Really upset with S&W Quality Control and Customer service!

You guys are right, Taurus is much better than Smith. Just ask Dirty Harry.
Its pretty funny that anyone would say this thread would keep them from buying another S&W ever. Smith didnt make those grips, the gun came from an online source, and as such couldnt be inspected prior to purchase. Theres no telling what happened to that gun before if got to the OP. Someone could have switched the grips, stole the screw to make another customer happy, and put the wrong one back in, the grips could have not been the ones it came with, etc. I have never bought a gun without seeing it first, and from a reputable local source. Saving a few bucks is not worth it for me, as the gun price is always much less than the amo, holsters, training, and everything else that goes with it. I have also worked with enough morons to know no matter how good a company is, there is always a few losers who work there that through thier actions can make a company look much worse than it is, and do not represent the company correctly. For such an enormous company that Smith is, I think they are doing a good job putting out a good product, at a decent price, and backing it up 99.9% of the time with great customer service. Grips are not the end of the world, and easily replaced, and if the only problem the Op has with this gun is on the grips from a gun he bought online, then I think hes going to be a happy camper once he gets properly fitting grips on the gun.
The place that sold him the gun should be responsible for the condition the gun was shipped in. I guarantee someone at that company at least saw the gun, had it in thier hand or looked it over, and if they didnt inspect it prior to shipping, that doesnt say much about them.
Rivers, I hope once you get some properly fitting grips the gun treats you well, as I 100% think it will. I have more than a few guns and my 686 is probably my favorite of all. There is no Taurus on earth that is even in the same league.
 
My Christmas-present-to-myself 686SSR had an interesting “feature” – a six-shot cylinder with seven flutes. The gun went through final QC early last December. It took a while and quite a few conflicting promises from CS before they made it right.

I had to make a monumental PITA of myself to get the response I was looking for. Even so, I was promised a final return call from them (the reason wasn’t made exactly clear) and that call has never materialized.

IMG_7873.jpg
 
Since it was asked- I bought two AR's from s&w. They were the latest greatest piston wonder-rifles. They wouldnt shoot a whole mag without jamming. Spent hundreds of dollars and lots and lots of time tryimg to make them functional. After a a stay at s&w for many months they came back still not functioning right, and came back all marred-up and covered in a ton of shop dust. After trying every AR15 voodoo trick, I sold them and swore off s&w rifles and products in general. Then they made a sweet no-lock engraved 640 with a really sweet trigger and I caved in and bought it. I get huge discounts so I basically stole it! :)
 
The six shot cylinder being bored from a seven shot blank is apparently becoming a common problem from S&W. After seeing one on a thread here a while back, three local gunshops have said it's a problem they are seeing more often from S&W. At one of the shops, a salesman brought two .44 MAGs out of the back that were waiting to be shipped back to S&W because of this same problem. Boy some of those bores are pretty thin on the outside! That could be disaterous! How does this get past QC and why is it happening more? The salesman said they always inspect every firearm before it goes to display for sale and this was easy to spot. Said he didn't understand how a mistake so easy to spot keeps getting past their QC department. Sounds like their QC department is headed in the wrong direction and from some of the other post, maybe their customer service as well. Seems either great or crappy depending on who picks up the phone. HMMMM!:rolleyes:
 
The six shot cylinder being bored from a seven shot blank is apparently becoming a common problem from S&W. After seeing one on a thread here a while back, three local gunshops have said it's a problem they are seeing more often from S&W. At one of the shops, a salesman brought two .44 MAGs out of the back that were waiting to be shipped back to S&W because of this same problem. Boy some of those bores are pretty thin on the outside! That could be disaterous! How does this get past QC and why is it happening more? The salesman said they always inspect every firearm before it goes to display for sale and this was easy to spot. Said he didn't understand how a mistake so easy to spot keeps getting past their QC department. Sounds like their QC department is headed in the wrong direction and from some of the other post, maybe their customer service as well. Seems either great or crappy depending on who picks up the phone. HMMMM!

3 different shops you say.... HMMMMM!
 
I'm not so sure that you have a whole lot to be ticked off about. While they quoted a 48 hour turn around for an email, it likely wouldn't have taken that long. Additionally, they offered to replace them up front.

Either way, the problem is solved. Enjoy your 686, I think you'll find it's one of the best .357s, if not the best on the market.
 
I'm glad that Mel doesn't work for Springfield Armory Customer Service. Three times I've requested shipping labels from them, (twice on their dime) and within 5 minutes I get a response from S.A. Customer Service that FEDEX is emailing me a shipping label. Which I receive within another 5 minutes.

Misters Smith and Wesson may be rolling over in their graves.
 
The six shot cylinder being bored from a seven shot blank is apparently becoming a common problem from S&W. After seeing one on a thread here a while back, three local gunshops have said it's a problem they are seeing more often from S&W. At one of the shops, a salesman brought two .44 MAGs out of the back that were waiting to be shipped back to S&W because of this same problem.
Click to expand...

I have a real hard time believing this occurred with guns chambered for the .44 mag. With the .357, it's just a matter of the same size cylinder being put through the wrong fluting or charge hole drilling. With the .44, they don't make ANY guns with seven round capacity. If it was a cylinder with eight flutes (for the 8 shot .357 model, the 327) and six .44 charge holes for a 629, I could see it, but not with seven .44 charge holes or flutes. Not even a little bit.

S&W's quality control has definitely been slipping. At least they mate it to good customer service, but the best customer service is the one you never need to use since everything was right from the get-go.
 
At least they mate it to good customer service, but the best customer service is the one you never need to use since everything was right from the get-go.
Click to expand...

I agree in theory, but cognitively, I actually have a higher opinion of a company if I *have* had a problem and their customer service has handled it in a stellar manner.

Basically, if I've never had a problem with Company "X", that's nice, but I'm not sure what will happen if I ever *do* have a problem with them in the future. But if I've had to deal with the customer service for Company "Y" and they've been absolute rock stars, then my attitude toward the company is "If I ever have a problem, they'll take care of me."

Since I can't believe 100% that I'll never need help from a company, knowing (or at least believing) that I'll be treated well if I do need help is worth a lot to me.
 
Yeah I thought the same thing since I know of no 7 shot .44Mag from S&W either but, you can have a hard time believing it if you may, but I seen it first hand. What I have a hard time believing, but then again seeing it first handwill make you a believer is that they ( even the picture of the one above that you can see for yourself) let this stuff get out of the building!
 
I was assured by S&W QC that no revolver like the one I bought had ever been shipped. If that's wrong, I'd like to see photos.
 
hydroholic, if this happened you should be able to provide pictures of the .44 revolvers, or a link to the gun shop.

If you can't...
 
Yeah you need absolute 100% proof against S&W cause it just couldn't be from the wordls best hangun manufacturer. Like I'm going to go into the gunshop and ask if I could shoot a few photographs of the two guns that I saw a month and a half ago that were screw ups from S&W. I'm sure the owner would not take offense being S&W along with Browning is probably the main brand they sell. Get a life! You have a picture above that is proof that they too make mistakes. And if you believe the " S&W assured me that was the only one that has ever been shipped out like that" garbage, then you will believe anything anyone says! There has been at least one other picture of the same problem from S&W posted on this site before. But you go ahead and believe what you will.
 
Posted by hydroholic:
And if you believe the " S&W assured me that was the only one that has ever been shipped out like that" garbage, then you will believe anything anyone says! There has been at least one other picture of the same problem from S&W posted on this site before. But you go ahead and believe what you will.
Click to expand...
It’s the same gun, genius!

Seriously, just because S&W made a serious mistake and shipped a gun that shouldn’t have gotten past any the people who handled it during production and QC, that doesn’t make their guns garbage. I have several S&W wheelguns and have a couple more on my “want” list.

As a competitive shooter for the last 50+ years, I’m very picky about my guns. I only want the best. IMNSHO, there is no other company that makes revolvers that can compare to S&W except for Ruger. I don’t own a Ruger revolver because I can’t get as good a DA trigger pull on one as I can on a Smith.

When I compete in the S&W Steel Challenge Nationals at the end of March, I’ll be shooting the same S&W 327PC that I used when I came in 2nd last year.

ISR2ndPlace.jpg
 
hydroholic,

As other posters have already pointed out (including yourself), S&W does NOT make a 7-shot .44. Therefore, it is not possible that you saw a 7-shot .44 that was mistakenly bored to 6-shot configuration. Even if it had been an N-frame .357, then it would have been an 8-shot cylinder bored with 6 .44 chambers.

So, if you want us to believe in such a weird mistake, especially if you are going to claim you've seen three of them, then provide a photo, or a link to the shop that is claiming to have received three of these guns.

My bet is you can't, for a few different reasons.

(Edit: and yes, there have been several threads which have featured Japle's gun. If you can actually find other guns with the same problem, provide links.)
 
Yeah I thought the same thing since I know of no 7 shot .44Mag from S&W either but, you can have a hard time believing it if you may, but I seen it first hand. What I have a hard time believing, but then again seeing it first handwill make you a believer is that they ( even the picture of the one above that you can see for yourself) let this stuff get out of the building!
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that either A) you don't know what you are talking about, or B) are full of it.

I'm almost certain that it's physically impossible to put 7 .44 caliber holes in an N frame cylinder. There just isn't enough room to fit a 7th hole. Also, to my knowledge, S&W has never made a 7 shot N frame anything. In .357 they made 6 and 8 shot guns, but anything larger than that and it's 6 shots only. L frames have 7 and 8 shot .357 variations, but when they were chambered in .44 special they only had 5 shot cylinders.

Japle's gun was an extreme rarity, one that slipped through the cracks. I'm sure that I would have probably overlooked it at first myself. Checking to see in the charge holes line up with the flutes is not something you normally do with a revolver. Everyone makes mistakes, and S&W is no exception. Believe it or not they weren't perfect back in the day either like some would have you believe.
 
Ok , after all the crap talk and claims that I couldn't have seen what I stated I saw, and the insinuation that I was " full of it", I decided to go back to the gun shop yesterday that I saw these two " Jewels " at. Like I figured , they were already gone and even though the same salesman was not there, one of the other guys new exactly what I was refering to. He was reluctant at first to even talk to me about it, but after a while of pretty much begging he basically told me what he had understood. He said they WERE .44 mags in the 629 series. He said he had held both guns in his hands ( which I did not, I only saw them when the salesman was holding them from a distance) and that is was a very noticeable mistake. He said that what he understood apparently had happened was the the cylinder was cut from the blank of a 629 Plus and although that is the the blank from a seven round .357, that it HAD been bored for 6-.44Mag holes. I asked him about the diameter of the cylinder and the ejector rod hole or whatever you want to call it that the cylinder mounts to v/s that of the correct cylinder for the gun and he said, and I quote " I don't know the exact measurements of either or if the bore of the center hole is different on the .357 v/s the .44 , but I can tell you that it was a 686 cylinder on a 629 frame, so whoever screwed it up made it work well enough to get out of the plant, but I don't see how because it was very noticeable". He said I either saw them the day they came in or at the latest the next day, beause they were sent back the morning of the 3rd day because S&W wanted them back ASAP! I am by no means a Smith and Wesson expert. I have owned a S&W 629 .44 Mag in the past and currently own a .500. I am not a fan of either and don't think they are all they are cracked up to be. But I know what I saw and am far from " full of it". I told the salesman after our talk why it was so important that I was questioning what I saw. He polietly asked that I not refer to this particular shop during my online discussions of this matter. He said to tell whoever to give Smith a call and ask them , but he would be very surprised if you got an answer , after all it wasn't a mistake to be proud of. He follwed up with exactly what the other salesman said about this being a problem they are seeing a little more of from S&W. He said it had always been the .357's , but this was a first out of the .44Mag and that the two they had were identical. So in your minds, I don't know if you think this is even possible, but I know what I saw!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top