S&W Quality Issues?

[mattnoks]

I'm planning on buying a new SW 686 in the near future. I was wondering if there actually are quality issues with them. I found people complaining of barrels breaking of the 629 and timing issues but nothing that was dated recently. I also found this article:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/smith-wesson_dark.htm

I really want to get the 686 but I'm worried about getting a dud. Anybody had issues with a new 686 recently. Is the GP100 currently the better gun?

Thanks
Matt

 

[jameslovesjammie]

I find alot of problems with that article. I have read several of Chuck's articles, and I take everything I read from him with a grain of salt. He's always angry at something or someone, that's how he keeps people reading his column.

There is a lot of assumption in that article and not necessarily facts.

As far as S&W copying everyone on the planet's gun designs, if there is a market for something, such as a small gun for police use, just because Colt made a small frame gun with a short barrel...that doesn't mean that noone else can either. Same with the L frame Smith. Saying it is a copy of the Python because it is the same size and has a full underlug is not a fair statement. If that is the case, then Dan Wesson, Taurus, and pretty much every other manufacturer is just copying Colt. It's like saying that Ford is copying Chevy/Geo. Since GM had the Tracker out first, Ford is just copying them with the Escape. Or every SUV is just a copy of Jeep, since it was the first with a 2 door, 4 wheel drive vehicle based on a truck platform.

As far as S&W just copying Colt in manufacturing a 1911...come on. So after nearly 100 years, Smith decided to cash in on the market of the most popular pistol ever created. Who else has "copied" Colt? Springfield, Sig, Dan Wesson (who has dedicated 99% of their resources to 1911 production instead of revolvers), Llama, and Taurus, just to name a few. Damn copycats!

Next comes the comments about how S&W is just a sellout company who changes their management staff every couple of years. Smith and Wesson is a company; a company in a business; a business whose purpose is to make money. Any company can be bought and sold. Look at Sears and Kmart. In the 1970's and 1980's, they were the number 1 and 2 companies in the United States. The market changed, but management styles didn't. Kmart went bankrupt, and one man bought controlling shares in the company. He then used what equity he had to purchase Sears a few years later. The one time number 1 and 2 retailers combined to become the number three retailer in the nation (after Walmart and Home Depot). What happened to Sears and Kmart? Management didn't keep up with the times. They were still managing their stores the way they did in the 70's, while Walmart, Home Depot, Lowes, Best Buy, and numerous other retailers walked all over what used to be their market. I feel that the same thing happened to S&W, and that was the reason for many of the management changes, along with anti-gun lawsuits.

In my humble opinion, this is the shirt that Chuck Hawks should wear.

 

[jameslovesjammie]

p.s. I have a 686, have over 10,000 rounds through it, and it is the best shooting gun that I own. It is the most accurate, has the best trigger, and is the most fun gun to shoot. Mine is a 686-5, which is a fairly new model. I have had zero problems with this gun, and I've had it since 2000.

If you do have warranty problems, send it to Smith and they will fix it. They will pay your shipping both ways, and you will have a fixed (or replaced) gun in two weeks or less.

 

[learn2shoot]

I have a 686 Plus and love it.... I haven't given it quite the use as james did, but have put at least a few thousand through it. Quite possibly my favorite gun (that I own) - got it in late 2005

 

[def4pos8]

Of twenty handguns, I own nine S&W revolvers, eight of which were purchased in the past six years. The oldest was made in '73, the newest in '06. I am very pleased with all of them -- even the one that broke.

My most recent purchase was of a second Model 21 Thunder Ranch Special, via SmithWessonForum.com. I believe that the prior owner abused it, cracking the frame at its interface with the cylinder crane. Although S&W was not obliged to repair the revolver under warranty (I wasn't the original owner.) they are, in fact, repairing it under warranty. I was even provided a shipping label and UPS over-nighted the thing to S&W at no cost to me!

As I write this, they have had it for ten days. I am not in a panic to have whatever repair they perform completed, as I have my other Model 21 on hand. I'm just very pleasantly surprised that S&W will support a secondary buyer like me in this way.

 

[Master Blaster]

My most recent purchase was of a second Model 21 Thunder Ranch Special, via SmithWessonForum.com. I believe that the prior owner abused it, cracking the frame at its interface with the cylinder crane. Although S&W was not obliged to repair the revolver under warranty (I wasn't the original owner.) they are, in fact, repairing it under warranty. I was even provided a shipping label and UPS over-nighted the thing to S&W at no cost to me!

Most likely they will call you and ask what new gun you would like to replace it with, or they are going to give you a new one with the same serial number as your old one on the frame.

Let us know how they handle it.

 

[MCgunner]

IMHO, if you are going to avoid all handguns on the market that have ever had a bad one get out of the factory, you're just going to not own handguns. Go to the gun store, know what to look for, pick it up and TEST the timing, check the end play, check the barrel/cylinder gap, etc, etc, etc. Don't BUY it if the timing is off! Now, I don't know about barrels falling off, but I'm not a big fan of barrel installation without the pin. I prefer the older pinned revolvers. I do think that is what the warranty is for, though, and I can't imagine it'd just "fall off". Get loose, well, I could see that happening, maybe, perhaps, but sounds a little fishy.

I don't own many Smiths, just one. I'm not a big Smith fan, but not because of quality. I just think they cost way, way, way too much for what you get. I guess you pay extra for the lock.

 

[MCgunner]

Example: A Guns and Shooting Online staff member purchased a brand new S&W 22/32 Kit Gun whose rear sight could not be adjusted far enough laterally to put bullets into the target at 25 yards. Upon close examination with a straight edge we found that this revolver's frame was actually machined in a slight curve. Clearly no one had test fired this revolver at the factory.

Well, there's one that would have slid past my pre-purchase inspection.

 

[18DAI]

Just find a nice 686-4, and avoid the whole "issue". Good luck! TJ

 

[HighVelocity]

I'm no expert, nor have I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express lately. I am, however, a huge fan of S&W revolvers and own or have owned quite a few.

That said, I'd be very skeptical of a new one. I've recently worked on 3 late production guns for friends and have been aghast at the lack of workmanship put into the guns. The fit and finish was less than acceptable. One of these guns was a Performance Center job too.

I don't know what's going on with S&W QC but whatever you do buy, I suggest that you have someone that knows what to look for go with you.

 

[bannockburn]

I've owned S&W revolvers for many years, and while the new models don't impress me as much as the older ones, I can still recall some real "duds" turned out even during the good old days of pinned barrels and recessed cylinders. Go with what MCgunner recommended and thoroughly check out any revolver before you buy it; new or used, no matter what company manufactured it, or when it was made.

 

[Old Fuff]

It used to be that Smith & Wesson and Colt both targeted their revolvers, and in the case of match-grade guns included a test target in the box. Those days are long gone. Today most handgun manufacturers proof fire a random sample, and perhaps shoot one or two rounds in case the gun ends up in NY or MD. I believe Freedom Arms still target in their big revolvers, so they'd be an exception. Ruger test fires guns, but that's about it.

So far as quality control at S&W - or for that matter other makers - no one is perfect, and even in the "old days" some stuff got out that needed to be returned. The company has an excellent waranntee system, which may be the best in the industry. But the blunt fact is that "back when" they had a better understanding about making someone's personal life insurance right the first time. Moderm economics and production costs have caused that to slip a bit. The chances of something getting out that shouldn't are higher then they used to be. I would personally stay away from the ultra-light or aluminum framed models that are chambered in Magnum or other high pressure loads, and carefully examine anything before I bought it. In all things the customer too often ends up being the beta tester and final inspector.

 

[Black Adder LXX]

Is the GP100 currently the better gun?

I've shot my GP100 and a 686 side-by-side and have to say, I'm more impressed with the ruger. I actually like S&W (I have a revolver and a pistol), but prefer the GP100 in this category for the following reasons:

1. S&W has the internal lock, Ruger does not
2. Ruger is less expensive
3. Ruger is built sturdier
4. The only criticism of the GP100 I regularly hear is the trigger, but it smooths out with use quickly.

IMHO if you want a medium frame 357 S&W revolver, buy a used one instead.

 

[Hawk]

In all things the customer too often ends up being the beta tester and final inspector.

Definitely agreed. Further, those like myself that are relatively inexperienced don't stand much of a chance of seeing what we need to see at the retailer - we'll usually uncover the gremlins later when such things are far more difficult to deal with.

At least with semi-autos there exist dealers that will give a specific firearm an extensive going-over to include test firing, zeroing and making sure the sucker runs right. I've found it to be a great way to buy a little insurance against aggravation and the associated high blood pressure.

Is such a service available for revolvers and, if not, would anybody be inclined to purchase such a service? Just because the factories lack the inclination to fully test and target a firearm doesn't preclude some distributor or dealer from firing up cottage industry doing exactly that. Just haven't seen it outside the context of semis though.

 

[Old Fuff]

You might have a good idea, but one problem would be the shipping costs of sending a gun back and forth the get the service. If it was offered by a local dealer(s) that would be something else. Also I'm not sure a lot of dealers would have the skill and facilities to offer such a service.

An alternative would be to have an experienced shooter at a local club or shooting range help target a gun - again something that might or might not be available.

And the bottom line is unless the dealer pre-inspects and targets the gun before the sale you still have to buy it first before you find you've got a lemon - if indeed you do.

 

[Hawk]

In my specific case, Dawson provides the service then I pick up the product from a local FFL. (actually I sometimes drive down to pick it up as they're convenient to Salado and the Stage Coach Inn - I'll buy you lunch there if you're ever in the area). He's a regular retailer - the product can be purchased "stock" or, optionally, "enhanced". It's part of the retail establishment so no extra shipping is involved.

It's this package.

I'm not sure but I believe they've plenty of competition - Brazos may be one.

Anyhow, I imagined a similar revolver operation being something like "Fuff's Smiths" where someone orders from a retailer in, say, Arizona who optionally does a full check out, targets the thing, snags 150.00 over the sell price and ships to a local FFL. The freight would be the usual USPS FFL-to-FFL amount. Revolvers could be purchased in their "stock" "good luck with that" form as well.

I doubt the service would set the world on fire in the context of 442s - it'd make more sense being applied to Performance shop stuff and relatively high-end stuff - I can't see Dawson selling many of those packages on 300.00 guns but someone buying an upper range product might appreciate such a service - at least that'd be my guess based on Dawson's growing lead times.

I sometimes see threads where those decrying the decline in QC also note that, in real terms, revolvers are much cheaper than they were 40 years ago - I wonder how many would pay a reasonable price to put all the QC back where it belongs - upstream of the buyer.

But, given the number of "where can I get a cheap..." or "where to get a "J" frame for under 350.00" threads I see, it's probably a suicidal business model but when I'm off my meds I do wonder why the semi-auto folks can do well with it...

 

[SJshooter]

I've shot my GP100 and a 686 side-by-side and have to say, I'm more impressed with the ruger....

3. Ruger is built sturdier

Totally false. The Ruger may be thicker, but that is because it HAS to be - it is cast and not forged, like a Smith is.

 

[dfariswheel]

Some of you may remember the famous "Burger War" of the 1980's.

Ruger started it by putting ads in the gun magazines claiming that their GP-100 was a better gun than S&W because it was beefier.

S&W did a devastating return ad showing a hamburger shaped like a Ruger, complete with bun and pickles, asking "Where's the beef".
The ads made clear that Ruger's HAD to be thicker than the forged S&W simply to equal the strength of the S&W revolver.

Ruger quickly dropped their ads.

 

[def4pos8]

Master Blaster

Oh! I'll tell the whole WORLD about it, good or bad. I called 'em today and it's somewhere in the warranty repair mill. I suspect that they'll replace the frame, adding a "star" or "R" suffix to the serial number to indicate the rebuild. I'm good with that.

The seller claimed "excellent condition" and the photo looked OK. This thing had extreme lead fouling of the bore, charge hole freebores, forcing cone, forward frame and crane. The fool(s) who abused it likely ran a bunch of Elmer Keith's "special" .44 loads through it. The light weight of the Model 21 didn't take the recoil well, battering, deforming and cracking the frame at its interface with the crane.

This is the first/last firearm I EVER purchase via the internet.

 

[SJshooter]

 

[def4pos8]

GREAT ad! --and I'm a Ruger stockholder!!

 

[Bill B.]

Two of the finest shooting and functioning S&W's I own are a new 625 & 627 with the lock and I am quite sure the dreaded MIM parts. I have S&W's that are over 50 years old that are not better. You can get a lemon on anything but I feel S&W is still tuning out excellent revolvers & auto's. There is some in their line that I don't care for but in your case the S&W 686 will be a keeper IMO.

 

[jaydubya]

I have a 637 purchased new four years ago (with internal lock and most likely MIM parts) and a 686+ purchased used but unfired a year ago (lock and most likely MIM parts). Having fired thousands of rounds through both, I am thankful that I have had none of the problems I read about. I also am thankful that S&W stands behind its products. They are the benchmark for customer support.
Cordially, Jack

 

[Capstick1]

I own both a Ruger GP100 and the older Security Six .357 Magnum revolvers. Both of these revolvers are strong have had numerous full power magnum rounds fired through them. The triggers on the Rugers are rough and do require a break in period. I've also shot some S & W's and I think their revolvers have a little better craftsmanship and are better finished. I'm seriously thinking about buying a stainless 6" 686 for informal target shooting and plinking at my local range. The revolvers seem to have become very "Old School" and have lost much of ther popularity over the years. These days everybody seems to want the latest Glock, H & K, automatic etc. For practicing my pistol marksmanship with a handgun I generally prefer revolvers over autos. I've owned and shot lots of semiauto pistols and although they can be fun I really hate picking up all the brass when I'm done. The nice thing about shooting a revolver is when you're done shooting all you got to do is open the cylinder, place it over your brass bucket, press down on the ejector lever and all your spent rounds fall into one neat little pile. If you want to fire some more slide in another six or seven in the cylinder and you're back in business. Some people might miss having a 15rd magazine to shoot but the fact that you only have 6 or 7 rounds available subconciously forces you to apply the fundamentals more into each shot. Another big plus for the revolvers is if you don't feel like spending the extra money or tolerating the extra recoil of full blown .357 Mag loads, you can always use the lighter recoiling .38 Special loads for target shooting. For this reason I think the .357 magnum revolver makes a much better pistol for a first time handgun shooter than a modern complicated semiautomatic pistol.

 

[CU74]

I love THR! OP asks about S&W quality issues and here we are in the middle of our weekly Smith vs Ruger vs Colt "debate".

I have several Colts, several Rugers and a bunch of Smiths. I like 'em ALL. Best trigger? A Ruger GP100 - police turn-in with a professional action job. The one revolver that gets taken to the range most often? Smith Model 27 no-dash - more fun than anything I have ever done with all my clothes on.

IMHO, there isn't $25 difference in any of them. OP, buy a pre-lock Smith and enjoy yourself. I'm not trying to re-start the ever-popular lock vs no lock debate, just opining that the general overall quality was better in the "earlier" days, back before the lock was introduced.