Scandium revolvers & frame damage?

[danbrew]

I've been on a jihad for S&W revolvers in the last year or so and have been buying the Scandium frame guns and have noticed a bit of a "dig" on the front on the frame, near the yolk where the crane swings shut. My terminology probably sucks, but I've got loads of pictures – and you know what they say about pictures.

See the area underneath the barrel that looks "shaved". My question is this – is this normal/typical with the Scandium guns? I'm shooting commercial loads for the designed caliber – these are all, for the most part, big bore magnum guns. A little surprised, to be honest, that I'm getting what looks like unintended wear on the frames.

Original image: http://danbrew.smugmug.com/photos/633976705_b7qd8-O.jpg
329PD .44 Magnum.
Shot mostly 240g magnum rounds, a handful of > or < bullet weights. Probably less than 500 rounds.

Original image: http://danbrew.smugmug.com/photos/633976819_boFek-O.jpg
327 PC .357 Magnum
Shot less than 100 rds of 185g magnum rounds. About 100 .38 rounds. No more than 200 rounds.

Original image: http://danbrew.smugmug.com/photos/633976961_9yYV7-O.jpg
329 Night Guard .44 Magnum
Probably 500 rounds or so. Mostly 240g. Maybe 100 of those 500 were .44 Special loads.

Original image: http://danbrew.smugmug.com/photos/633977123_GmmSo-O.jpg
325 Night Guard .45 ACP
500 rounds. All 230g

Original image: http://danbrew.smugmug.com/photos/633977352_CFjN7-O.jpg
Model 37 from sometime in the 80s. Not a Scandium gun, instead an aluminum alloy airweight. Similar issues, but not nearly as pronounced as the Scandium guns. Although I've had this gun forever for almost 30 years, I haven't shot much through it – backup gun for years. Probably less than 200 rounds through it.

Original image: http://danbrew.smugmug.com/photos/633977467_hcZR7-O.jpg
A model 640 .357 stainless steel. Note that blast residue in the same area on this stainless steel frame. A few hundred rounds through this one. Had for years.

Original image: http://danbrew.smugmug.com/photos/633977606_GASTd-O.jpg
Model 629 stainless steel. Pretty much the same as above – about 500 rounds through this one. Mostly magnum rounds.

So… do I need to be worried about the wear on the Scandium guns? It seems pretty clear that this area is a "blast area" in S&W revolvers, yet it looks as if the Scandium (and Aluminum) versions don't stand up so well to the expected consequences of a .357, .44, or .45 rounds. What's up with that?

Comments pro/con, thoughts appreciated. ☺

 

[Old Navy]

I have told friends for years not to shoot the alloy guns any more then necessary for familiarization due to guns not designed or built for large amounts of shooting that a all steel gun will withstand.

Even steel frame guns in magnum calibers have had problems lasting with steady usage. I got rid of my 642 because of the same reason you mention and went eventually back to a G29 for CCW as much as I hated to make the switch back to the Glock. I always felt under gunned with the 642 and the G29 is in my favorite caliber, 10 mm, and I shoot it much better then the 642 and have twice the rounds in the gun. I do however hate chasing my brass from my automatics when at the range.

 

[s&wchad]

Mine show the same wear. Shoot all you want, it's backed by the lifetime warranty.

 

[Old Navy]

Mine show the same wear. Shoot all you want, it's backed by the lifetime warranty.

I guess that's one way to look at it, but once that starts the warranty repairs will start getting hard to get. Normal wear and tear, not mfg defect.

 

[Dale53]

The best I can tell, in spite of the fine pictures, is that you are merely experiencing FINISH wear. These revolvers have a rather tender finish on them. I have seen unsightly nicks in the finish in a gun shop (new revolvers that have been handled just a bit).

I don't think you are going to be troubled by actual wear with a reasonable number of the "heavy hitters" in the revolver.

I shoot target Wad cutters out of my 642 as the "regular" practice ammo, reserving the Plus P's for carry use (just shoot enough of the Plus P's to keep my hand in regarding recoil).

I reload and cast my own bullets so can easily adjust the loads to my needs.

I look at alloy frame guns as "shoot a little and carry a lot" compared to my "range babies", the 625's and 686's, etc. Alloy frames are wonderful for carry guns but less so for a lot of shooting. They are often less than comfortable to shoot and while I do NOT expect my alloy guns to fail, I tend to "shoot a little and carry a lot" with them as I mentioned.

FWIW
Dale53

 

[SW357Addict]

Don't worry about it. That is quite normal where the cylinder rod of the yoke slightly overlaps the frame. It seems to be caused by the tight fit that S&W achieves. It is just a small bit of the anodizing that has worn off. It will not cause any problems or issues and the only time you actually will see it is when you have the cylinder open. Several of my stainless guns have the same thing. Here is a picture of my all-stainless steel 625 JM showing the same area:

 

[magnum12pm]

I agree with Dale: I have a 327 PD, got it brand new. It got that same wear pattern on it before I ever fired a shot out of it, just from opening and closing the cylinder. I don't think it has anything to do with shooting the gun.

 

[Andy Griffith]

It is just finish wear, perfectly normal, and nothing to worry about.

I have some old M&P pre-war guns that this area is complete silver from the bluing loss, but no damage.

 

[ENH]

Mine all have the same wear also, shoot away all you want.

 

[44 special Dave]

Danbrew,
I just saw your thread, so I'm late chiming in. I have a 325sc that has the exact same "markings", "wear". I sent it back to the factory, thinking the frame was cracked.
I received the gun back unrepaired with a letter stating that two "engineers" looked at the gun and the mark was from wear, it was not cracked. when I received it back on further inspection there are sharp burrs on the extractor rod "gas ring". That ring engages the frame EXACTLY where the mark is in your photo as well as many others I've seen.
I started a thread on this a while back and included a photo of a brand new, unused gun with the same markings. I've tried to gently file down the burr on the ring on my 325sc.

Take Care
Dave

 

[pinkymingeo]

I've shot thousands of rounds in scandium alloy guns with zero wear problems. Far as I can tell, they'll last as long as, or longer than, steel revolvers. The scrape mark on the frame ahead of the yoke is perfectly normal, and hurts nothing.

 

[sar4937]

Well my gun definitely has more that a light scuffing of the finish, you can drag a toothpick across it and it is pounded in a bit. I was told it was normal three years ago by S&W, but to me it indicates forward movement of the yoke. It has not gotten any worse, but I feel if I would put it for sale some buyers would be put off by it. And in that case, it is devalued.

 

[RightWinger]

From reading these posts I would say there is 2 schools of thought on scandium revolvers, some people say they are to be carried a lot and shot little, and others say just go ahead and shoot the piss out of them and if they break let S&W deal with it. I would say unless you bought the gun as a collector piece, than go ahead and try your darnest to wear it out. The muscle memory and familiarization you will gain by religiously practicing with your carry piece is much more valuable than the gun itself. Ever known one of "those" people who always seem to have cool carry guns and all this "tactical" equipment but never use any of it to its full potential? Why buy a 135 dollar surefire flashlight if you only plan on using it to flip your breaker back on when the power goes out?? I have been accused of torturing and abusing a lot of my equipment, but I'll say this, good quality guns and equipment is made by companies who stand by their product and the majority of the time I have had great luck with warranty problems from reputable companies. regardless of what your opinion is, you can't go wrong by owning a scandium revolver......they're top notch!

 

[Trojansteel]

7 years later... has anyone experienced abnormal scandium frame wear or degradation?

 

[SLT223]

Mine show the same wear. Shoot all you want, it's backed by the lifetime warranty.

I may be mistaken, but I don't think that works so well for guns that are out of production, like the Night Guards.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

I may be mistaken, but I don't think that works so well for guns that are out of production, like the Night Guards.

What makes you say that? They replaced the cylinder on my 325NG, under warranty, a few years ago.

.

 

[Texas629]

After reading this thread I checked out a 340PD scandium .357 that's a veteran of many trips to the range for qualifications for almost 20 years and compared it to my newer 629. Same wear marks, locks up tight, lots of holster wear. It cut the web of my hand shooting .357's. Tough pistol by all accounts.

 

[dwever]

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-re...p-scandium-scaring-crimp-creep-made-easy.html

Another informal current thread that looks more deeply in to Scandium frames via Smith & Wesson and Buffalo Bore.

 

[BillyMagg]

Well my gun definitely has more that a light scuffing of the finish, you can drag a toothpick across it and it is pounded in a bit. I was told it was normal three years ago by S&W, but to me it indicates forward movement of the yoke. It has not gotten any worse, but I feel if I would put it for sale some buyers would be put off by it. And in that case, it is devalued.

You're right, it is "peening" of the scandium frame where the cylinder "hub" (my descriptive term) overlaps the frame. It is caused by these heavier recoiling calibers which slam the brass case into the recoil shield upon "ignition", pushing the whole frame rearward violently.

The proportionately heavier, and harder cylinder initially resists that rearward movement until the case mouth expands and seals against the front inner chamber. That cylinder initially impedes the same rearward travel of the yoke, because the greater mass of the cylinder supports the rear of the yoke.

This front "overlap" where you see the wear, then becomes the initial "bearing surface" as it contacts the face of the cylinder "hub. The forward ejector rod latches into a lug under the barrel, and the rear of the ejector rod latches and centers in the center of the recoil shield on the frame stabilizing the cylinder about its longitudinal axis.

That's why cylinder "end-shake" is important, that front bearing surface prevents harmful wear, what you are seeing is indeed wear, but like "flame cutting" of the top strap, it is self limiting.

As noted, neither carbon, nor stainless frames suffer more than finish wear, but the aluminum frame is slightly displaced depending on factors such as cylinder endshake, and fitment of the crane into the recesses on the frame.

 

[SLT223]

What makes you say that? They replaced the cylinder on my 325NG, under warranty, a few years ago.

.

I wonder if they still have those parts in stock? I mean at some point I imagine they run out of out-of-production parts.