S&W Current State of Quality?

[Retired enthusiast]

Hello everyone. I'm a new member to this forum and I would like to relate a current experience with my model 340PD revolver. I had a law enforcement career of 33 years and have been retired for 7 years. I have always been a gun enthusiast and have had (5) S&W handguns. a model 39, two "J" frames, and a model 41 prior to buying a model 340PD. I have not had anything but good experience with all of them and they performed without problem. I did, however get a surprise with my 340PD which I bought new about two years prior to my retirement. The revolver was great and I really appreciated the light weight as I carried it daily for work. It shot fine with the +P .38 spl. ammo and was accurate for the type of weapon it was. I had never intended to use it with .357 magnum ammo. Since retiring, it sat in my drawer without use until about two months ago when a fellow retiree asked me to go shooting. I shot several of my pistols and brought by 340PD along. My friend asked if i had ever used .357 magnums in it and I replied, "No." He had brought his Python with him and asked if he could try the 340PD with some of his magnum cartridges. I asked if they were less than 120 gr., which they were. I gave him the 340 and he opened it and tried to load the cartridges. They wouldn't fit. They were too long.

I took the 340 back to the dealer where I got it and he called S&W and they said they would replace the cylinder with a magnum cylinder. I never sent it back and wondered if it may have some collector value in the future, which I really doubted. The barrel is marked with .357 S&W MAg." and has the caution for the bullet weight.

I wondered how this could happen. I also wondered if some of the rumors of S&W quality and quality control had some validity.

I would appreciate knowing if anyone else had a similar experience or if anyone has some commentary.

Thanks everyone.

 

[HAWKEYE10]

In my opinion it would have more value to send it back
and get it fixed. Don

 

[The Rabbi]

If you shot lots of .38 out of it and didnt clean the cylinder holes well then it won't chamber the longer cartridge. But it should be obvious from looking at it.
I personally think the 340pd is a waste: the lighter weight makes it harder to shoot without really making it easier to carry than the 442; the .357mag capability is a waste since I dont think the bullet is more effective out of the 2" barrel than a .38; and the price alone is a deterrent. BUt to each his own.
My experience with S&W quality is the guns have never been better. That doesn't mean there isn't a stinker here and there, since manufacturing invariably produces goofs. My 60 Pro arrives tomorrow.

 

[bassoneer]

If you shot lots of .38 out of it and didnt clean the cylinder holes well then it won't chamber the longer cartridge. But it should be obvious from looking at it.
I personally think the 340pd is a waste: the lighter weight makes it harder to shoot without really making it easier to carry than the 442; the .357mag capability is a waste since I dont think the bullet is more effective out of the 2" barrel than a .38; and the price alone is a deterrent. BUt to each his own.
My experience with S&W quality is the guns have never been better. That doesn't mean there isn't a stinker here and there, since manufacturing invariably produces goofs. My 60 Pro arrives tomorrow.

+1 on the .38 shells marking the inside of the cylinder...you should shine a light in the cylinder (if you havn't already) to make sure there isn't some crud build-up that is preventing the longer shells from chambering. This is very common and it could be that simple.

+1 on the S&W quality being good. I have several of their guns and they are all very nice.

I have heard the comment about the .357 vs .38 in lightweight snubbies before. I don't have enough experience or expertise to agree or disagree. I do have a 640-1 snubbie that is stainless steel and somewhat heavier, and I have it loaded with .357 Speer Gold Dot 135 grain short barrel rounds. I also have a 638 Airweight snubbie that is loaded with .38 +P Speer Gold Dot 135 grain short barrel rounds. Sometime in the spring, I plan to shoot a bunch of water jugs and determine what is the best round in each gun and judge penetration, expansion, recoil, etc. I'm sure I'll post something about it when I do that, but until then, I don't think you could go wrong with either round...just that .357 in a gun that light would probably hurt to shoot. If you like shooting the .38's, that's probably what I would use. Later, B

 

[bassoneer]

Also, I agree with Hawkeye10, if it has the wrong cylinder, I would send it back and get it replaced. B

 

[Sportsterguy]

I'll stick with the old sloppy S&W's. The only one I have ever sent back to the factory was my beloved 6" no dash 57 that went out of time from thousands of full house magnums.

 

[InTheWoods]

I think that although many of us may have issues with current design features and materials, the quality of the new guns is fine. The only two Smith revolvers that I have quality issues with are a couple of older blued ones (a 1950s vintage with terrible 'hitch' in the trigger and a 70's model with uneven polishing). One was bought new and the other in almost unfired condition. Can't think of any problems with the newer revolvers I have. I do have a 1911PD with a messed up slide serration, though.

 

[H Richard]

I would almost wager (along with what others have said) that the use of .38's exclusively in the past has built up GSR and must needs to be cleaned out. I bought years ago a Clymer "deleader" which is a reamer to clean out the gunk. A couple twists and all done. Otherwise, soak in good solvent and scrub with a brush.

 

[kennyb]

I would almost wager (along with what others have said) that the use of .38's exclusively in the past has built up GSR and must needs to be cleaned out. I bought years ago a Clymer "deleader" which is a reamer to clean out the gunk. A couple twists and all done. Otherwise, soak in good solvent and scrub with a brush.

+1 most likely if you look in the cylinder you will see a ring from shooting the shorter 38's...clean the ring out and your 357 round should fit...i haven't had any issues with the newer S&W handguns or EBR'S

 

[stevieboy]

I agree with the other posters about the possibility of cylinder rings caused by heavy use of .38s. A good scrubbing of the chambers might work wonders. As to the issue of quality, I have purchased several newer model Smiths in the last couple of years and the quality has been outstanding. My only issue -- minor -- is that there is a fair amount of blueing wear showing up on my blued 1911 that I purchased new earlier this year. The gun is owned purely as a shooter so I don't really mind all that much, but still, I find the wearing, at corners and edges, and in particular, where the barrel shroud and slide overlap the receiver, to be a little surprising. Mechanically, however, the gun is outstanding and I'm not thinking about sending it back.

 

[ken158]

I dont think quality has anything to do with the wrong cylinder being fitted when your gun was made, but also belive the others may be correct advising you to clean it good in case there is a 38 ring in that 357 cylinder. How embarrasing would that be to send it back and find out it was just dirty?

 

[tdan]

I've only had to send one gun back to the factory over the years.........surprisingly it was a 686-6 Performance Center gun. I had it back within 2 weeks properly repaired. Smith's superior customer service has your back in the event that you get a gun with issues. Personally, I'm sitting on the sidelines and watching with regards to this new 2-piece revolver barrel design. I'm watching with a raised eyebrow, this trend toward ultralight guns tailored for the concealed carry market with regards to shall we say..........structural integrity

 

[Stan Wilson]

Great Quality, they just wouldn't shoot!!

My gun shop owner got himself a Model 327 M&P R8 from the Performance Center. Eight shot 357 Mag.

I looked at it for about two minutes and had him order me a Model 327 TRR8, also from the Performance Center. Also an eight shot 357 Mag.

Both guns are beautiful (all in the eyes of the beholder) and well make. The only problem is that neither one of them would fire on a regular basis. The problem was that the firing pin was too short and not making good contact with the primers. When S&W was called they acknowledged the problem and sent two new, and longer, firing pins.

Seems to me that if they know there is a problem it should be fixed prior to shipping from the factory. Additionally, it is a high-end Performance Center product and I just don't think it is acceptable that a revolver, which is supposed to define reliability, won't work right out of the box.

That said, I love the gun a lot. So much so that I have ordered a new one to replace the original that was stolen from me last week.

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

Agree with the crud. I got a 27 as a legal fee that had been shot exclusively with .38's buy its owner and the first time I tried to chamber a .357 ir wouldn't chamber. cleaned the cylinder and no problem

 

[surveyor47]

I am NOT at all satisfied with current S&W quality. Why?

A S&W 57 Mountain Gun:
Out of time TWICE from the factory.
Trigger return spring failing to reset the trigger after repair.
Could not fire more than 100 rounds between various types of failure. Finally fixed by "the right" gunsmith at S&W. It took over a year to fix this gun.

A S&W 642-2:
Trigger locked up several times during firing- cylinder would not rotate. I evidently bent the trigger during firing. Extreme leading. S&W replaced the trigger, cylinder and recut the forcing cone. Havent fired it since repair. Total number of rounds fired through this gun - about 700.

I have seen 2 Performance Center S&W 27s lock up on the range. I have seen 2 more guns like that out of time right out of the box in the gun store.

I have purchased used pre-lock guns and found each to be delightlyfully reliable and accurate. I love the 3" S&W 65-5 round butt, most instinctive gun I have ever fired. It just hits where it points. The 640 38 Special just works, accurate and reliable. The 586 is reliable and accurate.

At this point, given the choice between a current manufacture S&W and Ruger, I will take the Ruger without hesitation. Given the choice between a Ruger and a pre-lock S&W, I will take the S&W every time.

 

[srgvaz]

Personally, I'm sitting on the sidelines and watching with regards to this new 2-piece revolver barrel design. I'm watching with a raised eyebrow, this trend toward ultralight guns tailored for the concealed carry market with regards to shall we say..........structural integrity

+1-- I have the 642-2 and that barrel sleeve looks questionable. I've seen a few posts with the cracked frame and it makes you wonder how much further there cost cutting measures will go. I hear the warranty is as good as their profit margin let's hope they don't start making polymer revolvers or half and half like the other guys.

---happy holidays---

 

[wellfedirishman]

I have a few recent vintage S&W revolvers (617-6 6 inch, 617-6 4 inch, 317) and all look and function fine. I cannot see any quality problems.

I also have a S&W 1911 SC which functions perfectly, in fact is more reliable then an original Colt 1911 Nat Match Gold Cup.

Cajunlawyer, j'aime bien votre ligne de signature...