I'm so angry at S&W, are there firearm lemon laws?

Howdy

I have completely given up buying new S&W revolvers because of the lack of quality. The last S&W revolver I bought was in 2015. A Model 686-6 that had QC issues.

Your photo did prompt me to look down the bore of my 686 however, and the rifling is spotless. I can see a slight hint of drag marks in the grooves, indicating to me that the barrel was rifled either using a broach or a button.

I did buy a S&W 9mm 1911 PRO semi-auto this year that I have been very pleased with. I just took a look down the bore and the rifling is spotless. There appears to be a hint of drag marks in the grooves, indicating to me that this barrel was also rifled either with a broach or button.

I have no idea how those crazy tool marks could have been left in the OP's bore, particularly down in the grooves.

I guess I am not up on the latest in rifling techniques, I never even heard of ECM rifling. Just a classic guy who likes old Smiths.

Smith and Wesson has definitely cut down on the in process inspection steps they used to have. Look on the frame under the grips on an old Smith and you will see several inspector's marks, each stamped there after an in process inspection. It appears they are content to accept the cost of returns rather than pay in process inspectors.
 
Last edited:
Although I have seen reamer marks across barrel lands, I can't figure out how to get evenly spaced marks across the bottom of the grooves, so I am going with the aliens theory.

I understand the monster magnum barrels are ECM rifled. I don't know about current standard models. They used broach rifling and lapping for years because cut rifling was too slow and the unsymmetrical shape of a barrel with rib and underlug would not button evenly. I suspect the two piece barrels are buttoned by the mile and cut off by the foot.
 
Seems as though the working theory on the other forum about this particular gun is that Lothar made the barrel and it somehow missed the last step in manufacturing.
 
I can't figure out how to get evenly spaced marks across the bottom of the grooves
Click to expand...

I'll join the chorus of bafflement at that. Aliens make as much sense as anything I can come up with, meaning, of course, zero.
 
Star Washer Theory

Those little lines also run up from the grooves to the lands in the pic of the OP's bore. I don't know Diddley about machine work or firearms manufacturing, but if I wanted to duplicate that look I'd get a stack of star washer like things and stack them using some twisted guide rails to give the rate of twist. The outside portion of S&W's 2-piece barrel would hide the lines and hold the mess together. Maybe have the rate of twist guide rods attached to the outer part, and the star washers also notched on their outside diameter so they would be held in place. I know it wouldn't work, but it would resemble the OP's bore (until it was fired).
 

Attachments

  • star washer.jpg
    star washer.jpg
    10.7 KB · Views: 90
Driftwood Johnson said:
Howdy

I have completely given up buying new S&W revolvers because of the lack of quality. The last S&W revolver I bought was in 2015. A Model 686-6 that had QC issues.

Your photo did prompt me to look down the bore of my 686 however, and the rifling is spotless. I can see a slight hint of drag marks in the grooves, indicating to me that the barrel was rifled either using a broach or a button.

I did buy a S&W 9mm 1911 PRO semi-auto this year that I have been very pleased with. I just took a look down the bore and the rifling is spotless. There appears to be a hint of drag marks in the grooves, indicating to me that this barrel was also rifled either with a broach or button.

I have no idea how those crazy tool marks could have been left in the OP's bore, particularly down in the grooves.

I guess I am not up on the latest in rifling techniques, I never even heard of ECM rifling. Just a classic guy who likes old Smiths.

Smith and Wesson has definitely cut down on the in process inspection steps they used to have. Look on the frame under the grips on an old Smith and you will see several inspector's marks, each stamped there after an in process inspection. It appears they are content to accept the cost of returns rather than pay in process inspectors.
Click to expand...
In process inspecting has become the machine operator's job. IDK how it goes with barrel making, but for normal CNC machine work it's not one guy per machine, more like one guy (making 10-12 bucks an hour) on 2 or 3 machines, not necessarily making the same exact parts. Operators are under the gun (no pun intended) when demand is high, but with how things have been the past 2+ years, demand is not high, definitely not for .460 revolvers.

Especially those that have been sent back to the factory with QC issues already.

Whatever the issue was with the chambers on the revolver months ago, mistakes do happen, but nothing explains this absolute failure on all levels and there are no acceptable excuses other than sloppy workmanship and ZERO QC of something like this to be sent out to a customer on a "fixed" $1100 gun.

It's like just when I think Ruger's newly made revolvers are suffering from poor QC, I see something like this from S&W. My best guess as to why it took 8 weeks for this to be sent back to the OP is S&W is horribly backlogged doing warranty work.

I agree with you: stay the Hell away from newly made S&W revolvers, stick with the older, better made classics.

EDIT: Maybe the J frames are okay given the sheer volume of those that are made. Like with the LCR, it seems the small frame snubbies are pretty solid QC wise.
 
I've had to send a gun or two back to Smith & Wesson for work that should have been done the first time. 8 weeks is not that long of a time. Smith's are worth the money and they will take care of you.

I would call and write down the name of the person you talk to. Also ask for their supervisor's name if you don't get the answers you are looking for. For one of my guns I kept asking for the next supervisor because I kept getting a different story as to where my gun was. I went to the top and got my gun back in one week, perfect.

It's worth giving them a chance but you have to stay on top of it.
 
In process inspecting has become the machine operator's job. IDK how it goes with barrel making, but for normal CNC machine work it's not one guy per machine, more like one guy (making 10-12 bucks an hour) on 2 or 3 machines, not necessarily making the same exact parts. Operators are under the gun (no pun intended) when demand is high, but with how things have been the past 2+ years, demand is not high, definitely not for .460 revolvers.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you have been working, but operators operating more than one CNC machine has been done for a lot more than 2 years. And they don't make $10 - $12 per hour either. In a former life I was a mechanical designer for an electronics manufacturer, and I would visit the machine shop regularly. I often saw guys running two or three machines at once. This was over twenty years ago. And they sure were not making just $10 - $12 per hour. More like $30 an hour. At about that time the machine shop did get rid of the inspection department and the operators were responsible for their own QC of finished parts. But before anything shipped it had to be run by the company's inspection department. They did a very good job of inspecting to Mil standards. I can recall seeing lots of rejected parts.

S&W used to have inspection after each major assembly, probably 3 or 4 in process inspections in all. I suspect now that if there is any inspection being done at all it is just before the finished firearms are shipped.
 
Driftwood Johnson said:
I don't know where you have been working, but operators operating more than one CNC machine has been done for a lot more than 2 years. And they don't make $10 - $12 per hour either. In a former life I was a mechanical designer for an electronics manufacturer, and I would visit the machine shop regularly. I often saw guys running two or three machines at once. This was over twenty years ago. And they sure were not making just $10 - $12 per hour. More like $30 an hour. At about that time the machine shop did get rid of the inspection department and the operators were responsible for their own QC of finished parts. But before anything shipped it had to be run by the company's inspection department. They did a very good job of inspecting to Mil standards. I can recall seeing lots of rejected parts.

S&W used to have inspection after each major assembly, probably 3 or 4 in process inspections in all. I suspect now that if there is any inspection being done at all it is just before the finished firearms are shipped.
Click to expand...
Should have been more specific, $10 to $12 per hour in firearm manufacturing. S&W probably pays more like $14/hour, but that's in Massachusetts, cost of living is very high there, so bottom line is pay is still low.

Everybody was making better money 20 years ago, relatively speaking.

I agree with you that inspection is done just before shipping. I don't think individual parts are being inspected by professional inspectors, they're getting checked by operators and I can speak from personal experience, we'll let one or two things go if they're not too far out of spec it keeps us from having to deal with supers asking, "What happened?"
 
I really wish that i could inspect that myself to see if there is any roughness that can be physically detected, or are those lines nothing but an illusion of roughness?
 
I really wish that i could inspect that myself to see if there is any roughness that can be physically detected, or are those lines nothing but an illusion of roughness?
Click to expand...

There is this in the OP:

I go to clean it and realize that something is still off. First of all, when I pass a brass brush through the barrel it sounds like zipping a zipper.
Click to expand...

If it's an optical illusion, it's one that makes noise.:D
 
Haven't heard anything from the OP in 9 days as to iffin he has contacted S&W and iffin he has, what their response was. Curious as all get out to what really is going on with his barrel..........
 
In 1974, my grandfather purchased a brand new S&W 39-2 9mm. First magazine or two resulted in a couple stove pipes with Remington 124 grain hardball. He shipped it back to S&W, who in turn polished the ramp and test fired it until it ran as smoothly as butter. He got his pistol back within 2 weeks. It is now mine and still functioning as designed, original springs, magazines, etc. I'm pretty sure even if there was an internet back in 1974, my Grandfather wouldn't have broadcasted any criticism towards S&W on social media, only praise.

My point is, S&W turns out a boatload of guns every year. Like any large reputable company (Colt firearms, Ford, Chevy, Bear Archery, etc.), given the tremendously high volume of products being manufactured, there will always be an occassional imperfect item that slips by Quality Control, hence their Warranty and repair Departments. The OP's weapon is unacceptable and should be returned for repair / replacement... repeatedly if necessary.
 
Last edited:
Arguably the most oft repeated myth of revolver aficionados is that their holy grail of handguns, the revolver, is more reliable than a semi. A good quality semi will whip a good quality revolver in reliability testing. A semi is of simplistic design with few moving parts. A double-action revolver is of complex design with many moving parts, all of which have to work perfectly for a revolver to function as intended.
 
On topic, like Remington, it's sad what has happened to an icon of American gun making. Prior to its sale to a British outfit in the early 80's, S&W represented the best of American craftsmanship.
 
SATRP said:
Arguably the most oft repeated myth of revolver aficionados is that their holy grail of handguns, the revolver, is more reliable than a semi. A good quality semi will whip a good quality revolver in reliability testing. A semi is of simplistic design with few moving parts. A double-action revolver is of complex design with many moving parts, all of which have to work perfectly for a revolver to function as intended.
Click to expand...

While the arguments for which is more reliable is as many and as highly discussed as "Which gun for bear?", the problem with the firearm in this thread is the barrel. Which IMHO, is relatively the same in either a revolver or semi-auto.

So......what's your point, other than your holy grail of handguns, is a semi?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top