Quality on new S&W revolvers?

[Hair Trigger]

You mean S&W has made revolvers since 1981????

No way. All of mine are older than that.

So are mine.

Several of you who commented basically said that if the gun I was looking at wasn't perfect then I should just pass on it and keep looking. Therein lies the problem! As best as I can tell, S&W doesn't make any perfect revolvers, at least not anymore.

There are plenty of older S&W's out there if you want something pretty to look at and shootable. I'd rather find something with honest wear defects (holster wear, hand-worn stocks, etc.) than a brand-new shiny gun with an off-center barrel or notchy action, from less-than-stellar QC.

 

[The Preacher]

Flame on; But I think 'Smith has just taken the last decade or so to perfect a Taurus...

 

[HOUSTON RICK]

Quality is overall very good, keeping with the times, some aspects are generally better (metallurgy) some aspects can be weaker (finish), but still very good. I would take a good deal on either old or new. We all have our preferences.

 

[Liquidm17]

This year I picked up a 340pd and 43c. Both seem flawless. Years ago I had a 340sc that developed an issues with the finish. S&W took care of everything perfectly.

 

[rbmac52]

I am sure the S&W revolvers of today are OK. But if you want "Swiss Watch" quality, you need to go back at least 50 years to get it.

 

[350mag]

I have both old and new and all work very well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rodfac]

Here's my list:

M-629, 3 years ago. Good to go, no issues, outstanding accuracy
M-69, 2 years ago. Good to go, no issues, outstanding accuracy
M-69, 1-1/2 years ago, Good to go, no issues, outstanding accuracy
M-637, 5 years ago, cylinder locked up at less than 100 rounds, S&W serviced it in less than two weeks, Good to go, no issues since. Good accuracy
M-63, 1 year ago, Cylinder locked up in DA mode, less than 100 rounds, S&W serviced it, replaced cylinder, hand, trigger and did a trigger job, in 5 months. Good to go since, good accuracy.
M&P .22 Compact 3 weeks ago, Good to go, lousy trigger but improving, no other issues, very reliable and with good/great accuracy.

S&W customer service has been outstanding but the quality control people are letting a lot of guns through that wouldn't have left the factory years ago. Each of the above were shipped and fixed on S&W's dime with polite knowledgeable people on the phone answering questions.

Best Regards, Rod

 

[smoothshooter]

Find out how to inspect a revolver the way S & W used o and look it over VERY CAREFULLY.

 

[balin]

I have several newer Smiths with no issues and shoot good. My older Smiths are good guns as well. But are definitely not more accurate.

 

[Nick B]

Bought a 629-6 that was made in December of 21 .
Fit and finish perfect.
Timing and lockup perfect.
Muzzle crown, forcing cone, and cylinder gap perfect.
Cylinder throats all at .429.5 .
Accuracy is excellent.
With all that said I would never buy a new one sight unseen.

 

[first-model]

With all that said I would never buy a new one sight unseen.

I wouldn't buy an old one sight unseen either. I've seen a few S&W's that look like a beaver gnawed on them before leaving the factory. The Bangor Punta years in particular, but examples can be found from every era that should never have left the factory.

By and large S&W makes great stuff ... but like every company, a few turds slip out too.

Mike

 

[comp124]

Model 19 Classic

I purchased a New Model 19 Classic from a pawn shop last year. Came in the blue box with all paperwork, was the second owner. Apart from the original owner trying to do work on the trigger for single action, I've had no problems what so ever.
I did send it back to S&W for repair, came back 3 months later free of charge. Shipping both ways was covered.

 

[Stephanie B]

I am sure the S&W revolvers of today are OK.

I'll just say that my experience has been otherwise and leave it at that.

 

[rbmac52]

Many people defend the new Smith & Wesson revolvers, but not me. I would never buy one. My newest gun is from the early 90s. Sorry to read of your troubles.

 

[357 shooter]

At this point I'm just trying to gauge if their QC has improved at all over the past 10 years or gotten worse. I'm perplexed why they seem unable or unwilling to fix the canted barrel issue.

Most of my Smiths are from the 1990s or early 2000s with the one exception of a 1981 66-1.

The newest Smith I've had experience with was a new 4" 586-8 "accidentally" won on auction in 2019. Quite a nice looking revolver is what I thought taking it out of the box.

The stamping group on the lower frame , "Made in USA" along with the 3 other lines was the weakest of any Smith or any other gun I ever owned.
Upon firing I had to move the rear sight way off center to the left to center things up. The SA pull had little bit of creep. Gun shot ok.

Shortly afterwards picked up a 4" 586-4 and first time out fired the best cylinder full at 50 yards in 30 years of revolver shooting. Had the 586-8 sold on consignment last year and actually made money on it , so a win - win!

Have a 6" 617-5 bought last year. It is from 2005 I believe. The fit , finish , lock up are among the best of any of my revolvers and it handily out shoots my older 4" 617-1. My most fired gun last year.

 

[StakeOut]

My newest production,a 2 1/2" 686-4, was made in 1995.
I looked over several newer production ones especially the 2.75" model 69 but all that I looked at in person didn't make the cut and definitely didn't meet my standard of acceptance.
Whoever was putting on the barrels needs retraining for starters.

 

[kaaskop49]

There have been periods of "iffy" QC. The late 70s/very early 80s come to mind. I had a 66 snub back then with the entire rear sight set-up loose in the box, a NIB model 65 with a bulged bbl, and a snub 64 whose bbl was canted several degrees. I've done OK recently with 3 lovely 627s, one Pro and 2 PCs. Other guns, J-frames, have required a small amount of work by a 'smith.

It's especially difficult for those of use who remember the days when the company turned out 1000s of plain vanilla service revolvers and they were overwhelmingly flawless. The dozens that I handled certainly were. Nowadays, inspection by the prospective buyer is paramount.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

 

[Dave686]

As someone that has worked in manufacturing and been a gun shooter/collector for over 50 years, I’m always amused by the “They were better back in the day" crowd.

They make the best revolvers in the world. You can buy cheaper than a S&W, but you can’t buy better. That’s not true of their semi-autos though.

However Customer Service and how a company handles a problem, if there is one, means a lot. For many years S&W was the Gold Standard all others were compared to when it came to customer service. They aren’t anymore, they are as bad as almost anyone you can name, because like all the others they just don’t care anymore. They will sell every gun that comes off the lines, just like Ruger, Glock, or anyone else. So customer support really doesn’t matter to the bean counters.

 

[Breaker]

I have a 640 pro series with the high visibility night sights and no internal lock that has become my favorite J frame. I also have a 4 inch 617 .22 that has the internal lock, which isn’t objectionable to me because it’s is not a carry gun. Both are all stainless and IMO well made.

 

[pctech]

They [S&W] make the best revolvers in the world. You can buy cheaper than a S&W, but you can’t buy better. That’s not true of their semi-autos though.

@Dave686

Do you really believe S&W still makes the best revolvers in the world?

I certainly don't. No offense, but your statement actually sounds laughable to me!

I'm pretty sure most everyone here would agree that Korth and Manurhin build a higher quality revolver than S&W, just as they should for 3-5x the price (or more) of a comparable S&W.

Colt is making some very nice double action revolvers again too. Aside from some minor production problems with early ones, their quality and consistency is a step or two above a modern S&W as well.

Even if you exclude Colt, Korth & Manurhin, I'm not convinced that S&W is still in a league above Ruger and Taurus. It seems that Ruger as a company has figured this out too, considering the MSRP for a basic stainless Ruger GP100 is now $1029 compared to MSRP of $893 for a comparable S&W 686. Gone are the days of Ruger being a lower cost alternative to S&W.

I do believe S&W is still CAPABLE of building quality revolvers, albeit without the fit and finish of their older ones. If you carefully look over enough of them you're bound to find some good ones among many that are subpar. Even when you do find a good one, be prepared for it to have a canted barrel/front sight and some minor finish issues.

As you said, Dave686, the main issues with S&W are their quality control and customer service. It used to be that if you were unlucky enough to get a bad gun at least you knew it would be fixed properly under warranty. Not any more! Many people are having to send guns in multiple times for the same issue. Nothing like adding insult to injury.