Quality Control? Here's how I feel...

[dwever]

Okay, I take it back. Geez

 

[H Richard]

About 20 years ago, when the Ruger Red Hawk was new a friend and I were taking his new 44 mag Ruger out for a session. After less than one cylinder full the 6" barrel went downrange. Blew off even with the front of the frame. Naturally he contacted Ruger and they had him send it in. They replaced it with a new model, and one with the integral scope rings and the rings. They did it within less than 2 weeks. Really fast. We later found out there was a series of these barrels blowing off, seems the barrel fitter when fitting (crush fit) didn't like the way the barrel lined up on several, and gave them an extra yank on the tool. Stressed the threads on the barrel enough that with the pressure of the 44 mag they let loose.

Another friend has sent back to the factory a Colt Python for locking up and cylinder wouldn't turn at all.

They all make errors, we just have to be tolerant and have them fixed. Once fixed seldom have further problems.

 

[DeadWhiteGoose]

The thing I don't get is someone going to a gun store, inspecting a gun, buying that gun and then getting home and complaining because they bought a gun with a "canted" barrel. Am I missing something here?

Well as I said, this was my first handgun purchase. I did a lot of research and was mainly told if I could afford the S&W over the Ruged then that's what I should get. Being a novice, I assumed that meant a product I didn't need to worry about. It wasn't until after the purchase and reading up online that I really inspected what was going on. I have much better knowledge now then I did then, and yes, I was very excited. But as a brand new handgun buyer, I put most of my trust in my LGS and the Internet instead of myself ha.

 

[PA Reb]

The QC of S&W sucks, plain and simple. There's no way in this world a gun should leave the factory looking like the one the OP posted pictures of. I personally won't buy another new product made by them until they fix whatever it is that's wrong internally with the company. As far as "inspecting the gun before you buy it" goes, I agree with the OP. I would have never thought to look for something like this until I read about it here. I now have two with canted barrels although not near as severe as the OP's. I also can't believe the way 75% of you defend them and turn the blame on the buyer and their inspections. Wake up S&W - Horace and Daniel are probably rolling over in their graves in disgust !

 

[pharmer]

I just buy pre 2001 S&W revolvers. No canted barrels or any of the other symptoms of poor quality control and cost cutting measures.

And they don't cost anywhere near $2000 either! Regards 18DAI.

I bought my first S&W (Model 19-3 4") in 1977. Sent it back 3 times, "personal attn: FJ Longtin", a S&W service manager. Each time they reblued it, addressed the issue (I shot the snot out of it, it was my only handgun). They never did get the cant out of the barrel (which drove me nuts even though it didn't affect the accuracy). I still have a hard time figuring how they got the pin in with that barrel so far off. Sadly traded that gun long ago. And I paid $193 to Meltzer's in Garfield NJ for it, more than a week's take home for a NJ I&A PO (sort of a security guard with "authority") at the time. Joe

 

[JohnAC]

I bought my first S&W (Model 19-3 4") in 1977. Sent it back 3 times, "personal attn: FJ Longtin", a S&W service manager. Each time they reblued it, addressed the issue (I shot the snot out of it, it was my only handgun). They never did get the cant out of the barrel (which drove me nuts even though it didn't affect the accuracy). I still have a hard time figuring how they got the pin in with that barrel so far off. Sadly traded that gun long ago. And I paid $193 to Meltzer's in Garfield NJ for it, more than a week's take home for a NJ I&A PO (sort of a security guard with "authority") at the time. Joe

Exactly - People keep saying this barrel cant issue is only a problem on 'newer' guns. It ain't!

 

[turbo38gn]

Funny thread, love it when the same few take their shots at S&W and whine about the QC, canted barrels, ILocks and whatever they can construe as being wrong from their view. The QC is excellent, period. S&W has far more happy customers than customers with QC problems. I can't say how many new S&W 's I've bought the last 2 years, nor how many older guns from the old school era.. The funny thing is the only ones I've had trouble with are the older non lock ones... The beauty of our 1st amendment rights.

 

[old bear]

I don’t expect perfection but I do expect a good value for my hard earned dollars. Several of you have mentioned that the O/P’s problems were minor and not really much to worry about, as all were quick fixes. Yes, all of the problems with the exception of the canted barrel can easily be fixed, but why should the owner have to repair a new out of the box product?
I can’t help but believe most of you would not be so cavalier if this was your new car, and you had to refit the wheels and adjust the breaks, before you could drive it. With all do respect we are speaking about a dangerous and deadly weapon not a golf club or an electric drill.

Lastly the cheap price defense should never be accepted and in a perfect world never be used. The business adage of the 50’s – the 70’s, “we can make it right or we can make it affordable” is part of the problem we are now experiencing with so many jobs that have left our country.

I am now off my soap box and returning to being my normal cranky self. Have a goodnight all..

 

[SW357Addict]

The easiest way to tell poor quality in a S&W is if it has the Internal Lock. If it does, it should have never left the factory as it is definitely defective.

 

[bsms]

... I can’t help but believe most of you would not be so cavalier if this was your new car, and you had to refit the wheels and adjust the breaks, before you could drive it...

We are not discussing an unsafe product. But when I buy a car, I am not surprised if I have to add air to the tires, or have an unclean windshield.

Screws can work loose while shooting. A slightly canted barrel that shoots well doesn't bother me, but if it does, S&W will fix it for you. It comes down to how much folks are willing to spend. S&W can QC things down to a gnat's rear end, but it will add to the cost - and they already cost more than Ruger.

Let me ask this question: What company is building better for less? Ruger may, if you like their designs - and I like some, dislike others. Anyone else? Anyone?

If S&W sucks, then who is better? And what does better cost? And why don't you buy from those who are building better?

You can boast about a 1965 S&W, but I'd be willing to bet there are some 1965 vintage S&Ws floating around that are pretty questionable too - and no one is obligated to fix them for you.

 

[old bear]

bsma

But when I buy a car, I am not surprised if I have to add air to the tires, or have an unclean windshield.

I would be as it’s never happened to me, and if it did I would see that the problem was resolved before I accepted the car.

S&W can QC things down to a gnat's rear end, but it will add to the cost - and they already cost more than Ruger.

And they are well worth the extra price.

Let me ask this question: What company is building better for less?

No one.

If S&W sucks, then who is better?

For revolvers no one.

Understand I carried two Smith and Wesson revolvers to work daily for 27 years. I trusted my life to them, and I can’t think of any higher praise. I do believe that S&W is capable of reducing the number of revolvers with defects that leave the factory.

 

[stantheman86]

I had a like-new S&W .38 DA break-top with sloppy timing, the gun had maybe seen a handful of rounds and sat in someone's drawer for 100 years. It would skip a chamber once in a while in fast DA. So, a defect from 1887 was not noticed by me until 2009...........do you think S&W would have fixed it under warranty

I sold it at a loss to a collector who I told about the issues.

My point is, because of the internet it has become common to bash the new S&W revolvers for minor, inconsequential issues.You don't hear from the 1,000 people who are totally satisfied, but one person gets a new 686+ with a 1/16" cant in the barrel that doesn't affect function a bit, goes on every gun forum talking about what junk his new S&W is........ I will echo what was said above, cosmetic imperfection in mass produced S&W revolvers is not a new issue.

 

[Shooting4life]

If you want a revolver that is perfect when first taken out of the box then buy a freedom arms. That perfection is going to cost you $2400 though. If you want a revolver that is a great value for the money and every now and then one slips through with an issue that the company is completely ready to stand behind and fix then buy a smith at $800.

 

[Triggernosis]

My point is, because of the internet it has become common to bash the new S&W revolvers for minor, inconsequential issues.You don't hear from the 1,000 people who are totally satisfied, but one person gets a new 686+ with a 1/16" cant in the barrel that doesn't affect function a bit, goes on every gun forum talking about what junk his new S&W is........ I will echo what was said above, cosmetic imperfection in mass produced S&W revolvers is not a new issue.

Maybe Charter Arms is the same way....

 

[Photog]

I have to disagree with a lot of posters on this subject. If I am paying 800 bucks for a new gun, I expect it to have all the screws tight, the barrel put in straight and tested enough to make sure it works as it is supposed to.
I realize that mistakes slip through, but I would gladly pay another 100 bucks for a revolver if it went through one final check, by a human who knows something, to make sure all screws are tight, the barrel is straight, no scratches, etc. You could probably incur that much expense getting the gun to and from the factory, plus the fact that you have to do without your purchase for up to several weeks. If you have the problem when Smith and Wesson shuts down yearly for a period, that could increase by quite a bit.
I am bothered by the apathy when it concerns poor manufacturing, and/or crappy QC. I post regularly on a big bore rifle forum and the general concensus is that when you buy a rifle, for dangerous game that can kill you if something goes wrong, paying upwards of 2500 bucks for it, you must not shoot it before you pack it up, send it to a gunsmith to be worked on so it will feed properly, the stock won't crack when you shoot it, and other "tune up" items that need to be done. Add that additional 4-5 hundred dollars onto the purchase price, plus the up to 2 year wait for a "specialist in big bore rifles" to get it back to you. Seems the norm and perfactly normal, perfectly acceptable.
I have some questions for those who don't think a crooked barrel is wrong due to how it looks as long as it is fuctional. If you had a house built and the windows were at different levels in the same room, or crooked, your ceilings were 12 feet at one end of the room, sloping to 10 feet on the other, the tile was laid crooked, but it was perfectly able to be lived in and none of these items hurt the function, would you be happy and not complain?
And as far as it isn't a big deal how it looks as long as it functions, then why the need for ivory grips, fancy wood grips, nice checkering (when some nice deep gashes with a file would provide the same grip), engraving, nice bluing, etc.?

 

[ldp4570]

I just buy pre 2001 S&W revolvers. No canted barrels or any of the other symptoms of poor quality control and cost cutting measures.

And they don't cost anywhere near $2000 either! Regards 18DAI.

Same here!!!

 

[bsms]

Well, I don't want to pay an extra $100 for QC, when the large majority of guns made are fine, and those that are not get fixed. With both my Ruger and 686, the screws came loose while shooting. I tightened the strain screw in my 686, shot it, and it had backed out 1/4 turn in 100 rounds - so I put locktite on it. I have no idea how any QC inspector would catch that - unless they made the locktite at the factory. Then we would have folks complaining that S&W can't make a screw without needing to glue it in, and how the guns made 100 years ago never have a fault.

As for my house...don't look at the walls too close. Ever replace the floorboards? Want to guess how perfectly flat your floors and walls REALLY are?

I think this is the Golden Age of guns, for shooters. When I shopped for guns in my 20s, I lived in a small town. If I didn't want the 3 guns in the case, I could drive 100 miles and take a chance on finding something else. Or order based on a picture in a book. Ammo cost what the local dealers charged - no ordering from Midway back then! And don't get me started on trying to find grips for my revolver!

Need advice? Hmmm...this forum vs guys in a gun shop - who were no more reliable then than now. And in most states you can get a concealed carry permit. In four states, you can carry concealed without one!

This is an amazing time to be a shooter. And S&W is turning out well built guns, and fixing those that slip thru...

 

[blujax01]

I think that the guns from "the old days" that are being touted as typical of S&W's daily output are just the creme de la creme that survived. I mean if in 1950 there were 10,000 guns made and 5000 are still around, it stands to reason that the half that didn't survive may have failed because of the defects.

Is it safe to say that the guns sold today will be half gone in 50 years? The survivors will be the ones without defect and the next generation of gunners may look back on the early 21st Century as the era when S&W made the best revolvers.

 

[Titegroups]

Most people now days could give a rats **s on how a job is done. Just grab all the money you can and go. Craftsmanship is all but dead. Businesses don't care about employees and employees don't really care about what they turn out. Perfection is just a facade. I'm sure S&W employees do their job no differently than you do yours. I can imagine what QC stops from getting through that you don't see.

 

[PA Reb]

I think that the guns from "the old days" that are being touted as typical of S&W's daily output are just the creme de la creme that survived. I mean if in 1950 there were 10,000 guns made and 5000 are still around, it stands to reason that the half that didn't survive may have failed because of the defects.

Is it safe to say that the guns sold today will be half gone in 50 years? The survivors will be the ones without defect and the next generation of gunners may look back on the early 21st Century as the era when S&W made the best revolvers.

I've bought two new 629s in the past year, one with a 6" barrel and one with a 4" barrel. I then read about canted barrels on this forum so I checked to see if the two I bought had this QC problem (no, I didn't look before I bought them as I never expected something like this). Guess what - both have canted barrels and I believe two out of two is 100%. I suppose my two will be left out of the 21st centuries best revolvers made by S&W even though they cost over $1,400.00! No sense in beating a dead horse though!