S&W 617 Replacement Sights

WASNTME

WASNTME

Regular
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Location
Dead center of Saskatchewan.
Greetings Gents.

I got to take my new S&W 617 6 inch stainless to the range. The groups are decent, but too high. At 15m the groups are about 5 inches high with the rear sight adjusted all the way down. If I use the tip of the front sight blade I can bring the shots down, but I don't feel that I should have to do this with a new $900 .22 pistol.

What do you guys think? Should I change the sights? Or ##### to Epps or S&W?

Thanks gents!
DSCN2864.jpg
 
Thanks for the reply. My friend who is reasonably experienced with pistols (owns a Sig 226 Tactical and a Beretta Ninety-Two) had the same problem with the groups being too high on my S&W 617. I also don't have any issues with either of his pistols. I'm thinking it's the gun.
Anyone on here have any troubles with their 617?
 
What do you mean when you state "If I use the tip of the front sight blade . . . "? In holding your sight picture, is the top of the rear sight and the top of the front sight level/equal? With iron sights, my 617 is sighted to hit 3" high at 25 yards (all 10X hits when I hold at 6 o'clock on the bullseye). My sight picture looks like this http://s1138.photobucket.com/albums/n530/lakers1138/sight pictures/
 
The sight picture I'm talking about (unclearly) when I say the "tip of the front sight" would have just the top tip of the front sight blade visible in the bottom of the rear sight notch.
sightpictureideal6oclock.jpg


My front sight is lower than in your 6 oclock pic. If I use the sights as above, I shoot high.

Thanks. Do you think it's a problem?
 
So I did a little reading about the 6 o clock hold. It seems in my mind that I want the gun to shoot a bullet onto the target where the front sight slightly "covers up" the target with the front and rear sight being level. Basically what the 6 o' clock hold does is sight the gun in high and you aim low so you can see what you're shooting. The sight doesn't cover up what you're shooting.

Thanks laker1138. I've been educated. Still not my preference, I'm disappointed my sights won't let me adjust it to where I'd like it.

Should the sight be more adjustable?
 
Hi
I have three 617's and all of them will allow me to use the center of mass hold if I choose to set the sights that way. Get someone else to shoot the gun to make sure it is the gun and not you. If you still have the problem it is an easy fix. Don't worry about the rear sight just replace the front sight with a taller one. It is a very easy fix as the 617's have the pinned front sight.

If you need more info drop me a PM and I will walk you through it.

Graydog
 
Your 617 should be able to be sighted Centre-Of-Mass. As recommended by others, get a second shooter to try your revolver. I know that when I sight-in my handguns, they are sighted for MY Eyes. When others shoot my pistols, they often achieve another point of impact. I deduce that others must see/use a different sight picture than I. I will PM you further on the subject of 'holds'.
Rest assured that your have purchased the penultimate rimfire revolver.
 
You need a taller front sight blade. Fortunately, these are easily swapped on current production S&W revolvers. I would try to see if you could get S&W to provide you one under warranty before buying one.
 
Given the issues that S&W seems to be having with quality control these days I'd check the barrel to frame alignment. An easy way to check this would be to insert a long straight cleaning rod section through the bore and into the frame opening with the cylinder crane open. With the rod simply laying in the bore measure or otherwise compare the spacing from the rod to the underside of the top frame strap at the forcing cone and back at the recoil shield. These two measurements should be identical. Given that the gun is shooting high if it's not a sight related issue then the spacing at the recoil shield might be a noticable amount more.

Or those with a keen eye for lining stuff up could open the cylinder and look along the side of the top strap and barrel and see if the barrel is lined up correctly as a first inspection.
 
BCRider said:
Given the issues that S&W seems to be having with quality control these days I'd check the barrel to frame alignment. An easy way to check this would be to insert a long straight cleaning rod section through the bore and into the frame opening with the cylinder crane open. With the rod simply laying in the bore measure or otherwise compare the spacing from the rod to the underside of the top frame strap at the forcing cone and back at the recoil shield. These two measurements should be identical. Given that the gun is shooting high if it's not a sight related issue then the spacing at the recoil shield might be a noticable amount more.

Or those with a keen eye for lining stuff up could open the cylinder and look along the side of the top strap and barrel and see if the barrel is lined up correctly as a first inspection.
Click to expand...

In the last two years I have bought and owned at least 20 new SAmith & Wesson Handguns. I have never experienced one problem with any of them. Also I have two close friends and between the two of them they also have purchased at least 30 new S&W handguns. They also have experienced no problems.

What are all the problems that you speak of?

I would bet money that the problem is not with the gun but rather with the shooter.
Just my two cents worth.

Graydog
 
I mentioned earlier that my much more experienced friend (with pistols) shoots high with the gun as well, and I shoot dead on with his pistols. I'm no pro, but I'm reasonably certain it's not the operator, it's the gun.
 
Graydog, don't shoot me. I'm just the messenger.

Their quality control does seem to be slipping over the last few years. I've seen too many stories with pictures showing issues to discount that a lemon can slip past them. Hell, there was a thread here on CGN a year or so back with a 686, I believe it was, that was new out of the box with the barrel sitting badly crooked in the frame. And a few stories on other forums with other oddities that required a return for warranty support the idea that a few bad apples are slipping through and making it to dealers.

Obviously for the number of guns they produce the percentage is small. But this may be one case where wasntme won the "Lotto" for a problem. Or it may just be that the wrong front sight blade was included.

Another option is that the rear sight has a burr of metal or chip or other debris under the movable portion so that the rear sight can't be drawn down as far as it should go. If you trust yourself with a small and proper fitting screwdriver you could remove the rear sight and check for anything that might be limiting the vertical adjustment travel range.
 
BCRider said:
Graydog, don't shoot me. I'm just the messenger.

Their quality control does seem to be slipping over the last few years. I've seen too many stories with pictures showing issues to discount that a lemon can slip past them. Hell, there was a thread here on CGN a year or so back with a 686, I believe it was, that was new out of the box with the barrel sitting badly crooked in the frame. And a few stories on other forums with other oddities that required a return for warranty support the idea that a few bad apples are slipping through and making it to dealers.

Obviously for the number of guns they produce the percentage is small. But this may be one case where wasntme won the "Lotto" for a problem. Or it may just be that the wrong front sight blade was included.

Another option is that the rear sight has a burr of metal or chip or other debris under the movable portion so that the rear sight can't be drawn down as far as it should go. If you trust yourself with a small and proper fitting screwdriver you could remove the rear sight and check for anything that might be limiting the vertical adjustment travel range.
Click to expand...

Sorry did not mean to come off that strong. With the amount of S&W guns that are sold every day in North America not to mention the rest of the world you see or hear almost nothing of bad ones.

If a fellow wants to complain about how the new guns are not as good as the old ones then I will listen and agree in most cases but then what company does make as good of a gun as they did 50 years ago. I am sure there are a few but I would guess there are not many.

Graydog
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom