Uberti 1873 Carbine - seeking advice

[frajecz]

Hello, so I've bought a factory-new Uberti 1873 Carbine with a 19" barrel in .357 Magnum about a month ago, and I am sad to say, I'm less than happy with it. I've done extensive research on the internet before I decided to go for this gun, which showed basically universal agreement that the 1873s are very nice, sometimes even perfect, guns.
Well, so far, I really can't say that about mine and I am quite disappointed by what I got for the money. So, I'm posting here , hoping to get some feedback on whether these imperfections are normal with these guns, and if not, whether I should try returning the gun, or generally doing something about it.

1. So, to start, probably the most concerning issue - the tolerances at the front of the left link seem unsafely loose (right link fit for comparion). To be honest, I don't know which surfaces exactly bear the load when firing, but I'm guessing it shouldn't be just the pins, but the locking "shoulders" as well, basically the whole round ends of the links. The front of the left link engages the shoulder very minimally. Even with the uncertainties concerning the 1873's strength using .357 Magnum aside, this seems like a potentially major safety hazard/point of early wear. It just doesn't inspire confidence.
Maybe I should mention as well that when unlocking the mechanism (moving the lever forward), the bolt slightly descends first, then shifts slightly to the left as it retracts back into the frame. Maybe that has some connection to the left link/bolt being out of spec?

2. The left sideplate seems like it was installed into the frame with great pressure, resulting in the edge of the plate getting squished and making a corresponding dent in the frame. This results in the plate not being able to be installed flush with the frame, and when disassembling, the plate needs to be knocked out from the inside out because of how tight it is.

3. The wood to metal fit on the forearm is quite poor. The left side is perfectly flush, but the left has about a 1 mm gap.

4. The barrel seems like it is screwed in crooked/not flush with the frame. Is this a cause for concern?

5. The buttstock is chipped at the tang. This I already knew when I was buying it, but I let this one slide, because it seemed like a small shortcoming, and this specific gun had a nicer style of barrel markings than the other one that was in stock. Now, in the light of the other issues, it seems to me like this gun as a whole is a lemon.

6. The lever is quite wobbly. It has cca 3 mm of travel to each side from the center at the lever lock. I've read that lever wobble is somewhat common on the 1873 guns, so I don't necessarily consider this a flaw. The links and pins are already quite scratched after a few hundred dry-cycles, so I'm thinking whether this doesn't have something to do with it.

I'll be glad for any input from more experienced users on this forum. I hope this post won't come off as whiny, but these guns are very rare where I'm from, so there's not many people to ask and my gunsmithing/manufacturing standards knowledge is very limited.

 

[Tommygunn]

The left link front bearing surface is probably the most troublesome being it is...you said .357 magnum? I have to say, having two Uberti 1873s (one bought @30 years ago) the links on yours look better machined than my 30 year old one .... but mine doesn't have that area with mismatched surfaces. I cannot dismiss this in .357 magnum. Maybe .44-40 .... but in .357 it may lead to asymmetric stretching.

Side plates needing to be knocked out isn't bad, but if there's a deformation there it ought to be filed down. I would not worry about chips or Mars that are covered by sideplates.

1 mm. Gap? This is cosmetic ....only you can say. Uberti wood fitting is pretty good but sometimes imperfect.

It's hard for me to tell from photos but it does look like your rear sight is not aligned straight. This is a big issue assuming I'm I terpreting the photo correct. The sight should be positioned at 12 o'clock precisely; the imprinting of the calibef, etc., is hardly critical just off-putting.

The wobbly lever ..... uh, I have two Uberti 1873s, a Miroku 1873 and 1866, a Henry rifle from Henry ....all levers exhibit some minor sideways motion. 3 mm. Is maybe a tad more than mine .... but not what I'd call deal-breaking.

The bolt moving slightly as its retracted. Hmmmm. If it chambers a round properly and the face of it is milled true I don't think that matters.

The barrel alignment and link being mishapped both need further imput.

 

[frajecz]

Here's a much better photo of the link fit. You can clearly see all the way through to the middle of the bolt. I've marked the area that actually seems to be touching, but it's hard to pinpoint exactly just by judging what I can see. That amount of contact doesn't seem like it would be enough for long-term use.

Concerning the sight, I'm not sure I understand well what you mean. The dovetail seems like it's cut straight/square into the barrel, so the sight doesn't sit at an angle, or at least I don't see it. Maybe the sight is installed like 0,5 - 1 mm off to the left side, but this rifle is still a subject for future potential sight-in. I haven't fired it yet.The sight probably looks quite of center from this photo when compared to the amount of barrel visible on each side, but it's mostly due to the angle I'm holding the rifle at.

However, it did look to me like maybe the dovetail is too deep, but again, I have nothing to compare it to. It was easy to shine light through before the gap got filled with oil.

I've also noticed this bent piece of metal when taking the gun apart this morning. Again, this may be a normal part of break-in of the 1873 rifles, but I just don't know. It's directly opposite the loading gate, so I guess it's just the rounds banging into it when being loaded/chambered?

 

[MachIVshooter]

IME, those issues are uncharacteristic of a Uberti and I would not be accepting of them, particularly the barrel to receiver fitment and side plate issue causing receiver damage. The link fitments I'd have to see and evaluate in person.

A little bit of lateral lever movement is normal on any style of lever action, has to be enough clearance for things to move. 1/8" isn't really excessive, unless your saying it moves that much just shaking the gun or turning it from one side to the other. I'm talking some pressure applied. My Marlins are anywhere from barely 1/16 on the 1895SS to about 3/16 on some of the >100 year old guns pushing on them, but they don't wiggle at all with just gravity or shaking the guns. Marlins are, of course, tighter than Winchester pattern guns in general.

Uberti firearms are usually quite well fitted and finished. My wife just got her 4-3/4" charcoal blue cattlemen that she's been lusting after, and I can't find any flaws with it. Definitely seems like you got whatever the Italian version of "Friday, payday!" products are.

 

[Tommygunn]

...... Concerning the sight, I'm not sure I understand well what you mean. The dovetail seems like it's cut straight/square into the barrel, so the sight doesn't sit at an angle, or at least I don't see it. Maybe the sight is installed like 0,5 - 1 mm off to the left side, but this rifle is still a subject for future potential sight-in. I haven't fired it yet.The sight probably looks quite of center from this photo when compared to the amount of barrel visible on each side, but it's mostly due to the angle I'm holding the rifle at. .....

Yes, it's the angle in the photo; it's hard to tell a lot from two-dimensional photos.

I'm not sure if the barrel to receiver fitting is dangerous but it ought not be. The barrel should snug up right against the receiver.

MachIVshooter suggested it might have been a "FRIDAY PAYDAY!" rifle and I think he's right. Also, if it was made in 2020 keep in mind that Italy was hit hard by Covid-19 and that might have affected QC along with production. He's also right about Uberti generally getting things right. I have three of their rifles and all are very well made. I've quite a collection of revolvers and they are also well made.

 

[czhen]

The (L) side plate was hit in order to fit. Therefore, its print on the plate as well the frame. The years 2020 and 2021 will be remembered for many reasons and low quality that manufacturers delivered during the panic/Chinese COVID.

 

[frajecz]

Well, sorry for the long break, but I didn't really have anything else to post here, but I do now.

I've finally had the chance to shoot the rifle, and it seems like it shoots fine, but when I stripped it down for cleaning and inspection afterwards, I think my suspicions about the left link being out of spec confirmed to be true. This is just after about 90 rounds of .357 Magnum.
It seems like the front pin hole is starting to deform at the front. The side at the right link still looks fine. When running a finger over it, my nail gets caught on the raised part.
Here, again, when running my finger over this part, I can feel a slight dent/ridge. There's nothing like this on the other side.
This one is hard to see, but I wasn't able to get a better photo. Again, I can feel a ridge there.

Sadly, I didn't think to take photos of these surfaces before shooting, but I'm like 90% sure now that they're not supposed to look like that. Now I'm asking for the opinion from those of you, who know these guns, or at least if you can say whether your locking surfaces look the same as mine. I've already set my mind on returning the gun, and hopefully the store accepts it, but I'm just looking for a second opinion before I do this.

 

[Coyote3855]

I would probably overlook some of those issues if they appeared as the only problem. With the possible exception of the toggle link fitment.
All these issues in one firearm would lead me to attempt a return. It's my understanding that various importers of Uberti firearms can order guns with their own specifications.

For example, many of the 1873 rifles come with a case hardened receiver, checkering, and other special features. Of course these features add to the end price to the buyer. Who was the importer of your carbine?

 

[frajecz]

I would probably overlook some of those issues if they appeared as the only problem. With the possible exception of the toggle link fitment.
All these issues in one firearm would lead me to attempt a return. It's my understanding that various importers of Uberti firearms can order guns with their own specifications.

For example, many of the 1873 rifles come with a case hardened receiver, checkering, and other special features. Of course these features add to the end price to the buyer. Who was the importer of your carbine?

Well, I don't exactly know how it works where I live, that being Czech Republic, but curiously, I do have "Stoeger" marked on the barrel, which AFAIK is the importer for the US, or at least one of the importers.

 

[Coyote3855]

Yes, Stoeger is the importer along with Taylor and Cimarron.

Here's a clip from Wikipedia on Uberti importers:
Stoeger, a member of the same parent company (Benelli, in turn a member of the Beretta Holding Company). In this case, Stoeger does not act as a brand, but only as a) the FFL under which the Uberti firearms are imported, which is why these are the only Uberti firearms to be openly marketed under the Uberti brand; and b) the company handling the 5-year warranty.

I take this to mean you have recourse under warranty. Let us know what you do and how it turns out.

 

[frajecz]

Yes, Stoeger is the importer along with Taylor and Cimarron.

Here's a clip from Wikipedia on Uberti importers:
Stoeger, a member of the same parent company (Benelli, in turn a member of the Beretta Holding Company). In this case, Stoeger does not act as a brand, but only as a) the FFL under which the Uberti firearms are imported, which is why these are the only Uberti firearms to be openly marketed under the Uberti brand; and b) the company handling the 5-year warranty.

I take this to mean you have recourse under warranty. Let us know what you do and how it turns out.

Yes, I've bought this gun less than 6 months ago, so warranty is still well in effect. I'll definitely do a followup on how it went.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

Sorry I have not chimed in before this.

The bearing surfaces for the links are the portions of the frame they bear against. The proper term for this is the mortises. A term often used in woodworking, but that is what the bearing surfaces for the links are called.

At the top of this photo is an original Winchester Model 1873, that left the factory in 1887. At the bottom of the photo is an Uberti replica of the 1873 Winchester that I bought used about 20 years ago. It was made sometime in the 1980s.

Notice he links are in full contact with the mortises with both of these rifles, that is the way it is supposed to be. Obviously this provides more bearing surface than relying on the pins to be the bearing surface. The machining of both the links and the frame needs to be very precise for this to happen. Yes, this is not the same side of the frame you are talking about, but it does not matter. The other side should look like this too. You have poorly mated links and mortises, at least on that side. In actual fact, there is often ever so slight a gap between the ends of the links and the mortises. If the fit was line to line the parts would bind. It is common for the links to fall out of the frame if a side plate is removed and the rifle turned so that side is down. When removing a side plate the shooter should always bear this in mind, or a pair of links may fall out onto the floor. But the photo of your links shows they are not well fitted, and the fact that one of the holes for the pins shows the metal has been displaced slightly bears this out.






There is often a slight bit of interference fit between the sideplates and the frame, that is not unusual. In fact, it is common to have to drive the side plate off on the side away from the loading gate by backing the side plate screw out slightly and tapping on it with a soft faced hammer to dislodge the side plate. I have to do that with my Uberti '73. Don't remember with the Winchester. It does appear to me your side plate was misaligned when it was mounted onto the frame, accounting for the bit of metal that has been displaced. This also accounts for the dent in the frame near the displaced metal.

I just popped the side plates off my Uberti 1873. Here is the backside of the side plates. The machining on the floor of the reliefs is slightly rough, but that does not matter. I have had this rifle for many years, and shot it extensively in Cowboy Action for about ten years, so there has been a little bit of wear over the years. Each side plate popped right off, I did not have to do anything. In fact, there is ever so slight an amount of slop, each side plate can move slightly, about 1/32" or so. You will have to do your own conversion to metric.







A slight amount of side to side play with the lever is normal. Mine can move about a total of 1/8" at its end. This is normal. If there was no side to side play it would mean the fit of the lever on its pivot screw was very, very tight, which would make it difficult to assemble.



Here is the wood to metal fit at the front of the Fore End. You can see there has been some scuffing of the varnish over the years. Yes, I can jam a thumbnail into those gaps. To tell you the truth, I never looked closely at the wood to metal fit on the Fore End before today, and this amount of gap does not bother me at all.






Unlike yours, my Uberti '73 has an octagon barrel. It is snugged up nicely against the frame. Ideally the barrel should be snugged up tight against the frame AND the dovetail for the rear sight should be horizontal. I cannot quite tell from your photos, it appears the barrel is snugged up against the frame at one spot, but there may be a void further around the circumference. That tells me that either the relief that was cut at the rear end of the barrel was not cut square, or the front of the frame is not square. Since the relief was cut on a lathe, I find it hard to believe it is not square. More likely the front of the frame is not square, not having your rifle in hand I cannot be sure. Holding a machinist's square against the frame should answer that question. Cosmetically it is not perfect, but I would not worry about the safety of the barrel to frame joint. The most important thing is the barrel does not unscrew at all. That will mess with the headspacing, and possibly create a dangerous situation. If the barrel is nice and snug against the frame and does not unscrew, I would not worry about it.






Your rear sight is quite different than the rear sights Uberti was supplying when I bought my '73. Mine is actually a Semi-Buckhorn sight made by Marbles. That is what was standard on Uberti 1873 Rifles for many years.






http://www.marblearms.com/rear-sights.html


With this style of rear sight changes of elevation are accomplished by lifting the body of the sight up and sliding the elevator forward or back so the sight blade rests in a different notch. The body of the sight is made of spring steel and will always be pressing down into the notches on the elevator.

Other rear sights had a single notched elevator in the center of the sight. The operation was the same, lift the sight and slide the elevator so the blade rests in the desired notch. This is the rear sight on the original 1887 Winchester Model 1873 I pictured in my first photo.






Your rear sight appears to be a folding type sight. You change elevation by sliding the piece in front of the blade forward or back. If I am not mistaken you can fold the sight straight up and the sliding piece then becomes your rear sight, using the V notch cut into it. Here is a photo of actor Robert Duvall as Gus McCrae in the TV series Lonesome Dove shooting his Henry rifle that way. That style of rear sight is still standard on Uberti replicas of the 1860 Henry.






Anyway, your rear sight appears to have a locking screw to secure it in place in its dovetail, I cannot be completely sure from your photo. The important thing is the dovetail should be cut so the sight blade sits perfectly horizontal in relation to the frame. If the sight slants one way or another, something is wrong. It should be as horizontal as possible. You adjust the rear sight for windage by tapping it to which ever side you want. If you want your impacts to move to the right, move the rear sight to the right and vice versa. If there is a locking screw to secure the sight in the dovetail, you must loosen the screw before you attempt to move it. The sight should not budge with strong pressure from your thumb. I use a brass drift and a small hammer to drive my rear sights whichever way I want to move them. If there is a locking screw I loosen it first, then tighten it again when the sight is where I want it. If your sight can slide in its dovetail with nothing more than finger pressure, the dovetail is too loose. Otherwise it is fine.


Your 1873 was manufactured by Uberti in Italy. The Gardone region to be specific. Uberti is owned by Beretta. Stoeger is a wholly owned subsidiary of Benelli, which is in turn owned by Berretta, which accounts for the marking on your barrel.

 

[frajecz]

Hey, Driftwood Johnson, and thank you for the exhaustive reply.

The link and mortises problem IS at the left side of the gun, so your pictures are definitely relevant. The other (right) side of the gun, or specifically the right link and it's mortises look fine, to an untrained eye at least. No three-dimensional deformation is apparent anywhere there. There are some pictures of the right side in this thread as well, btw.
What I probably should've mentioned as well is that even when locked (sideplates removed, links in place, lever gripped with lever safety disengaged), the left link can be slightly moved/bent up and down at the middle pin (at the lever connection), whereas the right link won't even budge. To me it seems like the left side maybe isn't even properly locked when firing.

The barrel-to-receiver fit is as you described - it's perfect at the right side, but gradually opens up towards the left. As far as I can see and know, the barrel is otherwise in there tight and firm.

Concerning the sight, yes, it's a ladder sight, because my 1873 is a Carbine and AFAIK they currently come standard with it (it's slightly different from the 1860 one). I've just checked and it seems like it's as tight in the dovetail as it should be. Yes, there's a small screw in there, which I've loosened before trying to move it.

And just to make sure, you DO agree then that the left link and it's mortises are a cause for concern and should hopefully be a valid reason for returning the gun? I'm going to be returning it in the coming few days, so I hope the gun store will accept my request.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

You have to realize, that with any assembly of multiple moving parts there needs to be a small amount of slop, for lack of a better word, built in. If everything is a line to line fit, nothing will move.

I just took the side plates off my original Winchester '73 and my Uberti '73 and have taken a few photos, as well as examined the function of the toggle links in a little bit more detail than I have before.

You may recall I mentioned that if you are not careful one set of links may fall out when the side plates are removed and the rifle is held horizontally and one set of links is on the 'downside'. In actual practice, this is more likely to happen if the lever is worked a few times with the side plates off and one side down. As a matter of fact, I just looked at my Winchester, and one of the sets of links fell out when I removed the other one for a photo.

First, a couple of old photos of my Winchester Model 1873, with the links 'locked' and the links completely folded. Note, there is really no such thing as the links being locked in a toggle link rifle, not in the sense of later designs that had locking lugs that truly locked the action in battery. With a toggle link rifle, the best we can say is the links are completely unfolded, the action is never truly locked in the modern sense. Anyway, the action in your Uberti '73 works pretty much the same as the originals.











Here is a photo of the backside of one of the links. Your links will not look quite like this, the pin near the hole at the right is not in a set of Uberti links, because the mechanism is slightly different. At least they used to be. The long slot is where the pin at the top of the lever slides as the lever is opened and closed. There is a little bit of clearance, or 'slop, between the pivot pins and the holes in the links. Also between the center pin and the slot. I don't know exactly how much, I'm not going to get out my calipers and gauges right now to do a tolerance analysis, trust me that there is a tiny amount of clearance between the holes and the pins. That is why a set of links can fall out if the 'gunsmith' is not paying attention.






In this photo, I am shoving the links of the Winchester all the way up. The two arrows point to the surfaces of the mortises where the links come to a stop. In other words, it looks to me that those two surfaces provide the hard stop for the unfolding motion of the links. From a mechanical standpoint it makes more sense for the mortise at the rear to be the hard stop, since that is part of the frame. The mortise at the front is attached to the bolt, which is itself a moving part. Using that surface as the hard stop will increase the amount of slop available between the moving parts. In actuality, I have no idea which surface the engineers at Winchester decided to use as the hard stop over 100 years ago.






In the next photo, I have removed my finger, and the links have unfolded a tiny amount, do to the inherent slop in the system. This would be the actual position of the links when the rifle is at battery and ready to fire. Yes, there is a very small amount of vertical play at the pivot point of the links, probably only a few thousands of an inch. Probably not much more than the thickness of two pieces of paper. I actually got my calipers out and the pin at the top of the lever, that slides in the slot in the links, is about .1865 (4.73mm to you) in diameter. The slot is about .1895 (4.81mm to you) across. .003 (0.07mm to you) of total clearance. Not bad for parts manufactured 134 years ago. Long before modern CNC equipment such as Uberti probably uses, existed.





Here is a photo of the links on the other side of my Winchester.




Here are some similar photos of my Uberti '73. Sorry, I have already buttoned it back up so I don't have any numbers or amounts for you, but yes, there is a tiny amount of vertical play. I seem to recall there is slightly more vertical play with the Uberti than with the old Winchester. Yes, my old Winchester has probably not been fired a whole lot over the years, that is probably why the parts are still in such good shape.









So. Bottom line.

Yup, clearly some issues with your Uberti '73. Frankly, the poor fitting of the mortises is probably less of an issue than you think. Back in 1879 Winchester conducted tests of the Model 1876, which was the big brother to the Model 1873. This model was physically larger than the Model 1873 and was chambered for larger, more powerful cartridges than the Model 1873. If you want to see one, watch Tom Selleck in the film Cross Fire Trail. This has been posted several times over the years on various gun boards:

"The Model 1876 is the only repeating rifle that had successful, documented use in the northern plains buffalo slaughter. Earlier repeating rifles such as the Henry, Spencer, and Winchester Models of 1866 and 1873 may have seen limited use, but only the Model 1876 was considered by hunters as powerful enough to do the job against the big woolies. The strength of the Model 1876 rifle and the .45-75 W.C.F. cartridge was tested by Winchester in the late 1870s. The factory conducted tests on the strength and reliability of the action to answer concerns by customers. These tests will astound collectors and shooters who have stated the Model 1876's toggle link action is "weak." In response to a letter sent to the company by Charles Hallock, Esquire, of Forest & Stream magazine, Oliver Winchester responded by telling about the tests the factory accomplished on the 1876 rifle. He indicated that engineers first started the tests by removing one of the toggle links and fired 20 rounds (this was with .45-75 W.C.F. cartridge with 350 grain bullet) with no effect. They restored the missing link then went through 6 more trials starting with a charge of 105 grains of black powder, behind a 700 grain bullet! The comment "worked well" is noted. They then increased the charge of powder to 165 grains behind 3 bullets (1,150 grains) and that "worked well." From there, they increased the powder charge to 203 grains and added more bullets until they reached 1,750 grains of lead (five 350 grain bullets). This also "worked well." Finally, they added one more bullet, bringing the total weight to 2,100 grains, and things began to happen. The comment was, "Breech pin slightly bent. Arm working stiff." The seventh and final test was again 203 grains of powder but this time six Martini bullets weighing 480 grains each (2,880 grains) were used. "The charge bent the breech pin, blew out the side plates, split the frame and otherwise disabled the arm," was the comment. Oliver Winchester noted that in this seventh trial, the shell had burst into fragments and the escape of gas at the breech did the damage."

I don't know how to compare the bolt thrust of a modern 357 Magnum cartridge to the bolt thrust of the 45-75 cartridge, that held 75 grains of Black Powder, but clearly it took some pretty serious overloads to incapacitate the Model 1876 in these tests.

I certainly would not be happy with the poorly fitted links in your rifle, but I suspect once everything wears in, meaning once the holes in the metal have stopped taking a new shape, and the mortises begin to take up the force of the bolt thrust, I suspect you will not have any problems.

Just a wild guess on my part, please don't hold me to it.

Anyway, how do you propose to take the rifle back to the dealer and ask for your money back after you have clearly disassembled it? I suspect you may have voided the warranty when you took it apart.

Sorry, that's the view from my chair, probably not what you want to hear.

 

[Hokkmike]

I commend you for your excellent post, accurate descriptions, and detailed photos. Merely from a psychological standpoint it is clear to me that you will NOT be satisfied with this gun in its current configuration. Ultimately you will need to do something. My own opinion is worthless as I have no experience with this brand in long guns. I do have a Taylor-Uberti 6 shooter that is flawless.

It is unfortunate that a pre-purchase inspection did not deter you from buying the gun. (again, only as you seem unhappy - no judgement on the gun from me)

 

[frajecz]

Well, I've attempted the return and it did not go very well.

First of all, the staff were obviously very stuck up on the idea that Ubertis are perfect guns, and basically told me that in their 20 years of selling these guns, I'm the first that claims there's some kind of problem with my gun, like it isn't even a possibility. The idea of returning the gun for a different one was otherworldly to them, allegedly because I've already registered it (the gun is registered to the individual's gun licence in my country), so it isn't even an option. Personally, I think that's bullcrap, because if my gun had exploded and was thereby rendered unusable, for instance, they surely would've had to replace it anyway. But that's just as a sidenote, I know my country's laws better than you guys from the US do, of course, so I don't expect you to give advice on this.

I've at least persuaded them into changing the bolt for a new one, which seems to have, at least mostly, fixed the fitting issues with the front of the left link, but a slight gap, although noticeably smaller than before, is still present at the top. This change created a new problem in turn, where the brass lifter can't clear the bolt on it's way down now, so the rifle ultimately stayed at the shop and a gunsmith is going to fit the parts together. Seems like the lifter needs just a slightly bit more clearance around the bolt.

What baffled me was the fact that the guy asked me which part I wanted them to change then, which is what I wanted THEM to tell ME, not the other way around. He also managed to dent the new bolt (from the side, so the "unimportant" part) with a hammer when hammering out the pin it came with, because he didn't even use a punch to do so. When I pointed that out, he said that it won't have any effect on the function of the gun, which is true, but come on... I really don't get how businesses like these are still, well, in business, with customer support like this. I think they agreed to change the bolt just to shut me up, and I don't think they even bothered to check the dents that I've mentioned on the old bolt.

I'll do another update after the gun comes back from the gunsmith with some pictures after the bolt change for comparison. Maybe there's going to be some other development. Lastly, I'll add that I won't be paying anything extra, this is all covered under the warranty, which is unfortunately just the standard 2 years and not the 5 that Stoeger offers in the US, which would've come handy in my case.

Howdy

Anyway, how do you propose to take the rifle back to the dealer and ask for your money back after you have clearly disassembled it? I suspect you may have voided the warranty when you took it apart.

Sorry, that's the view from my chair, probably not what you want to hear.

Once again, thank you for your very in-depth input. Although I've read your response after the visit to the gun store, it probably wouldn't have changed much. Judging from what you've pointed out, now I at least know that even if the parts aren't mated 100%, it still will probably work fine.

Thankfully, no, I don't think disassembling (more like field-stripping) counts as voiding the warranty in this case. The staff didn't think anything of it. To add, the "warranty policies" in my country generally are that you can either have the item repaired, have it exchanged for a new one, or get your money back (that's a hard rule usually only after you've acted on the warranty for a third time). The standard warranty on everything (I think mandatory by law) is 2 years. Anything over that depends on specific business practices.

It is unfortunate that a pre-purchase inspection did not deter you from buying the gun. (again, only as you seem unhappy - no judgement on the gun from me)

This is something I'm gonna have to live with, and unfortunately, it seems like I can only learn from my mistake. I don't understand how I could think that it was a good idea to choose a gun which had an obvious flaw.

 

[Hokkmike]

I guess all I can add is, "don't be too hard on yourself".....