Damaged forcing cone on S&W Model 66-2, advice needed

Status
Not open for further replies.
He didn't move the front sight. That stub you see in front of the sight, is part of the liner. If you look closely at the pics, you can see where the mate lines are.

The job wasn't done correctly, for the type of barrel and pressures. That was a quick drill out and maybe ream job. The sleeve was turned from a blank, likely very close in diameter to the stub at the muzzle
 
I don't think anyone said the sights were moved, we get that the liner is turned down, and I'm saying that Dan Wesson makes barrels like these, where the liner is much thicker and no two part seams exist at the forcing cone. I have seen other, excellent Dan Wesson style liner jobs, where the muzzle end is left thick like this, and those are great revolvers. The liner needs to be much thicker.

I agree fully: botch job. The idea is there, but the execution is bad.
 
I have seen this before on s-w 66 with a barrel liner, these barrels are too thin to do this, but it is still done all the time to make
a restricted out of a 12-6.
Why better to spend the extra money up front and buy a factory barreled gun.
 
The gunsmith that did this went to a lot of trouble. You can see from the way the front sight is set back that he left the front 1/2" or so of the "liner" the same outside diameter as the barrel "sleeve". The two appear very nicely mated. This makes a continuous barrel, required for the conversion from prohibited to restricted. He almost got it right.

Maybe just a poor choice of words????? I take "set back" to mean removed and set in a different location. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
 
This is the new replacement barrel being offered to me with a free installation, a few of you are saying it still looks just as bad as the old one. Any other input? Should I take the replacement or just fight for my money back and wash my hands of this?

28km3qw.jpg


2jb0vc.jpg
 
what is his return policy,, if this one blows up? will his insurance company cover your lost fingers or eye? does he even have insurance? or a business licence? is it even worth taking a chance? every time you pull that trigger your flinch factor will be off the chart. tell them you want your money back or a new factory barrel that has not been dicked with.
 
Run away! Same problem, the liner is too thin. The threads should be part of the liner, and the liner should be thicker. A thicker liner would be more likely to leave you with a proper forcing cone. While there are no extra bits around this forcing cone, I don't like this barrel either.

The muzzle extension is a separate piece in this picture, not a blank left thick at the front.

As best I can tell, this extension is also quite a bit more than the 106mm overall length. If money back is something that could happen, I'm with the people who say go for that!
 
I am the seller, as I'am being threatened with ousting, slander & negitive feedback in which positive has already been givin a year ago. I sold this firearm with full discloser as it was a prohib lengthend to be restricted. I gave the usual 3 day inspection period and like I said I hid nothing and disclosed all info about this firearm. I'm not going to refund a seller over a year later that was given appropriate time back then to inspect it. I did look at over when I recieved and with my untrained eye seen nothing wrong and accepted it. So did you, when is the statue of limitations on inspection period void?
 
My 'untrained eye' could have been blasted with shrapnel from a dangerous item! A 3 day inspection period is not even long enough to get an ATT to fire this thing. Sitting in a locked case for over a year makes no difference in the condition of this piece.
 
rc_p120 said:
My 'untrained eye' could have been blasted with shrapnel from a dangerous item! A 3 day inspection period is not even long enough to get an ATT to fire this thing. Sitting in a locked case for over a year makes no difference in the condition of this piece.
Click to expand...


Whoa up a bit here. Caveat Emptor is the rule, when it comes to buying anything. You didn't do your homework in the first place and you did drag your feet taking it to the range.

Now, the seller disclosed to you that it was altered. Fine. If he did the alteration, he is liable for any damage to you or the handgun. If he bought the pistol as he says, whomever did the alteration is still on the hook for damages.

There are some very sticky legal venues happening here and that job needs to be rectified.

Now, use your head for a second and figure out what it will cost to litigate this in court and how much a new barrel will cost.

Between the two of you, something should be able to be agreed upon. Right now, you're both working on raging hormones.

If it does go to court, this is not the place to vent your spleens.
 
bearhunter said:
Whoa up a bit here. Caveat Emptor is the rule, when it comes to buying anything. You didn't do your homework in the first place and you did drag your feet taking it to the range.
Click to expand...

The sale ad said 'like new' with 'brand new barrel installed' it did not say 'like new' with 'exploding time-bomb barrel installed'. This is my fault how?
 
Yes the gun was in excellent condition with a new barrel installed you obviously thought that too as + feedback was provided, aswell that was the info I was given from the smith that I purchased from. I passed the info I recieved on to my add, your purchased & accepted all terms. I helped get in touch with the smith/person I purchased it from, He offered what he offered I don't know what the details are but because you didn't like it you decided to tell me I owe you a refund? Sorry but no! private sale, all terms were accepted including inspection period. Anything could have happened to that firearm in the year that has passed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom