No lead bullets in S&W 586?

[easyrider604]

The gun is tight, no play. I should also mention that the lead 38 rounds were also factory loads.

After having the gun checked out, I took it to the range again yesterday and put 2 boxes of 38 through it followed by a box of 357 Mag jacketed soft points. No problems. I think the gun is fine.

What BCRider said above makes a lot of sense.

As well, most (it not all) revolvers come from the factory with barrel forcing cone angle optimized for jacketed bullets. As well, the chamber throats are also smaller than ideal for lead bullets which are usually .001 or more, larger than jacketed bullets. This is why target revolvers cyclinder throats are reamed out to .358 and the forcing cone is recut to 11 degrees, which are the optimum specs (to obtain best accuracy) for shooting lead bullets. Even without these optimum specs, I have shot thousands of lead rounds with occasional jacket .357 magnum loads, through my 686 and GP100 and have not experienced any problems. So it's likely not the issue with your revolver.

Who checked out the revolver? The lock up may be solid, bank vault tight, however, did you check the cylinder timing? I have seen some Smith revolvers with bad timing that would allow the hammer to drop even when the chamber is not Pefectly aligned with the barrel. This bad timing is more evident in double action shooting than when shooting single action.
If your revolver timing is correct, then the most likely cause is the cartridge.

 

[Meroh]

S & B gave you a good dose of risk-management. Putting the blame on you means they not only don't have to replace yours, but don't have to replace the others who may or may not be having the same issues. All large corporations have PR spin-doctors for this very reason; not just in the firearms and ammo industry. I have dealt with some real "types" in a couple of different industries; on one instance, a supplier caused a corporation 100s of thousands of dollars in both customer warranty issues and to do quantitative, controlled testing to prove a manufacturing defect; the manufacturer still builds defective parts, but is now covering all warranty costs.

A shooter with one box of ammo has neither the time nor the resources to take these guys on... that is what they are counting on.

 

[Robert777]

I have a 586.....1989 manufacture. All I fire is lead WC. 38 special. I shot that load since 1990. Never an issue.

 

[gunrunner100]

You had a bullet failure. It happens from every company.

 

[Suther]

I'm surprised they would risk their name over something like this. A box of ammo is not worth the scorn of the internet...

Do they have a Facebook page? You'd be surprised at how effective complaining on a corporate Facebook page can be...

 

[bamboo633]

gunrunner100 - I agree with you completely, they had a bullet failure. Given that it failed in a manner that is dangerous, I can't use the rest of the box. Had they seen fit to just refund my money I would have been fine with that.

Instead they chose to claim that it is a normal failure if you shoot lead bullets followed by jacketed bullets from the S&W 586. If this is the case, and they actually believe it is normal for their bullets to fail in this situation, then they are putting thousands of handgun shooters in a situation that they know could injure people. It is common practice for people to shoot jacketed bullets after lead. They are claiming that this is a dangerous thing to do with their bullets.

I think I would have owned up to the problem and given me a refund.

 

[ryan]

What is the type of lead bullet? Swaged bullets are softer than cast, and if the fit isn't optimal, you can have a lead mine there. I would suggest shooting some more of them and then check the cylinder and bore. Still shouldn't cause a jacketed bullet failure, but will cause higher pressures.

 

[bamboo633]

The bullets were Remington 158gr lead round nose. UMC I think, they were in a green and white box.

There did not seem to be any signs of excessive leading when I cleaned the gun after removing the bullet jacket from the barrel. I have shot about 250 rounds out of the handgun since, including a box of Remington soft points after 50 rounds of lead. Cleaning has seemed normal each time.

 

[gunrunner100]

gunrunner100 - I agree with you completely, they had a bullet failure. Given that it failed in a manner that is dangerous, I can't use the rest of the box. Had they seen fit to just refund my money I would have been fine with that.

Instead they chose to claim that it is a normal failure if you shoot lead bullets followed by jacketed bullets from the S&W 586. If this is the case, and they actually believe it is normal for their bullets to fail in this situation, then they are putting thousands of handgun shooters in a situation that they know could injure people. It is common practice for people to shoot jacketed bullets after lead. They are claiming that this is a dangerous thing to do with their bullets.

I think I would have owned up to the problem and given me a refund.

They gave you the lawyer answer. There is no way for them to confirm the condition of your revolver without inspecting it. For them to refund would admit that they were responsible, something no company will just own up to without a thorough investigation.
I had a similar experience with some commercial PRVI ammo.

 

[easyrider604]

S&B’s lawyer should have just advised them to refund the ammo in cases like this. Simple and cheap. No one will find fault in that and everybody wins.

Maybe the customer agent or the technical department, or both, the OP spoke to were grandstanding.

 

[haywire]

Strange reaction from an ammunition mtg. Considering that S&W built the 586 because some model 19 and 66s developed cracked forcing cones firing jacketed magnums after lead buildup. Even these were rare. Both Winchester and Remington have reimbursed me for bad ammo.

 

[Master-G]

Considering that S&W built the 586 because some model 19 and 66s developed cracked forcing cones firing jacketed magnums after lead buildup.

I’ve not heard that lead buildup was the reason for the cracked forcing cones. What I’ve read was that it was the combination of hot 125 Gr magnum ammo and the fact that the bottom of the K frame forcing cone being a little thinner than the rest of the circumference was what caused the issue.

 

[haywire]

I’ve not heard that lead buildup was the reason for the cracked forcing cones. What I’ve read was that it was the combination of hot 125 Gr magnum ammo and the fact that the bottom of the K frame forcing cone being a little thinner than the rest of the circumference was what caused the issue.

Little thinner is right. Take a look at one. Sheriff Jim Wilson says he put 5000 rounds of high pressure magnums through his. No problems. It only makes sense that lead build up would be a factor. Anyway I make sure mine are clean before firing any magnums.