S&W Model 637, Buyer Beware

[Old Fuff]

Gunmeister:

What you describe suggests that the yoke is bent or improperly machined. While this condition on "a" gun wouldn't suprise me having the same condition on several guns at one dealer would. Such a gap of that amount is not normal or satisfactory. I would call Smith & Wesson's Customer Service Department and then return the revolver to have the condition corrected.

 

[pm9596]

637 gap

I bought a 637 prior to them being marked +p although S&W conceded the were p capable. From the first round fired it spit powder and lead particles back into my face. After 20 or so rounds down range back to S&W it went.after about 10 days it was returned with a letter stating the gap was out of spec. and the cylinder had been replaced and was now within spec. back to the range and the gun has been perfect ever since. I have the letter in another location so it will take me about two weeks to post the correct spec. +- per S&W but my recollection is it was no where near.012.

I don't want to guess but I will post asap.

After repair, if thats what it can be called, it has been my pocket carry and fishing gun since with hundreds of rounds through it without a problem, most of which were +p as I practice with my carry loads.

PM9596

 

[wjh2657]

S&W 640 and 60 for winter (belt holster) carry and 637 and 642 for summer carry (pocket holster carry). Also S&W 317 for "trainer" gun. Over 500 rounds through each with no problems. I was a trained armorer in USMC and worked on M&P (pre 10) and model 10 aircrew S&Ws for several years. I have kept a close eye on all of my four EDC S&Ws and the .22, to include cleaning and detailed stripping. All have the dreaded ILS. I have experienced absolutely no problems with any of the revolvers. I cycle and clean lock along with rest of gun and make sure it is all the way into proper position each time I reassemble or clean gun. I do not fire 357 Mag in 60 or 640, I have a S&W 686 for that. As I have owned and still do own, nickled revolvers I have learned to be careful of solvents. I use CLP and some care in cleaning all of them and have not experienced "finish peel". I have carried, fired, and cleaned S&W revolvers for 48 of my 66 years. I had 637 in pocket all this weekend.

Bottom line, I will keep on buying S&Ws , especially J Frames.

 

[M&PVolk]

I have two 637's, and lockup, finish and trigger are good. The only complaint I have with these little guns is that the cylinder release is tight at first. It takes some work to relax it a bit. Wonderful guns and the ultimate in pocket carry.

 

[jaydubya]

I bought my 637 seven years ago, and have sent about 2,500 rounds downrange from it, mostly std pressure SWC/WC, but about a hundred +p (OUCH!). No problems such as have been described, though if I carried (I live in a California county with a no-no sheriff), I would expect the overcoating to wear off. And if I had experienced any problems, I know S&W would fix it. They have the best customer support in the industry.

Cordially, Jack

 

[Phydeaux642]

Man, this thread sure came back from the dead.

 

[wjh2657]

"Man, this thread sure came back from the dead."

There are a lot of happy S&W 637 owners and shooters out there who think it is a pretty neat little gun. Defensive knee jerks in action!

 

[mbr]

Oops, just noticed the date on this thread

 

[kmrcstintn]

for clarification, I thought that the aluminum frames on the airweight models (637, 638, 642, 649) is what got the baked on clear coat...do the bead blasted barrel and cylinder get clear coat also?!? if so it is new to me...I have bought, sold, traded several 642's, a 637, and a 442 (anondized black finish on aluminum frame) over the years and never had anything peel & flake off the cylinder and barrel which are the bead blasted steel parts on these guns

the only real purpose of the baked on clear coat is to reduce glare and reflection and offer a soft contrast to the bead blasted steel parts and having it wear off or removed with solvents is a minor problem at best; guns are tools and they are meant to be used...just as with any tool the 'new luster' will deminish with use

I will gladly accept slight cosmetic defects in the S&W snubbies over the major malfunctions that I have encountered with Taurus revolvers --> a spurless hammer 605 go out of timing after manual removal of a casing that had the primer move back and jam it against the breechface (jammed the entire gun); a shrouded hammer 651 that had hammer misalignment and would rub against the sideplate (again jammed the whole gun); 2 separate 66's that suffered mainspring failures within 1000 rounds (primers not hit hard enough when shooting double action) :banghead::banghead:

 

[ArmedBear]

I have been told that Gunscrubber or brake cleaner will soften the clear coat on these models.

No ****. Really?

It says so on cans of Gunscrubber and Brake Cleaner. It will also trash a gun stock, melt plastic, strip paint...

It's great to clean out semiautos if you're in a hurry and/or lazy.

But what would possess someone to use these things on a clear-coated revolver?

(And if you don't like the alloy frame, why didn't you buy a steel gun? The whole point of the Airweights is, well, their light weight. Sure, that involves compromises. Duh. Welcome to Earth.)

My gunsmith suggested another pistol instead of installing Wolff springs. He emphasized QC problems. I switched to a 3" M10 S&W.

LOL

You thought the 1 7/8" J-frame was too bulky, so you got a 3" K-frame?

Bull****. That sure sounds credible.

The little J-frames' DA trigger has never felt as good as a larger gun, but my 642 is good enough to keep them all in an NRA Bullseye target at 25 yards with stock sights in poor light. If I needed better, I wouldn't be carrying a snubbie. If you can't shoot the gun, maybe that's not the gun's problem.

Furthermore, I've felt the DA trigger on some really old Airweights, and the trigger pull was MUCH heavier than the new ones. Maybe these were bad examples, but S&W does appear to have dramatically improved the pull, not made it worse.

I just saw 637's at $297 and 642's at $307 locally yesterday! I was almost tempted to backslide on my "no new S&W" pledge, but I really dislike the mechanical safety "feature".

You do realize that you can take off the lock flag, right? To save a hundred bucks I'd sure consider it.

So, where are you guys finding new 637s and 642s for 300 bucks? I'd like to get myself at least one more, for that price.

I am not some stupid fanboy who thinks that S&W can do no wrong. Far from it. But most of this thread (WildAlaska, Tamara and a couple others excepted) is utter bull****.

 

[Old Fuff]

Pity the poor Old Fuff.

I was going to point out to Armed Bear, that he had some good points, but for a bit over $300 one could buy an older Model 37 that had an anodized finish that would stand up to various solvents, wear better, and not have most of the more recent cost-cutting features that have tended to degrade newer production.

"Why," I thought, "right now there is an excellent example on Gunbroker that is up for bid starting at $350, and it only attracted one bid. Such a deal I have for you...

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=126294077

Trouble is, with 2 days to go the bidding has gone up to $760, as I write this post.

This says something about the market's perception of older vs. newer guns, and shows how far out of date the Old Fuff really is.

I strongly suggest that no one take his advise from now on...

 

[ArmedBear]

I can get an old 36 for 200 bucks at a local store.

The finish is already half-gone, though. Neat gun. TERRIBLE trigger. Worst DA trigger I've ever felt, including Rugers. No +P.

Seriously, I do like old S&Ws, but I also think the current Airweights have a lot to offer as practical tools.

 

[Old Fuff]

Worst DA trigger I've ever felt, including Rugers. No +P.

Interesting, because while materials have changed, the lockwork design and springs haven't. With the exception of the hammer the other principal parts will interchange. The hammer would too, except it had to be changed to work with the internal lock.

Oh well.....

 

[ArmedBear]

Well, I've shot a stock Mark II Target with a little stoning done to it. Feels great, and mine has all Volquartsen parts plus custom work, so when I say it feels great, my baseline is not low.

It's not necessarily the design of the parts that matters; it's the execution.

 

[JR47]

I am not some stupid fanboy who thinks that S&W can do no wrong. Far from it. But most of this thread (WildAlaska, Tamara and a couple others excepted) is utter bull****.

Right. So glad to have such an "expert" chime in with a reasoned, and lucid judgment.

Is there some reason that insults are suddenly an accepted reason, instead of discussion?

 

[ArmedBear]

Calling out a poster who is full of crap is neither reason, nor is it an insult.

 

[amd6547]

I would buy a well worn Mod 36 for $200 right now.

 

[welldoya]

Jeeez, I started reading this thread and didn't notice that it started 5 years ago.
When I read about them being on sale for $299, I immediately decided I would buy a couple more 642s. Then I saw the date.
Around here, you can't hardly find 642s on the shelves.
I did see one last weekend at a Bass Pro Shop fifty miles from here. The price was $529 and no, they didn't have CT grips.
As far as the finish goes, I use Breakfree CLP and have had no problems. I don't think you are supposed to use any cleaners that contain ammonia.

 

[shooter429]

I disagree with the idea that 637 (or variants) are poor quality

I have owned several J-frames including the 442, 637 etc. They all had excellent actions, in fact the 637 was the crispest, lightest, action I have ever felt (including custom guns) and were tight as a drum, and held up to hard use. The finish of any gun will wear with holster use. I have never had a gun that did not show some holster wear after years in the saddle, so to speak. IMHO, $300 for a new one is an awesome buy. I paid ~$400, for my last 637 and thought I did well, considering the excellent quality. And now, S&W has started shipping them without the lock! Cudos to S&W. I would buy a brace at the $300 price point without hesitation. If a j-frame is not nearly perfect in every regard, it is an oddball, and should be sent back to S&W.

Shooter429

 

[Hawk]

IMHO, $300 for a new one is an awesome buy.

That's the problem with zombie threads - out of date pricing. I believe Bud's is showing 422.00 (in late 2009, should anybody check back in 2013).

On the other hand, it was nice to see some old Tamara and WildAlaska posts.

 

[harmonic]

Wow. Talk about resurrecting old threads. It had me going till I saw Wild's name.

 

[mustachio]

I've had one for two years. I paid $295 for it from a dealer on one of these forums. It shoots great and has given me no problems what so ever. It is a carry gun, it will get dinged up, it will show wear by the nature of the beast. If the finish comes off, I will polish the alloy frame and add some wax. Other than that, it beats a Taurus any day of the week.

 

[David E]

Fine, I'll contribute to this 5 1/2 yr old thread........

I always take someone's "opinion" on a gun they're NEVER FIRED with a huge grain of salt.

 

[KBintheSLC]

This is an old thread, but...

I feel your pain. I purchased a new 637 back in May 09. The gun had a crooked barrel, warped frame, and shot 7" left of POA. I had to send it back twice before S&W replaced it. The CS manager treated me like I was being unreasonable... refusing to admit that the gun was a lemon. Finally, a competent member of the repairs team took a look at it and immediately agreed to replace the entire gun. The replacement gun was a lot better though. I have been happy with it so far. I think they must have had a bad run or something.
They did take care of it and make it right... I have to admit though... after the 4-month ordeal, they will be very lucky if I ever buy another new S&W in this lifetime.

 

[joe_security]

The clear coat peeling ? A friend called the S&W factory, the person who answered said to clean the frame with CLP only...He went on to say that hoppes #9 would take the coating off very quickly. I use a 1981 model 65, it suffers from no such issues . Its just not light enough to drop in my pocket!