Has anyone ever bought a gun, and was happy with it, only to bring it home and under closer scrutiny found a horrible flaw? Well it happened to me. I bought a S&W 329 PD (I like guns that wake you up) and the yoke was cracked near the hinge. Plain as day, a silver crack on a black gun. In my blind "gotta have" for the gun, I never saw it. Til, I got home. I went crazy when I noticed it . I never even shot it and its broken. It is on its way to S&W right now. Luckly there is a Service center about 60 miles away from where I live. I still feel stupid, that in my gun fever, I missed it.
Has this ever happened to anyone?
If you enjoyed reading about "New gun, horrible flaw? Ever happen to you?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
August 19, 2003, 09:23 PM
You must be a young fellow. When S&W went down the tubes around 1980 it was almost certain that a S&W had problems .Many wouldn't work ,most had 2 or 3 major problems and many minor ones. I repaired many of these and used a check list to make sure I examined every part in the gun. Quality was so bad that the NRA made a special trip to S&W to talk about the problem. This is why many of us no longer consider S&W. It was very ,very sad to see an old company ,once the maker of the finest handguns in the world produce garbage.
Guy B. Meredith
August 19, 2003, 09:33 PM
Note that mete's message either applies to a specific time period or is tongue in cheek.
I am not familiar with past S&W revovlers, but the current top picks for competition are S&W and despite that the old timers and collectors pine after the revolvers of the past as being superior.
August 19, 2003, 10:40 PM
Can't speak for mete but Blueducks complete contempt of S/W's "standards" are not tongue in cheek, or limited to some past time period.
S/W does I'm sure make still make some fine guns now and again (more by chance and a great original design than any real quality control IMHO). But no, words been out a LONG time that it's a total crap shoot buying one. Might be great, might be junk. Better check one out real well before taking it home. Also better check it out even better if it comes back from service there....
August 19, 2003, 10:50 PM
Sad to say, Smith & Wesson has been infamous for its lack of quality control a long, long time.
August 19, 2003, 10:57 PM
Brand new Springfield Mil-Spec 45.
It shot about fifteen inches low and about 10 inches to the left out of the box.
According to the guys who wrote the instruction manual that came with the gun, the Mil-Spec was subjected to the most stingent QC ever. Somehow, this one slipped past them.
Yes. I could have shipped it back to SA to be repaired. But I didn't buy a new gun just to turn it around and send it back for repairs. I bought it so I could use it. It should have been done right in the first place.
If CZ can make a gun that is dead reliable out of the box and shoots POA with all the ammo I shoot through it (within about three inches elevation, dead on for windage), why can't Springfield?
To hell with them.
I got rid of it.
The pity is that they also make other guns that I would like to have, but the fact that their name is stamped on them makes me stay away.
August 19, 2003, 11:31 PM
Rossi Puma in .45 Colt. Found it at a gun show. New In Box, with all the papers, warrenty cards, and all. No sign that it had ever been fired. Nice tight gun. Passed all the pre-purchase tests with flying colors.
However once at the range I found it would not cycle factory ammo of any brand, none. My reloads were a maybe. The stock was cracked on the side of the tang, from top to bottom.
The forarm was also cracked.
There were several other defects that I could not have found with out taking it apart.
I paid a decent price for it and it was a legal private party purchace. So it got fixed.
Oh and not all early 80's S&W's were junk. My 25-5 is still going strong. Over 6000 rounds through it, untold dryfiring cycles, and NOTHING has broken.
It's just now beginning to show some wear. Big freekin deal.
Of course it's the newest one I own, so I can't say anything about the new ones. Well.......other than that stinkin lock and can speak on that.. :neener:
August 19, 2003, 11:46 PM
Yes, I'm afraid so. I bought a Model 19 at a gunshow last year. It appeared to be new or very lightly used. It had a pinned barrel, recessed cylinder, firing pin on the HAMMER, and the blueing was as perfect and deep as space. The box, tools, and manual looked new. I bought it quickly.
It was extremely accurate, but the cylinder would bind occasionally and I couldn't figure out why. A month or so ago it locked up while dry firing. I took it apart and the hammer stud fell out. Sent it to Cylinder and Slide to be repaired. I talked to the C&S smith a few days ago, and was shocked to learn all of the things wrong with it. Now, I'm paying C&S a lot of $ to make it right. Foolish perhaps, but the alternative was to scrap it, and buy another gun that might have some of the same issues. In the end, I hope to end up with a model 19 that is completely in spec, and has features that S&W can't or won't produce today. I'll find out next month.....:(
August 20, 2003, 12:07 AM
I guess (touches wood repeatedly!!) .. I have been lucky ...... my S&W M27-2 is approx 1977, and so pretty much ''pre-downhill phase'' .... seems good ... all others have so far not shown up as ''dogs'' ..... but I do know how the ''purchase fever'' can or could blur the observer's eye, enough to miss something wrong.
Closest maybe (well, vaguely) was my SRH with 9 1/2 tube not so long ago .... gun was fine but the store fitted the Millet Red Dot at same time .... after some days it turned out front glass had developed a crack ... which got worse .... guess over torqued fittings. Yesterday tho got that fixed with replacement sight.
Sad about the M19 tho ...... sounds expensive.:(
August 20, 2003, 12:25 AM
On the bright side... I've got a 1955 Target model .45acp, and a Model 66 .357/.38 snubby that are awesome...which is part of the reason I still have great faith in the overall quality of the older S&W's and want my Model 19 to work. I can't judge the new ones - I don't own one. But every brand has their lemons...just some more than others.
August 20, 2003, 12:27 AM
I bought a New 629 Mtn gun in 2001 and it had the rear sight cut in frame machined about 30 degrees off of flat and the sights jacked up and bent to bring to point of impact, until you tried to adjust them! I was pissed and brought it back to find a new in box 1989 629 Mtn revolver had come into the store. I traded thyem straight across with the store picking up the tax and license fees. They thought I was nuts:evil: I love this gun it is what I thought I was paying for in the first place , very sweet gun! I bought one of the last Model 25 Target's in early 80's only to find the crane to frame fit was not machined properly. I traded that gun back to dealer for something else. Alll this said I love my S&W's . I WOULD buy a 396, 296, or 360, IF I could find a good one. I think I'd have to pick thru alot of them to find one that was decent.:banghead:
August 20, 2003, 03:16 AM
I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
S&W's quality control "procedures" have slipped dramatically since the early 1990s, and it's apparently that they continue to do so.
August 20, 2003, 05:23 AM
New gun, horrible flaw? Ever happen to you?
When I was REALLY a green-pea, I met a range master with a Detonics. He raved and raved about it. You would have thought it made him breakfast in the morning.
4 years later, I'm in Prescott, AZ and wander into a gun store. Lo and Behold! A Detonics! Barely haggled and bought it for $500 in about 80% condition with only one mag. Took it home and started researching them and found out mine was one of the first 300 made. Wow! Really exciting!
Took it to the range.
Wouldn't fire more than 2 rounds without a malf. Fail to feed. Fail to extract. Stovepipe. When I finally got through the mag, the slide wouldn't lock back. And the groups were the size of Rosie O’Donnell (sp??)--at 7 yards.
Then I took it to the gun show to try and find some more mags. Found out that the early Detonics were all semi-custom and the mags were hand fitted. Couldn't find ONE mag that would even slide into the well, including some actual Detonics mags I found. Bought 3 anyway for $60 each (OEM).
Sent gun and mags to a semi-amateur 1911 gunsmith I knew (because I wasn't really interested in dropping a bunch more money to get a pro to work it over). Four months later, he threw up his hands, sent it back and told me not to pay him.
Finally sold it at a gun show for $450 with the mags. Almost felt bad about selling some one such a dog, but they were really excited about finding a Detonics that cheap. I couldn't bring myself to burst their bubble.
August 20, 2003, 07:35 AM
YES. Ruger GP-100, 3 inch barrel, barrel was a good .060" to the right of the frame. "gun barrel straight", not canted, but off that much. thankfully I didn't try to fire it before I noticed; Ruger was glad too, they replaced the gun...
August 20, 2003, 07:43 AM
that I ever bought were S&W's.
One, a new model 13 in 1981 bears out what others have said about that era in S&W history. It failed to operate after less than 500 .357 magnums.
The next (and last new S&W for me) was a new model 625 in 1999.
It failed to carry-up on two chambers, suffered light strikes on three chambers from new (with the strain screw tight), the hammer would 'push-off' from S.A. after 200 rounds, and it had those horrible 'torque stress' rings where the barrel seats against the frame, as well as rings (or concentric depressions) at two other points along the barrel.:fire:
S&W was a great revolver manufacturer once and may be so once again, but their Q.C. has certainly been spotty at times.:eek:
August 20, 2003, 08:32 AM
I have bought five S&W's produced from 2001-2, the 4" 625 having the hammer-lock-zit, and a twenty-year-old 'new' safe queen 6.5" M24. That last one - the 'old' one - was rough as could be, trigger wise. Additionally, it would lock up on occasion. I cleaned & lubed it initially - and several more times, to no avail. Finally, I took the lockworks out - yuck! The inside of the frame had rough milling marks and spattered brass (brazing rod residue? I think the pins are brazed.). Some small Arkansas soft stoning, buffing with a Foredom, and Flitz polishing yielded a fine revolver.
Three of the newer five, 625, 625MG, and 629MG, had light 'action' jobs and trigger return spring replacements 'out of the box' - they are all back to OEM springs now for reliability. My untouched 696 is now just as smooth as the doctored ones - and the 296 is as well. Additionally, it shoots POA at 12 yd with Blazer 200gr GDJHP .44 S&W Specials. The 696 had a scrunched ejector spring - not an operational problem, just found during dissassembl/cleaning - S&W happily sent a new one. The five newer ones have otherwise been smooth & flawless. Thank goodness they don't make them like they used to, if my '83 vintage is an indicator.
My other revolvers are Rugers: Old Army, .454 SRH (My first DA revolver!), and Bisleys/BH's - all worked fine out of the box. My wife's CZ-75B was dead on with Blazers out of the box - appears to be able to work forever without cleaning. My Ruger MKII is better than me. My 24" SS Puma M1892 .45 Colt works flawlessly through hundreds of rounds of LSWC/LRNFP reloads between cleanings - my best ever lever gun. My Marlin 1897 Cowboy, the prettiest firearm I have ever owned, was like that M24 - rough internal milling made the action horrible (No, I didn't 'try it' at the dealer's!). It left me after <2months. My other Marlins worked well out of the box. My CZ-452 .22's were/are fantastic - as was/is my Savage 93FVSS. The brand new Kahr/A.O. 1927 Thompson was a joke - poorly milled bolt ejected the extractor every three rounds - back to them for over 6 wks and they returned it nasty and loose - I sold it.
The moral is simple - everyone can produce a 'bad one' every now and then. Most marques assume we the consumer to be the final QC inspection - do so at the 'dealer's'! I feel that the likelyhood of S&W doing so is low at worst - and they will send you a mailer and have it picked up after a call to their 800 #. Your 329PD could have been dropped, the cylinder 'popped out' , etc. They will replace it - you'll love that revolver - just don't feed it too many .44 Maggies - YOU won't like it!
Yes, I'll buy more S&W's - with that ugo hammer-lock-zit!
August 20, 2003, 08:55 AM
Bought a used Ruger MkII Govt, shot a few mags out of it and discovered that the barrel could rotate in the reciever when heated by the sun. Sent it back to Ruger and am awaiting the arrival of its replacement. :fire:
August 20, 2003, 11:53 AM
"The moral is simple - everyone can produce a 'bad one' every now and then."
Unfortunately S&W has been producing FAR more than than a bad one "every now and then."
Not long ago I was at a gunshow where, in the span of about 20 minutes, I found FIVE new-in-box S&Ws that had barrels that were incorrectly installed -- the front sights weren't vertical.
If the company can't get something as basic as getting the barrel screwed in straight correct, why should we be surprised if they're letting far worse stuff out?
August 20, 2003, 12:25 PM
I'm a huge S&W fan but my newest S&W revolver was built in 1990 (a 4" 17-6) and the fit, finish, and function are great.
I'm wanting one of the new 66 F Comps, but after reading about the QC problems of the newer Smiths I won't buy one sight unseen over the net. I guess I'll have to find one locally so I can check it out thoroughly.
August 20, 2003, 01:07 PM
Yep! Bought a new Ruger Bisley 45 L.C. Got it home & noticed the grip frame wasn't properly fitted. After 5 or 6 shots the cylinder didn't want to rotate when I tried to cock the hammer. Took it back to the dealer who sent it back to Ruger. Got it back in 3 weeks, grip frame was fine, Ruger replaced the pawl and "repaired" the barrel ( bbl./ cyl. gap?) Anyhoo it works great now!
August 20, 2003, 01:25 PM
Not sure this counts as truly horrible, but when I bought my Kimber .45 when they first became popular in the 90's, I had a lot of trouble getting factory rounds to chamber properly without the slide stopping about 1/8" out of battery. I could get handloads to chamber if I cranked my taper crimp down really tight, but even then, I'd usually have a couple of failure-to-feeds in the course of an IPSC match. I finally took the thing to a gunsmith, and it turned out that the chamber was a shade tighter than SAAMI specs. A trip on the reamer took care of this problem for good, fortunately.
August 20, 2003, 03:29 PM
I must be one lucky Son Of a Gun (no pun intended). I have 20 S&W revolvers and Semi-autos (from .22 to .45) and with the exception of a 624 that had a horrible double action trigger, I have no complaints about any of them. I bought my first in 1972, and they are mix of new and used.
Maybe the fact that I've been so lucky with the S&Ws explains why I never win the Lottery.
August 20, 2003, 08:37 PM
My experiance with S&W has been similar to your's. I've purchased over a dozen S&W's in the last three years. About half new, one from 1933, and the rest from 1975 --> 1985. They have all proven to be great, with one exception, and that was due to a previous owner's abuse, not factory quality control. The folks at C&S were able to fix it right up.
BTW: most of these were bought sight unseen.
Must be a lot of Bad Kharma out there, or maybe folks who have had bad experiances are just more vocal that some of us.
August 21, 2003, 01:44 AM
Happily, no. You've got good eyes. BTW, did you drop it off or send it via your dealer?
August 21, 2003, 04:13 AM
Somewhere around 1979-1982 the Dallas PD armorer was a friend of mine. DPD issued 4" 64's. He told me that on average, out of 100 guns, 60 or so wouldn't work out of the box. The guys there could make about half of those work and on average, 30 went right back to S&W because they could not fix them. Thats really sad. Other than a few that had triggers that felt that they had been fitted with ball peen hammers and aquarium gravel, most of mine have been just fine though. But, that did scare me off for awhile...
August 21, 2003, 10:28 AM
I had a mod 19 from the Bangor Punta era. It was junk. If you held it at an angle you could see ripples on the frame flats where the milling machine chattered during manufacture. Internals were a mess. I bought a new mod 60 when they first came out. On second shot the hammer broke off.
August 21, 2003, 12:45 PM
All but one of my Smiths are from the 90s. They all work great. My 629 has an incredible 2.5# SA trigger! My 625 is the sweetest shooting 45 this side of a 1911. Maybe they were all made on Tuesday or Wednesday? Maybe I just don't know what to look for? Ignorance is bliss!
My F Comp 66 will be released from the 10 day holding tank next week!
August 21, 2003, 01:27 PM
I've always bought Colt revolvers, mostly D frames, one Anaconda. I had great luck with them until about 1999, then they went really downhill. I never bought a S&W because of loyalty. But, I always heard they were the best DA revolvers around. Now, I break down buy one and now everyone says there crap, unless your lucky. That's why I stopped buying Colts they were too hit and miss. Is there a good revolver out of the box? I recently bought a Ruger SP-101 3" and love it. Is Ruger "it" in the revolver market nowdays unless you get lucky with another manufacturer?
I just think its wrong that a company can sell a 700.00 gun and no really checks it out before it is put in a box. Furthermore alot of these guns you all are talking about for home protection, they have a greater responsablity to see that they work and work well. If I buy a $35.00 ladder at Home Depot its been checked at the factory, its going to work. They know if we make a ladder its important that it works so some one does not get hurt. It should at least be the same for a firearm maker. American gun makers need to show some pride in what they make, like they used to. When an old Detective Special or old Smith was a work of art not just another gun thrown into a box and shipped off.
August 21, 2003, 04:29 PM
Springfield Milspec .38 Super. Got it home, check the functionality thoroughly and found that when the safey was engaged the trigger still released the hammer. There's QC for you. Dumped it to someone who wanted it after repairs.
My only smith is a customized 686-1 with bull barrel, full underlug, trigger work, etc. It's been very reliable so far, built around 87 from what I can tell. I have two rugers (blackhawk and redhawk) that lack the 686's finesse but are incrediblt sturdy.
August 21, 2003, 08:31 PM
I have not bought a new S&W for a good while, but I never got one that didn't work right.
I think many of the makers now, especially of model 1911 clones, adopt the same policy Ford did with gas tanks. "Make it fast and cheap and if anyone complains we'll fix it." Only trouble with the gas tanks was that the owners didn't complain, they just died.
Maybe one day a piece of cheap junk will fail and someone will be killed, and his family will sue big time. Then maybe the makers will take notice.
August 22, 2003, 01:10 AM
Sent it to Cylinder and Slide to be repaired.
I took my 84' Buick to Firestone auto and they told me it needed over $800 worth of work. I was shocked to find out all the problems it had. I said, "just an oil change will do for now." I drove it for 4 years after that until I sold it. No problems. Maybe you should have sent it to S&W??? :rolleyes:
August 23, 2003, 08:56 PM
Next time you have a problem with a used S&W revolver, try sending it to S&W for a "tune up." For around $50 they will repair just about anything that is wrong short of replacing things like barrels etc
I have had a number of guns worked on and the work has been prompt and of good quality with a single exception, which they were quick to make right.
There is not much better deal around.... suggest you give it a try.
es, I'm afraid so. I bought a Model 19 at a gunshow last year. It appeared to be new or very lightly used. It had a pinned barrel, recessed cylinder, firing pin on the HAMMER, and the blueing was as perfect and deep as space. The box, tools, and manual looked new. I bought it quickly.
It was extremely accurate, but the cylinder would bind occasionally and I couldn't figure out why. A month or so ago it locked up while dry firing. I took it apart and the hammer stud fell out. Sent it to Cylinder and Slide to be repaired. I talked to the C&S smith a few days ago, and was shocked to learn all of the things wrong with it. Now, I'm paying C&S a lot of $ to make it right. Foolish perhaps, but the alternative was to scrap it, and buy another gun that might have some of the same issues. In the end, I hope to end up with a model 19 that is completely in spec, and has features that S&W can't or won't produce today. I'll find out next month.....
August 24, 2003, 01:06 PM
I love reading these stories where someone buys a lemon, complains about the decline of ethics in American manufacturing, and then proceeds to pawn said lemon off on some other unsuspecting sucker.
August 24, 2003, 02:41 PM
So who is doing that in this thread? I have never sold a faulty gun to anyone. I think that is bad ethics and I didn't manufacture the gun. I think we should hold makers of products that could get you killed to a higher standard. That gun should have never left the factory in that condition. But on the other hand I should have been more careful when I bought it, they didn't do there quality control but neither did I. I'm not going to pawn my gun onto anyone. I should get it back on Wednesday, if its not fixed to my satisfaction it will keep going back til they get it right. If I have to send it back again, what that will do is insure that I never buy another gun from Smith and Wesson again. This is the first gun that I ever bought that was broken from the get go. So over all, I feel lucky considering the number of firearms I have bought over the last 15 years. If Americans can't make guns correctly anymore, then how is our manufacturing sector going to compete with the rest of the world in making anything?
I do think it is kinda punkish to profess your glee in someone buying a lemon, Craigz.
August 24, 2003, 08:06 PM
it's a wonder there's only a handful of naysayers on this post.:rolleyes:
The fact is, any revolver from Smith or Ruger is highly likely to be a a sure-thing, right out of the box. Now, if you go back and read the posts complaining about S&W, just insert the brand-name Taurus instead. That's the real-world state of quality-control in their revolver manufacturing.
August 24, 2003, 09:23 PM
That is a point VictorLouis, just not a good one ;)
It's true, "I've never had friend that had car trouble with a Ferrari, but know several who have had trouble with Ford's, therefore Ferrari's are more reliable than Fords" is faulty logic.
But in S/W case were comparing apples to apples not apples to "Tauri". Current manufacture guns should have an advantage of comparing "brand new guns" vs. "Old possibly worn out guns made on out dated machiens". Now HONESTLY how many people you know who are going around saying "Wow I'd never buy an old S/W they just were not made very well, these new guns are great though!!!" versus the opposite opinion???
Standards have dropped considerably over the years to either keep prices down or increase profit. Anyone who honestly denies this is living in a dream world. Sure some good guns get out nowdays and some bad ones escaped in the old days but on a whole someone would have to be blind to to not notice the differecne.
What Ruger and Taurus do or have done is no concern to me. What bothers me is the constant "lowering of the bar" from a company we know from personal experience can do better. Frankly I'm less disturbed by the occasional "how the heck did that get outa here" gun (which is going to happen to any company) versus the "It meets our current standard" response to shoddy work.
August 25, 2003, 01:39 AM
"I've never had friend that had car trouble with a Ferrari, but know several who have had trouble with Ford's, therefore Ferrari's are more reliable than Fords" is faulty logic.
Well, in this case, S&W is Ford, whereas Korth might be Ferrari.:confused: In any case, the analogy is meaningless, as Smith has arguably produced the greatest number of revolvers, yet I've seen the least amount of poor examples of their product. I don't care whether you're referring to used guns, or new ones.
But in S/W case were comparing apples to apples not apples to "Tauri". Current manufacture guns should have an advantage of comparing "brand new guns" vs. "Old possibly worn out guns made on out dated machiens".
Now that I can make sense of.:) Yes, new Taurus guns are the only brand and product every one of which is hand-examined before being put out for display at one of my favorite shops. The owner grew weary of paying out of pocket to send back a handful of the ones he sold every month for warranty attention. Unlike S&W, they don't eat the shipping.
Now HONESTLY how many people you know who are going around saying "Wow I'd never buy an old S/W they just were not made very well, these new guns are great though!!!" versus the opposite opinion???
Now there's something that I can't contend with!:D Seriously though, I love old Model A's, and early Corvette
s. Heck, I'd drive one myself if I could afford the thing, and had a secure place to park it. Does that mean new Vette's or horrible, and they don't make them like they used to? Call me strange, but I LIKE stainless steel, and don't mind MIM parts. However, I could do without the lock-zit.
Standards have dropped considerably over the years to either keep prices down or increase profit. Anyone who honestly denies this is living in a dream world.
If you're talking about the lament of hand-polishing, and hot-dip blueing, I'm all with you. But, don't try and convince me that the modern alloys, and CNC machining that allowed for the likes of the .500 Magnum to come to market is a bad thing.
Sure some good guns get out nowdays and some bad ones escaped in the old days but on a whole someone would have to be blind to to not notice the difference.
Well, I wasn't of 'gun-age' during the height of the Bangor-Punta era, but I recall reading a lot of similar whining in that vein at that time.:o
"It meets our current standard" response to shoddy work.
Give me an example of that? You mean a gun with a flash gap of say.006", and you're displeased because it's not.003"? Sorry, but I thing anything less than .008" is acceptable, functionally anyway. Or, do you mean a 14lb "lawyer-trigger" necessitated by today's legal climate? Not happy because they didn't take the time to put it at 8lbs.? Sorry, but I've fondled enough NIB guns from the days of yesteryear that have also left me wanting. So, I can't get all lathered up over the supposed sad state of affairs in quality-control at S&W.
August 25, 2003, 02:56 AM
Give me an example of that? You mean a gun with a flash gap of say.006", and you're displeased because it's not.003"?
Well sent two guns in for work on the gap recently so that is a timely question. Was told by "Kate" who assured me that she spoke directly with "John" that a gap of .004 on one side and .010" on the other was perfectly "in spec" with them. You didn't mention your standards for cylinder run out but did state thatbut I thing anything less than .008" is acceptable, that means that you don't agree with S/W .004"-.010" specs either. Glad to have you aboard Vic :D
Second gun they sent back after working on would not even accept a .0025 gauge. Had I just loaded it up and depended on it as 70+% of people would I could have gotten into serious trouble. Didn't mention what your minimum was but I'm betting were in agreement on this not being right as well.
Lawyer triggers??? Still kinda looking around for the case law that sites a 15# trigger is ok, but a 12# is not. Perhaps it was the same suit that made "Vito" polish the heck out of my rebound slide during a trigger job and leave the area it rides on looking like a gravel road. Last $87 of mine he'll ever get. Came back with a bent yoke as well making a couple of cylinders out of line. I'm not saying it was bent there as it may have been bad when I bought it, but the spitting could have injured another shooter on the line. A basic inspection when performing any kind of work would not be asking too much.
No it's not about polished blued finishes, walnut stocks and little old men producing works of art. Nor is it about the "agreement" or S/W haters because of it. You'll find the original poster was not asking why "They don;t make 'em like they used too". He recieved a broken gun for a large sum of money. Go up and down this forum and you will find tons of complaints reagrding whats going on at S/W. People can stick there heads in the sand or deal with it.
Some have the idea that all complaints against S/W are some sort of Hillary Clinton like "right wing consipracy". Not sure how I can convince folks otherwise but I didn't buy 9 of the darn things profess my love for them over a few years at the S/W forum and TFL, just to set up some alternative agenda. I'm neither bright nor patient enough for that kind of planning ;)
August 25, 2003, 09:45 AM
Including my five new S&W's, I know of over thirty new recent model S&W purchases - friends and range-acquaintances. My previously mentioned scrunched ejector spring, again, only found upon dissassembly, and a 4" 625 with some cosmetic defect pin-holes in the ejector shroud (He looked it over in the dealer's - they were hard to find!) were the only faults I tabulated. Interestingly, S&W erred upon it's return - they put a 5" barrel on it! Another return yielded a perfect 4" 625 - with, I believe, chamfered charge holes and a better action than my 4"-er had new. Interestingly, through use, most S&W's lose the 'lawyer'-trigger. I will buy more new S&W's and Rugers - and avoid Tauri, but that is my opinion.
August 25, 2003, 10:36 AM
its a S&W 332 and ive got about 500-600 rounds at least through it now and it still seems to go bang every time and it's pretty darn accurate for a snubby too
but i'm glad to hear these stories cause now i'm more aware
i wonder whether you're apt to get more junk at gunshows because it's an opprtunity for unscrupulous ones to purchase what they know full well is junk and at a junk price, only to pawn them off on an ususpecting or, better yet, uneducated buyer
if i brought a gun like that home from my local gunshop, i'd be back in there making them take the thing back so fast their cylinders would spin
(please excuse corny gun pun)
August 25, 2003, 02:30 PM
Last SW581 I bought had an off-center barrel.
Looked at SW638 at the store, found metal shaving all over the inside of the gun! Yuck!
August 25, 2003, 03:43 PM
As I've noted time and time again in various S&W threads, I remember when S&W introduced the CNC machinery with great pomp & circumstance, saying that this would allow them to match the masterful handwork fitting of the old guns with the price benefits of modern computer controlled machinery.
After finding 5 NIB revolvers with barrels that were incorrectly installed, not to mention finding guns with sideplate gaps that look as if they were cut by a drunken monkey, and various other problems, I keep wondering when we're going to finally see the benefits from this CNC machinery...
Oh, silly me. We ARE seeing the benefits of the machinery.
Obviously that was a couple million dollars well spent.
If you enjoyed reading about "New gun, horrible flaw? Ever happen to you?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!