Q: Any troubles with S&W internal locks?

[Macinaw]

Being familiar with how litigation goes, and being a pal of Mas Ayoob's for more than 30 years, I'd always counsel caution about removing something from any firearm mechanism that is a "safety." I had a heck of a time explaining this once to a friend who wanted to permanently lock down the grip safety on his 1911.

After gently asking him, "ARE YOU NUTS??!!!!! " we had this jovial conversation about lawsuits and jail food and charges of gross negligence.

Thank you all for an invigorating chat.

As for it being "early yet," that's only because someone forgot to set his clock ahead

The S&W IL is a "storage device" not a "safety"!

 

[Macinaw]

For everyday carry guns I remove the IL.

For competition guns and range fun guns I don't remove the IL.

 

[NEURON]

Don't like them but have not had a problem. My dislike will not stop me from purchasing a gun with it if the price is right or it is model unavailable without the lock. I might remove it if was one of the type of gun listed that has had it happen in a well documented scenario. It is so easy to disable what is the fuss about. Nobody seems to complain about all of the big brother **** going into cars nowadays,weird.

 

[2hawk]

Aaaaaaaaaannnnnnnndddd, THEIR OFF!

Being familiar with how litigation goes, and being a pal of Mas Ayoob's for more than 30 years, I'd always counsel caution about removing something from any firearm mechanism that is a "safety." I had a heck of a time explaining this once to a friend who wanted to permanently lock down the grip safety on his 1911.

After gently asking him, "ARE YOU NUTS??!!!!! " we had this jovial conversation about lawsuits and jail food and charges of gross negligence.

Thank you all for an invigorating chat.

As for it being "early yet," that's only because someone forgot to set his clock ahead

oOo boy, now you done did it...

 

[Rick_A]

My problem is the principal of the thing.

Bought this plug:

Made this one:

20150306_204208 by Slick_Rick77, on Flickr

...and it is a storage device not a safety...

 

[AZretired]

I have the 642-2 and a 638-2 both with the lock now deactivated. However I carried and used both for years before I deactivated the locks. They had hundreds of rounds through them with no issues, never used the locks and the key stayed in the box.

 

[Augen]

I have no experience with the IL. Nor do I know of anyone having a problem with it. I won't buy a Smith with an IL the same as I won't buy a steyr with their IL. It's a purely political stance on my part. I'm a dinosaur but as long as I can purchase (new or old) handguns without it I will.

 

[Elkins45]

Being familiar with how litigation goes, and being a pal of Mas Ayoob's for more than 30 years, I'd always counsel caution about removing something from any firearm mechanism that is a "safety." I had a heck of a time explaining this once to a friend who wanted to permanently lock down the grip safety on his 1911.

After gently asking him, "ARE YOU NUTS??!!!!! " we had this jovial conversation about lawsuits and jail food and charges of gross negligence.

Thank you all for an invigorating chat.

As for it being "early yet," that's only because someone forgot to set his clock ahead

There is a huge difference between deactivating a passive firing safety like a 1911 grip safety and an internal storage device. Nobody expects that you are supposed to draw the gun from concealment, insert and turn the key, then fire the gun in self-defense.

Your friend Ayoob has done a lot of writing warning people about things that MIGHT happen, but I don't recall him giving any examples of when this particular thing HAS happened.

 

[at_liberty]

I have no experience with the IL. Nor do I know of anyone having a problem with it. I won't buy a Smith with an IL the same as I won't buy a steyr with their IL. It's a purely political stance on my part. I'm a dinosaur but as long as I can purchase (new or old) handguns without it I will.

I would give you a LIKE on that statement, but it does not address the actual question posed by the OP, which has actually been answered beyond further comment in older threads, if one were to search.

 

[epj]

I have removed the IL from a couple of revolvers, due largely to aesthetics. There WAS evidence that the lock had been dragging on the hammer. Trigger pull was just a bit smoother afterwards. I used "The Plug" to fill the hole. These devices may no longer be available, however.

 

[CH4]

Superfluous as a third nipple on a centerfold model - serves no substantive purpose and is distracting.

 

[rock doc]

I never had any problems with the IL, but then I removed them as quickly as possible. Here's what I did with the IL in my 642.

 

[Hapworth]

The best thing about threads on this particular subject is how quickly the replies reveal who has reading comprehension and topic retention skills and who doesn't.

OP, your question is answered: the overwhelming majority of those with experience who have chimed in on the matter over the years report no problems; a very small minority have. Life is a game of odds. A search will yield more specifics from the many other threads covering the same question, and if I recall, a poll on the issue, too.

 

[theoneff]

I never had any problems with the IL, but then I removed them as quickly as possible. Here's what I did with the IL in my 642.

Just pump lube until it squirts out the trigger and hammer. Convenient

 

[DonD]

I thought the forum had a policy of no more "beating the dead horse" threads on the ILS? If not, wish they did have that policy.

ILS?? I've had 5 Model 500s, lots of heavy loads downrange, never a problems with any of them for any mechanical reason, let alone ILS.

I now have 2 Model 500s that will remain in my collection.

Don't like the ILS, don't use it. Refuse to buy S&W products with ILS and you give up a lot of finely made revolvers fabricated out of materials superior to those of earlier guns. Your choice. Don

 

[russp1]

I've got both a 442 (.38 Spec) J Frame and a 686 (.357 Mag) with locks and have not had trouble with either one. I use the lock on the 442 if the gun is loaded and needing to be stored in my car safe. Have never used the lock on the 686.

 

[CajunBass]

I thought the forum had a policy of no more "beating the dead horse" threads on the ILS? If not, wish they did have that policy.

Yet you went ahead and got in anyway.

I don't think I've ever participated in one of these before, because I really had nothing to contribute. But now I've actually got a 642-2 with a lock. I'll admit that it hasn't been fired a lot, so it probably not a surprise to say I've had no problems with it.

To be honest, I don't expect any either. I see no more reason to expect the lock to fail and disable the gun, than I do to expect any other single part of the gun to fail and disable it. If it does, well, I was already having a bad day.

As to the look of the lock. I don't really even see it. To me it just looks like any other pin or screw in the side of the gun.

I got the gun used. It didn't even have a key with it. I suppose I can write to Smith & Wesson and see if they'll send me one. Maybe I'll just call CS later.

 

[at_liberty]

I've got both a 442 (.38 Spec) J Frame and a 686 (.357 Mag) with locks and have not had trouble with either one. I use the lock on the 442 if the gun is loaded and needing to be stored in my car safe. Have never used the lock on the 686.

Loading the gun and locking it are working against each other. Have you really thought through the scenario of needing the gun and retrieving it to operational status in time to do any good? Leaving a gun in a vehicle would be irresponsible for me. I use a small boogie bag carried to and from the car each time, and that's just for a backup gun and extra ammo for it and my primary carry.

Note that ILS keys are not unique. Anyone who has one can unlock the gun. I carry one on my key ring for others at the range but have not needed it so far. All 7 of my own ILS guns have The Plug and have the lock mechanism removed.

 

[Frizzman]

I have one. A very good friend gave me a new 625-9 Mountain Gun A few years ago. I don't really care for the appearance of the IL but it hasn't effected it's functioning one bit. It has one of the best DA triggers I have experienced. I am way past the age of having kids in the house and have no grandchildren yet. All guns not under my direct control are in my safe. I have never used it. If I was in a home with kids and needed a quick way to disable the gun in addition to unloading it, perhaps I might use it. In my LEO days, I just used my handcuffs secured through the frame on my service revolver to render it more secure. It did the same thing.

 

[CH4]

I thought the forum had a policy of no more "beating the dead horse" threads on the ILS? If not, wish they did have that policy.

ILS?? I've had 5 Model 500s, lots of heavy loads downrange, never a problems with any of them for any mechanical reason, let alone ILS.

I now have 2 Model 500s that will remain in my collection.

Don't like the ILS, don't use it. Refuse to buy S&W products with ILS and you give up a lot of finely made revolvers fabricated out of materials superior to those of earlier guns. Your choice. Don

So you beat the dead horse anyway.