In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
HAPPY ENDING: high-pressure handload & damaged M29
bwa
Member Posts: 224 ✭✭✭
Some of you have followed on the Experts forum my rocky re-entry into shooting last January beginning with a reloading miscue resulting in a bulged cylinder, leading to several foul-ups by S&W's service people, culminating in them sending the gun back after having damaged both the crown and grips(I won't bore anyone reviewing the details; if you didn't follow the story, suffice it to say it was quite the mess.). This will be the last installment, the matter having been resolved in a rather surprising manner.
After reviewing the Experts responses to my last update and thoroughly pondering the matter, I concluded that it was not kosher for a company to damage a customer's property and return it with no acknowledgment or effort to fix it(You may recall that, AFTER I told them about the damage, they sent a pair of grips which were warped.). I therefore decided to make one last written appeal, accompanied by the damaged original grips and photographs of the damaged crown and poorly-fitting grips they sent as replacements. I calmly reviewed the matter for them and asked them to take responsibility for the damage and the resulting loss in the value of the gun. I suggested that they do one of three things: 1)take my gun and pay me what I paid for it; 2)take my gun and replace it with a comparable new one; or 3)compensate me for the approximate loss I had incurred as a result of the damage their service people had done, based on an expert's estimate(Saxon Pig's) of the what the gun would now bring at auction($250).
Several days later I received an email from the Director of Customer Service saying that he understood my frustration, and that the company would buy my gun from me and reimburse me the complete amount I had paid for it(option 1 above). All I had to do was send it back with my original receipt enclosed, and they would get a check to me as soon as they could process it. So I sent it last week(they paid the shipping also). Consequently the only loss I incurred was the $10 transfer fee.
After receiving the email I promptly contacted my gun dealer and ordered a new M629, which he sold me at less than 7% above his cost(As you can imagine, this man has a large and loyal clientele.). This came to some $30 less than the amount I paid for the 29, so I came out ahead financially after the whole ordeal(and avoided the hassle, delays, and fees associated with shipping and transfer).
This whole matter brought an education with it. Hopefully I'll remember at least the most important lessons. And since you fellows have graciously and patiently shared your expertise with me during this experience, maybe I can pass along a few tidbits that will be helpful to some of you:
-If I were asked to grade Smith's customer service department(based of course on this one experience only), they would get a B+. Mr. Neil Gibree and Ms. Kate Fredette treated me quite well. The only thing keeping the dept. from an 'A' would be a rep with whom I had one contact who fed me the typical customer service nonsense designed to get rid of the customer without doing anything about his problem. But that was very brief and inconsequential.
-The service people on the other hand, as you can imagine, get a failing grade. Had they only got me on the phone and communicated/consulted with me a few times, it would have made a big difference.
-Consequently I would advise you not to refer people to Smith & Wesson for service/repair unless there's no alternative.
-Smith must have had some quality control problems in at least the case of this particular model, at least at the particular time it was made. As some may recall I pointed out some other abnormalities with the gun after I had bulged the cylinder, and some experts here were dead certain I had bent the frame and the gun was history. I didn't believe this to be the case because of certain evidence I observed to the contrary. My suspicions were confirmed when I happened to run across a website containing some older writings by an experienced Smith customer who described the exact problems I had encountered in some of his revolvers; e.g. an angled cylinder resulting in an uneven barrel/cylinder gap(He also described very similar problems with the service people -apparently they've been at it quite awhile.).
So why did I run out and buy another Smith? It's still the only large frame revolver I really like. I may in the future try a Ruger, but not the others(sorry Colt fans, though I'm sure it's a high-quality gun, I just don't care for the looks or the fit of your Anaconda -can't afford it anyway). The stainless isn't as attractive as the nickel finish, but I like the idea of not having to be so careful not to harm the finish. I just hope I never have to utilize the service department again.
My handload is shooting high. The powder company said that this was because I was loading it too light(quarter to half a grain under the starting charge). If I added more powder, the velocity increase would cause it to hit lower on the target(something about "actual realized velocity" or something like that). Anyone want to confirm or dispute that?
So that's about it for this story. Many thanks to all who have offered advice, support, correction, etc.
After reviewing the Experts responses to my last update and thoroughly pondering the matter, I concluded that it was not kosher for a company to damage a customer's property and return it with no acknowledgment or effort to fix it(You may recall that, AFTER I told them about the damage, they sent a pair of grips which were warped.). I therefore decided to make one last written appeal, accompanied by the damaged original grips and photographs of the damaged crown and poorly-fitting grips they sent as replacements. I calmly reviewed the matter for them and asked them to take responsibility for the damage and the resulting loss in the value of the gun. I suggested that they do one of three things: 1)take my gun and pay me what I paid for it; 2)take my gun and replace it with a comparable new one; or 3)compensate me for the approximate loss I had incurred as a result of the damage their service people had done, based on an expert's estimate(Saxon Pig's) of the what the gun would now bring at auction($250).
Several days later I received an email from the Director of Customer Service saying that he understood my frustration, and that the company would buy my gun from me and reimburse me the complete amount I had paid for it(option 1 above). All I had to do was send it back with my original receipt enclosed, and they would get a check to me as soon as they could process it. So I sent it last week(they paid the shipping also). Consequently the only loss I incurred was the $10 transfer fee.
After receiving the email I promptly contacted my gun dealer and ordered a new M629, which he sold me at less than 7% above his cost(As you can imagine, this man has a large and loyal clientele.). This came to some $30 less than the amount I paid for the 29, so I came out ahead financially after the whole ordeal(and avoided the hassle, delays, and fees associated with shipping and transfer).
This whole matter brought an education with it. Hopefully I'll remember at least the most important lessons. And since you fellows have graciously and patiently shared your expertise with me during this experience, maybe I can pass along a few tidbits that will be helpful to some of you:
-If I were asked to grade Smith's customer service department(based of course on this one experience only), they would get a B+. Mr. Neil Gibree and Ms. Kate Fredette treated me quite well. The only thing keeping the dept. from an 'A' would be a rep with whom I had one contact who fed me the typical customer service nonsense designed to get rid of the customer without doing anything about his problem. But that was very brief and inconsequential.
-The service people on the other hand, as you can imagine, get a failing grade. Had they only got me on the phone and communicated/consulted with me a few times, it would have made a big difference.
-Consequently I would advise you not to refer people to Smith & Wesson for service/repair unless there's no alternative.
-Smith must have had some quality control problems in at least the case of this particular model, at least at the particular time it was made. As some may recall I pointed out some other abnormalities with the gun after I had bulged the cylinder, and some experts here were dead certain I had bent the frame and the gun was history. I didn't believe this to be the case because of certain evidence I observed to the contrary. My suspicions were confirmed when I happened to run across a website containing some older writings by an experienced Smith customer who described the exact problems I had encountered in some of his revolvers; e.g. an angled cylinder resulting in an uneven barrel/cylinder gap(He also described very similar problems with the service people -apparently they've been at it quite awhile.).
So why did I run out and buy another Smith? It's still the only large frame revolver I really like. I may in the future try a Ruger, but not the others(sorry Colt fans, though I'm sure it's a high-quality gun, I just don't care for the looks or the fit of your Anaconda -can't afford it anyway). The stainless isn't as attractive as the nickel finish, but I like the idea of not having to be so careful not to harm the finish. I just hope I never have to utilize the service department again.
My handload is shooting high. The powder company said that this was because I was loading it too light(quarter to half a grain under the starting charge). If I added more powder, the velocity increase would cause it to hit lower on the target(something about "actual realized velocity" or something like that). Anyone want to confirm or dispute that?
So that's about it for this story. Many thanks to all who have offered advice, support, correction, etc.
Comments
I find it quite interesting over the course of this......S & W never started this problem in the first place. You overloaded and ruined the gun.....yet somehow with enough effort put into it, S & W became the "guilty" party and even though you claim injury to a "broken" gun AFTER it was rendered "useless" by you. Yes, you may have received some "bad" service on this gun, but you were probably entitled to "NO SERVICE" because of your own destruction of the gun in the first place. You should have "backed up to the bank teller when you cashed the check from S & W."
Let us all know where you will be shooting the "Handloads" that are already a problem for you ..... that way we can be somewhere else when your new experiments go awry.!!!! Good Luck!
Fish Shudder at the sound of my Name!
Smith did the right thing, and bwa handled it correctly, writing a concise and reasonable letter laying out the course of events, and giving options on the resolition of the conflict.
However that being said bwa, is still guilty of killing an innocent S & W.
"If you ain't got pictures, I wasn't there."
Margaret Thatcher
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
Mark Twain
Please allow me to correct your characterization of things. As I believe I've said in previous posts, I expected from the outset to pay for the repair of the gun, and I told Smith's people that repeatedly. In fact, in my final letter I offered to pay the complete cost of the new cylinder and its installation. They didn't accept my offer.
And so I do take responsibility, and am guilty, for "starting this problem". But I will always fail to see how that makes me somehow responsible for the rest of the problem, all of which occurred at the hands of Smith's service people.
Furthermore, I did not damage this gun by dangerous experimentation. If you recall my initial post, my powder measure was dropping inconsistent charges, and I somehow made a mistake trying to correct the situation. But I've learned from it and have been reloading safely since that time. I have never from the outset had any desire to push the envelope on safety. I've used the listed components and followed all instructions.
Finally, the gun was not ruined or rendered useless by the accident -only the cylinder, which has been replaced. I fired a number of factory loads in it afterward.
You're of course free to believe as you please. I hope you'll take the above items into consideration in forming your judgment.
You can't make a bad ball good by laying any subsequent problems on S&W. That they settled with you to buy peace and good will, shouldn't be construed as them having accepting blame. And your claim for consequential damages!! Give us a break.
From your original assessments, you hadn't a clue about what was wrong aside from the bulged cylinder because technical things are clearly not your bag. You're now presuming the cylinder was all that was wrong. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that you also twisted the frame and crane. Replacing a cylinder and straightening a crane never necessitates refinishing a whole gun. Your complaints regarding dinging of the crown and warped grips are trivial and easily corrected. While unworthy of all that howling, they nevertheless shouldn't have left the shop.
S&W saw that you were trouble and bought peace.
The irritating presumption that S&W owed you something comes through your comments, making it clear you haven't even now accepted responsibility for for the results of your carelessness.
Let me guess - you're a Liberal, right ?
Unless I am mistaken with these facts, and correct me if I am wrong, where does all that BS and liberal crap come from?
"If you ain't got pictures, I wasn't there."
Margaret Thatcher
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
Mark Twain
blow your hands or face off and that they gave you a new gun. Rest
assured, if you keep making such "mistakes" your luck won't continue
forever.
You blow up the engine in your car by using an additive which voids the warantee.
The factory elects to cover it anyhow and replaces your motor. In the process they scratch your paint and put a dent in your hood.
WOULD YOU BE HAPPY At the point in time they elected to work on the car(gun) they become responsible for their mistakes.
Good craftmanship is good craftmanship car or gun. The man offered to pay; at that point in time the problem became S&W's.
Respect for self Respect for others Responsible for all actions
"Due and dilligent care" is the issue.
Thank you Smokey for the anology.
"If you ain't got pictures, I wasn't there."
Edited by - Alpine on 09/26/2002 09:47:39
Margaret Thatcher
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
Mark Twain
reports of more "defective guns" from this guy.
There are clearly a lot of people here who are criticizing you due to their lack of info. on the real beef you have with S&W, which has nothing to do with the fact your gun was damaged from a handload. Ignore all that. I appreciate your continual updates on the whole ordeal you've been put through with your quest for repair to your gun. I know it has helped me out immensely knowing what to expect from S&W, as well as how to handle this type of problem myself in the future should I need to.
Just so I know I've said what I've got on my chest for everyone criticizing bwa, here it is. Read or know the whole story before making yourself look silly, and that is putting it nicely. If you, for example, blew up the engine in your used car, and it was your fault, and took it to the manufacturer's authorized service shop for repair, and the problem was fixed, but when you got it back it had a dent in the rear fender which wasnt there before, and the tires had been replaced with new ones, but put on with one lug missing on each wheel, and you didnt even ask for the tires to be replaced in the first place, you WOULD be mad about the dent and the tires, even if you were responsible for blowing up the engine. Do the math here folks, and get off of bwa's butt, because you dont know what you are talking about, and if you do, then you have a sad idea of what is the fault of a consumer, and what is the fault of a service provider. Enough said.
Thanks for the info. bwa!!
Geez, guess I should have read Smoky's post better, we think alike!!
SSgt Ryan E. Roberts, USMC
Edited by - robsguns on 09/26/2002 12:01:22
BWA attempted to trivialize the repairs, alluding to only the bulged cylinder when in all probability the frame and crane were also bent.
Smith made the mistake of accepting the gun and paid out more than they sold it for with BWA making money out on the deal. BWA's "you owe me" attitude smacks of of the Liberal mentality I have seen at close hand for many years and dislike.
v35: If you can somehow for a moment step away from your anger at me, I would like you to ponder something. I respect your technical expertise -consider this: Let's assume that you are correct in your belief that the gun was more seriously damaged than just the cylinder. But if that is the case, what are we to make of the fact that Smith's people didn't catch it? When I first sent it in I told them what had happened and that therefore I would like them to inspect for any damage beyond the cylinder and repair it(if such was possible). When the work order came back detailing what all had been done, the cylinder was the only repair made which was related to the accident. There was no mention of anything done to the frame, crane, or other components. And there was no message saying something like, "gun is damaged beyond repair; DO NOT FIRE!" No, they represented the gun as having been completely repaired and safe for firing. That is part of the reason for my viewpoint; I relied on them as professionals. You might ponder the implications of all this.