s&w warranty isn't bullet proof

[JNewell]

I believe that story completely, and anyone who followed Bill Ruger over the years will, too. These are the folks who welded a rod into the original M77 barrel just ahead of the chamber and tried to blow up the action (they didn't succeed). Another exploit was filling the cylinders of an Old Army with Bullseye (filling...Bullseye!) and plugging the barrel to see if it would blow up (it didn't).

I don't think it's realistic to expect other manufacturers to have that kind of zeal, though, and I'm not sure Ruger would do the same today.

Great anecdote, thank you for sharing that. WBR got tons of sh!t in his latter years but he was really a giant.

I don't know about Smith & Wesson replacing a gun due to over pressure ammo, but I do know about Ruger!!

A number of years ago while shooting a metallic silhouette match in Florida, I observed a friend's Super Blackhawk blow up!! The topstrap was broken and bent up at a 90 degree angle. The fired chamber in the ciylinder was gone and the chambers on each side of it detonated, blowing them apart also. Pieces of the blown out cylinder hit the shooter next to my friend breaking bones in his hand.

My friend called Ruger the next day. He was put on hold by the customer service agent. The next thing he heard was a rather gruff, yet polite sounding voice telling him to pack up the gun and any ammo left out of the box he had been shooting and ship it to them in Southport. Wishing to keep track of the proceedings for his records, my friend asked, "To who am I speaking?" The voice said, "This is Bill Ruger. I want to know what it took to blow that gun up!!"

Two weeks later, my friend had a special courier knocking at his door. The man had a package and a letter from Southport, Connecticut. In the box was a brand new Ruger Super Blackhawk. The letter from Mr. Ruger stated that the ammo that was sent with the blown up gun had been disassembled and analyzed. It seemed that the company that had re-manufactured the reloads loaded 22 grains of Hercules Bullseye powder in the .44 Magnum casing behind a 240 JHP instead of 22 grains of Hercules 2400 powder---an amazing quaduple overload! This load was 4 times the pressure of a Ruger proof load!

After a number of incidents like this, the careless ammo remanufacturer was closed down. Sturm, Ruger and Co ate the cost of that Super Blackhawk to satify Bill Ruger's curiosity!!

 

[Sansho]

^Neat story!

 

[RussC]

I was thinking their cost would be a lot less... They sell to LEO's at $335 all day long, and I can't imagine they are giving guns away.

Regardless, $334 is a good price, and they may ship you one immediately which is faster than finding one would be. I'd take the gun they offer and see if you can get your old one back too, but they will want to keep it for a number of reasons.

Cost will be ball park $250 - $275 if markup is similar to Kahr.

When I had trouble with my Kahr CM9 I was offered a Kahr PM9 all black which retailed for more than $700 for $400.
I was told it was cost.

It stinks the gun blew up but you must ask yourself how much is my time worth.

Yes, you can battle it out with Federal ammo spend hours on the phone going back and forth or pay the $250 - $275 cost for a Shield and move on.

No one wants to flush money but you have to ask yourself how much is my time worth to battle this out with Federal ammo with no guarantee they will not turn the blame back on Smith and Wesson.

If neither company is willing to take responsibility is it worth small claims court for the offer at cost S&W is offering.

I can see why S&W is not willing to replace the weapon and eat the cost. How do they know that spent casing was not a reload?

Tossing money at a problem only creates bigger problems.

Look at Walmart. Word is out on the street they will take back anything and sure enough you have people shoplift merchandise just to turn around and return it for a store credit.

I commend S&W for offering a compromise for something they believe was not their fault but ammo related when the weapon blew up.

S&W by taking that position will not be faced with folks blowing up guns by their own negligence with the attitude that S&W will bail me out.

Russ

 

[jimjc]

Sorry for your loss...but happy for no loss of limbs....S&W has always been fair from all the accounts I have heard of...they have gone out of their way to make it right...but some have spent considerable time to get issues resolved...

That said few companies will ever admit to being at fault for liability reasons...They don`t know all the circumstances and someone could have been hurt in the incident and just not related to them at this point...most lawyer up quickly..

As stated they say they have concluded it`s not the guns fault I would ask for them to produce the tests that prove it`s not the guns fault...They have to have them...If they refuse I would ask to have all you personal property returned...all the pieces including the bullet...

I would never accept a remedy of a gun at cost...These guns are made to fire bullets at much higher pressures than factory rounds and they need to prove that this particular round was way out of spec....If they refuse and it was me I would contact a lawyer....it would get resolved quickly....These gun companys are enjoying massive profits these days...and they are selling tons of guns and quality control is suffering in some cases they need to prove it didn`t in your case..Jim

 

[Rastoff]

I'm reminded of a sign I saw once that said:
"How about we refund your money, send you a new one at no charge,
close the store and have the manager shot. Would that be satisfactory?"

I've been in several stores where my answer to that would be an emphatic YES!

They can't just keep it. It still belongs to him, he paid for it. They'll either have to return the original one to him, or compensate him for it.

Yeah, their "compensation" is selling him another gun well below retail. If he accepts that "offer" they would not have to send the gun back. If he doesn't accept it, then they should send it back.

Either way, I'm curious to see if they send it back. I would want it in my hands as I pursued Federal.

 

[ginzo]

This is not on the same scale, but I called S&W this morning about a "probable" issue and the people I talked to were very accommodating. On the other hand, I have had contact with federal and they did make my issue right. (It was an ammo issue). Although the e-mails did get tense for a moment.

 

[jgreiner]

I piggybacked on another thread here but need some visibility so I get some feedback.

My shield blew up on the 4th time I shot it in December.
I used factory Federal 40 cal. hydra shock hollow points.
I do not have any reloads of any caliber.

Just received a letter from Smith is saying that the gun is not at fault but willing to sell me another one at cost.

This is the easiest path for them to close the case.

As they are the ones with the gun, the casing, the experts and the opinions, I think they should make my case for me to Federal.

Anyone else ever have to go thru this?

Let me guess what happened. You fired a round that had too little powder...and the round lodged in the barrel. Not realizing it, you fired another round...which impacted the first, and it cause the gun to blow up.

This is most likely what happened, and is not a rare occurrence. I have seen it a number of times before (to other people).

If this is the case, the ammo manufacturer is liable.

 

[jgreiner]

Thanks for the replys.

I think the title is appropriate. They are not warranting bullets albeit correct that I am disappointed. I had several old school S&W die hards tell me they would replace it. Maybe I was expecting more than I should.

I do not think they are responsible if it was the ammo. I do wish that since they have the gun, the casing, the lab techs with the opinion it was the bullet that they would contact Federal themselves.
They are leaving this at my doorstep not Federals.


All I have is a letter and heresay. Not much of an argument and I would think they have the contacts and the clout to somehow send me the gun without additional cost.

To those that think I am angry. Yes, a little. I waited 8 months for a shield, paid over MSRP, owned it 3 days and waited 10 weeks to hear back. Maybe it wouldn't be a big deal to you but I was pretty ticked off when it blew up in my hand.

BTW, I didn't go around showing pictures to everyone back in December. I waited until I heard back that I am on the hook for this.
Again, not a s&w hater but it wasn't my fault either. I came to the forums looking for advise as to how to navigate thru this.

If I offended anyone. Sorry but I am not taking back the title. If the owners want, they can delete it.

If the gun failed due to a flaw with the gun itself, S&W would replace it. Youi blaming S&W for this failure is like blaming Ford for your F-150 rear ending another vehicle. The gun wasn't the issue. The AMMO is. You have to go after the culprit, not the innocent party.

 

[HotRoderX]

One thing I wanted to add is I think the OP is questioning why Smith and Wesson is blaming the ammo. Really he has no way to validate it was a ammo issue. He basically has to take Smith and Wesson's word on it was a ammo issue. When he contact's Federal what happens if they say the gun was at fault? Smith and Wesson said there not at fault Federal might say the same thing. Then he left with no gun, no money, and a ton of wasted time.




I am going to go against the grain on this one.

I would say the op got average customer service. Them offering to replace the gun at there cost is nothing special. They know they have to do something to keep the customer happy other wise the customer will look else where.

I say poor customer service would have been them just shipping it back with a letter stating ammo issue.

I say Great Customer service would be them taking the time to contact Federal about the issue. I think both companies could learn a lot working together.

The bottom line is Kaboom's happen its how the gun handle's it that truly matter's. I am a little stunned there not more willing to help out my self.

I would be upset also first the OP jumped thought hoops to get the product. Once he finally did and waited week's and week's for Smith and Wesson to do there thing checking it out. They contact him back saying not our issue. The most the OP can hope for from federal is maybe the MSRP.

The OP's only recourse is to pay Smith and Wesson for another gun or contact Federal hope they make it right after another month or more wait.

I was in the OP's shoes I just get the gun back contact federal. Give other manufacture's such as Ruger and Springfield a close look. I am not saying there customer service would be any better, but hopefully I never have to contact it either.

 

[RobsTV]

Change the thread title, and take the good advice offered here. No gun manufacturer warrants/guarantees their guns against ammunition defects. If in fact that is what S&W said, that it was the ammo and not the gun, then have them send you a letter to that effect, along with your handgun, and talk to Federal.

Sorry but that is not correct.

As posted by others, Ruger does take care of customers, regardless of who is at fault.

Also, even USA made Hi-Point has a no questions asked, any owner, any reason, lifetime warranty. They have replaced many weapons blown apart by testers trying to see how hard or far they could push them.

So it is not a stretch to think that S&W might simply replace a damaged firearm. It is easy to pass the buck and blame the other guy. It is also easy to simply eat the cost and make the customer happy, something Ruger and Hi-Point always do.

With 3 different S&W new purchases here in 2012, all three have been back for warranty repairs, one of them 3 times including cylinder and frame replacement. Things seem to have gone down hill. The funny thing is, after reading reports of issues with the Shield 40, I still bought it knowing full well ahead of time that it might need to be sent back for mag drop. It did, but didn't expect 2 other severe defects needing done at the same time (I only count the Shield as 1 repair since all three defects were repaired under 1 ticket). Issues like these usually lead to a pass the buck mentality in customer service, and I would not be pleased with S&W if I was the original poster.

 

[baccusboy]

People go on and on about how great S&W's lifetime warranty is.

All it takes is selling the company again to turn that into a non-lifetime thing, or a "you need the receipt" ala Kel-Tec thing.

 

[Jyezahn]

Sorry but that is not correct.

As posted by others, Ruger does take care of customers, regardless of who is at fault.

Also, even USA made Hi-Point has a no questions asked, any owner, any reason, lifetime warranty. No questions asked, any reason? Maybe I should buy a Hi-Point and claim it died in a boating accident. (That way I'll have two!) Will they replace it then? They have replaced many weapons blown apart by testers trying to see how hard or far they could push them.

So it is not a stretch to think that S&W might simply replace a damaged firearm. I could see this if it was a damaged firearm from a large customer such as the LAPD or FBI. But not from just any average joe. It is easy to pass the buck and blame the other guy. It is also easy to simply eat the cost and make the customer happy, something Ruger and Hi-Point always do. I sincerely doubt they ALWAYS eat the cost to make the customer happy. That's not good business no matter how you look at it.

With 3 different S&W new purchases here in 2012, all three have been back for warranty repairs, one of them 3 times including cylinder and frame replacement. Things seem to have gone down hill. The funny thing is, after reading reports of issues with the Shield 40, I still bought it knowing full well ahead of time that it might need to be sent back for mag drop. It did, but didn't expect 2 other severe defects needing done at the same time (I only count the Shield as 1 repair since all three defects were repaired under 1 ticket). Issues like these usually lead to a pass the buck mentality in customer service, and I would not be pleased with S&W if I was the original poster.

Bad customer service would be S&W sending the gun back and saying, "you damaged it, it'll cost this much to repair or replace".

Good customer service is S&W examining their pistol, letting you know that it wasn't a defect in their gun, but rather the ammo that you used, and offering you a replacement at cost.

The unicorn of customer service is S&W sending you a brand new one, no questions asked, letting you fire the same ammo through the new one, and then replacing THAT one again with no questions asked, and keep on doing it until you decide to switch ammo.

Say you buy a new car, go get the oil changed, and the shop overfills your oil, thus over-pressurizing your engine and causing a breakdown. Should the car manufacturer eat the cost of that engine and provide you with a new one, when they determine the shop overfilled it? Nope. Should the manufacturer contact the shop to discuss costs? Nope. That's on the owner. Same principle, but with an overpowered round.

 

[L2R]

First, let me say thank you to all. This has been enlightening.

2nd, let me say that in my original post, I was not trying to slam Federal or Smith. If you read it again, I tried to give enough info to explain the sitiuation. My reason for the post was to ask for advise as to how to proceed with S&W and Federal hoping someone had been thru this before. My intent wasn't to get them but I did want a fair shake if the gun or ammo was proven to be at fault.

3rd, for those I felt I shouldn't have upset at Smith, well so be it. $335 dollars is a a lot to me but it was more the disappointment that prompted the ill feelings that bled thru my post. I waited a long time and looks like I will wait a while longer.


Had I known this would richocett into a crime scene investigation, I would have been more thorough. I did leave out some details as they didn't seem important to get advise on how to best negotiate with a big company.

So, as this has turned into a who did what, I hope to provide full disclosure and an update.

1. There are a few more bullets in another box. So, it stands to reason that some 18 years ago, I shot some and compiled what was left in same box and piled the rest somewhere else or shot it: however, same company, Federal and a Federal headstamp was what separated from the casing. So there is no other ammo company involved. I have never reloaded, or had a friend or family member reload. In the spirit of full disclosure, I have been buying the press and supplies to reload and will be starting 9mm's this week-end if nothing changing before then. (these are 40 cals) Until now, reloads simply did not exist in my world unless by accident. The lot number is now in doubt now that I took time to look more closely because of the mixture of Federal headstamps.

2. I did not, could not send Federal the casing as it was welded into the gun. Either it went to one or the other. I honestly figured that the shield would probably be the culprit as it was brand new. I didn't want to dig it out fearing I would do more damage and might cloud the investigation.

3. S&W's letter did not say 100% that it was not the gun. It said they 'felt it was probably an overpressured bullet. I could well imagine that if I had sent Federal the gun/bullet, they might have replied the same saying they 'felt' the gun was probably at fault.

I contacted S&W yesterday. They are polite. I can have my gun back if I want to ship it myself to Federal and deal with them. But until / or unless I return it to Smith, I cannot get another one from them at dealer cost. They were not willing to ship it to Federal or help any more other than to replace it at cost. I agreed and gave them a cc #. She then told me that it might be a couple of weeks for a few months. She had no way to know and she could not just walk out there and get one off the line.

4. I have 29, Federal 155 grain bullets and 1 original box where 20 reside. I have measured them from 1.117 to 1.130. My lovely wife bought me a dillon, digital scale for Christmas. I unpacked it last night and measured the weights. They are in 2 groups so guessing the bullets are different weights which further confirms at least 2 boxes. They group together nothing with a 3 -6 grain variance that would suggest a double charge. I listed 229.5 to 231.4 in one group and 253.4 to 255.8 in the other group. Of the highest weighted ones, they were among the shortest, being around 1.118. I know that would increase the pressure but that doesn't seem to be a lot to me. Those who reload would better know that.

Now, I have pictures and a spreadsheet so I will try to contact Federal tomorrow. Searching the internet doesn't seem to bode well for contacting them. Guessing it will be a rerun of what happened with S&W.

Thanks for tuning in.

 

[Rastoff]

Thanks L2R. I appreciate the info. I hope you get another gun quickly.

I know we live on opposite coasts, but you're welcome to come shoot my gun anytime.

 

[HotRoderX]

Thanks for the follow up post L2R if I was in your shoes knowing what you posted. I would get the new gun back and sale it immediately. Maybe they will get it back to you soon enough you can recoup some of your lost money. In the mean time I would look at other manufactures small pocket sized guns.

One thing I would have done different thought was asked for a written detailed explanation of there findings. That way I could understand why they where faulting the ammo and not the gun. As long as they didn't have anything to hide I cant see this being a issue. I am sure it would have taken some time to decypher. I would still wanna know there finding's that lead to there conclusion.

The reason I am saying this is we have seen 2 Smith and Wesson 40cal shields blow up both using factor loads with in the past 6 months. How often do we here about guns going kaboom? Normally when we do its because the person used handload's. Having two factor rounds double charged from different manufactures is almost unheard of in such a short period of time. I am not saying its impossible only saying its suspicious. Special when you take into consideration everything we know.

What we know is the shield is a very small single stack 40cal gun. The 40 cal is known to be a extremely high pressure round. I think its reasonable to say when you put a 40cal round thought a minimalist gun like the shield. Then tolerances must be kept exact standards. Things like the slide thickness, hardness, chamber support, etc must be almost perfect. That way the gun can physically stand up to the stresses the round places on it.

This lead's me to wonder if there is some kinda design issue with the gun. I am not saying there is only the possibility it could be there. This issue would be a lot like Glock's where the gun had to meet upper end of tolerances on the MIM extractor. While meeting the lower tolerances in the cut out for the extractor. Thus causing a rare situation where the extractor would drag and cause stove pipe's or unusual ejection pattern's. I know about the issue because I helped another forum trouble shoot it. We came to find out buying a specific aftermarket extractor would fix the issue in most cases. A few member's polished there extractor's with great success. As far as I know even thought we contacted Glock about this many times they never acknowledged the issue. Instead they continued to clam a recoil spring issue was at fault.

Company's can and do make mistakes and time will tell if thats true of the shield. It took almost 2 year's for the Glock extractor issue to become well known on Gen 4 Model's.

Sorry for any toes I have stepped on in this post. I am still a Smith and Wesson fan just there are to many unanswered questions with this topic.

 

[Bikemobile]

It seems like their cost to replace it is a small price to pay to maintain a good product reputation. Even if it was the ammo's fault this might live on as "Shields blow up." Or "s&w doesnt honor their warranty for shields that blow up."

They treated me right on my shield that dropped mags. Fixed it right the first time.

 

[JNewell]

Thanks for the follow-up. In today's litigation-riddled world I'm half-surprised that S&W feels they can send back an "unsafe" gun to a consumer, but I'm glad they will. I do think Federal will probably take care of it and wish you the best - please let us know and good luck.

 

[Deadeye Dick]

I have a similar issue. I purchased a set of 33" BJ-Badditch tires for my Ford Raptor and one of the darned things blew out on the highway causing my truck to roll over. Thankfully I was not hurt but my Ford was totaled. Do you think Ford owes me a new truck? NOT!

If S&W says that the gun was not at fault then it was the ammo by default. It's up to you to go after Federal not S&W. You can request the evidence back and a copy of any of their findings from S&W but don't expect S&W to fight your battle for you.

 

[N4KVE]

Back in 1970 when "muscle cars" were in their prime, the local zone reps for GM, Ford, & Chrysler would hang out at the local drag strip taking pictures of their company's cars going down the track. So when a 428 Cobra Jet Mustang was towed to the local Ford dealer with a blown rear end, the zone rep would show the owner of the car the photo's of the car on the starting line. They would then tell the customer his warranty was void as he raced the car. The owner would reply "what do you think people who buy these cars do with them. Use them to go to to Church". It was abuse & all the big 3 did the same thing. Race that Hemi Cuda, & you had no guarantee. Even if the wipers broke. In any business, if they feel the product was abused, even by accident, you're on your own. GARY

 

[agksimon]

Not here to bash Federal either. had I left out who, then everyone would have assumed or asked about reloads. I have the box, even with the old, red sticky price tag with the LGS's imprint on it. No chance of it being reloads, it was bought at my local store.

You may not want to Bash Federal, but I will: Using my M&P9c, I did a 25 yard benchrest test of two groups of five rounds each, with Federal, Winchester, S&B, PMC and a few others, all 115 grain FMJ. All but Federal averaged about 2 1/2" to 3", where Federal averaged 6" or more. There were no malfunctions with any of the ammo. These were chronographed while shooting and the Federal had by far, the highest standard deviation, which is understandable, considering it had the largest groups.

Tried the same test on another day with my M&P22 and my Ruger 22/45 pistols using CCI Mini-Mags in 36 grain HP and 40 grain solids and also Federal Champion 36 grain HP.
Results as follows:
CCI Mini-Mag 36 grain HP: 1-2" groups with stock sights on both guns.
CCI Mini-Mags 40 grain solid point: 2-3" groups with both guns.
Federal Champion 36 grain HP: 5-6" groups with both guns.

The M&P22 had a tendancy to short cycle the Federal Champion. It would eject the spent round, but the slide wouldn't go back far enough to allow the next round to come up and the slide would close on an empty chamber. (My daughter had the same problem with her Walther P-22.)
My conclusion is that Federals are very inconsistant in their loadings. I will pay more and use CCI for all my rimfire needs, as I shoot bullseye, IDPA and steel challenge and it needs to be dependable.
Your experiences with Federals and opinion may vary from mine.