The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 8, 2013, 10:37 PM   #26
skidder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 17, 2008
Location: Montana
Posts: 628
I'll admit, it's far more to me than just function

There are so many who view it as "irrational" to reject a S&W because of a silly hole. But there are others who can't fathom how "they" can just ignore it.

The elegant look of an old Smith & Wesson is like a fine wine or classic automobile. Yes, Mad Dog 20/20 and Boones Farm will still get you drunk, and a ford escort will still get you from point A to B. But for many of us "taste and elegance" are more important than.... "it's just a stupid hole, get over it".

Well.... Just like many of us could never get over an idiot drilling a big hole in the side of a prestine 57 Chevy for no reason. We find it just as hard to rationalize another idiot drilling a hole in the side of an artistic classic wheelgun.
__________________
Gun permit?? A bread crumb tossed to a sleeping society awoken by the sound of complacency. "They are for your own good", and "you will understand when you see all the lives they save". Yes master, what else will you toss me from your bag of infringements?? Do you want me to roll over and play dead? I do that very well. --skidder
skidder is offline  
Old May 9, 2013, 04:41 AM   #27
kcub
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2010
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 1,994
It violates the KISS principle for worse than no good reason.
Why should I buy one when the old ones aren't that hard to come by?
kcub is offline  
Old May 9, 2013, 07:17 AM   #28
45_auto
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2011
Location: Southern Louisiana
Posts: 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by aid_admin
The point I am making that you think of numbers and go like "oh, it's only a few out of thousands" until something happens to you or someone you know... and then there is a question: would you still buy S&W with the lock, when you can avoid it?
Will your friend's daughter still go to the Boston Marathon, even though she can avoid it?

Will she go to a movie theater (Colorado shooter) even though she can avoid it?

Will she drive or ride in a car (much better chance of death than a bombing or shooting) even though she can avoid it?

Will she fly on a plane even though she can avoid it?

Sometimes it's nice to apply a little logic to your choices despite the media/internet hype about certain subjects.
45_auto is offline  
Old May 9, 2013, 08:43 AM   #29
AID_Admin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 1, 2013
Location: Midwest, USA
Posts: 322
Quote:
Sometimes it's nice to apply a little logic to your choices despite the media/internet hype about certain subjects.
And the logic tells me the following: if I had no choice then having the lock is not the end of the world. I shot hundreds if not thousands of rounds through the rental guns with locks and never had an issue. But if I can obtain the older version without the lock, even in LNIB condition for basically same money, why should I take ANY chances at all with the lock?

It sure nice to apply a little logic and make the right choice
AID_Admin is offline  
Old May 9, 2013, 08:51 AM   #30
18DAI
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 30, 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 2,113
I find it logical to select a revolver with no unneeded parts, better asthetics, better build with some handfitting and better resale value than the ugly wind up guns wearing the famous logo.

And I get them for less than the asking prices of the current production junk.
__________________
S&W Model 19 Combat Magnum. Everything you need in a revolver, and nothing you don't.
18DAI is offline  
Old May 9, 2013, 04:51 PM   #31
WIN1886
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 25, 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 568
I only have one S&W revolver with the lock.....so far , it has not hindered the performance of my model 627 Pro ! In fact , of all my S&W's that date back to the 70's this revolver will out perform the others in DA or SA mode of fire ! The only gun that will consistently shoot better groups is my old S&W Model 41 semi auto .22 pistol ! Having said that I do like the older Smiths better without the lock...I never use it !
WIN1886 is offline  
Old May 9, 2013, 09:36 PM   #32
hAkron
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2011
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 289
If the lock ever fails on a self defense gun, can your next of kin send it back to S&W to have it repaired under warranty, or does that only apply to the original owner's lifetime? Technically he was alive as the issue occurred.
hAkron is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 06:49 AM   #33
540mope
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2008
Location: yonder
Posts: 329
Not a fan of the lock, but i recently purchased an IL revolver. I've been looking for a 2 5/8" barrel 627 PC, but unfortunately the pre-lock versions are more than double (some triple) the price of current 627s with the lock. I thought of shipping a 1 of 200 6 1/2" barrel 627 PC to Performance Center to have them install the snub barrel, but i wised up and sold it off to a collector before i went through with it. Will soon be ordering the plug kit to make things better...and will have $1000+ left over.
540mope is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 08:03 AM   #34
BoogieMan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 2012
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,273
It seems very easy to remove the lock, plenty of links and How To available.
I understand if your a purist you dont want the lock hole. SS guns can be filled and filed with a TIG and no one would know any different.
__________________
Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it.
Milton Freidman
BoogieMan is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 10:45 AM   #35
RickB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2000
Location: Western WA
Posts: 5,640
Quote:
If the lock ever fails on a self defense gun, can your next of kin send it back to S&W to have it repaired under warranty, or does that only apply to the original owner's lifetime? Technically he was alive as the issue occurred.
Is there any evidence that if a part is going to break on a Smith revolver, it will necessarily be one of the lock parts? I've had to have a trigger replaced under warranty on one of my Smiths, but no trouble with the lock.
RickB is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 12:51 PM   #36
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,847
This will be my one and only post in this thread as I've participated in more long, drawn-out, and frustrating lock debates than I care to remember and have no desire to get mired in another one.

The lock, to me, is a non-issue. The two ILS-equipped revolvers that I've owned shot just as well, if not better, than the pre-lock revolvers I've owned. After researching the issue, I've come to the conclusion that the number of documented cases in which a S&W revolver failed to function properly because of the ILS is so small as to be statistically insignificant. I've come to the conclusion that the S&W lock is not significantly more likely to cause a revolver to malfunction than any of the other parts which could potentially cause a S&W, or any other handgun for that matter, to fail. The whole issue has, IMHO, been blown out of proportion by questionable reports of anonymous posters within the internet echo chamber.

I've also come to the conclusion that in the extremely rare instance in which the lock does cause a problem, it is due to defective, broken, or improperly-fitted parts rather than a design flaw. The reason for this is because I understand the manner in which the lock works. When engaged, the lock "flag" rotates up and back towards the shooter thus allowing a small tab on the "flag" to engage a recess in the hammer and prevent it's movement. The "flag" cannot engage the hammer when the revolver is at full lockup, as it would be at the moment it's fired, and the recoil arc of the gun will force the "flag" down and out of engagement through inertia. I also notice that reports of problems with the lock seem to be most common in lightweight guns such as those with scandium-alloy frames firing heavy-recoiling ammunition such as .357 and .44 Magnum. This makes sense as a defective or improperly-fitted part will be more likely to fail and fail sooner if subjected to the extra beating of a lightweight magnum. I also notice that repeated lock failure is nearly unheard of if, after the first incident, the revolver is returned to S&W for repair.

It seems to me that the majority of people who bash the S&W lock do so out of personal preference and that the motivation for such is usually rooted in aesthetics or politics. As far as looks is concerned, I will concede that I don't find ILS guns to be quite as visually appealing as pre-lock examples, but I still think that S&W makes one of the better looking revolvers in the market. As far as looks is concerned, I personally feel that a half-lug revolver with the lock still looks better than a pre-lock gun with a full underlug, but that's simply my personal preference and I don't disparage the quality of full-lug guns nor the people that prefer them.

Politics is the other major factor that seems to be at play here as many still begrudge S&W for the Agreement of 2000 with the Clinton Administration. Such people often stoop the the use of childish invectives like "Smith & Clinton" or "Hillary Hole" thus exposing their underlying bias. I, personally, think that it's somewhat silly to continue boycotting S&W over this as the parent company which entered the agreement no longer holds interest in S&W, the new owners have publicly stated that they consider the agreement null and void, and S&W was never in full compliance with the agreement to begin with. If we boycotted every company who ever failed to maintain a "no compromise" attitude with gun-control advocates, many of the larger firearm makers would be out of business and the gun grabbers would get exactly what they wanted.

So there you have my take on the subject. I'm sure that some here will disagree with me vehemently and I've probably debated the subject with most of those people before. I simply don't have the time or patience to circle that tree again, but a search on the subject will reveal a great deal of information to those who are unsure or curious. If anyone has a legitimate question on the issue, I'd be more that happy to answer a PM, but I'm not getting drawn into another urinating competition.
__________________
Smith, and Wesson, and Me. -H. Callahan
Well waddaya know, one buwwet weft! -E. Fudd
All bad precedents begin as justifiable measures. -J. Caesar
Webleymkv is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 02:20 PM   #37
AID_Admin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 1, 2013
Location: Midwest, USA
Posts: 322
Webleymkv, this is a very in-depth and very sounding post and thank you for that. As a newbie to revolvers I really appreciate that. But put yourself in the shoes of someone not so experienced (like OP or perhaps myself) choosing an average revolver for targets AND defense, lets say 686. All esthetics and biasing aside. Given a choice of buying a new one with the lock or a LNIB older version without the lock for the similar price, wouldn't I be better off with an older no-lock one?
AID_Admin is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 02:52 PM   #38
southjk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2012
Location: Memphis
Posts: 419
Quote:
Given a choice of buying a new one with the lock or a LNIB older version without the lock for the similar price, wouldn't I be better off with an older no-lock one?
Yes, you'd be better off buying older if what your are looking for is a prelock revolver. If you want a newer one then buy a newer one. The point trying to be made by Webleymkv, I think, is that it's a moot point. Buy what you want and don't worry about it. Guns malfunction. Non lock guns malfunction, IL guns malfunction. Buy what YOU want.
southjk is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 03:04 PM   #39
MrBorland
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 31, 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by AID_Admin
All esthetics and biasing aside. Given a choice of buying a new one with the lock or a LNIB older version without the lock for the similar price, wouldn't I be better off with an older no-lock one?
Not necessarily, if aesthetics and resale aren't an issue.

I've generally found no functional difference. What matters more to me are the features available only on the newer ones: pinned front sight, new style cylinder release, frame-mounted firing pin. Right now, the -5 and -6s have these features I prefer, and between them, only the -5 was pre-lock. Still, my main match gun is a -6 (and I'm a master-level shooter, knocking on the door of a national title), while my -5 is my backup until my -6 is shot out. Again, my -6 has over 70+ hard rounds through it, with nary a hiccup, so while I do own some older ones, I'd be hard-pressed to find anything categorically wrong with my newer guns.

BTW, I did an action job on a friend's early 686 no-dash, and it looked like hung-over monkeys with rasps put it together, so IMO, it's an over-simplified cliché that older guns are "better". Webleymkv expressed my thoughts on the matter pretty well.
MrBorland is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 03:19 PM   #40
AID_Admin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 1, 2013
Location: Midwest, USA
Posts: 322
Thanks for a great explanation!
AID_Admin is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 10:20 PM   #41
FoghornLeghorn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 2, 2011
Posts: 537
Quote:
if aesthetics and resale aren't an issue.
Aesthetics, granted.

But resale is an important factor even if you don't plan on selling. You never know what's going to happen.

So, yeah, it's an ok thing to buy the IL Smith if resale isn't an issue.

That's a big "if."
__________________
"I say, boy, I say, you're doing a lot of choppin', but no chips are flyin'."
FoghornLeghorn is offline  
Old May 10, 2013, 11:03 PM   #42
S&W-Keeper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 6, 2009
Location: SE-SC
Posts: 387
I fought the lock for a while,but finally broke down and bought some with the lock.I am fortunate to have a safe full of the older Smiths as back up if I have a problem.If i don't want to look at the lock I just put a piece of masking tape over it.Seriously I must have 6 or 8 with the lock,and have never had a problem.
S&W-Keeper is offline  
Old May 11, 2013, 12:11 AM   #43
Sheikyourbootie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2010
Posts: 344
I have a little more than 30k rounds through my 627 without a single failure. Just got her back from Apex Tactical for it's 30k tune up...they replaced the rear sight blade that I broke while hunting, removed the end-shake, and slicked up the trigger.

The lock was removed on day one, since I had an issue with my 340 PD locking up on me at the range from the internal lock that USED to be in that weapon.
Sheikyourbootie is offline  
Old May 11, 2013, 05:59 PM   #44
Nick_C_S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2013
Location: Taxifornia
Posts: 1,845
I just bought a new S&W 686 3" with the lock. I own two other 686's - from 1984, and 1986, I bought new.

I've got about 200 rounds through the new piece. So far, I don't care for the trigger feel. It's a little "grindy" just before hammer fall. But I don't know if it's because of the internal lock, or the fact that it's a 7-shot (my others are 6-shots), or the fact that it's just new and needs to break in.

At any rate, it shoots nice and straight - I make a nice, tight little pattern at 10 yards.

I basically like the piece. But if I had my way about it, I'd rather it not have the lock. Hell, I've had it only 2 weeks and I'm not sure what I've done with the key lol.
__________________
If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, it's because your tactics suck." -- Allen West, quoting Marine 1st Sgt Jim Reinfinger
Nick_C_S is offline  
Old May 11, 2013, 06:28 PM   #45
smee78
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 14, 2008
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 972
There are many things in life I can live without, a wind up lock on a gun is one of them. There are plenty of good pre lock S&W that I can buy and shoot, I just dont see why they will offer some guns with and others with out. As a consumer I would like to have the decision left to me, not a lawyer. Make both models and see what one sells better.
__________________
We know exactly where one cow with Mad-cow-disease is located, among the millions and millions of cows in America, but we haven't got a clue where thousands of illegal immigrants and terrorists are
smee78 is offline  
Old May 12, 2013, 10:20 AM   #46
SecurityGeek
Junior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2007
Location: Little Elm, Texas
Posts: 8
Given today's legal climate in most areas, if I had a self-defense revolver with an internal lock I would not remove it for any reason. I would hate to go to court after using the weapon in legitimate self-defense and risk an anti-gun prosecutor making a big issue of my "removing a factory-installed safety device". While anyone in the know would see right through this BS argument, I would not trust that a randomly-chosen dozen of my fellow citizens would get it. Same would hold true on a 1911 grip safety, for example.

If you have a lock, keep it. If you don't, even better. If you're worried about the lock, buy a model without one.
__________________
"How old would you be if you didn;t know how old you was?"

- Satchel Paige
SecurityGeek is offline  
Old May 12, 2013, 11:32 AM   #47
CSG
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 6, 1999
Location: Out West
Posts: 176
Gotta agree with the thought that if you bought a gun for CCW with a lock, leave it alone. Otherwise, for a range gun, up to you. But in a shooting with a modified gun, you are on your own.
CSG is offline  
Old May 12, 2013, 11:54 AM   #48
Sheikyourbootie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 6, 2010
Posts: 344
Quote:
SecurityGeek

Given today's legal climate in most areas, if I had a self-defense revolver with an internal lock I would not remove it for any reason. I would hate to go to court after using the weapon in legitimate self-defense and risk an anti-gun prosecutor making a big issue of my "removing a factory-installed safety device". While anyone in the know would see right through this BS argument, I would not trust that a randomly-chosen dozen of my fellow citizens would get it. Same would hold true on a 1911 grip safety, for example.

If you have a lock, keep it. If you don't, even better. If you're worried about the lock, buy a model without one.
I have two friends who are deputies that have 340pd's as backup guns (ankle rigs). They BOTH have had me remove their internal locks, after my 340pd locked up at the range. One of them was with me and watched as I took the gun apart, right there at the range... his response was, "here...get that $h!t out of my gun too."

The internal lock is NOT a "safety device"...it's a storage device. Removing parts from a defective design is no different than having your gunsmith add a longer firing pin (for reliable ignition), smoothing out a trigger, or adding all the tacti-cool crap that people like to hang all over their guns these days.
Sheikyourbootie is offline  
Old May 12, 2013, 04:13 PM   #49
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 3,215
I have both 642 and 340SC with the locks.

I have shot the 642 alot, and I use it for my practice gun so the 340SC is carried alot, shot seldom.

But I have maybe put 100 rounds through the 340, maybe 20 .357 magnums, and so far not one problem with either. And I use the .357 Corbon DPX 125 gr. load in it for carry.

But I never use the locks, not even to see if they work.

Now you can this. Open the insides and take EVERYTHING out. When doing so you will notice the spring that makes the lock works. Put in a heavier one so the little lock is very hard to turn with the key. Re-assemble and shoot.

That will make it almost impossible for it to flip on (in fact very hard to turn it on even with the key.)

That way you don't disable the lock, just make it very stable under magnum loads.

Deaf
__________________
"The government has confiscated all of our rights and is selling them back to us in the form of permits."
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old May 13, 2013, 05:52 PM   #50
WildBill45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2011
Location: Western PA.
Posts: 1,369
The last two revolvers I have purchased, with my 638 being the last, have locks. I don't worry much about them, but, I would rather have less parts, and anything that COULD EFFECT FIRING not needed, gone... PERIOD!
__________________


.........................................................
"If Ands and Buts were Candy and Nuts, everyday would be like Christmas"
WildBill45 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.17840 seconds with 7 queries