S&W Issues Recall for Walther PPK/PPKs Models

The discharge is taking place because his is taking off the safety and then manually pulling back the hammer partially and then allowing it to fall back. The failure is that the gun should not be able to fire unless the trigger is pulled back.
 
If this is a defect (pulling the hammer back almost to lock and letting it fall - resulting in discharge without trigger pull) aren't virtually every firearm with a hammer defective?
 
If this is a defect (pulling the hammer back almost to lock and letting it fall - resulting in discharge without trigger pull) aren't virtually every firearm with a hammer defective?
Click to expand...
Not really. Most modern firearms have a safety feature that prevents the firing pin from striking the round unless the trigger is pulled fully to the rear.
 
I think this is the wrong issue. In the video, the safety is taken off, and thus the firing pin is exposed. A partial pull of the hammer will allow it to spring forward, and hit the pin.

What the recall is all about is the reverse. A round in the chamber, the hammer is cocked. This could be after firing, or after manually chambering a round. Then, what you are supposed to be able to do is put the safety "on" i.e. down, in the "safe" position. Doing so is supposed to position the firing pin block, and release the hammer down on it. As such, the pistol is safe for carrying, in that the hammer is down, and blocked from the firing pin.

BUT, it seems the recall is because the firing pin block either does not move into position, or may have broke (I've seen stories about the part, having been made of steel for decades, has been replaced by a plastic part by S&W - sounds true enough, but I have no experience opening the pistol to that degree.)

The danger is what happens when the safety is put ON, not how dangerous it is with the safety OFF. That's always been true, and that's why they call it a SAFETY.
 
Most modern firearms have a safety feature that prevents the firing pin from striking the round unless the trigger is pulled fully to the rear.
Click to expand...
This one may not. Remember, it's a 60 year old design. I just double-checked the owner's manual, and it says nothing about a trigger safety. The only recommended way to lower the hammer is by decocking it by turning the safety to the safe position, and relying on the firing pin block to keep the hammer from hitting the firing pin when the hammer is released in the decocking sequence.
 
I've seen stories about the part, having been made of steel for decades, has been replaced by a plastic part by S&W - sounds true enough, but I have no experience opening the pistol to that degree.
Click to expand...

It's stainless steel. I doubt that it's form or sectional density differs from Walther original parts, they too were known to break. Remember, the guns are made under license, they cannot make changes without approval (I assume). I think that's the purpose of licensing, to protect the name holder's reputation. (Walther)
 
This one may not. Remember, it's a 60 year old design.
Click to expand...
My Interarms PPK was made in the 1990's and has a rebounding hammer safety that prevents the hammer from touching the firing pin unless the trigger is held to the rear. S&W may have made some recent changes, but prior to that I'm pretty sure that the original design included the rebounding hammer safety.
 
Do any of you guys who contacted s&w know if they are going to let us know when they ship our pistol back or will it just show up? I guess they may have their hands too full to do so, but was just wondering.
 
I just called today, same story. Right now they are working on the ones they had "on hand" in Jan-Feb. I don't know what that means, or if some people shipped theirs upon the recall, without waiting for return authorization. Hmmm. She asked when mine got there, I told her in March, when the labels came out. She said 8-12 weeks, no email, it'll just show up. I had sent them an email asking for an update on the website, to tell people how the recall was going, how many they have in the mill, etc. No response to that suggestion.
We'll get them back when we get them. That's it.
One more thing, she did say it's "first come - first served," so they do have them scheduled in order of arrival.
 
Last edited:
S&W may have made some recent changes, but prior to that I'm pretty sure that the original design included the rebounding hammer safety.
Click to expand...

The S&W hammer rebounds also. As I stated earlier, these guns were made under license, any changes made were approved beforehand. I'm still waiting to hear the whole story, and suspect that we will not hear it for a long time as lawyers and insurance people are involved.
When I say the whole story I mean that the actual problem has never been specified in detail. My own suspicion is that it is a metallurgical problem that has occurred in a small percentage of existing guns, a percentage of guns large enough to arouse the interest of the people mentioned earlier. Walther engineers worked with S&W engineers in making the changes between S&W made guns and earlier Interarms, French Manurhin and even earlier German made guns.
Changes noted in an article in American Handgunner from 2003 (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_165_27/ai_105698452/) are as follows;

The tang was extended as noted.

The grip material was changed to Zytel.

The lower rear of the slide was aggressively deburred to minimize slide bite. (Which I carried even farther on mine.)

The trigger serrations were eliminated, reportedly they caused discomfort.

The barrel and frame feed ramps are cut after assembly instead of prior to, a clear improvement from an engineering standpoint.

Closer tolerances due to the use of CNC equipment.

The serial number engraving method.

No mention was made of any changes to the safety.

I took the safety out of mine and it is made of stainless steel. In my opinion alloy carbon steel is stronger and more durable than any stainless alloy but there may be disagreement on that by metallurgists.

We don't know whether or not they are swapping parts with a different alloy, perhaps 17-4 PH for 416 or visa versa, cast for machined, or changes in the safeties sectional area within weak areas. (I don't recall whether or not the safety appeared to be machined or cast) They may even just be inspecting them for casting voids or machining mistakes that have been discovered in failed guns, stamping the mark and sending them back.

If anyone knows anything more and can report it I'm sure many of us would love to hear the details.
 
Recall

Read on another forum that S&W has the parts for repair, and started working on them May 4th.
 
If that's true they just started on them....that is ridiculous customer service! Mine, and surely many others were received by Smith/Wesson by the end of March and to just be sitting there for a month is uncalled for.
 
This doesn't jive with my telcon last month when she said they where working the ones on hand. Even so, TLeo, you and I should be right in the front of the pile they are now finally starting to work on. The actual "fix" shouldn't take but a few minutes, unless they have to go through safety checks and range firing.
None of us are happy, but at least things do seem to be moving, even if it is at a snail's pace.
 
MartyG I hope the info the person from S&W gave you was correct and not just giving you some BS to satisfy you and that other info was wrong.
 
Just got off the phone again. Here's the latest. My pistol, which was signed for on 3/30, made it into the processing line on April 4th.

They had a delay getting the fix approved by their own safety dept.

Once the mods began, they soon found out the disassembly and part replacement was much more labor intensive than their original estimate.

She said they are still working on guns they received in January, but said she hasn't had an update in a while.

I suggested again a web site update periodically, so she wouldn't have to answer calls like this. She agreed, it has been considered, but nothing yet. She thought maybe they would once they got into a predictable flow pattern.

All of this is understandable, but aggravating, too. Not much we can do but wait.
 
Received e-mail from them today that said to "please allow additional 4-6 weeks for turnaround" (I shipped mine March 27)...my impression is that they meant from today, i.e the original 8-12 weeks is more like 10-12 weeks.

I was also negotiating with them for a free magazine since they probably will mess up the slip-on Hogue grip that I left on it :eek:
 
I saw a used Smith&Walther at one of the local shops. Tempting at $425...
Ill look and see if its within the recall range first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top