Issues with new J-frame vs older ones.

[PittsburghJon67]

I have been CC my J-frame S&W revolvers exactly 50 years, starting with the Model 36 Chief Special, and more recently the Centennial Model 642-2. When picked up from LGS, the Centennial had a non-finished forcing cone and >12# trigger pull, so back to S&W twice before the problems were actually resolved. During the fix I received a personal phone call from one of the S&W technicians which generated a conversation about the internals on the newer J-frames. His take (and my experience) is that the newer snubs don't have the same quality internals (perhaps MIM parts). The Centennial's trigger pull is far better now, but nowhere near the glass-like pull on my Chief Spl, but you would expect that from good honest wearing in over 50 years' time. That all being said, I have recently been eyeing up a model 49 Bodyguard to add to the stable, but my experience with the newer S&W "quality" has me a bit leery - rough non-finished forcing cone? Really? And I am also not enamored of the locking device, as are many others perhaps? I do carry the supplied key on my keychain, just in case. These revolvers are daily carry and must work 100%, 100% of the time, and as Bill Jordan said "there is no second-place winner" here. Have any others had similar experiences with the newer J-frames? My two semi-auto pistols (not S&W and in larger calibers) are great for in-house guns, but my J-frames get the nod for everyday protection since 1974, just like old friends. Any chance of getting a Bodyguard done right the first time, or are my expectations just a bit too high? Any comments are much appreciated in helping to get this purchase right the first time!

 

[swagmeister]

I have no opinion, comments, or answers to give you concerning new J Frame revolvers, as I don't own one, but have had many vintage ones that gave years and hundreds of rounds of service with zero problems. Too many bad reports of new Smith revolvers of any frame size lacking in quality. Forgive my unsolicited opinion, but the older the better when it comes to Smith revolvers for me (pre MIM and certainly pre-lock). Just have no desire for a new one. But I'm old and stuck in my ways concerning many things!! Good luck to you.

 

[rct269]

Your observations are simply symptoms of S&W's revised philosophy---which began in the mid 1950's---in my opinion.

In the beginning---and continuing for the next 100 years, their philosophy, very simply stated, was: We will be successful if we build the best possible product for the price. They did just that----and it worked!

Then, for whatever reason---new ownership perhaps, that philosophy began to change, to: ----------if we build the product (and operate the business) at the lowest possible cost.

Your experiences, and those of a similar nature we read about now on a daily basis, are also simply symptoms of the same disease ----and are more commonly thought of as "chickens coming home to roost"---also known as "As you sow, so shall you reap!"

These are samples of farmer lingo. I use them because I'm a farmer---sort of. I live on a farm. I don't grow anything besides the grass on the lawn, but I rent the farm land to a real farmer who, all total, rents maybe 2,500 acres to grow feed for his beef critters---of which he has A BUNCH at any given time! He takes GOOD care of ALL the land he uses (and his beef critters)---and makes out like a fat rat in a cheese factory!! He does all this because he knows better than to not do so.

Maybe someday the owners of S&W will come to know better too--or maybe the new owners will.

"Hope springs eternal!"

Ralph Tremaine

 

[MetalMan]

While I can't answer your question concerning the Bodyguard, I can say that my experience closely mirrors yours. All of my J-frame snubs (36's and 60's) range in age from 1968 to 1988 and have been functionally flawless. I also have a couple of K-snubs; a 19-5 (1988) and 66-4 (1994).

I did stumble upon a 2021-production 640-1 Pro which, while not as aesthetically pleasing as my older J's - inconsistent roll markings on frame and barrel - the fitment was perfect and it, too has performed flawlessly; it's my current EDC.

As I feel that I have everything that I "need" and based upon what I see at my LGS and local gun shows, and hear and read on the forum, I would tend to be somewhat hesitant to plunk down my hard-earned $$ on any new/newer S&W.

My 2cents FWIW…

 

[Lucnic]

I've bought four "newer " J frames, 442 no-lock, 640, 642, and a 642 Pro. On the 640 and 642 I've removed the locks and plugged them. Both have replacement spring kits, Wilson Combat (642) TK Customs (640). Did this for trigger pull and lock hatred. No timing or fitment issues on either one. Both shoot to sights. The 642 goes with me everywhere.

The 442 no-lock was good to go out of the box. Great trigger. The 642 Pro had a problem I was able to fix myself. Needed a good hosing out and some oil. I don't ever carry these two. Bought them because "new, shiny".

As far as the 49 goes IMO do a thorough revolver check before you buy it. If you do get it and you don't like the lock, remove it and plug it. If you don't like the trigger after a while, replace the springs. If I wanted it, I'd buy it after I checked it out. The MIM parts don't worry me. I've had the 640 and 642 apart. Both seem well made.

For what it's worth I've had good luck with the Taurus 856 line. Own two of them. I believe they are a good buy for a self defense revolver. Internally the springs and parts are larger than new S&W revolvers. Seem to be well made. Put a Wolff spring kit in the 856ULCH to improve trigger pull.

I own two Kimber K6s revolvers. Build and fitment on both is excellent. Superb triggers, buttery smooth.

Having said all of this, none of them are like my vintage Smith and Wesson J frames. There's just something about a vintage J-frame. The look, the feel, the bluing, the workmanship, the hand fitting and finishing. They have a soul that the others lack. My favorite J frame is my late 80's Model 49. Hope this answers some of your questions.

 

[L-2]

Regarding Post 1 comments,
-right now, the Model 49 is discontinued, no longer listed on S&W's website. Unknown how old the Model 49 the OP is considering.

-The OP could also consider a 642-1 (still being made) instead of the 642-2 he bought and not have to worry about carrying the S&W lock key.
https://www.smith-wesson.com/product/j-frame-103810

As already, mentioned, there are frame plug kits on the market and I doubt there's even a 1% chance of the lock unwantedly engaging if left in place.

Regarding new vs. old, I've got both new and old. For J-frames, I do like having/carrying the later "magnum" frames rated for +P .38 Special ammo.

 

[pantannojack]

I had a 36-7. Wish I still did. It has a larger ft sight and rear notch; But I traded for a 3" bbl one.

 

[petepeterson]

Being from roughly the same area as you, I still see older used Js coming up for sale occasionally. Are you opposed to a used revolver?

 

[Olly556]

I am also a fan of the older designs and the workmanship that went into them. The reason I reference the Regulation Police in 38 S&W is because I fell into one some months back. Made in 1935/36, it is absolutely beautiful to look at the fit and finish of all the parts, even the stocks numbered to the gun. I knew Colt was good and always considered S&W to be a mass produced piece. This little "I" frame has caused me to look closer at older S&W. I seldom look at anything new anymore.

 

[max503]

I only own three J frames. The older 36 is an unbreakable gem. The 70's era 34 had issues, but it is now 100% and has been for decades.

That leaves the 10 year old 638. When I buy a gun I intend to use it. I don't think these Airweight J frames are meant to be used regularly. Regular practice with mid-range wad cutters caused the bolt hole to enlarge on my gun. After a period of back-and-forth communications with S&W they finally agreed to fix it. While they did change out frames it looks like they replaced it with a previously used frame. It had obvious wear on it. Even the bolt hole on this frame looks like it has some enlargement. The gun works but I'm afraid to practice with it much for fear of wearing it out.

No, I won't be buying any new S&W's ever.

 

[steelslaver]

S&W has tried to replace craftsmen with production methods. Part of that is the fact that actual craftsmen who take pride in their work are disappearing. I have worked jobs where they are paid $40+ an hour plus good over time and per diem and they have not been able to fill 20% of the slots.

MIM parts are fine. Nothing wrong with them. But, to believe that a group of unskilled labor can assemble a pile of well made parts into a good revolver is ridiculous. While the majority may come out fine a percentage of them will have a variety of problems. S&W seriously needs to add some serious quality control and have the rejects fixed before they go out the door. They are ruining a great reputation.

Do I believe all the older guns were perfect? No, but a lot fewer with real problems left the plant

 

[pistolpete10]

S&W just ain't what it used to be but, I have 2 newer 642s. One has the lock, the newest one does not. The one with the lock shoots ok but has a burr in the forcing cone. The one without the lock is good but it came with a mainspring that would have been good on the front end of a Chevy truck. I installed a standard spring from Wolff and it good to go. I have 4 or 5 other newer revolvers, all have/had problems. Don't plan on buying anymore new S&W revolvers. plenty of older guns for sale.

 

[Retired W4]

The newest J frame I have owned is a 60-9. Besides the typical heave trigger pull, which I easily fixed, it is/was trouble free. It is from 1996.

 

[Green Frog]

I am also a fan of the older designs and the workmanship that went into them. The reason I reference the Regulation Police in 38 S&W is because I fell into one some months back. Made in 1935/36, it is absolutely beautiful to look at the fit and finish of all the parts, even the stocks numbered to the gun. I knew Colt was good and always considered S&W to be a mass produced piece. This little "I" frame has caused me to look closer at older S&W. I seldom look at anything new anymore.

The pre War I frames tended to be little jewels, in fact the last of the leaf spring I frames made post War qualify as well. I truly love my 1949 HE 32 snub! The earliest "improved" I frames with coil springs and the Baby Chiefs Specials are still on the list, but my list of little bitty dream guns ends there. I own a couple of Stainless J frames from much later (still no lock) and they can come close, but it just ain't the same. JMHO, YMMV!
Froggie

 

[jimmyj]

The only S&W with "The Lock" I have is a Model 642. I was "Leary" of the lock but after three years plus I have experenced negative issues.

 

[balin]

I find the internals to easily be as good as decades ago. Modern makes that easier to do. Now the assembly is a different thing. With the tolerances being more nominal then in the past. Assembly cab be quicker as trying to match the right parts together so they mate well as they did in the past and then hand filing and fitting took lokervand would be much more expensive now. Few would be willing to pay the cost if things were done the same as long ago.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

I have been CC my J-frame S&W revolvers exactly 50 years, starting with the Model 36 Chief Special ...

... And I am also not enamored of the locking device, as are many others perhaps? I do carry the supplied key on my keychain, just in case.

Stay with the 36.

What is the key on the keyring going do for you when you needed it twenty seconds ago?

If you want a another snubby get a used one but my first choice is always a Detective Special. My BUG from when I was a cop. But nothing wrong with a .32 especially as a Senior Citizen.

 

[Beju]

I find the internals to easily be as good as decades ago. Modern makes that easier to do. Now the assembly is a different thing. With the tolerances being more nominal then in the past. Assembly cab be quicker as trying to match the right parts together so they mate well as they did in the past and then hand filing and fitting took lokervand would be much more expensive now. Few would be willing to pay the cost if things were done the same as long ago.

Also, any hand fitting of the post-forged, pre-MIM internals like hammers and triggers (which were stamped) theoretically reduced the long-term durability of the part since it removed some of the very thin case-hardened layer.

 

[steelslaver]

I would bet that a good revolver smith could fix the majority of problem guns that are currently leaving the plant in short order, especially if he was well stocked with current parts.

Shame on S&W for not having an actual QC dept and some of those smiths on the payroll

I can't believe the cost of shipping and handling and loss of sales due to reputation damage is worth it.

 

[Greyman50]

Only have 2 J frames with the cursed lock. Comparing the internals is like night and day. S&W sure messed up with these new revolvers and not just J frames.