Called S&W first thing this morning. They are mailing out me a replacement front sight for my 442UC. I tried giving her a heads up that they’ll be getting a lot of calls concerning this issue. At least look into why they’re shipping this way.
Called S&W first thing this morning. They are mailing out me a replacement front sight for my 442UC. I tried giving her a heads up that they’ll be getting a lot of calls concerning this issue. At least look into why they’re shipping this way.
“When You Go Home, Tell Them Of Us And Say,
For Your Tomorrow, We Gave Our Today.”
Sweet! Looking forward to seeing what you come up with!Originally Posted by rhamre
Well I guess the cat's really out of the bag now
We're working on some high horns.
Enclosed backstrap and open backstrap
And yes.... they're substantially lighter than G10 and wood.
I think they became aware and got on it yesterday. Definite high level of attention to this project.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
I’m still pretty pissed as I’m writing this.
It’s bad enough before even the first shot I had to have a new front sight sent to me.
Now my first range trip consisted of just 30 rounds and I quit before wasting any more ammo. This 442UC shot consistently WAY high at just 7yds.
On the attached pic of my target I missed the first 2 shots completely aiming at the center circle and was stumped as to where they went. I then went to the lower left circle and finally found where they were going. These first 5 shots were Georgia Arms 148gr. snubby wadcutter load. It was accurate but crazy high. I’ve never had a snubby do that that bad.
I was using a 6 o’clock hold btw.
I then switched to some Federal GMM wadcutter, Speer GD 135gr. JHP, Winchester 130gr. FMJ, and lastly AE 158gr. LRN. Results were all the same, crazy high. I buried the dot a few times and brought them down some but not enough to make me happy.
Needless to say it’s either going back to S&W or I’m bouncing it.
Still waiting on a .32 model and hopefully it’s not the same results.
I was going to get rid of a 642PC because these new snubbies were supposed to be so much better…not now. That 642 shoots way better with a variety of loads.
Do love the grips still and the sights, just shocked they were this far off.
I was willing to give up my Glock 42s to go back to snubs because of these UCs. Guess I’ll wait a little longer.
Edited to add…JEC said instead of different height sights from XS that the bases would be different between the .38 & .32 models. Maybe I got a .32 barrel shroud with the wrong base. Just guessing as I’ve never seen such a bad POA/POI shift like this with any pistol in 30+ years of shooting.
Last edited by cathellsk; 03-04-2024 at 01:23 PM.
“When You Go Home, Tell Them Of Us And Say,
For Your Tomorrow, We Gave Our Today.”
Damn... Those sights require a bellybutton hold.
If there were a high level of attention to this project, we wouldn't be having the current discussions in this thread. It appears that once again, S&W has screwed the pooch. I can't imagine that Lipseys is happy.
"Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA
Beware of my temper, and the dog that I've found...
This is concerning so far. I'd rather have a pushed delivery date of a dialed-in/ verified revolver than meeting the promised deadline.
I'd better get some wool socks, my feet are getting cold.
I'd figured I'd likely pick up my 642 / 442 UC and likely sell my 642 Pro that's been back to S&W twice and is finally dialed in as it should be. Bird in the hand..
Picked up the Lipsey's 442 on Saturday. Front sight's fine, trigger is slightly better than my 642, the grips are perfect. But the cylinder, per Lipsey's website, is advertised as being beveled in the front with chamfered cylinder holes. Mine has neither, it looks identical to my 642's cylinder in both regards. Am I missing something?
"Customer is very particular" -- SIG Sauer
A proper bevel on the cylinder charge holes will be very slight. The goal is not to wallow them out, but just to break the edge so that cartridges find their center. Some people go nuts with it and over machine them.
That said you should be able to pop the ejector star up and see at least a slight bevel on the edge of the cylinder if you look closely.
My 638 produced 10 or so years ago already has a slight bevel on the front edge of the cylinder that isn't there on older guns. It does not have a bevel on the cylinder charge holes. They have a hard 90 degree angle on them.
3/15/2016
Reply With Quote
