New 617 cosmetic defect - Is this OK?

[MichiganScott]

I don't mean to be a jerk, but is your picture a Photoshop? The second stamp does not have the same lighting characteristics as the first stamp, and seems to be a layer superimposed over the real roll mark. If I Photoshopped a "double stamp" and didn't carefully combine the lighting and shadows of the two, it would look exactly like that.

???

You look close enough, the one set of stamps actually seems to hover over the other instead of superimposed in the metal.

However, it may be real. The OP's first ever post from six days ago mentions the double strike. I'd still send it back. I've never heard of a collector spending extra fro a cosmetic defect.

 

[Dragon88]

Like I said, I'm not trying to be a jerk or call anyone a liar. Just curious.

If it really is a double stamp, I would send it back to get it fixed. It's not like an incorrect roll mark, or omitted roll mark, that might be cool to a collector 30 years from now. It's a manufacturing defect and QC travesty that S&W will fix if the OP chooses.

 

[QuercusMax]

I'm the OP, so thought I would follow up after thinking this over for a while. I really appreciated all of the helpful comments and opinions that were offered (but read on).

In the end, while I would prefer that it were cosmetically perfect, I didn't want to go through all the hassle of sending it back, so this is the advice that I decided to take:

If it shot tight groups ,I would keep it.If not ,back it goes.

Since my original post, I have been out with it twice so far and have run a full 525 box of Federal Champion through it. Mechanical functionality was perfect and accuracy was excellent (limited mostly by myself), so it's a keeper.

In fact, I didn't even notice the double-stamp at all while I was enjoying my shooting sessions with it!

Amidst the useful advice offered here were also a few posts from people who claimed my original picture must have been a fake created by Photoshop. To them I say:

1. It's sad that your first impulse was to make an accusation of fraud, especially when I was not selling anything or seeking anything but advice from people who know about S&W guns, not photo manipulation.

2. I took a few more photos in different light. In them it is very easy to see how the 2nd stamp has slightly deformed the metal of the first stamp in places.

In any case, it's a shooter and I'm keeping it. Bang!

 

[Qmark]

I would at least contact S&W and see if they offer a remedy. Not a gun, a friend of mine bought a set of Goodyear tires. After discovering a few months after the purchase the size was incorrectly stamped 13 instead of 15 inch. Goodyear gave him a non-expiring $100.00 off coupon on his next Goodyear tire purchase. The Goodyear factory rep told him the tire dealer knowingly bought the tires as seconds but failed to advise the end purchaser or pass the savings on.

 

[ladder13]

I would have sent it back, but it's not my gun. Good luck with it.

 

[NE450No2]

Lets face it the S&W of today is not the same as the S&W's of the past.

IF that revolver shoots good and is accurate I would live with the double stamp.

You might send it back and get one with perfect frame stamping, and it might shoot so bad you could not commit suicide in a phone booth with it...

 

[Avery11]

I would have found another group of people that wouldn't welcome me to a forum by insinuating that I'm a liar!

Seriously folks, the guy asked if he should seek reparations. He didn't come here trolling or trying to sell a fraudulant piece.

Last time I checked, this was not the FBI photo lab forum.

Uh oh! This font doesn't match the beginning of this post. Maybe I'm lying about thinking some of you need to chill out and skip a few episodes of CSI.

To the OP, welcome to the forum. Thank you for supporting Smith & Wesson.

 

[wproct]

Thanks for sharing your decision with us. I can understand completely. I hope you have many years of enjoyment with your revolver.