So you want to by a S&W???

Status
Not open for further replies.

Big Gay Al

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
498
Location
Mason, MI, USA
Better look REAL close, specially if you're buying new.

News Observer said:
Published: Mar 18, 2006 12:30 AM
Modified: Mar 18, 2006 03:33 AM



State wants faulty guns replaced
Correction officers are experiencing serious problems with several Smith & Wesson models

Dan Kane, Staff Writer
State prison officials want gunmaker Smith & Wesson to replace hundreds of revolvers after dozens failed to shoot and the barrels broke off of others upon firing in training exercises.
The company has witnessed the problems firsthand. Last month, three company representatives met with state prison officials at a shooting range near Smithfield to test about three dozen revolvers.

Four of the revolvers didn't fire when a state weapons instructor pulled the trigger. The cylinder that holds the ammunition jammed on two revolvers. Then, the barrel broke off as the instructor fired a different model with a longer barrel, just as 14 others had in practice shoots dating back to 2003.

"In one sense it's funny," said Chief Deputy Correction Secretary Dan Stieneke. "In another, it's alarming."

In previous tests of revolvers purchased in 2004, roughly one in four misfired. They are .38 caliber Model 64s, which have 3-inch barrels. The .357 caliber Model 65s had the problem with barrel breaks. Test fires of a third revolver, the slightly smaller Model 60, resulted in cracked or sheared barrels in four cases.

No weapons have failed in the line of duty. Stieneke said the guns will remain in service while the department tries to resolve the problems, but annual in-service training will cease until a solution is found. New hires will receive weapons training because there are enough reliable revolvers to train them.

"On the one hand, statistically [the revolvers' performance] is not bad, but it's just the safety issue," Stieneke said. "That kind of failure gets people's attention."

The weapons are assigned to probation officers who keep track of probationers with more dangerous criminal histories, and to correction officers who patrol prison perimeters and escort inmates outside the facilities. (Those correction officers often carry rifles and shotguns as well.)

Correction officers inside prisons do not carry guns because there is a much greater risk that they could fall into inmates' hands. They carry pepper spray and batons.

Correction officials have asked the company to replace the 500 Model 64s purchased in 2004. They might extend that request to replace all of the department's 5,000 revolvers.

If Smith & Wesson does not replace the guns, the department might file a lawsuit or turn to taxpayers for help. Replacing the guns, which cost about $320 each, would come to more than $1.5 million. The department also would have to replace ammunition, holsters and other accessories, and retrain its officers to use the replacement weapons.

"We're at a point where if we have to make a quick switch, it's going to cost millions of dollars, and it's going to take a lot of training and effort to get back up to speed," Stieneke said.

Smith & Wesson officials did not return repeated phone calls for comment. Based in Springfield, Mass., Smith & Wesson is one of the nation's largest gunmakers.

The company's guns have drawn criticism from other law enforcement agencies. In 2001, New Jersey canceled a purchase of about 3,200 semi-automatic pistols from Smith & Wesson for its state police because of high malfunction rates.

North Carolina prison officials have been using Smith & Wesson revolvers for at least 20 years, even as many other law enforcement agencies have switched to higher-powered, semi-automatic handguns that carry more rounds.

Stieneke said that no one noticed a troublesome trend with the revolvers until late 2004, when trainers began seeing misfires with the new batch of Model 64s. A misfire is when the trigger is pulled and nothing happens.

In March and April 2005, the trainers tested all 500 of the new batch of handguns at shooting ranges across the state. They reported misfire rates of between 11 percent and 43 percent.

In the meantime, another problem emerged: barrels dropping or flying off the Model 65s during firing. The department surveyed trainers across the state and counted up 14 cases of barrel failure in the past three years.

Both problems led to the visit by Smith & Wesson on Feb. 21.

Stieneke said the revolvers are no longer a popular item and that might be contributing to their unreliability. For example, the department has had to special order the Model 65s in recent years.

That, along with the weapon failures, has Stieneke thinking it is time to follow the rest of the law enforcement community and switch to semi-automatics.

Staff writer Dan Kane can be reached at 829-4861 or [email protected].
 
In March and April 2005, the trainers tested all 500 of the new batch of handguns at shooting ranges across the state. They reported misfire rates of between 11 percent and 43 percent.

In the meantime, another problem emerged: barrels dropping or flying off the Model 65s during firing. The department surveyed trainers across the state and counted up 14 cases of barrel failure in the past three years.

"On the one hand, statistically [the revolvers' performance] is not bad, but it's just the safety issue," Stieneke said. "That kind of failure gets people's attention."

Well if he says so... :eek: But the people that were issued these revolvers might have other thoughts. :rolleyes:

But then, it would seem that the internal locks worked O.K. :neener:
 
Note that the guns in question seem to be several years old and possibly made before or just at the beginning of the new ownership. Also the model 65 is no more. Of course that it could happen with happen with an old standby like the model 64 is frightening.
 
The article mentioned a N.J. purchase of S&W semi-automatic pistols that was cancelled in 2001, but as I read it, all of the revolvers that are the core subject here were purchased in 2004 or later. That's recent history, as the current owners took over in 2001. The model 65's apparently came from a special production run, made for this order only.
 
What could cause a barrel to fall/break off?

Yeah, I'd like to know that one, myself...:rolleyes:

Perhaps they should buy Taurus or Rossi with lifetime warranty? I've never had a problem with either, well, one busted firing pin on a Rossi 971 followed immediately by another busted firing pin. But, it did get fixed and it wasn't a barrel. :D

Then again, I've never had a problem with a Smith and Wesson or Ruger revolver I've owned, either. I take this with a huge grain of salt, perhaps a whole salt tablet.:) I can see tied up cylinders (could also be ammo problem, too) or such, but a "barrel that breaks off"? :rolleyes: Perhaps they picked up the revolver, never been cleaned or serviced (we are talkin' New Jersey here, right), there's a dirt dauber nest in the barrel and it's fired. I could see a "barrel breaking off" in that senario. :banghead:
 
S&W has had previous problems with their current system of "crush fit" barrel mounting in Scandium frames, where the barrel blew off. I'm wondering if any (or all) of these late-production revolvers used the two-piece system and the barrel tube was pressured enough to crack when it was installed, and then failed later. The misfires could have been caused by a batch of too-soft stainless steel mainsprings.

Seems like no one believe in quality control inspections anymore, and leave it to the customer.
 
The NJSP autos were designed/modified/hacked by the commandant of the SP, Oberst Carson J. Dumb-Bar. I can't blame S&W for the problems experienced by NJSP.
 
Love the older Smiths, but could care less about the new STAINLESS company still calling itself S&W. Bottom line though, to each his/her own. Most of their newer revolvers just aren't my cup of tea!!
 
denfoote:

The model 65-6 was made from 1998 until the model was discontinued in about 2003. In any case it might be that the revolvers which are part of this thread were made as part of a special order.

In previous tests of revolvers purchased in 2004, roughly one in four misfired. They are .38 caliber Model 64s, which have 3-inch barrels. The .357 caliber Model 65s had the problem with barrel breaks. Test fires of a third revolver, the slightly smaller Model 60, resulted in cracked or sheared barrels in four cases.

In the meantime, another problem emerged: barrels dropping or flying off the Model 65s during firing. The department surveyed trainers across the state and counted up 14 cases of barrel failure in the past three years.

For example, the department has had to special order the Model 65s in recent years.
 
JNewell said:
If you buy (or, rather, don't buy) based on reports like this, you'll also SC Beretta, Glock and SIG, for starters.
Oops! Too late! I already DON'T buy Beretta, Glock or SIG. Not that I wouldn't buy a SIG, but I don't really like Glocks. I guess it's all those pictures I've seen of them blown up. ;) Berettas, well, I prefer my Taurus pistols with their 1911 style frame mounted safety. :D
 
ts that dams locks fault. I try to only buy older S&W. Ones with pin barrel and a real fireing pin.

I like that!

I don't know, my 686 has been fine. I had to tighten the strain screw but that's it. Maybe its a conspiracy between Smith & Wesson and the criminal menace to arm the authorities with guns that don't function. Just kidding. I don't know what is up.
 
Looking at the pics, I'm guessing that the barrels were over-torqued.

That's not something that QC would catch at final. It's likely that those reolvers were part of a special run, and the operator took it upon himself to make 'em fit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top