Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns HATING ON S&W..

that picture is a clone of what mine looks like. I got the gun basically free from cabella's, so i havn't kbitched too much. i replaced the grips, disabled the hole, and put a high vis front sight on it. shoots okay and is purty, but it isn't the same gun as the older ones, Since i have it laying on my desk, it's a m29-10.

Some related facts:

I don't know if it is still true, but a few years ago Hamilton Bowen suspended working on S&W revolvers. This is because the factory had started screwing the barrels on so tight that it was risking damage to remove them. When one of the premier revolver smiths in the world won't work on your new guns, you ought to pay attention!
http://www.bowenclassicarms.com/news.html
See note dated March 15, 2016.

Also, a few years ago, S&W had only four factory service centers in the US (maybe the world.) There was the factory, a place in Alaska, a place in Hawaii, and Frank Smith in Comanche, Texas. I've dealt with Frank Smith a time or two and always came away satisfied. He was a S&W warranty station for 37 years, he knows what he is doing, and he tells you the truth. No bs with Frank. Now his website says:
S&W Closed All USA Warranty Stations 12/15/2016
I suspect Frank was costing S&W too much money by doing the right things.

Maybe it is my eyes, but I can see the barrel crooked (yawed to the left) in the first video. (I haven't had the time to watch the second video all the way through.)

If I had to communicate with S&W about a similar issue, I'd be sending them a picture with two straightedges, one each laid along each side of the frame. That will show a yawed (not rolled or "mis-clocked") barrel real quick. Let them try to deny that physical evidence. (I'm not saying I'd get better results. But we'd cut through some bs real quick.)

If it wouldn't hurt my chances of a new gun or proper repair by shooting it (I don't know about that), I'd see how far to the right or left the rear sight had to be adjusted to make a gun shoot to point of aim. That also tells you a lot in a short time.

That is indeed the truth .... and the issue is potentially cracking the frame, as well. Cracking a frame is actually not an uncommon occurrence when removing a barrel and in the old days, S&W would make them right (if done my a professional gunsmith) because they cracked frames all the time in the S&W repair shop.

On the 29 Classic I posted pictures of, I sent that photo to S&W and asked them if they would fix it. The CS guy gave me a song and dance story about how that .013 gap was "within spec" and that there was no point in returning it. Oh well ..... I then asked if I could send it back and get the Performance Center guys to just set the barrel back properly at my expense. Again, the answer was no. I was a Detective once, but I still didn't fully pick up on that "clue" he just unwittingly revealed.

Anyhow, I just took the gun to one of my pistolsmiths (who has been building guns for almost 40 years) and he conditionally agreed to set the barrel back. Well, he couldn't get the barrel off without risk of cracking the frame (he's cracked a few and knows how far to push things) and told me S&W no longer makes any concessions for professional gunsmiths like they used to in the old days.

To make a point; when done correctly, barrel fitment is a precise operation and S&W is using a machine driven method that requires the "clearance" I've made reference to and I personally believe that mechanically forced method is what's leading to all the wonky barrels. They're fitting barrels this way because it's cheap and it can be performed by a monkey - plain and simple.

Makes one pine for the old days.

Well, this is easy. I won't be buying ANY new S&W products...

All my S&W revolvers are old guns with the exception of a no lock 642 Airweight I bought new a couple years ago. This new 642 is every bit as good as my old humpback M38 Bodyguard Airweight so it's all good in my gun safe.

I finally tortured myself through the second video, and I use the word "torture" with intention.
That guy is all over the map: S&W builds crap! Isn't this gun beautiful? S&W builds great guns! S&W are crooks!
(So I guess they are crooks who can build great guns when they choose to? That may actually be close to correct.)
Good grief!!!
Plus he throws words around that are imprecise when what is needed are precise terms. Then he starts guessing about S&W policies that he has no clue about. It is also clear his actual knowledge of revolvers is far less than what he thinks he knows.

That was over thirty minutes of video that could have been taken care of in five minutes with the right text, views of the guns, and a set up with straight edges to show the issues. Maybe seven minutes.

None of this is meant to imply S&W doesn't have issues. There are plenty of rational, knowledgeable people here to prove that they do.

Dammit! When am I going to learn when to turn off such train wrecks?!!!
Don't come at me with "So, who's the real dumbass here?" hell, I concede the point.
Good grief!!!

Here's the real tragedy;

When Tompkins brought S&W into the modern era by spending well over 100 million in upgraded CNC equipment, they were for the first time actually building major components to a tolerance they were NEVER able to produce in the past. But, they dropped the ball by relying on close tolerances (produced my a machine) as a substitute for precision fitting (produced by a skilled worker).

The lock-up, timing and chamber alignment on most of the turds I've handled and shot was OUTSTANDING, and better than anything they have ever produced in the past. If they'd just suck it up and get some skilled workers back in the production cycle, things would straighten themselves out for the most part.

But to do that, they'll have to leave the Union environment of the NE, where labor cost have torpedoed every gunmaker in that part of the country into potential bankruptcy …. most notably Colt.

I have finally given up on them. Two model 63's returned one was so bad they gave me my money back, two recent 44 magnums returned because they over torqued the barrel. All brand new, all P-hucked up from the factory.

I'm a fan of my no lock 442, also, but it did have to go back and be replaced for a new one because of a quality control issue. Now it's one of my favorites.

Just so happens that Hickok45 just put out a video that's kind of on point.

Thirty minutes! Geez, doesn’t he know about brevity! So what’s the bottom line, new or old?

You're supposed to savor his videos.

Did Remington buy them?😂

Those videos make me want to fall on a sword.

I'm afraid we're living in an age where anyone with a smart phone and an internet connection can use 1,500 superfluous words (500 more if it involves "unboxing") to parrot the information garnered from a published spec sheet and call it a review.

I am a big fan of S&W revolvers. I have 2 Hillary hole guns . But, I will never buy another one. Not because I've had so many bad experiences. I just don't want to expose myself to the potential for that.

It's simply too easy to buy the older guns and be a very happy camper with them. And, there's just something about Old Skool.

I took one look at the guy and didn't click. Call me judgmental.

I hear you! Dumb as I am about watching some stuff on UTube, if "unboxing" is in the title . . . Oh, HELL no!!!

I think we've got Hickok 45 confused with the long haired, bearded guy who was sending his 686 Plus back to S&W.
Hickok can get long winded at times, but he looks pretty normal (for a really tall guy), he knows a thing or two, and he shoots pretty damn good.

Never understood why one would choose a new Smith when proper ones can be had for the equivalent or less. I recently gave $450 for this M19.