New S&W Revolver QC

[SwampDweller]

Shot another 200 rounds through the 19-10 today, still going smooth. We are at 842 rounds total through the gun, and 612 since the one light primer strike with one round of Armscor .357.

While I had no functional issues, I did notice something with the Remington Golden Saber 125gr .357. It seems to use some kind of gasket seal or something to seal the primer, and this little circular seal falls out into the gun while shooting. Usually it just sat stuck to the recoil shield, but I could see how easily it could end up somewhere that jams up the gun. I’m not sure when Remington started doing this, but I really don’t care for it. What if it fell into the little window where the hand is?

[MountainRaven]

Picked up a 66-8 2.75" that my LGS special ordered for me. Looks like, above the, "Model 66-8," on the box, there's a date of, "011224," which I'm guessing means 1 December 2024. Or maybe it's meaningless.

Anyway. Lock up appears to be super tight with no discernible lateral movement on the cylinder, very little fore-and-aft play. Gun appears to lock up on every charge hole before the hammer falls. Pulled the side plate to install an Apex hammer kit and everything looked fine, but entirely dry. Apex kit install was super easy, only challenge (as someone who has never pulled the side plate of any revolver) was getting the hammer safety reinstalled. If I knew where my feeler gauge went, I'd check the barrel/cylinder gap. But overall, I have a good feeling about it.

Won't be able to check those good feelings for a bit as I'm headed out of town, tomorrow, so... we'll see.

Only problem, maybe, along with being bone dry inside, is the front sight might be slightly bent. But I'm planning to replace that with a gold bead at some point, anyway.

Alright, I've added three new Smith & Wessons since this:

1- 19-9, b. July 2024. Seems perfectly fine. Apart from the soul-leaking hole in the side.

2- 629-8, b. December 2024. Lipsey's Mountain Gun. Seems fine, apart from what I think is some minor imperfections in the MIM'ing of the trigger, but another user on here thinks might be the flash chroming flaking.

3- 10-10, b. March 2025. Seemed fine at the store, except the front sight wasn't seated properly when it was drilled and pinned. No big deal, I'm going to replace it with a gold bead, anyway (if I can find one).
Got it home and started dryfiring it and have occasional short-strokes. Odd.
Try the other three. Am only able to induce short-strokes with those pistols intentionally.
Wake up this morning, pop off the side plate and see that the double-action sear on the hammer is catching, occasionally, on the trigger, permitting the trigger to travel past the double-action sear without cocking the hammer.
Do some research.
Take the factory hammer from the 66-8 that I'm not using and swap sears. Same problem.
Do some more research.
File about half-a-dozen (two or three at a time) strokes on the bright shiny bit of the double-action sear where it appears the double-action sear is hand-fitted. Problem seems to be solved, though I am able to induce a short-stroke intentionally.
Will continue to dry fire it and see if I get any more unintentional short-strokes, at which point I might send the gun to S&W. Or just buy an Apex Evolution kit for it (which I sort of want to do, anyway).

[Pistol Pete 10]

New S&W revolver. In my experience it will have something wrong with it. Maybe minor, may be really bad. Return to S&W, they may or may not repair it. I won't buy another new S&W.

[SWAT Lt.]

I recently purchased a 632 UC Ti to go along with my 632 UC. The front sight glowed, barrel seemed to be properly aligned, and the action functioned without any glitches. I installed an Apex kit, I like them and dislike the hollow firing pin in the gun, so I don't know if there would have been any light strikes or not (I think the light strikes are mainly occurring with ammo loaded with foreign primers, which I no longer purchase).

I fired 131 rounds of assorted domestic ammo through it yesterday without issue and did not have to adjust the sights. I took my no lock 340 M&P also and found the 632 UC Ti to have less recoil than the 340 with Federal GMM WC, let alone +P JHPs. As a result, I am having a hard time finding a reason to keep the 340. I really like the Ti.

[Rex G]

I recently purchased a 632 UC Ti to go along with my 632 UC. The front sight glowed, barrel seemed to be properly aligned, and the action functioned without any glitches. I installed an Apex kit, I like them and dislike the hollow firing pin in the gun, so I don't know if there would have been any light strikes or not (I think the light strikes are mainly occurring with ammo loaded with foreign primers, which I no longer purchase).

I fired 131 rounds of assorted domestic ammo through it yesterday without issue and did not have to adjust the sights. I took my no lock 340 M&P also and found the 632 UC Ti to have less recoil than the 340 with Federal GMM WC, let alone +P JHPs. As a result, I am having a hard time finding a reason to keep the 340. I really like the Ti.

Thanks for your report. Liked!

[WobblyPossum]

Took my new 432UC Ti to the range today. Of 24 rounds of Lost River 100gr Wadcutters I attempted to fire, I had three light strikes. Two of the three rounds fired on the second attempt but I couldn’t get the third to ignite. Should I contact Lipsey’s or S&W first?

[Hambo]

I have a new 6" 586. Yes, it has the hole. Barrel is clocked perfectly, cylinder gap OK. I shot about 150 mixed .38 and .357. The trigger doesn't feel like an old school action job, but I shot it DA and was very accurate. That's remarkable because I haven't shot very much DA in the last decade. It did have three light strikes on Hambo Ammo 1995 vintage reloads, but so did my .357 Contender, so we'll call that old primers. Like the TC, it shoots very well with 158gr XTPs over H110. Thinking about buying a shorter barreled L frame now.

[APS-PF]

Took my new 432UC Ti to the range today. Of 24 rounds of Lost River 100gr Wadcutters I attempted to fire, I had three light strikes. Two of the three rounds fired on the second attempt but I couldn’t get the third to ignite. Should I contact Lipsey’s or S&W first?

Do you have any other rounds you can try? Last year I had 2 boxes of those wadcutters with high primers in them.

[WobblyPossum]

Do you have any other rounds you can try? Last year I had 2 boxes of those wadcutters with high primers in them.

I don’t at the moment but I can order some other ammo. I’ll hold off on contacting anyone until I’ve had a chance to try some other manufacturer’s rounds then.

[taadski]

I’ve waffled about posting this here, especially as I have pretty limited experience with Smith & Wesson‘s customer service. But I’ll share the two experiences I have had.

About 15 years ago I had a 4 inch model 617 come out of time. It was sent back to the mothership and was returned. The revolver had what can only be described as an exquisite double action trigger when it was sent back; largely from many thousands of rounds being shot through it. It was returned with the timing fixed, but a horrendously rough trigger. I sucked it up and shot the shit out of it (I used it as a steel challenge revolver) and about 15,000 rounds later, the trigger has worn back in to a level similar to how it left. This left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth, obviously, but I didn’t draw much attention to it.

Fast forward to a year and a half ago, I purchased a new custom shop 5” 986. The gun seemed fine out of the box, however, I didn’t shoot it extensively until more recently.

Approximately 500 rounds down the tube, it began having some issues. The trigger initially started occasionally staying stuck to the rear following a DA press. This morphed into the trigger not cycling the cylinder at all.

Smith & Wesson paid for the return shipping label and returned the gun to me approximately five weeks later. The notes for the repairs done was “Repaired trigger, repaired yoke”. I called customer service and asked for more details regarding what they’d found and was told that the notes I’d received in the box were all they could share with me. After some discussion and clarification, I asked to speak with a customer service supervisor. I was told that a supervisor wasn’t available and when I asked to have a call back from one, I was hung up on.

At the range the following day, vetting the returned 986, the same problem returned after approximately five cylinders of shooting. I called Smith & Wesson Customer Service again and this time spoke with a very helpful fellow. I shared with him the details of the initial problem, my interaction with his coworker and then the new problems following the revolvers return. He was very apologetic, advised that he was flagging the series of interactions for review and immediately sent another RMA. I was notified by email that they were in possession of the revolver just shy of six weeks ago but I haven’t heard another peep since. The repair is currently still pending. To say I’m frustrated and displeased is a significant understatement.

For perspective, I have a really warm affinity for classic Smith & Wesson revolvers. I learned to shoot with one as a youngster and I currently own a pretty good cross section of them. I don’t consider myself a collector but I definitely appreciate old world craftsmanship and my Smith wheel guns are by a long shot my favorite firearms to handle and shoot to this day.

The above experiences and those of others border on heartbreaking. 😥


T