S&W lock failure--it finally happened

[CCantu357]

There are so many new Smith & Wesson revolvers that I would buy if it were not for the lock. I simply do not trust them. If S&W announced tomorrow that they would no longer install the lock in new production models, I would buy one every payday. Until then, I will look for older models without the lock, or buy Ruger revolvers. I would even be happy if they simply made the lock an option, much like the thumb safety on the M&P autos.

 

[rwt1405]

Opinions are like other parts of the body. Everybody has one.

But they are not all that useful.

Dale Carnegie is also a LOT more generally useful then R. Lee Ermey in most of life's pursuits.

I don't understand why the Locks generate such emotion. Most revolvers are NOT suitable for LEO or serious self-protection use. They are NO longer Police guns but are consumer grade products. The engineering that goes into them does NOT warrant trusting them as much as an Semi-Auto designed for LEO use.

Perhaps I missed something, but I didn't see where the OP said anything about LEO use, and stating that revolvers have no use for "serious self protection" is absurd and nothing more then an uneducated opinion, unfounded in fact.

As to opinions, I suggest you follow your own advice "Opinions are like other parts of the body. Everybody has one.
But they are not all that useful."

I'll leave it at that.............

 

[Ralph G. Briscoe]

It was definitely the lock. Got the key, turned it and it worked fine.

 

[Ralph G. Briscoe]

Thanks for your kind offer to talk me through "dehorning" the lock. I found a good youtube video and "got 'er done."

 

[Ralph G. Briscoe]

GLOCK????
That's sacrilege on Smith and Wesson forum
Life's too short to carry an ugly gun, but they are functional.

 

[Ralph G. Briscoe]

Thanks for the kind words Doc. Us gun guys do seem to love a good debate, but no offense taken from anyone. I'll be 70 in a couple weeks--too old to fight

 

[Ralph G. Briscoe]

Thanks for your knowledgeable comments. As I said, I was always skeptical about the reports of Smith revolvers locking up. I have 6 that have the locks and have shot most of them a lot. The 432 that locked up was fired the least, and always with light loads. Until I removed the lock it had never been open up. Just reporting the facts....do with them what you may. I can't go along with those who say "I'll never buy a Smith with the lock." It's a simple matter to remove the lock if you desire, and to replace it if necessary. I also have quite a few pre-lock Smiths which I prefer for aesthetic reasons, but the modern lightweight plus p guns fit my bill for CC guns.

 

[L-2]

Due to this thread and many other related threads on various forums, I finally bought to plugs and installed them today. One in my 627 Pro and the other in my 586 L-Comp.

I took no photos but everyone can find pics as to how they look.
I bought them from here, although there are likely other sources or retailers of this same company's products:
S&W Lock Delete - ORIGINAL PRECISION

My installation issues.

The 627 Pro went well installing the plug. Unfortunately, my prior rear sight blade mod/replacement I did on this gun had the parts fall out, as the captured/staked on nut fell off somewhere at some time and the sight parts fell out right on my workbench. I must not have adequately staked the nut onto the adjustment screw. I already ordered replacement parts.

With the 586 L-Comp. It was just a bit more frustrating as I had trouble getting out the original "trident" lock retainer and launched the spring. I found the spring but it probably took me an hour more to do this gun. The replacement "trident" didn't quite fit as well but I stoned both sides of it as it either came a bit rough or I put a burr on it myself as, otherwise, the "trident" wouldn't fit into the frame's slot. This is a fairly small part, by the way.

Next, I could only get the plug in from the inner direction, whereas the plug on the 627 Pro would go in from either the outside or the inside. Putting the plug in from the inside was fine, however, as it's really just the reverse of the disassembly process.

For anyone who loses that little "trident" spring, a Glock firing pin safety spring could work, but it is just a bit larger than the lost S&W trident spring. As previously mentioned, I subsequently found the S&W spring on the floor and the Glock spring wasn't needed.

 

[hostler]

So, to recap: S&W finds it vitally necessary to install a "Locking, storage, safety device" on double action revolvers, most with a fully functional exposed hammer, while Glock sells a "Safe action" single action only auto, without anything remotely capable of "locking" anything. Hmm. Joe

Apples and oranges. A storage lock isn't going to stop Glock leg or any other NG while holstering.

 

[michpatriot]

I couldn't get on board with the plug system, and having a decade of micro-tig welding experience on exotic alloys molds and tooling..my MP340 found its way onto my welding table. Scandium welds beautiful...one more alloy under my helmet, and the holes are gone for good.

 

[riverrat38]

I couldn't get board with the plug system, and having a decade of micro-tig welding experience on exotic alloys molds and tooling..my MP340 found its way onto my welding table. Scandium welds beautiful...one more alloy under my helmet, and the holes are gone for good.

I like it, but permanently altering the frame this way likely would void the S&W warranty.
I have thought about Silver brazing a piece of stainless rod in the hole, trimming and polishing to match the frame. Also voiding the warranty.

Best,
Rick

 

[4530pop]

A lot of solutions for a problem that really doesn't exist.

 

[medic15al]

A lot of solutions for a problem that really doesn't exist.

The problem does exist and has happened. Pull your head out of the sand and read the thread of those it has happened to.

Don't make statements like that based only on your experience.

 

[shocker]

The problem does exist and has happened. Pull your head out of the sand and read the thread of those it has happened to.

Don't make statements like that based only on your experience.

I worry about more likely things like a dud primer (only 6 sigma or 99.9997% reliable).

I've had 3 lock guns, turned the lock on all of them and decided that the the recoil pulse it would take to actuate the lock would be enough to stick the hammer spur through the front of my skull. Absolutely a non problem. IMO.

 

[medic15al]

I worry about more likely things like a dud primer (only 6 sigma or 99.9997% reliable).

I've had 3 lock guns, turned the lock on all of them and decided that the the recoil pulse it would take to actuate the lock would be enough to stick the hammer spur through the front of my skull. Absolutely a non problem. IMO.

Then explain how 2 locked revolvers of mine locked up when firing? I had to unlock them twice on one and 3 on another firing standard pressure ammo. One a 438 and the other a Model 25-13 Mtn. Gun. Removed the locks and no more problems since.

 

[4530pop]

The problem does exist and has happened. Pull your head out of the sand and read the thread of those it has happened to.

Don't make statements like that based only on your experience.

I'll make any statement I care to make.

I won't believe every statement "based only on your experience"

 

[medic15al]

I'll make any statement I care to make.

I won't believe every statement "based only on your experience"

Then do your research. I can't help intentional ignorance.

 

[Fastbolt]

Then explain how 2 locked revolvers of mine locked up when firing? I had to unlock them twice on one and 3 on another firing standard pressure ammo. One a 438 and the other a Model 25-13 Mtn. Gun. Removed the locks and no more problems since.

The question can't be answered without examining the particular guns referenced, and determining how they'd been assembled at the time the problems occurred. The installation of the torque lock spring in the locking arm ("flag"), and how the bottom end of the spring was secured in the recess within the bolt channel, would have to be examined.

Also, whether either/both of them had ever been disassembled by you (or a previous owner, if you acquired them used) to the point where the hammer and bolt had been removed, or the locking arm allowed to "tip out" and pull on the spring's bottom leg upon removal of the hammer (which could've changed the correct installation, albeit without the owner's knowledge or intention to affect the spring being secure in the frame).

While I did have one of their long time customer service guys (who used to be in production, and now retired for several years) once tell me that for a short while it was wondered if some of the early production revolvers might've had the ILS springs incorrectly installed, he said he hadn't heard of any problems since the early days of it being used. He said he remembered a few problems reported (in-house) with the early ILS-equipped revolvers, but those had been during the development of the X-frame guns (.500/.460), and due to the horrific recoil.

I've talked to someone else from the factory who not only told me of some ILS-equipped revolvers being used by some competitors who racked up high round counts, and without experiencing any "lock failures". He was one of the competitive revolver shooters who used them.

Now, I tend to prefer my S&W revolvers without the extra safety lock, myself, being somewhat of a traditionalist. I only own one of the new model revolvers equipped with the ILS. As an armorer, the ILS-equipped revolvers mean there's 5 additional parts in the gun, but it's not like armorers are told it's suggested to keep extra parts for the ILS on hand. The only thing about the lock system even covered in the class was replacement of the locking arm and torque lock spring, if ever needed, and that was covered in a short few minutes.

In my class I had some armorers from agencies who were longtime revolver guys, and while they didn't care for the aesthetics of the ILS, neither they, nor any other armorers in the class, could think of any instances where a newer model J-frame (still popular as backup and off-duty weapons) had experienced an actual lock-related problem.

One of the guys said he'd fired more than 500 rounds of Magnum ammo through his PD , without any problems, and he was looking forward to ordering a M&P 340 (which was only offered with the ILS at that time). I thought he was probably a bit of a glutton for punishment, myself.

 

[medic15al]

The question can't be answered without examining the particular guns referenced, and determining how they'd been assembled at the time the problems occurred. The installation of the torque lock spring in the locking arm ("flag"), and how the bottom end of the spring was secured in the recess within the bolt channel, would have to be examined.

Also, whether either/both of them had ever been disassembled by you (or a previous owner, if you acquired them used) to the point where the hammer and bolt had been removed, or the locking arm allowed to "tip out" and pull on the spring's bottom leg upon removal of the hammer (which could've changed the correct installation, albeit without the owner's knowledge or intention to affect the spring being secure in the frame).

While I did have one of their long time customer service guys (who used to be in production, and now retired for several years) once tell me that for a short while it was wondered if some of the early production revolvers might've had the ILS springs incorrectly installed, he said he hadn't heard of any problems since the early days of it being used. He said he remembered a few problems reported (in-house) with the early ILS-equipped revolvers, but those had been during the development of the X-frame guns (.500/.460), and due to the horrific recoil.

I've talked to someone else from the factory who not only told me of some ILS-equipped revolvers being used by some competitors who racked up high round counts, and without experiencing any "lock failures". He was one of the competitive revolver shooters who used them.

Now, I tend to prefer my S&W revolvers without the extra safety lock, myself, being somewhat of a traditionalist. I only own one of the new model revolvers equipped with the ILS. As an armorer, the ILS-equipped revolvers mean there's 5 additional parts in the gun, but it's not like armorers are told it's suggested to keep extra parts for the ILS on hand. The only thing about the lock system even covered in the class was replacement of the locking arm and torque lock spring, if ever needed, and that was covered in a short few minutes.

In my class I had some armorers from agencies who were longtime revolver guys, and while they didn't care for the aesthetics of the ILS, neither they, nor any other armorers in the class, could think of any instances where a newer model J-frame (still popular as backup and off-duty weapons) had experienced an actual lock-related problem.

One of the guys said he'd fired more than 500 rounds of Magnum ammo through his PD , without any problems, and he was looking forward to ordering a M&P 340 (which was only offered with the ILS at that time). I thought he was probably a bit of a glutton for punishment, myself.

Both revolvers purchased new, in the store range witnessed by on site armorer and range staff. Never been in the guns, opened up while there with the armorer and nothing was out of place as shown by video, armorer's manuals, or by myself looking at it. Parts removed and smooth operation afterwards. I wore these afterwards as a PT officer and as armed security as well. Both have had master revolver action jobs done by the PC prior to shipping to me as a custom order.

 

[Fastbolt]

Both revolvers purchased new, in the store range witnessed by on site armorer and range staff. Never been in the guns, opened up while there with the armorer and nothing was out of place as shown by video, armorer's manuals, or by myself looking at it. Parts removed and smooth operation afterwards. I wore these afterwards as a PT officer and as armed security as well. Both have had master revolver action jobs done by the PC prior to shipping to me as a custom order.

Interesting.

So, you're saying that both guns had been worked on by the PC before you got them NIB?

Then, after the problems were experienced, the armorer at the shop removed both the hammers & bolts and found the locking arms secured, meaning the bottom leg was tucked within the recess in the upper surface of the bolt's channel (and would normally be prevented from shifting out of the recess by the presence of the bolt)? The bottom leg of the spring is itty bitty, though, and it might be easy to miss seeing something amiss until the parts were actually being removed by someone knowing what to look for.

When you consider the number of new model revolvers made with the ILS which have not had ILS-connected problems over the years since the design's been incorporated, the chances of 2 disparate models being bought by a single owner, and both having a "lock" problem, becomes mind-boggling.

Looking at it another way, when a single buyer ends up with 2 such "problem" guns, instead of looking at the guns, it's often better to look at any other common factors that have "touched" both guns. Not saying you did it (since you never removed the sideplates), but what else might've caused 2 randomly purchased NIB guns to suddenly exhibit "lock problems"? Were the springs defective in both guns NIB?

For example, did a single person produce both guns in the production cell (but then the guns both received tuning packages at the PC, which means parts were removed from the guns).

Dunno, but if the design were that defective and prone to failure, there would be many thousands and thousands of the guns being returned for the problem.

S&W's corporate legal team would have long since started losing their minds with all of the complaints, especially since many of the J-frames with externally accessible hammers have been, and continue to be, in-service with LE users.

From what we were told, it's the guns that have hammers which can be externally manipulated and thumb-cocked into SA that will always have the ILS system incorporated. You'll notice how it's some of the Centennial style models, which can't be thumb-cocked in SA because of the internal/shrouded DAO hammers, that have been offered sans the ILS.

Dunno what to say about your dismaying experience, but I wish I'd been present and able to examine them, at the bench, when the "locks" apparently unintentionally engaged.

Best regards.