S&W 29-10 failure part2

GunGuy34 said:
handloads or no handloads, its for certain that S&W does not make guns as well as they use too. That's just a fact, ive seen it several times myself with my own guns.
Click to expand...

You got it!
They did not just steadily decline in quality, though. A way back, I think it was still in the /70s when they first went from 6.5 to 6" in barrel length for the Model 27, 357, was the worst 27 I ever had. I think it was after that they moved the operation to Brazil and actually improved quality, as I remember it.
 
10k? That would be 333.3 rounds every single day, 666.6 if you went every other day,or 1000 if you went every third day. Yikes! And what, maybe $3000-$5000 depending on caliber? Double yikes!
grinder08 said:
I really don't agree that the number of rounds in a session should have any impact on a gun blowing up. I know people who shoot 10,000 rounds a month without problems so 500 in session is certainly not out to lunch and unless you heat the gun barrel up to 300 plus degrees C it should have no effect. As this is way to hot to handle and load so I don't see how overheating is the reason. Good quality steel operating at 80% of maximum strength can handle hundreds of thousand of load cycles without failure. If the ammunition is within spec. a gun barrel should never explode, it should wear out first. Using H110 would pretty much eliminate the possibility of double charging the case by accident as a single load is pretty much a full case.

Overall this sounds like S & W trying to avoid liability for what seems to me to by an under designed or poorly manufactured gun. Remember all the car manufacturers that screwed up their design and said it is not our fault.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
dirtybarry said:
Nope, S&W says that any failures are caused by the ammunition and it is the responsibility of the ammunition manufacturer for any damage. Since I manufactured the ammunition by reloading it, they say it's my problem. I'll post the exact passage from the email I got from them when i get to my own computer.

The recipe was once fired Starline brass, Winchester large pistol primer, 23.8 grains of Hodgdon H-110, Campro 240 grain TMJ bullet seated to 1.60" COL

Mike from Hodgdon has a theory but I want to hear from Campro before I let that particular cat out.

Here's the first response from S&W:

I am sorry to hear about your issue and to say that we do not support the use of reloads. We build our firearms to meet SAAMI specs so any load within SAAMI specs would be fine for use.

With that being said, even the major manufactures occasionally do make mistakes and we have seen injuries and guns destroyed due to this.

When we determine that the detonation was in fact due to an over pressured round, we have to ask you to inquire with the ammo manufacture. They will usually cover the cost of the firearm because it was their ammo that caused the issue.

When you choose to use your own reloads and have an issue, theoretically, you are the ammo manufacture and would end up having to cover the cost.

Please contact one of our warranty centers in Canada to see what they can do for you. Here is a link below:
Click to expand...

This makes me curious. I have bought boxes of Campro in the past that had a handful of different weight, shape, and caliber bullets in them.........
 
oh god, no... you're not saying.... it was the bullets?!?

the plot thickens... this thread rocks.

(seriously; it could easily explain the hammered forcing cone, and then everything else falls into place!

I'd be wondering if the op noticed some slugs seating harder than others, as another back-up to this new theory, but for it maybe to be NOT S&W's 'fault' after all, lol)
 
Bigbubba said:
...use in the same fashion as the first one and would be expecting a different result which is the classic definition of insanity.
Click to expand...
Sorry for the thread hijack but this quote bugs me. You'll often see of attributed to Albert Einstein--here's my beef with it.
  • Albert Einstein didn't say it
  • Even if he did he was a theoretical physicist, not a psychologist
  • And, it's not at all the definition of insanity...maybe of compulsive persistence, but not insanity

Again, sorry for the thread derail. To the OP, as Abe Lincoln said at the Battle of Gettysburg, "Sorry 'bout yo' gat, homie."
 
*MALICE* said:
This makes me curious. I have bought boxes of Campro in the past that had a handful of different weight, shape, and caliber bullets in them.........
Click to expand...

I don't want to say too much but also I don't want Campro to be cast in an unfavourable light, so before things get out of hand let me say that I've used literally thousands of their 240gr TMJ bullets and have found them to be consistently well made with essentially zero variation. I've got hundreds of rounds loaded with their bullets and have no reservations about firing each and every one of them in the new gun.

As far as the mix ups, I found a bonus 115gr 9mm in one box of .44's. I used it. My guess is that they are strays that are getting hung up in the packaging process.
 
Kayser Sose said:
oh god, no... you're not saying.... it was the bullets?!?

the plot thickens... this thread rocks.

(seriously; it could easily explain the hammered forcing cone, and then everything else falls into place!

I'd be wondering if the op noticed some slugs seating harder than others, as another back-up to this new theory, but for it maybe to be NOT S&W's 'fault' after all, lol)
Click to expand...

I've found Campro's bullets to be very consistent with diameter variations that are measured in tenths of a thou and seating consistency within .002" COL. They are a precision piece compared to Hornady XTP's.
Hornady's diameters are decent but I've had batches where almost every single round had to be fine tuned for COL. Major PITA.

But now that you mention it, I have not measured every brand of bullet that I've used. Thanks for the idea, I've added it to my list of things to do today.
 
First off lucky you didn't get hurt.......complete absolute bull#### from SW with the answers the gave you I would be bouncing off walls.....especially that you bought this firearm new this year....I would take this to the top and not stop till this has been replaced....so they are telling you that if you didn't use handloads they would of covered it? Bull#### they said said contact the ammo manufacturer....haha I'd laugh....try and tell remington or winchester to replace your firearm.....this is completely insane that SW won't help you out....almost not believable......and how many times have they had deal with issues like this on a model 29-10? I bet 1 in 10,000 would blow up like this....you paid good money for a supposedly top quality revolver.....and you sure did use it! I wish I could afford to shoot as much .44 as you can....you put that revolver to the test and they should back u 100%.....don't stop till its replaced......Keep escalating this phone calls and complaints! Hope u get this resolved keep us posted
 
grinder08 said:
My conclusion, probably a production flaw in the barrel but sadly being S and W I doubt you will get anywhere.
Click to expand...

If you are collecting opinions, I would like to respectfully disagree with grinder on the mechanism. Based on what I can see in the photos provided, the key to the failure mechanism is seen in photo #2:

2ibksnd.jpg


Note that the fracture through the topstrap of the frame has a stepped appearance. This is caused by multiple cracks (in this case there appears to have been at least four) that initiate independently in the same area, then eventually coalesce. These are called ratchet marks and are considered characteristic of fatigue. The 45 degree crack extending from a corner is also typical of fatigue.

It appears that extensive use of the revolver at stress levels in excess of the endurance limit of the material initiated multiple fatigue cracks in the frame. Cracks in the topstrap propagated until the topstrap was almost entirely penetrated. When the next shot was fired, the remaining material of the topstrap fractured, producing the ridge of brightly fractured material along the top edge of the topstrap that we can clearly see in the photo. With the topstrap broken, the barrel was unable to hold together on its own and it split. The outward displacement of the barrel halves fractured the thin frame supporting the bottom of the barrel instantly.

Note that I am not saying your loads were excessive, but I am saying they were beyond what this particular revolver was capable of handling.

My qualifications are a metallurgy degree and 5 years spent as a failure analysis consultant.
 
icelink said:
First off lucky you didn't get hurt.......complete absolute bull#### from SW with the answers the gave you I would be bouncing off walls.....especially that you bought this firearm new this year....I would take this to the top and not stop till this has been replaced....so they are telling you that if you didn't use handloads they would of covered it? Bull#### they said said contact the ammo manufacturer....haha I'd laugh....try and tell remington or winchester to replace your firearm.....this is completely insane that SW won't help you out....almost not believable......and how many times have they had deal with issues like this on a model 29-10? I bet 1 in 10,000 would blow up like this....you paid good money for a supposedly top quality revolver.....and you sure did use it! I wish I could afford to shoot as much .44 as you can....you put that revolver to the test and they should back u 100%.....don't stop till its replaced......Keep escalating this phone calls and complaints! Hope u get this resolved keep us posted
Click to expand...

No worries, I'm not the type to go away quietly. Just have a lot of other things going on right now.
 
BattleRife said:
If you are collecting opinions, I would like to respectfully disagree with grinder on the mechanism. Based on what I can see in the photos provided, the key to the failure mechanism is seen in photo #2:



Note that the fracture through the topstrap of the frame has a stepped appearance. This is caused by multiple cracks (in this case there appears to have been at least four) that initiate independently in the same area, then eventually coalesce. These are called ratchet marks and are considered characteristic of fatigue. The 45 degree crack extending from a corner is also typical of fatigue.

It appears that extensive use of the revolver at stress levels in excess of the endurance limit of the material initiated multiple fatigue cracks in the frame. Cracks in the topstrap propagated until the topstrap was almost entirely penetrated. When the next shot was fired, the remaining material of the topstrap fractured, producing the ridge of brightly fractured material along the top edge of the topstrap that we can clearly see in the photo. With the topstrap broken, the barrel was unable to hold together on its own and it split. The outward displacement of the barrel halves fractured the thin frame supporting the bottom of the barrel instantly.

Note that I am not saying your loads were excessive, but I am saying they were beyond what this particular revolver was capable of handling.

My qualifications are a metallurgy degree and 5 years spent as a failure analysis consultant.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much, your opinion is most appreciated.
 
Your primers look flattened and 23.8 grains of H-110 is close to max. You stated that you have put almost 6,000 rounds through it in the last 10 months. Did you start low and work your way up looking for pressure signs,or just start loading just under max?
 
mr.e moose said:
Your primers look flattened and 23.8 grains of H-110 is close to max. You stated that you have put almost 6,000 rounds through it in the last 10 months. Did you start low and work your way up looking for pressure signs,or just start loading just under max?
Click to expand...

Most definitely started low with 4 different powders. IMR4227, Hodgdon HP-38, H-110 and Winchester Autocomp. Settled on IMR4227 and H-110. Worked up the current H-110 load 1/10 at a time.
Pretty much anything I ever fired in this thing has flattened the primers to some degree so I've paid more attention to how easy the brass ejected. And these rounds slid right out.
 
Measured 7 random samples of each of the three brands of .44 bullets that I have left, with the following results:

Campro 240gr TMJ - 0.4292" to 0.4294" 16 cents each
Speer 210gr GDHP - 0.4295" to 0.4298" 36 cents each
Winchester 210gr STHP - 0.4297" to 0.4298" 65 cents each (have not been able to bring myself to use these expensive and irreplaceable beauties)

Also used but also used up, Hornady 180gr and 200gr XTP's (miserable things to work with)
 
Last edited:
Is the Speer a typo? If not, there's your oversize bullet.
dirtybarry said:
Measured 7 random samples of each of the three brands of .44 bullets that I have left, with the following results:

Campro 240gr TMJ - 0.4292" to 0.4294" 16 cents each
Speer 210gr GDHP - 0.4925" to 0.4298" 36 cents each
Winchester 210gr STHP - 0.4297" to 0.4298" 65 cents each (have not been able to bring myself to use these expensive and irreplaceable beauties)

Also used but also used up, Hornady 180gr and 200gr XTP's (miserable things to work with)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom