2 Sets of Defective Walker Nipples?

[arcticap]

Last month, someone in Finland bought a brand new Walker that came with nipples that looked as if they had been dry fired, so he requested another set of nipples from the dealer.
The hammer also looked like it may have been dry fired but the cylinder notches looked perfect and unblemished.
When he received the 2nd set of nipples they also looked defective due to poor machining.
And after only test firing the 2nd set of nipples, some of the threads actually broke off as if the metal was too brittle.
The dealer refused to send him a 3rd set.
Is the dealer selling factory 2nd nipples that should have been scrapped or is Uberti trying to pass off scrap nipples as being 1st quality?
Why would Uberti even let these nipples leave the factory to be sold on the open market to consumers?
The original thread can be found here:--->>> http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?371817-Uberti-Walker-nipples

 

[alsaqr]

Just looked my new in box Uberti Walker: Got the gun as a Christmas gift about five years ago: Examined under magnification the nipples are nicely machined. i seriously doubt that the nipples shown in the OP were made by Uberti.

Upon closer examination the hammer is all wrong too. Has China knocked off the Uberti Walker?

https://imgur.com/nDqOCv1

 

[arcticap]

Just looked my new in box Uberti Walker: Got the gun as a Christmas gift about five years ago: Examined under magnification the nipples are nicely machined. i seriously doubt that the nipples shown in the OP were made by Uberti.

Upon closer examination the hammer is all wrong too. Has China knocked off the Uberti Walker?

https://imgur.com/nDqOCv1

The OP stated that the Walker has a CT proof date code which is 2018, but that's an interesting hypothesis.
What exactly is it about the hammer that's different or "all wrong"?

BTW, the cap on the nipple was said to be a CCI #11.

 

[alsaqr]

What exactly is it about the hammer that's different or "all wrong"?

1. Look at the rounding.
2. Look at sloppy fit at the cylinder top.
3. Look at the trigger guard detail.
4. The case hardening is faked.

IMO: Either Uberti is selling cheaply made revolvers overseas (very unlikely) or they're being faked.

 

[arcticap]

There appear to be some differences but I don't know the reasons why.

IIRC there was a difference noted with another Uberti model that involved an 1858 trigger guard part that didn't fit on another Uberti gun.
It was attributed to Uberti recently retooling and changing the dimensions of the part.

I think that we all know that some low level employees are willing to put anything in a box without caring about the quality of its contents,
especially if they won't be held personally responsible for what goes into the box.
Just look at how often that happens with mass produced auto parts.

And while anything is possible regarding an unscrupulous dealer possibly swapping out good nipples with defective ones,
I also wouldn't be shocked to learn that Uberti sells some lower quality guns as 2nds through some kind of insider distribution network.
And then that information isn't advertised to the consumer.
Or perhaps it's just poor quality control where only a small percentage of an entire batch of guns, material or parts is closely inspected.

 

[Cowhide Cliff]

I just got a new Walker a few months ago still in the box. I guess I should get it out and look it over.

 

[LonesomePigeon]

I would call Uberti. If nipples are chipping that could cause serious harm to the shooter and bystanders. I agree that the hammer doesn't look right. The trigger guard looks super over polished too.

 

[Cowhide Cliff]

Personally it wouldn't concern me much because the best thing a person can do is trash the Uberti nipples as soon as you take it out of the box and replace with Treso or Slix Shot anyway.

 

[LonesomePigeon]

I generally replace the factory nipples too but not everyone does and if Uberti produced a batch of bad nipples it could be a serious problem.