Model 624 Recall and "F" stamp

[wheelgun28]

I am curious as to how they can"keep the gun" I dont see any legal way they can. They dont own it, you dont consent to them keeping it. I dont care if they found it turned to glass and will explode on the next round. They can inform you as to its condition and not to use it, in writing. They may even be able to do something to render it inoperative temporarily, say remove the hammer. They cannot render it inoperative permanently, say cut it in two. They arent doing you a favor by taking the gun and sending you a new one. They are taking away a future liability and cutting their loss now. Better to lose the cost of a new gun ($500 ?) rather than hundreds of thousands later.

If manufacturers could do this what stops Toyota from taking your car next time you take for an oil change.

As for the owners liability, if you are not the owner of record, haven't received written notice that this could be a defect. You should not have liability of this. The owner doesn't have an obligation to see if there's a recall. However if you did get notice, or can be linked to having prior knowledge of a safety defect, and knowingly sell it with out full disclosure, you might have liability should something occur.

What happens if you sell an old lightweight gun with an aluminum cylinder and the next owner shoots it and blows it up?

I am NOT a lawyer and may NOT be correct!!!

What say our legal eagles?

 

[Snapping Twig]

I don't know the term for it, but the offering of a replacement allows them to do this.

Gun rules are not typical or aligned with normal retail rules. I suppose it's the mindset of guns being bad somehow, so special exceptions are made.

 

[flintsghost]

One thing I recently saw online was a 624 with a recall stamp on the label circle C in red. It was interesting in the description the owner noted that on the right side of the grip frame under the grips, along with some other stamps was a circle C also. I would say that hearing that, would indicate to me for revolvers that don't have boxes, look for a circle C on the grip frame under the grips. S&W has always had some sort of a stamp to indicate a gun has been checked or had work done by their shop. In this case it would be logical for them to stamp the circle C on the grip after the inspection done and the gun was to go out. That's certainly worth looking into, I would think.

 

[shawn mccarver]

I notice a discrepancy of sorts in the information provided in message #16 of this thread. The quoted Skelton article provides serial number ranges such as ADXXXXX, etc.; the info from Kate at S & W is nearly the same, ADXXXX, but notice the different number of Xs. The serial number on my 624 is AHTXXXX, which seems to put it in the "uh-oh" category if I interpret the Skelton info correctly, but leaves it out of the recall when using Kate's numbers. Who's right?

An official S&W serial number has three letters followed by four numerals. It has been that way since they went to the so-called 3 alpha, 4 numeric system in or near 1980, or thereabouts.

 

[Harkrader]

My 624LH has a serial number thus: ALWXXXX.
The former owner must have sent it in (I've had it for a long time) because it has the Circle C on the box.
The circled "C" on the grip frame is on a number of S&W revolvers I have seen. It would seem not to be a record of the recall.
Mine also has the "F" stamped on the rear face of the cylinder. I have no idea what it might signify.

 

[Pizza Bob]

I have two 624's and both have been through and passed the recall. Both also have an "M" stamped under the crane adjacent to the serial and model number. This is how they have designated a "passed" recall in the past - really don't know if it is relevant now. I can't imagine that S&W would designate a passed recall gun with only a rubber stamp on the box - makes no sense as the box is too easily separated from the gun.

Nor does there seem to be any consensus as to why the guns were recalled to begin with. I have heard two versions. The first says that there were several batches of SS that weren't up to spec and may cause weakened cylinders. The second, which is attributed to Roy Jinks, is that some cylinders were mistakenly bored long and could chamber a .44 Mag cartridge. I don't think either by itself makes sense. However - if both of the above stories are true, then a recall makes sense.

A cylinder made of out of spec steel could probably withstand the relatively low pressures generated by the .44 Spl round (going by SAAMI specs). However, if one had a defective cylinder and it was bored to accept magnum cartridges, that is an accident waiting to happen.

That is pure speculation and really does not jive with what I understand the recall procedure is/was - which is simply magnafluxing the cylinder which would show up any cracks or voids, but really is no indication of the cylinders strength or composition.

Glad this necro-thread was resurrected, maybe more info will come out now that we are a couple years down the road.

What say you?

Adios,

Pizza Bob

 

[Shark1007]

I just acquired one and it's a recall number gun.

I wonder what they trade them out for if they have no parts? Anyone had them trade out for something else?

 

[TAROMAN]

I have three 624s, 3", 4" and 6-1/2".
Two of the three were in the recall serial range.
Coincidentally, both of them needed sideplates replaced and went back to S&W. Both passed scrutiny and were repaired and returned.
Before sending them in, I read every scrap of discussion that I could find.
My conclusion was:
Both of these guns had been shot - a lot - before coming to me.
They had not failed structurally any any way whatsoever.
I have never seen, or even heard of, any 624 failure of any sort.
I don't hot rod my .44 Specials. Have plenty of 66 Magnums for that job.
Conclusion:
I would shoot any S&W 44 Special revolver with SAAMI-spec ammo and not worry in the slightest.
As for sending it in, wouldn't do it unless other work was needed.

That's my decision. Its your gun, you will have to make yours.

Last I heard, the (very few) replacement guns were current production 629s.

 

[fomeister]

Ok, I just read this entire thread found by searching for the "F" marking on a cylinder on my 3" 66. So I'm pretty sure the F isn't specific to 624. Anyone have any idea what that means? Also I. The A serial prefix range.

 

[fomeister]

Update: I also just found reference of the F on a model 58, so that's three very different models with the mark.

 

[fomeister]

I was told by someone who knows that the F was to let the assy line know which guns got magnum cylinders with the new steel at the time during the transition. Verified by three guys who were in the know at the time.

 

[Mac1184]

Looks like there are still a lot of "mysteries around this recall.
I have a 4" 624 that was manufactured in 1985 and is in the serial number range for the recall (AHB3xxx). I have fired about 200 rounds through it over the last two years with no problems. I do not use hot loads and don't intend to. When I found a 6.5" 624 that I was interested in, I called S&W (my E mails somehow do not get through) and was told that they did not have specific serial numbers, just ranges. He also said that if mine had been fired, it was probably OK! That is not reassuring enough to get me to spend $800.00 on another one, but I plan to keep shooting the one I have.

 

[Santafe66]

An Update on the Smith recall of 624 pistols to dispel some of the variety of info I've seen here.

Today, I called Smith about my 624 to ask about my S/N and get info from them. The fellow in Customer Service I talked to looked up my S/N and told me it fell within the range of the recall and to send it in. They will provide me with free shipping to and from. I asked if they would send it back if it didn't pass..........No was the answer. They will provide me with a suitable replacement.

Since I didn't want their replacement, I asked if other pistols near to the s/n of mine were sent in and passed? Shuffling of papers ensued and the answer was.......yes, two pistols numbered immediately after mine had been sent in and passed the magnaflux test. So, contrary to info I've read here, Smith DOES keep track of pistols sent in, whether they passed or not, and all numbers therein.

Since I don't want to take the chance mine will be kept, I contacted a gunsmith I have personal knowledge of, David Clements, and told him my tale. He offered to magnaflux the cylinder if I would send him just the cylinder, and tell me the result. If it didn't pass, he said I could probably purchase an N frame 357 mag cylinder (stainless of course) and line bore it to .44 spl. I plan to send David my cylinder for him to check. If it doesn't pass I will take that step of line boring an N frame 357 mag cylinder to the measurement I wish thereby no doubt making it more accurate for the bullets I cast and purchase than the original Smith cylinder.

By the way, I determined that the "F" on the cylinder DOES NOT indicate it passed any test. It is simply a mark indicating that cylinder is for the 624. Smith didn't necessarily mark every one with an "F" but that's what it represented when they did. The ONLY indication a cylinder passed the magnaflux test is the red "C" within a red circle stamped on the box. If you didn't send in a box, you got no indication it passed, other than getting your gun back. Smith does keep a record of these so you can call and, if you get a willing cust support person, can verify pass or fail info. The guy I talked to was willing to spend the time searching paper records to help me, your experience may vary with mine.

 

[Snapping Twig]

I've heard TWO stories about the recall.

One is poor steel.

The other is that the chambers were drilled too deep and can accept 44 mag.

S&W's record keeper said the second reason was the accurate one.

Try to drop a magnum in your cylinder, see if it accepts it. My bet is that if it does, you got a 'recall' gun.

I could never accept an MIM, lock, EDC barreled S&W, so no current replacement would be acceptable to me.

 

[Nemo288]

I have all 3 of the 624's.
All have the red C on the box.
The one I am looking at now (4" AHB5742) has a V on the rear face of the cylinder.
If as Mr. Jinks suggests, the steel was not an issue, then why were some 629-1's recalled?
I have one of those too. 6" with a red C on the box.
Here are the markings on the grip frame of my 6" 624.
Nothing I see would suggest a recall marking.

 

[Santafe66]

It looks as though Smith has expunged the entire history of the 624 from their records. I asked for it and was told the 624 was obsolete and that was why I couldn't get information. Did this happen to other discontinued models historically? I believe the answer is ..... No!

Incidently, Kate emailed me that the cylinder of my pistol, if I was to send it in that is, would be magnafluxed to determine if it was flawed. That implies that the problem was most likely the steel and not the chamber length. That is if you can believe all you hear about this. I will check my unreturned pistol to see if it will chamber a .44 Magnum round if I can find some.

Update: It didn't chamber a .44 Mag and Smith source said that wasn't an issue with the recall. I have sent my cylinder off to a well-respected custom gunsmith who will get it magnafluxed and can line bore a 357 Mag cylinder to replace it if needed. Better than Smith keeping my 624 if it flunked and giving me something else that I probably wouldn't want.

 

[BigBill]

Magnaflux for cracks? Stainless m624 only?

I just purchased a new, unshot m24 /6 1/2" in nickel you guys are scaring me. I got the last one to be found.

 

[S&WIowegan]

Magnaflux for cracks? Stainless m624 only?

I just purchased a new, unshot m24 /6 1/2" in nickel you guys are scaring me. I got the last one to be found.

If your gun is a 24-? and is modern with a lock, you have nothing to worry about! The guns in question are stainless steel from the mid-1980s.

 

[moralem]

Send it in you will get your gun back.....I picked up a 624 earlier in the year and when I called on it they said send it in. They emailed me th shipping labels, I went to my local Fed Ex and off it went. In about 2.5 weeks I had it back. There were no marks anywhere to indicate it was magnafluxed. Not really any paperwork to verify it had a clean bill of health except and an invoice type form that listed the gun info. and a line that said tested.

 

[Santafe66]

Magnaflux for cracks? Stainless m624 only?

I just purchased a new, unshot m24 /6 1/2" in nickel you guys are scaring me. I got the last one to be found.

The recall was only for early 80's 624 stainless pistols due to a shipment of flawed metal they received. I understand from Kate that only one 624 has been found to be bad so far.