Canted or Over-clocked S&W revolver barrels

9mmepiphany said:

It isn't so much the QC has improved but that manufacturing techniques have been modernized. Along with the closer tolerances being held with MIM parts, two-part barrels have eliminated canted barrels.

Since two-part barrels are screwed in separately from the barrel shroud, you don't run into the issue of a barrel which isn't clocked correctly. The barrel gap can be fitted without affecting the alignment of the sights

Click to expand...

ThomasT said:

That was what I was going to say. The two piece barrels have pretty much eliminated canted barrels. I have only had one gun with a canted barrel. An older 66-1 with 6" barrel. You could only tell it because the grooves cut in to the top of the barrel didn't quite line up with the front of the frame. But it was very minor. It didn't need any off center rear sight adjustment to shoot POA.

Click to expand...

It's logical to assume that two piece barrels would eliminate the problem, however..........
Here's my post from a different thread on the subject:
I wouldn't buy a performance center two piece barrel revolver without looking at it carefully from the muzzle first. In the last three years we've sent back 5 of them, one was a 19 Carry Comp. The barrel shrouds were not indexed properly so the front sights were off to the right. It's not obvious from the rear unless you're looking for it, but it's quite noticeable from the front. The strange thing is that there is a notch on the shroud and a nub on the frame (maybe the other way around) to index the shroud and as far as I can see there's no way to adjust the position. It seems to be a flaw in the machining, or more likely, the programming of the machine.
Anyway, my point was, um, uh, oh yeah, I remember, I don't recommend buying one sight-unseen.

Suppose that there is some proportion of new S&W revolvers that have a quality problem. Given that owners are human, how many will send the gun in (possible more than once) and get it fixed vs. just selling it? Repeat this N times. So the defective ones would become more visible than the ones that are correct, leading to an overestimate of the lack of quality control.

I don’t have an opinion about the issue—I was just curious about why there’d be one group that says the problem is nearly unheard of and another that says the opposite. Maybe just random factors are sufficient—if I bought two guns and both had a problem I’d assume it was widespread, but if it is a three percent thing you’d still expect one in a thousand customers to get two lemons in a row. Hard to estimate without a random sample.

9mmepiphany said:

It isn't so much the QC has improved but that manufacturing techniques have been modernized.

Click to expand...

Now you have me wondering how many of the S&W revolvers up to 1982, that had the pinned barrels, left the factories crooked?

I would imagine the old technique of drilling after assembly, likely with a fixture to hold the odd shape of a barrel and frame in position, might have worked out better than the more modern, screw together until it stops and put it into the box, method but that’s just a guess without any statistical data.

That said, “modern” doesn’t always equal better often but not always it means cheaper. In a perfect world it would be both…and this thread wouldn’t exist.

Over the past ten years or so I’ve sent back a few Smiths; three pre and one post-lock, a couple of Rugers; a Blackhawk and a Redhawk, and I have a Dan Wesson .22 that’s been giving me fits and been with a ‘smith for a quite a while now.

The only handgun brands that I have multiples of that I haven’t ever sent one back are Springfield (2 1911’s) Glock (4 9mm’s) and Colt (2 .38’s.). A small sample, but it does show that there may be an issue with just about any gun maker.

Stay safe.

I was looking over my revolvers. I believe the only one I have with a 2 piece barrel is my 3 inch model 60 Pro. A friend has a model 67 with a 2 piece barrel that shoots great

kidneyboy said:

17 or 18 manufactured from 1955 through 2015 or 2016. Not my first rodeo.

ETA - How many I have owned is irrelevant to my original post. I'm pointing out the fact that out of millions of revolvers manufactured very few have had issues. It is statistically unlikely to get a gun with issues from any manufacturer.

Click to expand...

What's alarming is the poor customer service on the ones that do have a problem, even PC guns.

Over torqued barrels can be more of an issue than simply sight alignment. The stresses caused by too much torque pressure can crack the barrel near the surfaces where the frame and barrel mate up. As I recall a shipment of S&W revolvers sold to a prison system on the east cost was returned to the factory as barrels cracked between the threads and shoulder of the barrel. When fired the barrels separated and flew down stream. The photo's show the issue rather clearly. Once over torqued (crush fit) the barrel needs to be replaced.

Mid-80s Model 17-4. Traded for it about ten years ago. It bugged me when I noticed it and I couldn't "un-see" it.

Smith and Wesson fixed it for about $80. Was too old to be under warranty.

Glad it good OP. Let us know how it shoots.