How normal is this?

[SullyVols]

I've put maybe 1500 rounds through my 686 and dry fired it an additional 1500 times. I was cleaning it today with a brush to get some carbon build up out of the frame window when I noticed the 'ratchet' teeth, for lack of the proper technical term, were damaged. I compared to my recently partially rebuilt 629 and my 19 and they have zilch observable wear on their teeth (albeit with less rounds and dry firing).

Photo is a bit blurry but the shiny spots show where the metal is worn and there are some raised burrs. Damage seems to go from almost none at 3 o'clockish to the worst at the opposite ratchet at 9 o'clockish.

 

[kgpcr]

That is not right. I would take it in for a checkup

 

[Drail]

That is called "ratchet peening" and it's not good. I think you may have somehow got a rachet that is dead soft. It also looks as if the ratchet is striking something as the cyllinder is closed and raising those burrs. Send it back. Please let us know what the clowns at S&W tell you. (like' Oh that's perfectly acceptable") The machining on that ratchet looks very strange as well. Is this a used gun?

 

[45lcshooter]

He said he has 1500 rounds through it, I would think its a used gun. Lol

 

[HKGuns]

LoL? 1500 rounds is nothing. LoL. Why not add something of value? LoL.

Sorry OP I don't have anything more for you than to suggest as above, send it in for a check up. That can't be right.

 

[SullyVols]

I finally found a thread on the Smith and Wesson forum with a similar problem on an older Model 10. Looks like if the cylinder/hand setup isn't quite right then the hand wears into the softer ratchet teeth.

The machining is normal for a new S&W. I will ask a gunsmith but from what I've seen on internet it looks like this isn't entirely unusual - just a sign of sub-par fitting. Part of it may be how the newer revolvers extractors are fitted. On the Rugers and to a lesser degree the newer S&W revolvers the extractor isn't pinned in place so it has some slop too it.

I will have to watch how my 629 wears in. I will also check out the hand the next time I take off the side plate for cleaning. The trigger on this particular 686 has worn in nicely so I really don't want to test what I already know to be a pretty lousy gunsmithing outfit at S&W.

 

[Drail]

I have several S&Ws with the new style extractor (like yours) and the machining doesn't look anything like yours. There are no mill chatter marks on it at all. And they all have thousands of rounds through them. My 696 was made in 1996 (first year for the new extractor design) and it has no peening. But that machine work looks like it came from Auto Ordnance. I have older Smiths and am aware of how the new guns are stamped out. But I didn't know they had gotten that bad. I would replace the extractor and the hand on that one.

 

[SullyVols]

I don't know if there is anything to read into on this, but my model 19 (1973) and 629 (2013) both lock up immediately before the hammer drops. It's like a click-snap. My 686 locks up much earlier. It feels like it is locking up earlier in the trigger travel.

 

[SullyVols]

Just got finished dissembling my 686. There is not obvious signs of wear or damage on the hand where it makes contact with the ratchet. There is some wear on the arm from where it is making contact with the frame however. Don't know if that means anything or not.

 

[oldbear]

LoL? 1500 rounds is nothing. LoL. Why not add something of value? LoL.

HKguns, He did, a sense of humor, which has been sadly lacking around here for sometime.

 

[5-SHOTS]

I've owned a S&W 686-6 Plus 2.5'' for three or four years, put 1800/2000 rounds and probably as much the dryfires: same results. One day I removed the burrs on the horizontal surfaces of the notches with a jewerly file and the problem apparently disappeared but I have to say that the shape of the vertical surfaces of the notches was "smoothed" and a little changed by the action of the hand: that's where the burrs came from. From my experience the steel of the ejection star is very very soft, certainly softer than the steel used for the hand; I think however it's a S&W choice because the function of the gun was 100% and the action was much smoother at the end.

On the Ruger I have there's no sign of burrs and I've dryfired it like crazy.

 

[SullyVols]

I've owned a S&W 686-6 Plus 2.5'' for three or four years, put 1800/2000 rounds and probably as much the dryfires: same results. One day I removed the burrs on the horizontal surfaces of the notches with a jewerly file and the problem apparently disappeared but I have to say that the shape of the vertical surfaces of the notches was "smoothed" and a little changed by the action of the hand: that's where the burrs came from. From my experience the steel of the ejection star is very very soft, certainly softer than the steel used for the hand; I think however it's a S&W choice because the function of the gun was 100% and the action was much smoother at the end.

On the Ruger I have there's no sign of burrs and I've dryfired it like crazy.

Thanks - I wonder how the alloy steel works out. Dont know if I want a 2nd 629 or a 29.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

I have several S&Ws with the new style extractor (like yours) and the machining doesn't look anything like yours. There are no mill chatter marks on it at all. And they all have thousands of rounds through them. My 696 was made in 1996 (first year for the new extractor design) and it has no peening. But that machine work looks like it came from Auto Ordnance. I have older Smiths and am aware of how the new guns are stamped out. But I didn't know they had gotten that bad. I would replace the extractor and the hand on that one.

None of my Smiths look like that either. It isn't right. A buddy of mine bought a "new" Taurus judge. The teeth were so badly chewed up, one chamber would not fire. You better send her in man.