Report on J-frame quality control

[Veker]

I've only had a 19 and a 10 in the past. They were perfect. I missed having a S&W so I bought a m360 snub a few days ago. Well right away I noticed I was not able to place a .38 case into 1 of the 5 cylinder holes. I thought ***? As I examined it more, I found that the extractor star was not cut right and it wasnt allowing me to load that spot in the cylinder. I took a small file and lightly filed that spot on the star until it allowed a .38 to drop into place. I touched it up with a gun blue pen and oiled it afterwards. It's fine now. But I can't believe they allowed it to leave the factory that way.

It frustrates me that my 2 old prelock smiths were perfect. I buy a brand new one and it doesn't function correctly out of the box. I probably will only be looking for prelocks in the future.

 

[DanWales]

I know that isn't funny really. But I hit the floor with that photo.

I honestly bit on the new caliber. Of course when I saw the photo it was all I could do to maintain some type of control.

Edmo you do have a unique pistol. I have the el cheapo stock 640. I'm a lucky man I love the pistol and love it a little more after some smoothing and trigger work. Kept the DA up over 9 has shot everything I have tried.

 

[susieqz]

i'm new to s&s.
i just got a cosmetically beat up 15-4 with the best trigger i've ever seen.
everything works fine.
if QC is now bad, what is the cut off date?
mine was built in 1980.
i'll probably get another but i want a good gun.
so, please tell me what years to avoid?

 

[muddocktor]

The wife and I got a 60-15 about 1 1/2 years ago for her for Christmas and that pistol didn't have any bad problems with it. The lockup was tight, the barrel not overclocked and no endshake issues. It was dirty as heck internally and the rebound slide did have a sharp edge that was cutting a very shallow groove in the frame metal (mainly just making for extra drag while pulling the trigger). Once I used a polish stone on the rebound slide and cleaned it up internally, that pistol has a trigger that will stack up with any earlier made Smith I own. With 38 Specials that gun is an absolute pleasure to shoot. 357 Mags are a handful though, but that's more due to the light weight of the gun than anything else.

And I just got me a 627 Pro yesterday and I don't see any QC problems with it so far. I will be going to the range today to give it a run. I know it's not a J frame, but it is newly made and I doubt that Smith differentiates their QC practices based on frame size. If they slack on one frame size they will slack on all. And while some people have been getting poorly made guns, my luck has been good with the new ones.

 

[turbo38gn]

i'm new to s&s.
i just got a cosmetically beat up 15-4 with the best trigger i've ever seen.
everything works fine.
if QC is now bad, what is the cut off date?
mine was built in 1980.
i'll probably get another but i want a good gun.
so, please tell me what years to avoid?

There is no "cut off date" ... they are all good. The new guns are fine, in many ways better. I own both old and new models, many of them. I have not found anything in the new that equates to poor QC any more than the older guns had. I own older prelock guns that I have found to have a few problems... it happens, get over it and forget about the guys trying to turn this into a "new S&W guns " suck world... it just ain't so!!

 

[SmokinLoon]

The 66-8 I recently bought had a barrel that was not properly aligned. Granted, it wasn't off by much (I posted a photo in a different thread), but it was off enough for me to notice and be annoyed by it. I called S&W and without hesitation they paid to ship it back, paid to have a gunsmith (?) properly align the barrel to the frame, and then paid to ship it back to me. One would like to think that if S&W would simply take a wee bit more time to double check something so minor that they'd earn (save) money.

I just bought a Model 69 a few days ago and the barrel and frame are aligned **almost** perfectly.

Of my 4 new revolvers (1/2013 and 3/2016), and the Shield 9 (2016), I'm not seeing or have not had any issues save for the minor barrel-frame alignment for the 66-8. No cracked frames, no forcing cone issues, no sloppy cylinder lock up, etc. The Shield 9 is as good as it gets, too.

 

[Edmo]

I know that isn't funny really. But I hit the floor with that photo....

Edmo you do have a unique pistol...

Hopefully it is getting close to being a "finished" product.

Now that it is on it's fourth trip back I find the whole saga somewhat entertaining. They have me wondering what is the next issue I'll find when they return it.

OBTW, on the third trip back when they replaced the barrel (for the second time), they didn't even attempt to etch the caliber on the barrel. Fortunately now the bullets hit where the sights aim... Ultimately, that's what I really want!

Below is the evolution of my poor 640's barrel etchings...

Edmo

Original barrel - New in the Box - YIKES!!

Second barrel - Nicely Done

Third barrel - Slick Side

 

[slabside2]

As Long as we keep lining up at the door to buy an inferior product they will keep producing an inferior product. What reason do they have to chance anything?

 

[eb07]

I would like to share this because I just bought a Smith 442-1 manufactured in Feb 2016

The forcing cone is a consistent thickness but it had a lot of machine marks as noted by the op. The barrel seems to be correct but I can't tell if it isn't. It locks up great and it has no slop when pushing on the cylinder from the right.

Just thought I would share. Please see photos I took before I ever fired a round ( just dry fire). I apologize for the quality, it is the best I could get with the phone but you can clearly see the rough edges/shavings/marks on the forcing cone.

They are actual size and large so you can save and zoom in if you wish.