Considerable discussion of this at the S&W Forum. Looks like a possible metallurgical problem to me. It happens. There was a batch of 624's that had cylinder problems.
Posted on 03/19/2006 8:10:48 AM PST by Copernicus
Faced with problems ranging from misfires to barrels breaking off, the state has asked gun maker Smith & Wesson to replace hundreds of sidearms carried by probation and corrections officers.
None of the revolvers have failed in the line of duty, and for now, the department is keeping the guns in service. But in testing, about one in four revolvers didn't fire when the trigger was pulled. In some cases, the barrel of some models broke off when the gun was fired.
"In one sense it's funny," said Chief Deputy Correction Secretary Dan Stieneke. "In another, it's alarming."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsobserver.com ...
Best regards to all,
Considering that the vast majority of agencies transitioned to the semiauto pistol in the 80s and 90s, one wonders just how old these revolvers are.
If its like one agency I'm aware of, they may be over 80 years old - someone found a crate of revolvers in the armory and discovered that they were old Peacemakers - still carried on the books as ready-to-issue.
Considerable discussion of this at the S&W Forum. Looks like a possible metallurgical problem to me. It happens. There was a batch of 624's that had cylinder problems.
Nah, post pinned barrel (~1984 or later) stainless revolvers, using the new crushfit barrel of the time.
Ahem ... reading the article says the ones that would misfire were bought in 2004.
But I do smell a rat here - Revolvers would seem to have very little to go wrong and cause that many misfires...
I don't believe a word of this article.
The Model 64 .38 special +P is still being sold and given the purchase date, these are not vintage S&W revolvers. This could be a QC issue after all. Not good for S&W's new American owners if true.
Just another reason to not issue revolvers, IMHO.
2004 vintage would have the floating firing pin, as opposed to the one mounted directly on the hammer. In my experience, these are more likely to have FTF if the mainspring is messed with, or the strain screw is backed out. This might be the fault of a shadetree armorer in pursuit of a lighter DA pull.
This vintage would also have the much reviled internal lock.
The barrel issue looks like QC to me.
Shame, I've got several dozen that always go pop when pulled. But then again, I'm not professional enough to shoot myself in the leg with a Glock. :)
Guns flying apart ping!
I trust they ruled out an ammo issue. Do you have a link to the S&W forum? Sounds like a good place to browse.
They need to standardize on the new S&W M&P..
See S&W stock price...SWB.....breakout.
I wonder if the Colt King Cobra also has this. I've got one that won't open.
Especially when there are better alternatives - it's not 1835 any more, why should you use a weapon from that era? Here's a couple favorites:
Older S&W's rule. Although I do have a recent 625 that seems to be reliable.
To the anti-gun nuts: This is what a "defective product" in the firearms industry is.
That doesn't look good. I'm going to have to go over and read some of that stuff.
I have a Brittish police issue model S & W although it is a .357 magnum, the barrel is stamped 38 special. It seems that people taking the mod. 66, 626, as well as other .357's are using .357 magnum ammo at the range, when in fact S & W said .38 special ammo should be used during practice, and .357 used for carry. The heavy, continuous loads of .357 magnum ammo has a tendency to crack the forcing cone, at the bottom of the barrel, this problem has been documented since the late 1970's.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.