at this, Dad." He held the barrel in one hand and the frame in the other and they wiggled. Back to S&W for total replacement.

I purchased a S&W 329PD when they first were available, for backpacking. At the range I was shooting factory 240gr jacketed ammo when I experienced a jam. Getting the cylinder open was very difficult. Then, I could not extract the shells. Even with a brass rod TAPPED, yes, I am SURE, I TAPPED it, the shell was difficult to extract and the crane broke. Back to S&W, fixed no charge.

A few years later I sent it to Cylinder & Slide for an Ashley Outdoors Big Dot Front Sight and their Extreme Duty rear, with tritium tubes. I asked them to look it over and "tune it up" as necessary.

They called to say the lock work was so battered they wouldn't work on it until it was repaired, and suggested sending it back to S&W. I said to do that, and they did. I don't know how many rounds had been through it, but I shot no more than 20 rounds of spec .44 Magnum ammo through it in a year, perhaps another 100 of my Cowboy loads, and each year before I headed for the mountains I fired three, 300-gr Hammerhead rounds to be sure I knew point of aim vs point of impact. These were hunting loads that S&W said the gun would handle.

In the years since I fired it about the same amount, except I stopped using the Hammerheads because they hammered my wrists and hands. No further problems.

I have a vague memory of a Colt double-action that would lock up at about 1/2 of the trigger pull and could not be fired until the trigger was relaxed and pulled again. I sold it as-is to someone. Yes, I told him about it.

I was firing the 386PD with Tulammo when the cylinder jammed for no obvious reason. The shot felt normal. No bullet had slipped forward, the firing pin had retracted, the cylinder bolt had retracted. We could not open the cylinder until we really forced it. I was concerned we might break it, but at that point we had an inoperable gun no gunsmith would touch, so there we were. After we got it open I sent it to S&W for a checkup. They said it was fine, but replaced the hand. That's the last time I EVER used, or will use, Tulammo.

Despite those problems, I have been flat-out amazed at how tolerant they are of corrosion or terrible maintenance. Rusty, pitted bores, rusty pitted chambers, gritty lockwork from lack of lube, cylinders that rattled in the frame, I even remember someone who had a revolver (don't remember the brand) with a slightly bent barrel. Shot just fine. Or so he said.
Saw some with bulged barrels, too. Seemed to shoot just fine.

In Central and South America I saw "repairs" that scared the c$%& out of me, but that worked. One I particularly remember, the trigger did not operate the lockwork so the user turned the cylinder by hand to line up the chamber with the bore. How did he lock it in place? WITH HIS FINGERS! Another had a crack in the mouth (front end) of a chamber. Solution? Load five. Front sight broken off? Paint a stripe on top of the barrel.
I saw a number with the trigger guard cut out at the front, a la "Fitz" Colts. Scary, but they worked. Barrel cut off? With a hacksaw? No problem, even if the muzzle was a little, uhm, angled. And not crowned.
I can't count how many I saw that were painted because the finish had worn off and the shooter didn't like the way it "glinted" in the light. Same for a couple stainless steel models. Krylon from Ace Hardware.

Sooo, sure, they fail. In my personal experience, more revolvers than autos have failed. But I kept mine in excellent repair and none ever failed in the field.
 
Wow!

While I knew revolvers could and do have failures I didn't realize it was so common and widespread. I hate to say it but there doesn't seem to be clear reliability advantage to the revolver at this point and both seem to break or fail eventually. And that's coming from a revolver fan!

Please tell me there is some reliability advantage to a revolver!

Morning John Rus

I can tell you that but that doesn't make it so.

If there was much of a measurable reliability
increase by using revolvers then the FBI, Police,
& Army would still be carrying revolvers.

Both revolvers & semi autos can jam, malfunction,
or lock up. How fast a person can clear the problem
boils down to the type of failure & how much practice
a person has in that type of failure in that particular gun.

One place I can tell you that revolver is more reliable
is in shooting out of (through) a coat or jacket pocket
as the revolver doesn't need room for the slide to cycle.
 
I had a 642 (-3 I think) that I had put a titanium cylinder in.
The gun was 6-8 years old, no lock, and had about 200 rounds through it before the cylinder swap.
After about 100 rounds through the new cylinder the trigger went floppy.
Would not function or fire again.

I shipped it back and it was covered under warranty.
Can't remember what they did to it, but the people I talked to at S&W didn't feel like the cylinder swap had anything to do with the failure.

Also had Taurus and Rossi revolvers lock up the point that cylinder had to be opened to get them to work again.

ETA: Almost forgot, I've had the mainspring break on TWO NAA .22lr mini revolvers.
 
Last edited:
Morning John Rus

I can tell you that but that doesn't make it so.

If there was much of a measurable reliability
increase by using revolvers then the FBI, Police,
& Army would still be carrying revolvers.

Both revolvers & semi autos can jam, malfunction,
or lock up. How fast a person can clear the problem
boils down to the type of failure & how much practice
a person has in that type of failure in that particular gun.

One place I can tell you that revolver is more reliable
is in shooting out of (through) a coat or jacket pocket
as the revolver doesn't need room for the slide to cycle.

I guess this begs the next question, how can we continually praise the quality of a Smith or other quality revolvers if by the admission of all these people that just posted have so many issues and the only reason the rest don't have issues because they haven't been shot enough?

I will still continue to shoot revolvers, I just want to have a realistic idea what to expect from them.
 
Last edited:
The Registered Magnum has been put on pedestal as the epitome of revolver workmanship. I owned a 3 1/2 inch that had been shipped to a FBI agent and when he returned it to change the sights he asked S&W "TO CHECK FOR CYLNDER COMING OPEN IN RAPID FIRE WITH 357 AMMO AS HE HAD HEARD OF THIS WITH OTHER REG. MAGS."
He stated he had not experienced this issue himself.
 
I guess this begs the next question, how can we continually praise the quality of a Smith or other quality revolvers if by the admission of all these people that just posted have so many issues and the only reason the rest don't have issues because they haven't been shot enough?

I will still continue to shoot revolvers, I just want to have a realistic idea what to expect from them.

Evening John Rus

We can praise or criticize a modern revolver all we want
but that doesn't change the fact that they are mechanical
marvels that have many precision moving parts & depend
on mass produced ammunition components to function.

Modern automobiles are probably about as good as they
have ever been reliability wise BUT a number fail to function
correctly every day.

IF you shoot any gun enough you will eventually get a
malfunction, maybe gun related or maybe ammunition
related but either revolver or pistol the chance for failure
is always present.

About all we can do is use quality ammo & keep the gun
in good operating condition. Then TRAIN, TRAIN, TRAIN
to quickly work through a gun malfunction & get back
into the fight.

The ones that are going to suffer the most are the shooters
that don't shoot much so don't get many malfunctions.
It's inevitable that failure will eventually occur, the smart
(& probably surviving) shooter will be able to quickly clear
the malfunction & get on with the fight.
 
Have a 69 with a broken firing pin right now. Actually Fed Ex has it. Had the revolver for three weeks. Had 800 rounds through it. I was shocked it had a failure so early. I also have a 13 and a 29 with thousands and thousands through them without more than pieces rattling off. 29 was a loose ejector rod, 13 had the cylinder release button fall off. Those were super easy fixes tho.

Wifes 60 has been flawless.
 
about 35 yrs ago I bought a new mod 67 (with stainless sights) was shooting for qualifications and about half way thru I could not pull the trigger it was locked solid. The range officer checker it out and said it looked like some one had messed with it and gave me another gun to finish. I don't know what was wrong with it but he fixed it and I sold it. I felt like I could not trust it any more.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Wolverine!

I guess the take-away is not so much that a revolver is unreliable as much as being prepared to deal with a malfunction when it occurs.

I can't shoot a semi auto because the type of recoil bothers my tendinitis a lot more than a revolver, more weight and not having that slide come forward makes a HUGE difference for me.
 
Back
Top