My new 686 has a "feature"!!

I wouldn't use it with anything but mouse fart reloads. But that's just me.

Japle said:

Yep! They used a cylinder intended for a 686+ 7-shooter for my SSR 6-shooter! I emailed S&W customer service and attached a photo. It'll be fun hearing what they have to say about this one!!

Click to expand...

If and when you call S&W, if you want a 7-shot, ask them to send you a 7-shot. You'll have to redo the paperwork, but the extra chamber might be worth it. If you stick with the 6-shot, then they'll just fix it and send it back in the mail. Any configuration changes, alas, require new paperwork.

You know.... I think you guys have it all wrong.

Perhaps I'm just a glass-half-full kinda guy, but the way I see it, he paid for a 6 shooter, but got an extra flute free of charge! That's pretty good! You just don't see companies going out of their way to give you more for your money like that any more.

So call 'em up and say so.
We can't help you.

Well, I'd at least ask to have the screwed up cylinder back as a conversation piece. And as Confederate suggests, you could always request that a 7 shot cylinder be fitted. It'd still be unique, but in a good, won't explode in your face kind of way .

686 sw lemon ,not sqeeser

WOW! I would not fire that any more talk about thin cylinder walls......

All I can add to this thread is the fairly universal impression: "WOW...!"


.

Obviously you people are mistaken...

Today S&W cylinders are made using the very latest in CNC controled machinery, so errors are imposible.

Of course if in the name of cost-cutting you eliminate both floor inspectors and machine operators then I suppose...

I think if you send the gun back it will be the last you'll see of that particular cylinder. I have to wonder if they ran anymore that didn't get caught.

Given that your action work had nothing to do with the cylinder's condition I see no reason they should mess with your lockwork, but if you switched any of the original springs out I'd put them back...

Ah... Isn't that an extra-cost Performance(?) Center offering??? Oh my.

It can happen. Back in the 80s, the little Ma, Pa & Sons gun shop that I was involved with got a new Model 29 in once...and .44 Magnum cartridges wouldn't fit the chambers. Nope. It wasn't cut for .44 Special. .41 Magnum ammo slipped right in. The bore was .410 diameter, but the roll mark said .44 Magnum. It was a Model 29 that somehow got a Model 57 cylinder and a barrel that was marked wrong. A guy bought it and brought it back. The owner handed him another gun and called Smith. They wanted it back in the worst way, but he kept it. As far as I know, he had it until he died, and probably passed it on to his surviving son.

Can you imagine the mischief if it had been fitted with a .44 cylinder and a .41 barrel...and roll-marked .44 Magnum?

I'd keep it and buy a replacement cylinder. No telling what it could be worth in the future (or even now).

I'm not a revolver guy, so my terminology is likely off, but...

When do the indexes get machined that stop the cylinder in the correct position when the hammer is cocked? There should be 6 of those. That should have been the biggest clue that there was something not quite right about this 686.

I'm sure that there are many examples of such mistakes on just about any brand of firearm (or any other product) and it shouldn't happen, but it does. That's why I always take my feeler gauges, calipers, micrometers and chamber gauges with me when I find a weapon that I'm interested in buying. I also take my time and look it over and over untill the dealer probably gets irretated with me, but it's my money and buyer beware. But if you do end up with a (new) weapon that you find is a lemon then as irretating as it is, that's what warranty is for.
With a used weapon you had best take your time and never let yourself get rushed into buying untill your as sure as you can be before you lay down your money. The previous owner my have had problems with it and sold it.
I'm proud to say that I own many fine examples of S&W handguns, but I'm not just lucky, Im careful.
It's a shame that S&W has had problems with product, maybe unions and management, but so have other companys, that's life I guess.

10mm, when you care enough to send the very best.

Hey folks,

Assuming the photo is an accurate depiction of the pistol as made by S&W, the company has made a mistake that has the potential for significant liability problems for them and significant safety problems for someone using the pistol. If the owner sends the gun back to S&W to correct the problem cylinder, S&W would be crazy to return the incorrectly made cylinder back to the owner for any reason. As long as the defective cylinder is in the hands of any customer, it will always be a severe risk for S&W. If S&W did in fact make the pistol as depicted in the picture, and if that pistol was actually sold to a customer, I would think S&W would go to great lengths to get the customer to return the pistol to them for replacement - not simply to replace the cylinder, but to replace the pistol in its entirety.

I find it hard to believe S&W could make such a mistake, and my first thought is to wonder if Japle is playing a joke on us. I have no reason to think Japle's picture and information is not true, so I have to accept S&W made a big mistake as hard as that may be to accept. If that is the case, one does not need to be a lawyer to recognize the potential liability problem, and one does not need to be a marketing genius to recognize the potential deleterious effects this will have on customer trust in the company and its products.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

But I was told Taurus had the poor QC department.

I find it kind of interesting that the thread above this one is titled "S&W's worst years".

But I was told Taurus had the poor QC department.

Click to expand...

I'd take a deformed S&W over a Taurus any day....

Oooh my. I work in QA for a large company-emails (with photos) are gonna fly over that, non-conformance reports, corrective action plans, meetings, meetings about meetings. If S&W ever gets their hands on that cylinder you'll never see it again, it will be a paper-weight on somebody's desk.

How's it shoot?

Performance center model?


I noticed the flat sides on the barrel? You'd think they'd have a little more QC on these guns too.

But I was told Taurus had the poor QC department.

Click to expand...

That's got to be the answer ! Someone put a Taurus cylinder on a always perfect S&W gun !

460Kodiak said:

That's down right embarassing for S&W. LOL. Yeah keep us updated on the outcome. It's almost worth keeping as a joke. Maybe if it was done on a Charter or a Taurus, but not on a $700 + S&W.

Click to expand...

Actually I think it's more like an $800 revolver. In any case you would think this can't happen in today's lawyer filled world but mistakes can and will happen.

BTW, what does the price of a revolver have to do with human mistakes. There are many more problems with the other companies mentioned than S&W or Ruger. I'm sure S&W will take care of this quickly, with other companies you would probably wait 6 months or more for the fix.

Maybe some full house loads should be procured and fired from a Ransom rest if available from a safe distance behind a barrier. Take pictures of the results, I'm sure the folks at S&W will just love those photos.

If S&W wants it back, remove cylinder, call S&W and ask if they can just create a new cylinder for your gun.

If they can, and if they will, be prepared to have to pay for the new cylinder as they would have no proof of this MISTAKE without the complete gun in their hands.

So, the question then becomes: is this cylinder worth keeping and worth paying for (the total cost of the new - proper cylinder plus all shipping and handling)?