Is this normal? S&W 629 4.2"
- Thread starter G37
- Start date
Exactly i agree on these issues.
When I was looking for one of my Smith revolvers I looked at Wholesale and they had two in stock of what I wanted, one was the demo on the shelf which I've seen people close the cylinder by quickly twisting it to have it close with enertia. With a 500 that's a lot of weight so I didn't want one that might have a slightly bent crane... and the new one in the back left S&W with an incomplete stamp on the barrel, the SMITH & WESSON name was missing 1/3 or so of the bottom of the letters which when you're paying $1300+ for a new gun, you want it to be perfect when you get it
Redhawk vs smith. Hmmm... I love the triggers on the smiths and overall appearance slightly better. But the ruger looks great too and is one hell of a shooter. I would never sell my redhawk, and have grown more attached than I thought I would to it. Only place smith really wins is the classic smith look, which I love. But I hate, HATE, the key lock, and there is a huge difference between these smiths and the smiths from 10 years ago.
Your welcome lol.
Yes, I do owe a public thank you. Gunguy34 sold this dream firearm to me when I was in need of it like no other. It's been a great pistol, and after grips and a trigger job it turned out way better than I would have thought. In all honesty between the recent 629 and the redhawk, I would go redhawk. Just my .02 cents
It's been awhile since I owned a S&W revolver so I can't compare one with my Ruger (at the moment).
I'm no expert but the single action trigger of the Ruger feels like it breaks so much crisper than my semi's. I love the Modern Classic Cowboy look of my Redhawk and the way its overbuilt. I'll be able to compare it to my S&W 460V when it arrives next week
As I mentioned early...I really wanted to get one of these 4.2" 629's but will pass for now.
[/IMG]
I'm no expert but the single action trigger of the Ruger feels like it breaks so much crisper than my semi's. I love the Modern Classic Cowboy look of my Redhawk and the way its overbuilt. I'll be able to compare it to my S&W 460V when it arrives next week
As I mentioned early...I really wanted to get one of these 4.2" 629's but will pass for now.
Last edited:
So I went up North this weekend and made a point of stopping at my favorite small town gunsmith. He has been in this business for 3-4 decades, so he is in the know. I bring up this issue and although he is not on this website, he has known about these guns for a while! He has been asked to inspect a few of them.
He has no doubt that S&W built these 4.2" 629 "Canadian Versions" using salvaged parts from returned 629! Notice he said parts, plural, not just cylinders (Hint, if you don't want more aggravation, don't check the trigger group). He tries to tell me it is not the distributer or the dealers fault because the Manufacturer bullies the distributer and the distributer bullies the dealers ...... I respectfully disagreed.
So there you go! As far as I am concerned the mystery is now solved.
Frankley, I don't have a dog in this fight, so I don't know why am I so angry! I guess that's because I just learned how much respect these guys have for us, their customers. None, that's how much. I can tell you this much, if I had one of these guns and my money was not fully refunded up on demand, I would be in a Small Claims Court as soon as yesterday. A few claims and they will automatically join together and become one. Let S&W learn a lesson.
He has no doubt that S&W built these 4.2" 629 "Canadian Versions" using salvaged parts from returned 629! Notice he said parts, plural, not just cylinders (Hint, if you don't want more aggravation, don't check the trigger group). He tries to tell me it is not the distributer or the dealers fault because the Manufacturer bullies the distributer and the distributer bullies the dealers ......
I respectfully disagreed. So there you go! As far as I am concerned the mystery is now solved.
Frankley, I don't have a dog in this fight, so I don't know why am I so angry!
I guess that's because I just learned how much respect these guys have for us, their customers. None, that's how much. I can tell you this much, if I had one of these guns and my money was not fully refunded up on demand, I would be in a Small Claims Court as soon as yesterday. A few claims and they will automatically join together and become one. Let S&W learn a lesson.
Last edited:
Thanks much for that input Home3, it's my same feeling. There really is no other possibility at this point.
Are Canadian dealers ruining one batch of new guns before sending them out to customers? No.
Are the smiths at S&W all of a sudden so incompetent that they are ruining an entire batch before they get sent out? Most likely Not.
Was the "Special-Run" for Canada made of salvaged parts? Well... faced with all the possibilities this really is the only one that would explain it.
I've also not received a reply from S&W on this matter.
Return the gun for full-refund or class-action. Interesting. I guess I'll see how I fell when mine arrives back from Murray (should be this week.)
The real question is, does the term "Special" as in "Special-Run" for Canada (I noticed North Sylva Co. used that term) include/incorporate the use of used parts?
I'd bet money that if this thing went all the way, we'd find this buried somewhere in the contract between North Sylva and S&W.
That's my gut feeling.
Last edited:
So I went up North this weekend and made a point of stopping at my favorite small town gunsmith. He has been in this business for 3-4 decades, so he is in the know. I bring up this issue and although he is not on this website, he has known about these guns for a while! He has been asked to inspect a few of them.
He has no doubt that S&W built these 4.2" 629 "Canadian Versions" using salvaged parts from returned 629! Notice he said parts, plural, not just cylinders (Hint, if you don't want more aggravation, don't check the trigger group). He tries to tell me it is not the distributer or the dealers fault because the Manufacturer bullies the distributer and the distributer bullies the dealers ......
So there you go! As far as I am concerned the mystery is now solved.
Frankley, I don't have a dog in this fight, so I don't know why am I so angry!
No, sorry, I don't think this tale holds water. How do you explain how some have no blemishes? I have checked the lock work of mine and they are just fine. (I believe it is against US law to re-sell items and state them being "new".
Sounds like the famous "gunshop lore". Does he tell you hollow points are illegal too?
All guns are made of parts and if S&W can put together a run using surplus parts I don't see a problem but it doesn't explain why the notches are peened. I can't imagine S&W using parts from used guns.
I'm leaning towards bad heat treating.
I'm leaning towards bad heat treating.
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...Sylva-regarding-the-new-629-with-4-2-inch-bbl
POST#9
Can-down, I hear what you are saying, and would agree with you except for one detail. If "heat treating" were the reason, how did this entire batch make it out the door and past the Quality-Control? One revolver, sure, a batch of revolvers?
Also, peening of the notch generally occurs after thousands of rounds or poorly timed. If a revolver is operating perfectly (mine is) how the hell did it get peened in the first place?
The only explanation as far as I am concerned is that these revolvers were made with "used" parts (i.e. mostly cylinders).
Also note the crazy-gap in serial numbers on the frames; mine is in the 48xx range... another member had a 28xx frame.
WTH? You'd think this would raise some flags somewhere.
The big scam here is we were not informed that these were new, made with old parts. I think we should all be given the option to return for full-refund, or a discount (cash-back) to reflect the "New, but with old parts" condition of the gun.
My gun was checked by a smith and is working perfectly fine. It was the smiths opinion that someone had abused the gun (spinning cylinder and abrupt stop, repeatedly), but the timing was perfect and he had no other explanation on it being a *new* gun.
Since almost all of these guns have the problem, used-parts is the only reasonable assumption.
Any other suggestions?
POST#9
Can-down, I hear what you are saying, and would agree with you except for one detail. If "heat treating" were the reason, how did this entire batch make it out the door and past the Quality-Control? One revolver, sure, a batch of revolvers?
Also, peening of the notch generally occurs after thousands of rounds or poorly timed. If a revolver is operating perfectly (mine is) how the hell did it get peened in the first place?
The only explanation as far as I am concerned is that these revolvers were made with "used" parts (i.e. mostly cylinders).
Also note the crazy-gap in serial numbers on the frames; mine is in the 48xx range... another member had a 28xx frame.
WTH? You'd think this would raise some flags somewhere.
The big scam here is we were not informed that these were new, made with old parts. I think we should all be given the option to return for full-refund, or a discount (cash-back) to reflect the "New, but with old parts" condition of the gun.
My gun was checked by a smith and is working perfectly fine. It was the smiths opinion that someone had abused the gun (spinning cylinder and abrupt stop, repeatedly), but the timing was perfect and he had no other explanation on it being a *new* gun.
Since almost all of these guns have the problem, used-parts is the only reasonable assumption.
Any other suggestions?
Last edited:
