New 625 w/ no chamber chamfer

[alfsauve]

<Say that 3 times real fast.>

Just got a brand new 625-8. Out of the box I noticed the rounds (full clips) took a little wiggling to get them to seat. When I got home, I noticed there is absolutely zero bevel to the chambers. Comparing that to an older model (-2) which has a nice little bevel, I wondering if the factory forgot to chamfer them?

In addtion the extractor ends are noticeably smaller than the part of the cylinder they meet. (I also noticed the extractor is cut/milled in a square shape and not in a hex pattern.)

Is this normal for the newer guns?

This is my first 21st century Smith all others being pre-2000.

Thanks, Alf

 

[alfsauve]

Pictures

Here's a picture up close of the new 625JM.

Notice the ill fitting ends of the extrator and the lack of any chamfer.

As compared to a 625-2

 

[scooter123]

Ok, put on some reading glasses and take a closer look. What you will see is that the Extractor Star IS chamfered and only the cylinder is not. That is why it appears the fitup is so poor. The reason is that S&W is using the same extractor on the 625 JM and the 625 PC. On the PC version the cylinder gets fully chamfered. Basically, S&W is saving a dollar or so by using the same extractor for both versions.

Now for a bit of good news. If you have a steady hand and the correct tools you can use that chamfer on the extractor as a "guide" to chamfer the cylinder on the 625 JM. I used a diamond burr on a Dremel and start to finish it took me about 45 minutes to chamfer the cylinder on my 625 JM.

BTW, I chose the 625 JM for two reasons. One is that it is less expensive than the 625 PD. The second is that I think the slab sided barrels so popular on the PC guns are just plain ugly.

Since I knew going into the purchase that the JM wouldn't have some of the features of the PC version my approach was that is a model for those who like to do their own customizing. Not only did I chamfer the cylinder, I also removed the barrel, crowned it, lapped both crown and forcing cone, tuned up the action, replaced the grip, and installed MIM blued smooth target trigger and service hammer. Now I have my own "version" of a 625 PC unlike any other you'll find. Now if I could just find a 625 Mountain Gun barrel and a 45LC cylinder I'd have my Grail 625.

Now, I'm not saying that you have to take the same approach, however it has been fun creating my own version of the ideal 625. If you don't want to do any customizing, your 625 JM will shoot just fine with that mismatched extractor and cylinder. I'll also tell you that nobody else at the range will notice that mismatch unless you point in out to them.

 

[alfsauve]

Chamber Chamfer

Scooter, I appreciate your reply.

I am aware that Brownell's sells a chamfer tool ($101), or I could try to do it manually. Or better I could take it to my local smith....but why should I have to do this to a NIB gun?

The point is that this is a Jerry Miculek signature gun and it should be competition ready. You cannot reload very fast with the gun the way it is. You'd think that beveling the chambers would have been a given. I certainly thought so. (duh, silly me). I have several other 6xx series Smith's and they ALL have beveled chambers. Why not one specifically designed for comptetition?

[Is it me? Does JM really do his fantastic reloads with a straight walled chamber?]

On the other hand, if S&W decided not chamfer, then the extractor should at least match. It looks very sloppy.

However it's resolved, I'm disappointed with my first NIB, 21st century S&W. I'll go back to the pre-2000s.

Since this gun headspaces with the moon clips, I may run my rounds back through the crimping die and at least roll the edge of the case inward to help with loading. At least until I figure out what to do with this gun.

I've sent S&W customer service an email and will hold my breath until I hear a reply.

 

[one eye joe]

Scooter, I appreciate your reply.

I am aware that Brownell's sells a chamfer tool ($101), or I could try to do it manually. Or better I could take it to my local smith....but why should I have to do this to a NIB gun?

The point is that this is a Jerry Miculek signature gun and it should be competition ready. You cannot reload very fast with the gun the way it is. You'd think that beveling the chambers would have been a given. I certainly thought so. (duh, silly me). I have several other 6xx series Smith's and they ALL have beveled chambers. Why not one specifically designed for comptetition?

[Is it me? Does JM really do his fantastic reloads with a straight walled chamber?]

On the other hand, if S&W decided not chamfer, then the extractor should at least match. It looks very sloppy.

However it's resolved, I'm disappointed with my first NIB, 21st century S&W. I'll go back to the pre-2000s.

Since this gun headspaces with the moon clips, I may run my rounds back through the crimping die and at least roll the edge of the case inward to help with loading. At least until I figure out what to do with this gun.

I've sent S&W customer service an email and will hold my breath until I hear a reply.

I hear ya, alfsauve. I'd be very disappointed myself. I seriously doubt that JM's shootin' a box stock revolver like yours....

 

[amazingflapjack]

It is like they are trying to nickel and dime people away from the S&W brand. There seems to be more reports all of the time. The good news is that S&W still chamfers for $30.00 the last time I checked, but I would lay this case at their feet and ask, Really? Just Putrid.

 

[Dale53]

alfsauve;
I would suggest you call Smith. Most have better results by talking to someone on the telephone.

On the other hand, I would simply chamfer the cylinder throats myself. If you don't feel comfortable doing that, maybe your local pistolsmith can handle it if Smith doesn't respond favorably.

I have a number of Smith revolvers. Few of them have chamfered cylinders (they probably should, but don't).

Don't let this relatively minor "defect" turn you off new Smith's. I know it is fashionable to slam the new Smiths but I have a number of older and newer ones and my two 625's (a 625-8 JM Special like yours) and a 625-6 Model of 1989 are my two most used (and most enjoyable) Smith revolvers.

Keep us posted as to your results from S&W.

Dale53

 

[WC145]

Unless the gun was supposed to have chamfered charge holes from the factory you have nothing to complain about. I'd just go ahead and do what I've already done with my 25-2 and my 29-10, have the chambers chamfered yourself. Any competent gunsmith can do it and it cost me less than $50 per gun.

 

[alfsauve]

I hear ya, alfsauve. I'd be very disappointed myself. I seriously doubt that JM's shootin' a box stock revolver like yours....

I'm sure JM's is highly modified, tuned and fitted. And I'm wondering what caliber he shot his record score (12/3) with? .38super perhaps?

I'd just expect a gun with his endorsement to at least be able to reload smoothly.

 

[DanWales]

Done been down this road. I didn't use a diamond burr but a medium angled stone. Chucked it up in the drill press took out the ejector Viola few minutes later ole Jerry would have been proud of how you could throw them jokers in there when I was done.

Sent it back for shooting "way high right" did I say way high. Got it back thank goodness it wasn't WAY HIGH right any more it was just WAY HIGH. Had enough of this. Nice gold front sight from SDM and correct rear sight blade cured cured that issue.

De-burring it took another 3 hours........ but lemme tell ya now after smoothing the trigger and some other love this 625 JM is fun to shoot. Makes takin the 1911 out more fun just double the ammo.

Dan
​

 

[scooter123]

If you look at the listings for the 625 JM and the 625 PC you'll find that only the 625 PC is listing as having a chamfered cylinder. Since chamfered cylinders have ONLY been featured on limited performance models IMO it's rather foolish to assume that it's a standard feature on any of the production models. To be blunt, if you wanted a chamfered cylinder you should have spent the bucks on the PC version.

 

[alfsauve]

Yep

First an apology, I was a little po'd about this and assumed, because reloading had never been an issue with my other Smith's, that they were all chamfered. WRONG. I should have checked. My 686's and 629's are not. I'm sorry, I usually check statements before hand.


You're right Scooter. In doing some research, I've found only the PC states that the chambers are beveled. I should have checked that too, but my plain jane 625-2 was so it never occurred to me a JM (world's fastest reloader) wouldn't have been.

However, I think I still have issue with the extractor fit. All (I've checked this time) my other Smiths (nine) have extractors that match/fit the chambers. It's a sloppy looking design. Sloppy's not the word for it. More "crude".

Live and learn. Thanks all for the reply's I'll update when I decide what to do. Meanwhile, I've loaded some dummy rounds and will practice, practice, practice, my reloading technique.

 

[MTKTM]

BTW, I chose the 625 JM for two reasons. One is that it is less expensive than the 625 PD. The second is that I think the slab sided barrels so popular on the PC guns are just plain ugly.

Interesting thread. I purchased a 625PC a couple of years ago. It did need one trip back to S&W because of frequent failure-to-fire malfunctions. A new firing pin and bushing fixed that problem and it has been flawless ever since, but it definitely begged the question of how a gun could "excape" the Performance Center in the first place, incapable of shooting!!

Re the "slab sided barrel", while I've seen that on many of the PC guns like the 627s and the UDRs, and while beauty exists, or not, in the eye of the beholder, the 625PC does not get that treatment. I love the barrel shape and contour of the PC gun, prefer it to standard 625s with the full underlug, but again, that might just be me.

Also, while I don't know the 'on-the-street' cost differential between the PC and the standard, I don't think it's that great.

 

[alfsauve]

Got it back from the smith this week. Did a nice job on making it match the ejector. Loads a whole lot easier too. Below is a before and after.

Got a Safriland 586 holster and now I'm ready to try IDPA.

 

[Dave T]

I own five 45 ACP S&W revolvers dating from 1918 to 1989. Not a single one of them has "chamfered" chambers. I didn't know they were required. Heck, I've even competed without such modifications. Dang, who knew! (smile)

As far as I know Jerry M did his 12 shots in 3 seconds with a 45 ACP. That cartridge lends itself to reloading with moons much better than either 38 Super, 357 Mag or even 38 Special. The large diameter combined with the short length just feeds them in the charge holes.

Dave

 

[WC145]

Whoever did the work for you did a nice job, how much did they charge?

 

[AZ Desertrat]

I have had ALL my revolvers chamfered at Robar, here in Phoenix....yes..Im spoiled cuz I live here....but they do the best job of anyone I have used.

 

[alfsauve]

I own five 45 ACP S&W revolvers dating from 1918 to 1989. Not a single one of them has "chamfered" chambers.
Dave

I have a -2 and it is chamfered, BUT it could have been done after market. This 625-8 is the first "new" Smith I've ever bought.

My main beef is how poorly it looks to send out a beveled extractor with straight edge chambers.

WC145: Local smith named Bill Hayllar (Atlanta). He's a top rate machinist. Not that he can'd do "tune ups" and such, but his real forte is in his lathes and mills. He charged $50.

 

[WC145]

Good deal, money well spent.