Fixing my 63 Smith

Did you give S$W a call maybe they would fix for Free like Ruger

Same gun, same problem but on a new out of the box purchase....I called S&W, they sent me a fedex label and I had the gun back, fixed in 3 months. They changed the barrel, ejector star, ejector rod and the hand. I'd not recommend home gunsmithing. My wife's M36 had a problem with the cylinder stop and Smith fixed that one too...same deal, and I'd bought it for her in 1992. Best Regards, Rod

I had a 657 Classic Hunter that came that way... I always said a drunk 3rd grader cut the barrel with a dull hacksaw. That thing threw lead more to the side than it did toward the target. S&W fixed it up very, very nicely, however, and the first 6 shots went into the same hole when I got it back.

Look forward to hearing how it went.

PapaG said:

My second 63 has the same vexing problem as the first. Both are from the seventies, first run. They will not go more than 12 rounds before binding and tightening up. Lube is not an issue. I discovered that the barrel on my present one was not faced off square with a gap of .006" on the left and less than . 0015 on the right. I spent yesterday afternoon carefully diamond filing and stoning the barrel face square and obtained a square face as uniform gap. Today I'll shoot it as see what happens.

Click to expand...

Mine's from 1982, and the issue I had with it was tight chambers such that after a third cylinder full, I could barely extract the brass. My Dad successfully lapped the chambers using a hand drill, and Bob's your (my) uncle.

My model 63 had a barrel to cylinder gap of .005” on the right but .015” on the left. I bought it new at the end of 2019. Accuracy was terrible.
I sent it back to S&W and it was returned rebarreled and the B/C gap was .005” all around.
I am happy with it now.

Funny, I have an old Rossi 68 (Interarms-vintage) that seems to do the same thing. Being modeled on the 36, I wonder if they also copied the imperfections.

My biggest complaints with S&W rimfires is also the mega-tight chambers. I bought chamber honing tools off of Amazon in 400 and 800 grit and using cutting oil I honed the chambers to polish out the imperfections. Now the ones I have that stick no longer do .

Hopefully S&W will dial your Model 63 in so it’ll work for more than a few cylinders .

Stay safe.

Riomouse911 said:

My biggest complaints with S&W rimfires is also the mega-tight chambers. I bought chamber honing tools off of Amazon in 400 and 800 grit and using cutting oil I honed the chambers to polish out the imperfections. Now the ones I have that stick no longer do .

Hopefully S&W will dial your Model 63 in so it’ll work for more than a few cylinders .

Stay safe.

Click to expand...

Luckily super tight chambers don’t seem to be an issue with my 63. It seems S&W may have learned from earlier practices. The chambers in my model 17-3 are pretty snug.

My older 63 looks nothing like the newer guns. Does S&W even still have parts for the older guns and will they work on them if they need parts replaced?

I have a model 34-1 Flat Latch that has very tight chambers. Remington Golden bullets need to be pushed in all the way. CCI Mini Mags slide right in. But the gun is so stupid accurate I don't want to mess with it.

I don't think they'll repair older ones under warranty. I sent an 80's revolver back a few years ago and was charged for the repair because it was too old for the warranty.

I keep hearing they dont have a lot of parts for some of the older guns. If they cant clean up the back of the barrel, or something else major like it needs to be replaced, I think we might be SOL.

Last thing I would want, was it coming back with one of the new barrels on it, if it even fit.

I suppose barrel replacement on an older gun would be dependent on finding an older barrel (pinned or not?)

I had to find a 4" barrel for my 1986 624 as S&W had none. I got lucky though & the factory did the swap for me at reasonable cost.

The OP’s problem seems more like powder granules under the ratchet (star) rather than cylinder gaps
However, a cylinder gap.of only .0015 would likely drag the cylinder if only lightly fouled.
Be glad you’re cylinder is that tight!

Thread needs some pics...

Armybrat said:

Thread needs some pics...

Click to expand...

Any thread about the Model 63 (or 17) requires pics. (that's a rule, right, guys?)

Kinda bummed about the OP's issues with his guns. I've never really heard about problems with the early 63s, but then, they're not exactly a huge topic on internet gun forums that I've noticed...

Anyway, the chambers in my (first run) 4" 63 no-dash are very tight and loading is not exactly slick. However, as it's not a defensive firearm, I don't worry about quickly loading or ejecting casings, either. It's accurate and reliable, handles so well, perfect balance and feel in the hand. Those are the reasons we like these revolvers, right?

My vintage 63 (purchased used from a friend back in 1980) makes my short list of the "one handgun I would keep if I could only keep one..."

Old Dog's statements pretty much mirror my sentiments.

Pictured below with the 317 kit gun... The 317 now sports an Ergo Delta grip...

Now that pics are included in the thread, I realized that I read the OP with some dyslexia (post 8.)

I do indeed have a nice 63-3, though, but I haven't shot it (had it maybe two years.)

This is my 63-3.


The newer versions do nothing for me. The older guns are the class act.

Here’s my model 63.

Over on castboolits.gunloads.com
There is a member DougGuy that does cylinder honeing he fixed my ruger BH 41 magnum from leading and accuracy improved