Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Revolvers > S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present
Forum Register Expert Commentary Members List


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-18-2009, 06:07 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Can someone please explain to me the disadvantages to having an internal lock on the 442/642? I maybe ignorant, but I don't see a draw back to having the ability to lock the firing mechanism. Does it somehow make the gun less reliable or otherwise interfere with the firing mechanism? Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-18-2009, 06:31 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Owensboro, KY
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Default

The J frame guns are the guns that have almost all of the documented internal lock failures. Personally I have nothing against the lock in the bigger guns, I would purchase one without a second thought, that being said there is no way I would own a J frame with the internal lock, especially if there was any time that I would risk my life on that gun working or not.
__________________
Drew
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-18-2009, 07:05 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

The lock can keep the gun from firing when you need it to fire. That can get you killed. You wouldn't trust your life to a life jacket that could become an anchor without warning. A Smith revolver with a lock is the same thing.


Okie John
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-18-2009, 07:31 PM
5Wire's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Portsmouth NH USA
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 533
Liked 378 Times in 154 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by DrewW:
The J frame guns are the guns that have almost all of the documented internal lock failures. ...
Got a link to or copy of the documentation?
__________________
Bob
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-18-2009, 07:32 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

There are a lot of discussions about this topic on this site. You are about to quickly learn that everyone has strong opinions on the matter.
As for me, I've purchased 3 Smiths with locks in the last year, and I don't give it a second thought. True, the lock is an unnecessary mechanical part that can fail just like any other mechanical part, however the chances are very very very slim. Who knows what the statistical probability is that one might have a critical lock failure, however I would venture to say that you would be better off worrying about getting hit by a car, or maybe even getting struck by lightning during your gun fight
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-18-2009, 08:22 PM
5Wire's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Portsmouth NH USA
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 533
Liked 378 Times in 154 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by NVBob:
...I would venture to say that you would be better off worrying about getting hit by a car, or maybe even getting struck by lightning during your gun fight
I was thinking, like, maybe being hit by falling satellite junk.
__________________
Bob
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-18-2009, 08:36 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 1,450
Likes: 0
Liked 21 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Jeeze, can we go a whole week without an I hate the lock thread?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-18-2009, 09:14 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Owensboro, KY
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by 5Wire:
Quote:
Originally posted by DrewW:
The J frame guns are the guns that have almost all of the documented internal lock failures. ...
Got a link to or copy of the documentation?
Documentation was posted as a sticky on the forum, but was taken down with the updates and the cleaning up of the forum.
__________________
Drew
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-18-2009, 10:10 PM
5Wire's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Portsmouth NH USA
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 533
Liked 378 Times in 154 Posts
Default

Quote:
Documentation was posted as a sticky on the forum, but was taken down with the updates and the cleaning up of the forum.
Yup. I remember, Drew, that's where I got my count (in another post on this subject) of 19 S&W of 23 ILFs over the five years it was up. The other gazillion posts were why the IL did or did not matter. IIRC there were more views accumulated than there have been forum members in any one year. Still, in spite of the effort of Osprey, the Original Poster, the core posts were not really documentation in a statistical sense but it's as close as we're likely to come until S&W publishes reasons and frequencies of failures.

I was hoping you might have something else we could look at. Ah, well

I'm not gonna hold my breath.
__________________
Bob
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-19-2009, 05:43 AM
Photoman44's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 4,240
Likes: 209
Liked 712 Times in 347 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by jtheise4:
Can someone please explain to me the disadvantages to having an internal lock on the 442/642? Thanks.

The very remote possibility of the gun locking up right at the very moment you need it to save your life. The statistical probability of this happening is astronomical.
__________________
Centennial Every Day
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-19-2009, 07:08 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Owensboro, KY
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by 5Wire:
Quote:
Documentation was posted as a sticky on the forum, but was taken down with the updates and the cleaning up of the forum.
Yup. I remember, Drew, that's where I got my count (in another post on this subject) of 19 S&W of 23 ILFs over the five years it was up. The other gazillion posts were why the IL did or did not matter. IIRC there were more views accumulated than there have been forum members in any one year. Still, in spite of the effort of Osprey, the Original Poster, the core posts were not really documentation in a statistical sense but it's as close as we're likely to come until S&W publishes reasons and frequencies of failures.

I was hoping you might have something else we could look at. Ah, well

I'm not gonna hold my breath.
Yeah Bob when I said "documented" that probably wasn't the best word as that makes it seem as if S&W agree there is a problem.
__________________
Drew
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-19-2009, 08:21 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mt. Clemens, MI, USA
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Well the biggest problem on a centennial style frame with a lock is that there is only one way to see if the gun is locked. Pull the trigger. No flag, no way to know. It is actually a hazard to have since it makes it more likely that someone will have it locked when they need it unlocked and would be less likely to lock it when it would be a benefit since it is hard to tell if it is locked by look or feel.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-19-2009, 08:23 AM
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by DrDremel:
Well the biggest problem on a centennial style frame with a lock is that there is only one way to see if the gun is locked. Pull the trigger. No flag, no way to know. It is actually a hazard to have since it makes it more likely that someone will have it locked when they need it unlocked and would be less likely to lock it when it would be a benefit since it is hard to tell if it is locked by look or feel.
Darn good answer

______________________________
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-19-2009, 08:32 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,292
Likes: 11
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by DrDremel:
Well the biggest problem on a centennial style frame with a lock is that there is onlu one way to see if the gun is locked. Pull the trigger. No flag, no way to know. It is actually a hazard to have since it makes it more likely that someone will have it locked when they need it unlocked and would be less likely to lock it when it would be a benefit since it is hard to tell if it is locked by look or feel.
Since I don't normally even look at the guns with locks, I hadn't realized this about the Centenials. Do the lock equiped Bodyguards also suffer this additional issue?

Good god, why oh why do they keep making this ****?
__________________
Formerly know as Lucky Derby
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-19-2009, 08:46 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Absurdistan
Posts: 1,229
Likes: 445
Liked 138 Times in 75 Posts
Default

I agree that most if not all the reported lock failures have occured with the small, lightweight guns.

I couldn't find a 442 without the lock in my area but I got a good deal on a 442 with the lock. I got the factory cash rebate in addition to a good price.

I went into the deal knowing the first thing I would do is disable the lock. I did so knowing full well the legal arguments against modifying the gun but that is a chance I am willing to take.

The gun is now as reliable as a man-made device can be.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-19-2009, 08:49 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Thanks for all the feedback!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-19-2009, 07:20 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 108
Likes: 1
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by 5Wire:
Quote:
Originally posted by DrewW:
The J frame guns are the guns that have almost all of the documented internal lock failures. ...
Got a link to or copy of the documentation?
Well, I'll chime in. I did not post to the sticky thread when it was up - it sounded like there was enough bickering going on. The second cylinder full of ammo locked up my 340. I went to the house and got the key and able to unlock it after a couple of smacks with a screw driver handle. This was before all of the hubub here. After going round and round with Smith on the phone I took it to a local smith and he took the lock out and plugged the hole. I am not trying to change anyone's mind on this. The orig poster asked so here is my experience. I am not going to tell anyone what to do or think. Since the sticky thread is gone here you go.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-19-2009, 08:16 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Debary, FL.
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Ontop of the "excellent" post by DrDremel, about not being able to tell if it's locked or not on a centennial or bodyguard model, a buddy of mine purchased a model 60 at a gun show.. Got home and tried the lock, it locked and wouldnt unlock.. Took it to a local smith to hace it checked out and it ended up having to be shipped back to S&W for service.. We never found the exact reason, although I contemplated the original owner may of took the lock out when they owned it and possibly put it back in backwards or something? (The gun would lock and unlock, but the action would never "unlock", if ya know what Im sayin..) That and the 20 something documented cases of lock failure, that used to be posted on here, are more than enough to deter me from getting one with a lock.. I'll take that back.. It'll deter me from carrying one that has a functioning lock in it.. There are at least 2 great threads on this site with tutorials on disabling the lock and filling the hole.. Best of luck on your purchase!
__________________
Mick
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-19-2009, 08:43 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yonkers NY USA
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

then there's the resale value, as an accumulator of used S&W's when i am out looking i notice the IL guns linger.
Regards,
Rich
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-20-2009, 05:14 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 3,415
Likes: 623
Liked 499 Times in 313 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by stevieboy:
Jeeze, can we go a whole week without an I hate the lock thread?
Yes, if we can go a week without someone's asking about the lock. Surprisingly enough, when one person asks about the lock, often another person answers. Many people hate the lock, for what should by now be an obvious reason, thus when they answer, they imply or say outright that they hate the lock. String a few of these posts together, and you have a thread.

Any other questions?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-22-2009, 06:34 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,292
Likes: 11
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by 5Wire:
Quote:
Originally posted by DrewW:
The J frame guns are the guns that have almost all of the documented internal lock failures. ...
Got a link to or copy of the documentation?
I understand that the 329 N frames had a few as well.
__________________
Formerly know as Lucky Derby
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-22-2009, 06:47 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: S.E.Michigan
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I wish I'd have read this before I purchased one last week... DANG!

What should I do now... throw it in a lake?
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-22-2009, 08:33 PM
Photoman44's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Great State of Texas
Posts: 4,240
Likes: 209
Liked 712 Times in 347 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by knuckles:
I wish I'd have read this before I purchased one last week... DANG!

What should I do now... throw it in a lake?
There's way too much fuss about the locks. I carry two J's with locks and don't lose any sleep. I also have pre-lock and no-lock J's.

If it bothers you, just remove the sideplate and take out the locks.
__________________
Centennial Every Day
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-23-2009, 06:21 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 154
Likes: 2
Liked 34 Times in 22 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by 5Wire:
.. that's where I got my count (in another post on this subject) of 19 S&W of 23 ILFs over the five years it was up....it's as close as we're likely to come until S&W publishes reasons and frequencies of failures.
Don't hold your breath is RIGHT.

Based on the 43K PLUS members registered here, that's about six-hundreths of one-percent. I'm afraid that amounts to being statistically insignificant, unless you're the poor schlub that's one of the statistics!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-23-2009, 08:17 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Well I won't be one of those "schlubs", the IL is gone in ANY gun I use for SD.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-23-2009, 09:15 AM
5Wire's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Portsmouth NH USA
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 533
Liked 378 Times in 154 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by VictorLouis:
...Don't hold your breath is RIGHT.

Based on the 43K PLUS members registered here, that's about six-hundreths of one-percent. I'm afraid that amounts to being statistically insignificant, unless you're the poor schlub that's one of the statistics!
That would be true if all the ILFs occurred in one year, but the divisor for five years would be the sum of each year's memberships over five years.

I'm guessing at an average of 30,000 members each year over five years,

19/150000*100 = 0.0127%, give or take.

I'm guessing, but I'll bet there are more poor schlubs with broken hammer springs, broken pawls, or broken hands, not to mention faulty reloads, bad primers, factory squibs, and so on.
__________________
Bob
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-23-2009, 09:24 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TN
Posts: 601
Likes: 5
Liked 18 Times in 10 Posts
Default

I'm not a fan of the IL, but I am perfectly happy saying I dislike it just because of the looks of it and the political motivation that made the IL a reality. You can come up with a million other justifications to say why they aren't safe or why they are going to fail when you need the gun to work but most of this is just wishful speculation to justify our hate of the IL.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-23-2009, 10:56 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: S.E.Michigan
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Photoman44:
Quote:
Originally posted by knuckles:
I wish I'd have read this before I purchased one last week... DANG!

What should I do now... throw it in a lake?
There's way too much fuss about the locks. I carry two J's with locks and don't lose any sleep. I also have pre-lock and no-lock J's.

If it bothers you, just remove the sideplate and take out the locks.
Just take it out huh... it's that simple... anyone care to elaborate?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-23-2009, 11:52 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: MA
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

A few months ago (before the forum re-org) I posted a picture of a M29 where the flag was visible asking if this was okay as the gun felt 'funny'.

I just tried a search and can't find the original post but you can count that post as another lock failure.

Bill
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-24-2009, 05:44 AM
Dogmann's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 591
Likes: 1
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Take me as documentation. I carry a J Frame Titanium/Scandium model as a backup gun..... the damn thing locked up on me & I had to send it back... S&W had it back to me in two weeks- but never the less I can no longer carry it in confidence.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 03-24-2009, 07:12 AM
5Wire's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Portsmouth NH USA
Posts: 1,578
Likes: 533
Liked 378 Times in 154 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Dogmann:
Take me as documentation. I carry a J Frame Titanium/Scandium model as a backup gun..... the damn thing locked up on me & I had to send it back... S&W had it back to me in two weeks- but never the less I can no longer carry it in confidence.
I'm not counting any more, actually, I stopped when Osprey gave up. The frequency of ILFs isn't going to change much from what it was back then.

No one is going to change their mind about ILs, either you don't care, disable, or don't buy. Odds are astronomical against the failure and I'd be willing to bet bailout money that there are other much more common and dangerous failures but without the press agents.
__________________
Bob
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-24-2009, 05:12 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by knuckles:
Quote:
Originally posted by Photoman44:
Quote:
Originally posted by knuckles:
I wish I'd have read this before I purchased one last week... DANG!

What should I do now... throw it in a lake?
There's way too much fuss about the locks. I carry two J's with locks and don't lose any sleep. I also have pre-lock and no-lock J's.

If it bothers you, just remove the sideplate and take out the locks.
Just take it out huh... it's that simple... anyone care to elaborate?
http://westvirginiahillbilly.b...k-on-your-smith.html

I go one step further on a self-defense gun and remove the remainder of the lock, leaving a hole in the frame.

Many people just grind down the nub on the flag with a dremel tool or remove the flag and use a grinding wheel on the nub, then reinstall the flag.

I just yank the whole *** out of there on a SD gun.

I would imagine some people remove the flag and epoxy what's left of the lock so it stays in the frame and doesn't move. I've never tried that.

Edit: I only do this on lightweight guns. On standard weight guns, I leave the lock in there.

EXCEPT for my Model 67 where the darn flag was grinding against the hammer!! I just took the stupid improperly aligned flag out of that one and left the rest of the lock in there. I don't use the Model 67 for SD though. (The hammer now has a "wonderful" deep scratch in it from that stupid flag.)
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-22-2009, 01:04 PM
Dogmann's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 591
Likes: 1
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default

WIll putting in "THE PLUG" and taking out the lock prevent these problems....
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-22-2009, 01:23 PM
Bullseye Smith's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Mountain State
Posts: 3,427
Likes: 26
Liked 145 Times in 65 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogmann View Post
WIll putting in "THE PLUG" and taking out the lock prevent these problems....
Yes it will, don't say it to loud, they can't cry in thier beer .
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 12-23-2009, 10:03 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 596
Likes: 10
Liked 59 Times in 40 Posts
Wink

I have the 617-6 and 686-6, both with internal lock. I never use the lock. in fact I never even use the guns. I got pre-locks in both chambers aplenty. when I start reloading 357's I guess you know which gun will be the "test gun".
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 12-23-2009, 10:14 PM
tom turner's Avatar
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 61
Liked 1,070 Times in 149 Posts
Default

Locks have absolutely no business being place on revolvers . . . OR parachutes.

Parachutes must always open. Your revolver must always go bang. Nuff said!

T.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
340, 442, 617, 642, 686, bodyguard, centennial, j frame, lock, m29, model 29, model 60, scandium, sideplate, sig arms, titanium

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present Thread, Disadvantage of internal lock on 442/642? in Smith & Wesson Revolvers; Can someone please explain to me the disadvantages to having an internal lock on the 442/642? I maybe ignorant, but ...
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why the Internal Lock 1973Glenfield25 The Lounge 12 11-24-2011 10:46 PM
Internal Lock Revolver-time S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 5 11-21-2010 09:49 PM
can the internal lock, lock my cylinder up? gunman1960 S&W-Smithing 4 06-02-2010 06:15 AM
internal lock on 625 billy396 S&W-Smithing 3 03-20-2010 09:29 PM
S&W getting rid of internal lock? Gun 4 Fun S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 100 10-12-2009 01:04 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:05 PM.


S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2013
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)