Space between cylinder and barrel (637)

[Random Discharge]

Quality Control

Anyone ever think about just how easy it is for a gun owner to check b/c gap?

Isn't it amazing that Smith, Ruger, Taurus, you name them; with all their specialized factory tooling; can't get this right? Maybe they don't have feeler guages at the factory, so they can't inspect this before shipping the new guns?

Or maybe, once built wrong, it is expensive (new barrel) or time consuming (threading barrel in another turn-also expensive due to labor) to fix? Why inspect the b/c gap when you can ship out a slew of improperly built guns and only have to repair or rework the few that come back? Even better, increase the "official" maximum specification enough so that most of the improperly built guns can't even come back as warranty repairs...

Sadly, it shouldn't be difficult to get this dimension right the first time.

The only message the manufacturers will understand is the cost of warranty repairs. If it ain't right, by all means send it back!

 

[Macmac]

Random Discharge , Exactly...

"Why inspect the b/c gap when you can ship out a slew of improperly built guns and only have to repair or rework the few that come back".

I removed your "?"

I just want to back up Old FUFF.. About a year ago he helped me repair a black powder gun...

If you get down on your knees and beg, once he understands you have tools, and maybe a few working brain cells he will help you.

The thing is you need to do what he tells you to do, the way he tells you to do it.

And that cylinder to forcing cone is pooched.. Send it back.

 

[Old Fuff]

Well thanks for the plug.

But there are problems.

You can't always diagnose the cause of a mis-functioning gun over the internet, and often times fixing something, and doing it right - not just doing it, requires experience, knowledge, and maybe some specialized tools. A shop manual (if available) is also a must if you are going to do your own work.

If one is looking at fixing "a" gun, the cost of getting everything together may be more then getting a professional to do the job, and this is especially true if the cause of whatever's wrong isn't certain. If for example, the barrel has to be removed and fixed or replaced, or the issue turns out to be an out-of-spec frame, you will be way passed a do-it-yourself job.

Shouldn't they have caught this at the factory? You bet they should! Especially on a model that is commonly sold as a personal defense weapon. But now days that simply doesn't happen, and frankly if they did it right on a 100% basis you might not be able to afford the gun. So the buyer is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

The good thing here is that if it's returned to S&W they will completely check it out, and fix anything they find wrong, and they will do it on their dime - including shipping costs.

 

[Orange_Magnum]

I'm currently on my 3rd and 4th handgun. I learn more and more about how a handgun works by cleaning and disassembling them. Being technically inclined and no stranger to analyzing problems in general helps too. There are indeed many faulty guns floating about out there, especially on the Internet where owners want to dump their unwanded ones. A gun store that allows you to handle their guns is the best way to ensure a functioning gun. On the Internet a serious seller must have a good track record and be more than willing to accept a return. I handled a S&W 64, 38 spl 4" barrel this summer in Cabela's in Gonzales, LA. Tight barrel gap, timing stop on. It looked excellent, unfired, new old stock, $399. After a while I noticed that the barrel was slightly, slightly off, pointing to the left. It turned into a cold fish in my hands.

 

[fastbolt]

Yep, something to consider is that old and new production methods are quite a bit different.

I also like to hear the thoughts and reflections of Old Fuff.

Some trivia from an armorer class a while back ...

It took 7 machines to make the old style S&W revolver hammers. It's considerably simpler nowadays with MIM hammers.

The older frames required 75 machining steps (without counting the barrel), and the newer frames only require 3 machining steps before heat treating. CNC has changed things.

I remember being told that S&W invested something like $17 million in new CNC equipment for the last fiscal year, and almost that much in the preceding couple of years, and that some shifts were being revised to allow round-the-clock operation of CNC machines (except for routine maintenance).

Personally, I was singularly unimpressed with the quality control of S&W revolvers in the 70's, 80's & 90's.

I'm reserving judgment on the ones being turned out in the 21st century. I want to see more.

However, I've received some with decent quality examples in the last several years.

Three of the last four J-frames I've bought have all exhibited reasonably good quality and fitting during assembly. This is compared to one I bought in the 90's which immediately required repair NIB before it would cycle and the trigger would reset.

I wasn't completely pleased with the fitting of the extractor and carry up on fourth J-frame, but it was relatively easy to correct. The factory would've done it for free if I'd returned it to them. It also had a rather noticeable deep, beveled scratch in the black finish around the yoke screw which had apparently been 'touched up' with a marking pen of some sort, and which revealed itself as soon as I cleaned the gun the first time. In my case I shrugged and moved on, since that J-frame was really only intended for rotation in my off-duty carry but heavier and more frequent range sessions than my other J-frames, and I expected it would soon acquire the normal wear and tear associated with that role. Annoying, though. Sloppy on the production line.

Personally, I don't think the company is turning out a "slew of improperly built guns". Granted, I'd like to see some additional time and effort lavished on them before they left the factory, but that would reasonably cost more money. Where do you think we should draw the line? How much more money are we willing to pay for more 'hand-fitting' when assembling MIM components, or going back to forged/machined parts in some of the models? I remember when one fellow at the factory casually commented that they were trying to keep costs within reason so they didn't have to have parts production out-sourced to some country where labor was cheaper.

BTW, even investing in the 'basic' armorer tools for repairing simple problems with S&W revolvers can require some outlay of cash. The standard revolver armorer kit from S&W costs over $300, and it doesn't include some tools many folks might consider desirable.

The company is facing the task of balancing 'practical' against 'fashionable', and 'function' against 'appearance' in some respects. I don't envy them the decisions facing them in this slowing economy.

 

[fourdollarbill]

FastBolt, I'm going to ask S&W today if they will take this gun back and fix it. My question is how dangerous is this gap problem? (i'm new to revolvers). If they strive for .004 to .006 and mine is .026 it sounds dangerous. I do not have an agenda for this question other than good old knowledge. Every thread I have read said "Don't shoot it again?" Also this is a 6 month old 642 with about 400 rounds through it. They were all FN Plated or jacketed bullets no lead yet.

Thanks again for all of this info guys, if it gets annoying let me know. I feel like a kid asking why, why , why...

 

[Old Fuff]

The danger, such as it is, is that when using lead bullets you might get excessive side-spit at the gap, with flame, flash and lead particles. This wouldn’t be so bad for you, but it could make things miserable for anyone standing next to you.

But there are two issues that Smith & Wesson needs to resolve. First, the gap may be an indicator of a more serious problem that might require replacing the frame, barrel, yoke, cylinder– or any combination thereof. Second, it isn’t right! So it should be made right. Considering the cost there is no excuse for this kind of workmanship and lack of proper inspection.

 

[fourdollarbill]

Old fluff, my friend is a NRA CCW instructor and he told me that lately within the past couple of years has had to ask other people to step back from the line while a revolver shooter is qualifying as the are getting sprayed. He always wondered why the tolerances were getting so loose. Small World!

I'll let you guy's know what S&W says today. It sounds like they will fix it with no questions. They always have been good to me on the automatics.

 

[Deanimator]

What will this forcing cone miscut face do?

Here's what it did in my Model 29-2:

1. Shaves lead and jacket material causing "spitting". This is dangerous and can cause facial and especially eye injury.

2. Directs powder gasses at the shooter and those to the sides.

I bought my gun used. As far as I know, the gun came that way from the factory. The fix is to machine the rear face of the forcing cone square, then turn back the barrel hood if necessary to allow the barrel to be screwed in enough to have the proper barrel/cylinder gap.

 

[Deanimator]

The danger, such as it is, is that when using lead bullets you might get excessive side-spit at the gap, with flame, flash and lead particles. This wouldn’t be so bad for you, but it could make things miserable for anyone standing next to you.

It'll do it with jacket material as well, as my 29-2 did.

In addition to the forcing cone being assymetrical, mine was dished up the center, directing high velocity powder gases straight up toward the top strap, like a half chimney. This caused the powder gasses, lead and jacket material to be directed not just to the sides but backward at the shooter, especially on the left side.

The forcing cone had to be machined square, and the barrel hood turned back for proper indexing... then they damaged the barrel and the whole thing had to be done again, including a total reblue.

 

[fourdollarbill]

I am so absolutely confused my eye's are crossed. I emailed S&W with the information of the over sized b/c gap and they say it is okay. Here is a cut and paste from my email.



RE: 642 repair question‏
From: Ogonowski, Mel ([email protected])
Sent: Tue 12/16/08 8:30 AM
To: 'Gary' ([email protected])
hi
yes the gap is fine
thanks
mo

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Gary ******
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 8:50 PM
To: Smith & Wesson Support
Subject: 642 repair question

To whom it may concern, I bought a new 642 revolver from a local shop and found the gap between the cylinder face and the barrel cone is .008" on the top and .021" on the bottom. The barrel is cut at an angle. It shoots well. And no problems are accuring that I know of. But everybody I talked to said that gap should be no more than .006" total and it should be absolutly straight. Does it need fixed? Also I just stopped at a local gun retailer and looked at a new 642 and it looks exactly the same with a angled cut. I attached a picture in .jpg. Can you tell me if it is okay or not.

Thank you,

 

[fourdollarbill]

Different gun than the start of the thread. I'm going to start a new thread. Oops.

 

[Old Fuff]

4$bill:

I would telephone Smith & Wesson and ask to talk to a gunsmith in the repair department, not someone in customer service. I'm not sure that Mel is qualified to answer your question. There is no company in the industry that where a .021" gap is within specification. Insist that you want your revolver inspected and repaired, and keep going up the ladder until you find someone with the authority to say, O.K.

They really do not want this spread all over the Internet...

(800) 331-0852 or (413) 781-8300

 

[fastbolt]

Call and ask to be connected to a technician in Revolver Repair concerning a warranty repair. Be prepared to leave your name, a brief message & phone number on the revolver repair center's voice mail if one of the fellows doesn't answer the phone when your call is transferred.

Okay, I just saw you started the new thread ...

Let them examine the gun and correct the problem. Enough said.