Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
A Review of the S&W Model 681
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mtngunr" data-source="post: 4328836" data-attributes="member: 46104"><p>This seems a good time to mention the infamous 581/681/586/686 recall, of which this 681 no-dash was a member, this gun lacking an M-stamp signifying it was factory reworked under the recall.</p><p></p><p>Since the .357 was introduced, the advice was always to check function of desired carry ammo to make sure powder load and lacking primer hardness were not going to cause cratering of primer into firing pin hole and tying up the cylinder.</p><p></p><p>In the early 1980s, despite the US Customs Service doing a 20k rd test with their 158 gr load and having no problems, a rash of reports of guns locking up with assorted agencies began popping up.</p><p></p><p>S&W issued a recall, and the "fix" was to install a new firing pin bushing in frame, and new hammer nose/pin, both of smaller diameter.</p><p></p><p>It turned out it was mainly an ammo problem, mainly with light bullet loads using faster powder, and it seems mostly to have been a problem with the always quite hot Federal 125 gr JHP, and seems also to be the problem was due to the same sealant as applied to primers was also applied to bullets, which sealant all by its lonesome took 385 lbs of force to pull a bullet from the case....add that to an already hot load, and you have some extreme pressures, where these loads were reputed to crack new M19 forcing cones in as few as 11 shots....much of this listed in an article on revolverguy, by way of credit.</p><p></p><p>My 681 as turned out originally by the factory, works perfectly with every .357 load tried to date, including with the still hot Federal 125 gr load.</p><p></p><p>Forums across the net still have posts up by folk with earlier guns lacking the mod and asking if the gun safe to shoot, and typical internet wisdom regarding the 581/586/681/686 states they had weak cylinders and/or don't shoot the gun until it sent back for the "upgrade" then always follows.</p><p></p><p>In fact, I never knew of a problem or saw a problem with S&W revolvers breaking hammer noses/pins, until they went to the smaller diameter parts in the latter 1980s....it doubtful they have the parts to work the guns today, anyhow, even the smaller diameter parts discontinued in the late 1990s I believe (1997?).</p><p></p><p>In short, if you have a 681 or 681-1 lacking an M-stamp, do not worry about it past making sure your batch of carry ammo isn't running a bit overpressure and/or equipped with softer/thinner primer cups from a bad batch, and keep in mind hot weather can change things...all VERY old advice.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mtngunr, post: 4328836, member: 46104"] This seems a good time to mention the infamous 581/681/586/686 recall, of which this 681 no-dash was a member, this gun lacking an M-stamp signifying it was factory reworked under the recall. Since the .357 was introduced, the advice was always to check function of desired carry ammo to make sure powder load and lacking primer hardness were not going to cause cratering of primer into firing pin hole and tying up the cylinder. In the early 1980s, despite the US Customs Service doing a 20k rd test with their 158 gr load and having no problems, a rash of reports of guns locking up with assorted agencies began popping up. S&W issued a recall, and the "fix" was to install a new firing pin bushing in frame, and new hammer nose/pin, both of smaller diameter. It turned out it was mainly an ammo problem, mainly with light bullet loads using faster powder, and it seems mostly to have been a problem with the always quite hot Federal 125 gr JHP, and seems also to be the problem was due to the same sealant as applied to primers was also applied to bullets, which sealant all by its lonesome took 385 lbs of force to pull a bullet from the case....add that to an already hot load, and you have some extreme pressures, where these loads were reputed to crack new M19 forcing cones in as few as 11 shots....much of this listed in an article on revolverguy, by way of credit. My 681 as turned out originally by the factory, works perfectly with every .357 load tried to date, including with the still hot Federal 125 gr load. Forums across the net still have posts up by folk with earlier guns lacking the mod and asking if the gun safe to shoot, and typical internet wisdom regarding the 581/586/681/686 states they had weak cylinders and/or don't shoot the gun until it sent back for the "upgrade" then always follows. In fact, I never knew of a problem or saw a problem with S&W revolvers breaking hammer noses/pins, until they went to the smaller diameter parts in the latter 1980s....it doubtful they have the parts to work the guns today, anyhow, even the smaller diameter parts discontinued in the late 1990s I believe (1997?). In short, if you have a 681 or 681-1 lacking an M-stamp, do not worry about it past making sure your batch of carry ammo isn't running a bit overpressure and/or equipped with softer/thinner primer cups from a bad batch, and keep in mind hot weather can change things...all VERY old advice. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
A Review of the S&W Model 681
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom