Interesting S&W Scandium-frame blow-ups...

[Jim March]

http://armedandamphibious.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/sw-329-night-guard-kaboom/

http://wheretheresawilliam.blogspot.com/2011/01/range-report-s-625-10-sn-scc0487-kaboom.html

Two things that jump out at me regarding both cases is that first, these aren't snubbies...and the cylinders and steel barrel cores are completely intact. That in turn tells us it's not "bad reloads" or otherwise over-pressure ammo, it's also not squibs in the barrel or other normal ammo-derived blowups.

These are fundamentally flawed guns - at least these particular specimens anyhow.

I find the second one particularly alarming because it was a 45ACP - a relatively low-pressure round (21k PSI tops) that in a large frame size like this should have been a *****cat, and no particular challenge to hold together. The black 329 was a Scandium 44Magnum and yeah, that's really pushing it...but a 45ACP?

There are references to other failures with this particular gun, with barrel overtorquing being discusses as a culprit.

These spontaneous disassemblies shouldn't have happened. It's more fodder for the "are scandium/aluminum alloys really a good idea?" discussion...

 

[44 AMP]

I think I'll stick with my pinned & recessed N frames! WOW!!

 

[Jimmy10mm]

Here are a couple of more sad but true. I had a 340PD and shot +P and magnum rounds in it with no problem, other than a sore web of the hand. Sold it before I read the articles at the links below. I still have a 386PD and it has been good to shoot, even with magnum rounds. Hope it sticks together.

http://www.thegunzone.com/sw340pd.html

http://lonelymachines.org/2009/11/08/pushing-the-envelope-vs-pushing-your-luck/

 

[geetarman]

I have a friend that blew up one of the scandium frame .44s. The gunsmith at the range told him before he bought the pistol it would hold up under full power loads.

It cracked the frame at 1300 rounds. The gun SHOULD have been able to digest factory loads. I might have a problem with handloads but would not expect problems with factory rounds.

The gun was returned to factory and was replaced. The guy then bought a .44 Alaskan and seems happy with that.

I have heard too many horror stories of those revolvers to want one.

I would much rather have steel.

Geetarman

 

[Wyosmith]

EGADS!

I am now very happy my S&W N frame revolvers are ALL made from 1957 to 1981 and are all STEEL.
That old design is not broken, so I think we should not fix it.

 

[MLeake]

Jimmy10mm, I know the guy who runs one of the websites you linked to. He is a gun dealer, and his shop carries S&W. He has an extensive collection of S&W revolvers of his own.

When he recommends against a particular S&W, I would listen carefully indeed, because it is a rare occurrence and would require serious cause.

 

[James K]

I wonder if those guns could have fired out of alignment,* so that the bullet struck the edge of the barrel. In a steel frame, nothing would have happened, or at worst a slightly bent frame. But with the Scandium frame, the barrel moved forward, stripping the threads and breaking the frame, and the resulting gas escape broke the top strap and blew it off.

*One shooter mentioned a chamber that failed to align, before the blowup.

Jim

 

[Technosavant]

Probably overtorqued barrels that damaged the frame. S&W had an issue with that for a period of time.

 

[8shot357]

First thing I thought was somebody might have shot hand loads in it without reporting it, so we really don't know why it blew.

Don't drink and reload.

 

[Jim March]

Oh no. Sorry, but overload rounds would blow the cylinders.

The cylinders are completely intact...in fact, they could easily be installed in another gun no problem.

It ain't the ammo.

 

[mete]

I wish the amateurs would learn before they talk ! "scandium alloy " ??? NO they are aluminum alloys containing about 0.5% scandium .The term 'scandium alloy' is just for hype . The scandium is there to strengthen the alloy and improve it for welding.

IIRC there was a detailed thread somewhere about these guns and the problem was incorrect dimensions in the barrel thread and overtorqueing during assembly.

 

[10Ringmagic]

I just bought a brand new 329PD back in March, granted I have only put 18 reloads through it when I first got it.

I hope it never goes KA-BLOOIE!

 

[Jimmy10mm]

Here is a very interesting blog on a knowledgeable shooter/reloader's experiences with a S&W 329PD. What I've gathered from reading it is that if you buy one, get it new with the warranty. If you shoot it a bunch it may need some factory TLC. I wouldn't mind having one but I've got a 2 1/2 and a 7 1/2 629 so that pretty much covers the bases. OTOH, that never stopped me in the past.

https://sites.google.com/site/hobbyhintstricksideas/Home/s-w-329pd-info

 

[10Ringmagic]

That is a good read if you are interested in, or have a 329PD.

Thanks for posting the link.

 

[totaldla]

Both of those are example of bad barrel installs - a well known problem that S&W repairs without question. They've had at least one recall over this.

Do you have data showing the catastrophic failure rate of alloy-framed versus steel? If not, then your sample is meaningless - just Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt spread on a forum to the unknowing.

FUD is just bad form.

By the way, Ruger had this same problem with steel revolvers.

 

[FTG-05]

Anyone want to unload one of their "gonna blow up any minute" S&W 329PDs with 4" barrel, just let me know.

 

[Webleymkv]

My first thought upon seeing the photos was over torqued barrels. However, upon thinking about it, there may be another possibility: flame cutting. The Scandium S&W's have a steel blast shield installed over the top of the b/c gap because, apparently, flame cutting is a bigger issue with scandium alloy than with steel. It is fairly well known that the blast shield is meant to be replaced periodically as it will eventually wear through to the topstrap itself. I wonder if the guns in question either had blast shields that should have been replaced long ago or were defective/improperly installed to begin with thus allowing flame cutting to weaken the frame to the point of catastrophic failure. Either way, S&W has excellent customer service and I'm sure they will rectify the issues unless there is significantly more to the story than what we know.

 

[drail]

I never could figure out why so many S&W buyers believed that weight reduction was SO important that they would even consider buying a handgun made from aluminum alloy. The first time I fired one I was convinced it was "not a great idea". IMO aluminum is for aircraft and beer cans. Chrome moly steel is for firearms.

 

[Webleymkv]

I never could figure out why so many S&W buyers believed that weight reduction was SO important that they would even consider buying a handgun made from aluminum alloy. The first time I fired one I was convinced it was "not a great idea". IMO aluminum is for aircraft and beer cans. Chrome moly steel is for firearms.

Having owned small revolver made of both steel (S&W M36) and aluminum (Colt Cobra) I will say that I can see uses for aluminum with relatively low-pressure cartridges with light recoil like .38 Special particularly for certain 'alternative' carry methods like ankle carry. However, when you start getting into higher-pressure cartridges with heavier recoil like .357 and .44 Magnum, I've never been able to rationalize the durability and shootability issues as being worth the savings in weight.

 

[James K]

I also thought of flame cutting, but that damage takes time and lots of firing; it just doesn't happen in the first few shots out of a new gun. The best explanation is probably the known over-torquing problem.

I find it hard to think of a Scandium frame and .44 Magnum in the same sentence. I recall what someone said about the J frame Sc revolvers in .357 - that the used gun cases in his area were full of superlight .357's with boxes of 47 rounds of ammo. (One round to try the gun; one round to see if it was as bad as it seemed; one round to be really sure it was that bad.)

Jim