mkk41
US Veteran
Yep , Rugers had problems too.
Model 67 Catastrophic Failure
- Thread starter bodyarmorguy
- Start date
Fishslayer
US Veteran, Absent Comrade
I work at an Academy just north of these guys and we also use late model M67's for Corrections. Thus far (3 or so years now) we have had issues with strain screws unscrewing themselves but not much else. I do not recall if ours are two piece or one piece barrels at the moment. Our previous M15's lasted some 25+ years and had gosh knows how many rounds (I'd guess 100,000+rd each at least) through them with mostly zero drama until they became so worn that even new parts would not always get them back up and running right.
I'd guess that if I was ordering new DA revolvers today for long term Academy use (I am not the coordinator) I would go with Ruger GP100s in .38Spl and never look back. Elsewise S&W would have to do a Heck of a sales job on me.
I'd guess that if I was ordering new DA revolvers today for long term Academy use (I am not the coordinator) I would go with Ruger GP100s in .38Spl and never look back. Elsewise S&W would have to do a Heck of a sales job on me.
mkk41
US Veteran
Well , these certainly look like two piece barrels now! LOL
Fishslayer
US Veteran, Absent Comrade
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,018
- Reaction score
- 7,100
Yep , Rugers had problems too.
Do you suppose this is where Ruger got the idea to build the Alaskan model, or whatever their large caliber snub-nose blaster is called?
BlueOvalBandit
Member
Perhaps the older ones seem better due to "natural selection." Sort of like my 96 year old aunt has never been sick a day her life. I suspect that's how she got to 96.
Now I'm one who prefers the older guns for a number of reasons, but I have to wonder how many were weeded out over the years.
Now I'm one who prefers the older guns for a number of reasons, but I have to wonder how many were weeded out over the years.
chipking
Member
Unfortunately this is not an uncommon issue. I have seen several barrels where there is an actual bulge in the barrel about midpoint in the frame from where where it has been over torqued. If you want to check yours put a tight oiled patch on a jag and push through slowly if you feel a definite letup in resistance just before the forcing cone and then it gets tight again the odds are real good you have an over torqued barrel. Far too many and all in the same spot to be obstructed barrel issues. Stainless is worse than regular steel.
At one time 3 of my 5 Mountain guns had the bulge and my current 625 has it. I shot them anyway without any issues but they are N frames and thicker to start than the K's
--- Chip King ---
At one time 3 of my 5 Mountain guns had the bulge and my current 625 has it. I shot them anyway without any issues but they are N frames and thicker to start than the K's
--- Chip King ---
I've never seen this on a S&W before, but I have seen a similar phenomenon called "stress corrosion cracking." Stainless steel under stress (torqued into position) that comes in contact with chlorine or fluorine (mostly) is subject to it. The CL or FL gets into crevasses in the steel and causes cracking. Add the pressure from the cartridge and the metal cracks through-wall and falls off. The only way to confirm is to have a forensic metallurgical exam done. And, I would highly encourage S&W to do it especially if they are using cutting or cleaning fluids that have CL or FL in them.
rburg
Member
riverrat38
US Veteran
But, just think of all the material they saved.
Maybe S&W has got something here. The ultimate belly gun. Fires right out of the cylinder. Maybe all at once!
Actually, this looks like something out of a "Sledge Hammer" episode! Barrel goes further than the bullet.
Maybe Speer can come up with some new "ultra short barrel" ammo!
Rick
Last edited:
Now maybe some will understand why so many (including)
myself will never buy anything of S&W's made newer than 1980
or so. Sorry but junk is junk. Would like to know who is in
charge of QC these days ??? Pee Wee Herman.....
Chuck
myself will never buy anything of S&W's made newer than 1980
or so. Sorry but junk is junk. Would like to know who is in
charge of QC these days ??? Pee Wee Herman.....
Chuck
Cruiser RN
Member
Yep it happens.I had 2 Model 60 357 magnums become frame crackers and barrel launchers using solely factory 38 special ammo.The Model 36 that replaced it had a right canted barrel that took 2 trips to S+W to fix the problem.They finally replaced the barrel and it is all good.
photoman
Member
You're cheating yourself out of the joy of owning a perfectly good weapon by subscribing to the false presumption that all stainless steel S&W revolvers will fail like this one did.
riverrat38
US Veteran
The assembler may have over torqued the barrel to get the front sight vertical, rather than re cutting the set back. And, it would be the threads that fail in doing so. A crush fit, which I think is the same thing auto mechanics refer to as a stretch fit, is very critical with respect to torque. It is calculated to be close to the yield point of the steel, under stress of firing, in order to prevent loosening of the joint. Going beyond that point is not good!
I also suspect that the assemblers may be under trained in the theory of this, and are under pressure to meet production goals. Modern bean counting policy is to get the work out, as long as the warranty costs are less then the cost of "doing it right the first time". This is true in almost all large "consumer" industries. But its also why a S&W gun costs $700 and not $2K. Look at how much it costs to have a stock gun "blue printed"! Or how much it costs to build a 200 HP aircraft engine, compared to the same size car engine.
I don't think that the material had anything to do with this failure. Stainless steel is a very tough material.
Rick
I also suspect that the assemblers may be under trained in the theory of this, and are under pressure to meet production goals. Modern bean counting policy is to get the work out, as long as the warranty costs are less then the cost of "doing it right the first time". This is true in almost all large "consumer" industries. But its also why a S&W gun costs $700 and not $2K. Look at how much it costs to have a stock gun "blue printed"! Or how much it costs to build a 200 HP aircraft engine, compared to the same size car engine.
I don't think that the material had anything to do with this failure. Stainless steel is a very tough material.
Rick
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
