Page 4 of 5
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:36 pm
by bearandoldman
Japle wrote:Still curious as to the purchase of this gun. Was it internet or mail order or an over the counter with the LGS?
I was in a local gun shop and mentioned that I was looking for a 686 SSR. The owner checked with his supplier, got me a very good price and I ordered it.
The owner had no chance to inspect the gun before I bought it. He's not responsible in any way for selling me a gun that never should have left the factory. After I'd done the action job and found the screw-up with the cylinder, I took the gun back to the shop and let him try the action. He loved it. Then I pointed out the cylinder. He went white. I can imagine what was going through his mind.
Anyway, officially, I absolve Johnathan of any responsibility in this fiasco.
Anxiety has been known to cause problems with vision, so now we know the one who should be chewed out. How do you do that to yourself?
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:55 pm
by Japle
Anxiety has been known to cause problems with vision, so now we know the one who should be chewed out. How do you do that to yourself?
I'm not as flexible as I used to be, but I'll try.
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:25 pm
by bearandoldman
Japle wrote:Anxiety has been known to cause problems with vision, so now we know the one who should be chewed out. How do you do that to yourself?
I'm not as flexible as I used to be, but I'll try.
That I would like to see, or would I??????
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 5:54 pm
by bgreenea3
I'm going to disagree here a bit. the LGS should inspect every gun that comes across their counter and if the factory sends them a lemon (obvious lemon) they should take care of it with the factory before it hit the customers hand. I'm not talking about a test fire but a basic once over for obvious problems and function check. YOU as the buyer should do the same before laying down any greenbacks for any product.
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:17 pm
by bearandoldman
bgreenea3 wrote:I'm going to disagree here a bit. the LGS should inspect every gun that comes across their counter and if the factory sends them a lemon (obvious lemon) they should take care of it with the factory before it hit the customers hand. I'm not talking about a test fire but a basic once over for obvious problems and function check. YOU as the buyer should do the same before laying down any greenbacks for any product.
Little Greener, you speak a lot of truth there, my friend.
On my carry gun or any other, when I pick it up I check to see if it is loaded, even though I know it was loaded when I set it down and know it is loaded when I pick it up, but I look anyway. Those flutes on the cylinder should have been noticed easily by at least 3 people.
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:13 pm
by Hakaman
Face it, QC is not what it used to be. I think they hope, by sheer numbers that
95% of the guns will be ok. Many computerized machines (computers don't make
mistakes) that keep high tolerances and consistency. BUT, I think the best preventative
medicine is to have the experience to know what to look for. The two smiths I sent back, one
issue I should have caught, the other would have entailed looking down the barrel to find. I was
inexperienced and those times it cost me. Just the same, both guns were sent back and returned quickly
in "inspected shape". I think a lot of people associate "new" with "perfect".
Haka
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:52 am
by Japle
Those flutes on the cylinder should have been noticed easily by at least 3 people.
When I first posted photos of the gun, dozens of people looked at them and, even though they were told there was "something wrong with this picture", they missed the fact that there were seven flutes on the cylinder. Once you know, it's easy to see. If you don't know, it's not obvious at all.
The dealer didn't notice because I'd special-ordered the gun and he'd only had a chance to check to see that the serial number matched his invoice. I didn't notice because, of all the things I check on a new gun, the number of flutes on the cylinder isn't one of them. Not only hadn't I seen it before, I'd never even heard of it.
The CS guy at S&W told me this has happened before, but the mistake was always caught before the gun was shipped. I'd say the odds are high that "Verify correct number of flutes on cylinder" is a step on the QC checklist.
If it wasn't before this hit the firearms forums, you can bet it is now!
Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 3:23 pm
by Japle
UPDATE - 1/30/12:
Got a call today from Paul Pluff, Director of Marketing Services at S&W. We had a long conversation about S&W’s inspection, QC and testing. According to him, they fire 40,000 psi proof loads through their .357 Magnum revolvers. The fact that this cylinder, even with 40% of its wall thickness missing on one chamber, passed the proof test is pretty damned impressive.
We discussed the liability problems S&W faces if this cylinder is left in the hands of someone they can’t control. I told him I completely understand their position. I have the FedEx shipping label they emailed to me and I’ll ship the cylinder back tomorrow. I hate to part with it, but I have to respect S&W’s position.
Darn!!
We discussed several other issues which I don’t need to go into. The bottom line is, S&W is aware of the severity of their mistake. They intend to make it right, and then some.
Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 3:46 pm
by bearandoldman
Japle wrote:UPDATE - 1/30/12:
Got a call today from Paul Pluff, Director of Marketing Services at S&W. We had a long conversation about S&W’s inspection, QC and testing. According to him, they fire 40,000 psi proof loads through their .357 Magnum revolvers. The fact that this cylinder, even with 40% of its wall thickness missing on one chamber, passed the proof test is pretty damned impressive.
We discussed the liability problems S&W faces if this cylinder is left in the hands of someone they can’t control. I told him I completely understand their position. I have the FedEx shipping label they emailed to me and I’ll ship the cylinder back tomorrow. I hate to part with it, but I have to respect S&W’s position.
I;m proud of you, you are a true gentleman, had my doubts the beginning, but you have redeemed yourself.
Darn!!
We discussed several other issues which I don’t need to go into. The bottom line is, S&W is aware of the severity of their mistake. They intend to make it right, and then some.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:42 pm
by Japle
UPDATE 2/3/2012:
The FedEx guy showed up today with my 686. As they promised they would, S&W installed an unfluted cylinder and didn’t mess with my action work.
It looks pretty good, don’t you think?
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 4:05 pm
by bearandoldman
Glad to hear you got it back, now go out and shoot a couple boxes of ammo through it.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:22 pm
by bgreenea3
that is a sweet looking pistol. I like the smooth cylinder and the flat sides on the bbl.... nice lookin' stocks too...
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:55 pm
by greener
Excellent. Also like the grips. The OEM Hogues on mine aren't comfortable.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:06 pm
by blue68f100
The smooth cylinder definitely gives it a different look.
Now it's time to make up for lost time.
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 6:47 pm
by Oldguy
That's very nice. I always thought mine would look good with an unfluted cylinder (and I was right). Simply cool.