scooter123
Member
I have a new model 620 purchased on April 15. Yesterday I got hit by some fragments 2 times when shooting 357 Magnums (Federal 158 gr JSP) at my local indoor range. Since it is only a 60 foot range it could heve been crap thow back from the bullet trap, however I was hitting COM on the target so the rounds should not have been impacting the trap too far off center. B/C gap on this revolver measures at 0.005 inch and headshake is essentially zero. Examination of the forcing cone shows no indication of any shaved lead or uneven wear to the forcing cone.
Because this is a new purchase, I had their revolver expert take a look at the gun. If the cylinder is held back firmly while cocking the gun, timing on the cylinder is a tiny bit "late". However, if the cylinder is not held back, the timing is 100% perfect. He did not think this was an issue worth sending the gun back to Smith for correction. I am inclined to agree however thought I should ask for a second opinion.
BTW, the timing was checked with the cylinder unloaded and there is some "slop" in the movement of the extracter star, which is NOT pinned for rotation as was done on my model 67. Frankly, I think this was a mistake on Smith's part because relying on the flat machined on the ejector rod to reference rotation allows the star too much movement. I suspect that this movement is the reason why the timing is late when the cylinder is held back.
So, should I be concerned about this or am I worrying over nothing? My thought is that it's probably a non-issue.
Because this is a new purchase, I had their revolver expert take a look at the gun. If the cylinder is held back firmly while cocking the gun, timing on the cylinder is a tiny bit "late". However, if the cylinder is not held back, the timing is 100% perfect. He did not think this was an issue worth sending the gun back to Smith for correction. I am inclined to agree however thought I should ask for a second opinion.
BTW, the timing was checked with the cylinder unloaded and there is some "slop" in the movement of the extracter star, which is NOT pinned for rotation as was done on my model 67. Frankly, I think this was a mistake on Smith's part because relying on the flat machined on the ejector rod to reference rotation allows the star too much movement. I suspect that this movement is the reason why the timing is late when the cylinder is held back.
So, should I be concerned about this or am I worrying over nothing? My thought is that it's probably a non-issue.