Ok..So Now I'm Angry...S&W Problems On New Revolver

[TDC]

Time to quit complaining and produce some hard evidence of some of the problems mentioned here. Not a single picture has been produced on this thread to support any of these issues. People have mentioned sending pictures to S&W -- why don't they post them here for us to see for ourselves?

I have a large collection of older S&W's. A few have had minor problems. I also have several new guns including a 629-6 and a 500 that are among my current shooters. They aren't giving me any of the "grief" mentioned here, in fact, I find them to be a dependable and more accurate than my older guns..

I cast, lube, size my own bullets and hand-load my own ammo in 9 different calibers... No unusual problems for the new guns I don't encounter with the older guns, too.

I'd like to see this kind of thread prohibited from this website unless photographic evidence is produced to support the OP's or any other posters accusations. That would only be fair to everyone including the gun owner, the manufacturer and the membership, and get rid of the possibility of any unfair and/or unfounded complaints.

I'm not saying these complaints aren't true, I just want more than the comments of members who have only posted on this site comparatively few times to put their pictures where their mouths are....

JMHO

 

[stashu]

Here you go. This was posted last week.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/191990-new-617-3-steps-away-perfect.html


Stashu

 

[TDC]

Here you go. This was posted last week.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/191990-new-617-3-steps-away-perfect.html


Stashu

Thanks, Stashu,

This is exactly the kind of "picture" post we need to see to relate to the problem. It's very obvious to determine from your pictures a serious problem exists at S&W with quality control, at least with the gun you display, and we all can get upset with what's happening and support your complaint.

There are many of us who haven't had a problem with new gun purchases and we have felt it necessary to defend the company. I've been one of them.... Allowing a gun to be shipped in the condition you've shown is indefensible and needs to immediately be brought to the attention of top S&W management.

This kind of shabby workmanship from such a reputable and revered company is painful to see and disappointing to say the least. Keep us posted on how this is resolved, and congratulations on providing a well documented assessment of your problems.

TDC

 

[Fishslayer]

What type of ammunition does S&W recommend in the owner's manual?

Remember when all else fails read the instructions.

It should read "Use only SAAMI spec .38 Special."

If it said "Do not use 158gr bullets" I would probly go see what Taurus or Ruger had to offer.

 

[scooter123]

Here are a couple of pics posted by member Markush in the following thread

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-smithing/190712-returned-service-i-need-some-help.html

First an example of the older broached rifling and one problem that can occur with this process. Note, I believe that the barrel blanks for our revolvers start out as a very long rifled blank, they are not cut to the final length and then bored and rifled. So if a defect is 3 or 4 feet into the blank it won't be visible until the barrel has been finished to it's final contour and length. That makes these types of defects rather expensive. As for why it wasn't caught during inspection, countless statistical studies have show that people doing this type of inspection will pass a whopping 15% of the losers and fail 15% of perfectly good product. I know many won't believe this but I can assure that anyone who has been responsible for a manufacturing line won't argue with that error rate and all, it's been proven so many times by so many different studies that it's considered as cast in stone. Basically, hand inspection is nothing more than an assurance that the quality will NOT be acceptable to the general public.

Next up is a picture of the new style of rifling, which is done by an innovative derivative of EDM machining. Markush stated that this type of barrel appears to be overpolished or "shot out" and visually I think that is a very good description of how it looks. However, I can assure you that this rifling is NOT "shot out" in fact the accuracy I've seen from this type of rifiling is absolutely SUPERB. Problem is that IMO it's NOT appropriate for use with lead bullets until someone figures out how to get a lubricant to "wet out" on that near glass smooth surface.

Now, one final note. I've seen indications that S&W has been assembling some models using barrels that they had stored in their warehouse. From some recent posts it appears that this old stock of broach rifled barrels are now running out and I expect that we will see a large volume of posts concerning the new style rifling on models that just recently featured broached rifling.

For those who are concerned about this change, I'll make a few points.

First, it's actually uncommon to find lead bullets in commercial ammo today and the selections that remain on the market are basically very cheap range fodder. If you're going to carry a modern jacketed hollow point for defense, you may as well choose jacketed FMJ for your practice.

Second, take a look at the surface finish of the 2 methods. As you can see, it's rather obvious that the glass smooth ECM barrels will yield a bit more velocity with jacketed bullets than the broached rifling. I also expect that change in velocity will result in a change in the POI, so if you are going to carry jacketed SD ammo it makes good sense to shoot a similar load for practice.

Finally, accuracy and the new style of rifling. I have 2 revolvers that feature this type of rifling and I can assure that either one will group under 2 inches at 35 YARDS from a benchrest with a reflex sight. I know that for a fact because I've done in on multiple occasions. I'll also note that in both cases I'm shooting calibers that are shorter than what the revolvers are chambered for. In the case of my 620, it's 38 spl. because I just can't afford to shoot 357 Magnums. In the case of my 610, it's the 40 S&W and it's for the same reason, 10mm is "holy cow" expensive to my mind. So, even with the "bullet jump" that is supposed to degrade accuracy, I am seeing accuracy with this new style of rifling that is nothing short of superb. One day I'll mount that scope I used on the 620 on the 610 and try it out at 50 yards, when I do I expect that I'll see that it's capable of 1.5 inches or less. Bottomline, if you are good enough, these barrels can hit a 1/2 dollar at 50 yards.

 

[gr7070]

>>Note, I believe that the barrel blanks for our revolvers start out as a very long rifled blank, they are not cut to the final length and then bored and rifled.<<

I know that Ruger does them that way. I would suspect other do.

Sidestory:
My Ruger MKiii bbl *filled*'with lead on my first trip to the range. I sent it back, talked to the tech who it was assigned to before I sent it.

He asked if my gun was SS. It was. He figured it would be as Ruger had a couple others come in just like it.

The problem? They rifle one long rod then cut them to length and machine the remaining. This group of bbls were rifled and then when milled were turned backwards. Which means all their rifling was the wrong direction.

Ruger's MKiii rifling is uni-directional. I would have never thought it would matter, but apparently it causes them to lead like crazy instantly.

 

[Will Carry]

As for why, I've personally shot a 7/8 inch group at 50 YARDS with the 620 and believe that it's capable of grouping an inch or less at 100 YARDS in better hands than mine.

Scooter123? They ought to call you shooter 123! I can't make 7/8" group at 5 feet.........I know. I'll keep practicing

 

[scooter123]

Will, it took a fair bit of practice and some "cheats" for me to do that. First cheat was a handgun scope, there was a day when my vision tested and 20/10 but that was a good number of years ago. Second cheat was using a chair. The 50 yard indoor range I shoot at is quite thoughtful in providing chairs for us old farts. Third cheat was a good rigid benchrest, also thoughtfully provided for us old farts. Fourth cheat was a sandbag, the range thoughtfully keeps them stacked up on the prep bench. If butt stocks were legal on a modern handgun I'd have probably used on of those as well. About the only remaining skills required are a good clean release, something I'm still working on, and recoil management, also being worked on. To be honest, I don't think that I'm that good, I've simply learned how to use my "cheats" as well as I can.

Now, if you want to see some outstanding shooters who leave me in AWE, go to a Bullseye match sometime. They basically duplicate what I can do with my cheats but they do it with iron sights shooting with just one hand.

 

[Nemo288]

Has anyone tried the copper plated cast lead bullets in this rifling to see if the plated bullets perform more like jacketed or lubricated cast bullets?

Good suggestion. I plan on moving to plated lead for all
my lower (under 1Kfps) velocity shooting. We start talking
about moly coated copper plated lead I know we are in the 21st
century Not sure what Elmer and Skeeter would think.
I suspect they would give it a go.

---
Nemo

 

[Dale53]

I have two 625's (a 625-8 and a 625-6) that reputedly have "electro" rifling as well as my daily carry 642 and a recent buy Model 520 (pictured):

They ALL shoot extremely well with my cast bullets (all that I shoot in my guns).

They aren't 2" snubbies (except for the 642) but they all shoot so well I find it hard to believe it is the design. Either something is wrong with your ammo or something is wrong with your particular revolver. A conversation with Smith is definitely called for. I suggest a couple of pictures of the targets showing the tumbling would be in order.

Dale53

 

[scooter123]

Dale, what lube are you using on your cast bullets? IMO this may be a bit critical for these barrels when shooting lead. I've seen other posts that indicate that these barrels will work with cast bullets but do not know what type of lubrication was used.

What I do know is that just 50 rounds of Blazer LRN in my 620 produced enough leading in the barrel that 3 strokes with a solvent soaked patch left me with a shredded patch. Then it was an 8 hour ordeal of using a bronze bore brush soaked with a 50/50 solution of white vinegar and peroxide to get it reasonably clean. Since this solution produces some rather nasty toxic byproducts it's a procedure that I'd rather avoid. Since then I've only used jacketed or semi jacketed ammo.

BTW, post up the details of that 520 such as the dash number. From the looks it not only has a tensioned barrel but also has the DX front sight. If so, that's the first L frame I've seen with the interchangeable front sight, a feature that I think should be standard on every 6 inch 686 and perhaps the 4 inchers as well.

 

[MrChubbs]

Update: Another Smith & Wesson rep called me on Friday, the 27th. I asked on status of revolver I had shipped back for warranty repair. He said they would address the issue a.s.a.p. He also said he personally knew the gunsmith and would ask that he give my revolver some T.L.C.