I was thinking of purchasing a new Model 638. Has anyone had a problem with the lock malfunctioning on this model.

Not here, but I always removed the lock & replaced it with a delete kit.

As long as you inspect the gun before you buy it, I'd say buy with confidence.

No problems since 6/2023 with ~1600 rounds through mine.

__________________
432UC/638/642/60 + more

It's a good choice; I've had mine since 2015.

S&W 638.jpg

No problems with mine. I ignore the stupid lock. These lighter revolvers though should only be fired with well crimped rounds, due to the possibility of the recoil moving a bullet from a live round forward into the path of the cylinder travel. Factory ammo is fine, but shotshells can make this happen. I used to keep a few shotshells loaded since we have a lot of snakes and rats out here, but when I tested it once with the mixed cylinder, it bound up on a shotshell shot container. So now i don't mix shotshells with heavy rounds in the lightweight revolvers.

Theoretically, the IL is a potential failure point, especially in the lighter weight revolvers.

In practice, failures seem pretty rare. Perhaps not enough people with wrists of steel are shooting cases of .357 Magnum through their scandium frame/titanium cylinder 340/360PD models.

Not a 638 - but a 649.
No problems. Yes, I have shot a Few 357s.
Mostly shoot 38 Specials.

Attached Images

IMG_0293.jpg (48.3 KB, 13 views)

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

I have never had a problem with
the keyed storage safety in any
of the Revolvers I own.

I have the S&W 637-2 +38Spl, no
problems yet.

The Best to you and your Endeavors

The bolt hole on mine wallowed out from a diet of mid-range wadcutters. It really wasn't all that many. 1000 - 2000 is my guess.

No problems with mine. I inherited it and it came with the lock. Poured some superglue in the lock hole and sealed it over with fingernail polish. I dry fired it 2000 times while cleaning and lubing during the process. Never did keep track of how many rounds after that I’ve put through it, but it works just fine.

Attached Images

IMG_0286.jpg (77.5 KB, 16 views)

__________________
Two Handguns every day

Not a 638, but I ordered a M&P 340 from the first production run, and at that time the model came with the ILS (lock). I used that gun as my 'armorer bench practice' snub after a S&W revolver armorer class, and one of the things I did was replace the ILS torque lock arm (flag) and its spring, for practice. I wasn't having any problems with the ILS during the first few hundred rounds of Magnum and +P loads, but I wanted to practice how they'd taught us to replace the locking arm w/spring in the class.

That was in '05, BTW. Since that time that first M&P 340 has been my 'range beater' and frequent off-duty (now retirement) snub, and it's seen a lot of rounds go downrange. A few years alter ('12?) I ordered another M&P 340, since they offered one without the ILS. It's also seen a lot of use, but that first one - even though it has the lock - remains my favorite. It was puffed out from practicing 'deburring' and replacing parts, including cutting a new extractor (since the armorer kit came with a factory-made tool for that for the J's). All the dry-fire and range/trigger time over many years made for a very smooth trigger pull, too.

FWIW, I don't use the ILS to 'lock' the gun's action. None of my other several J's have the ILS, so I don't use it with that one. That's why I have a safe, when I'm not carrying it.

BTW, from what we learned in the armorer class many years ago, the free end of the little dog-leg spring installed in the 'flag' is secured in a recess within the locking bolt channel. If someone removes the hammer and the locking bolt (while tinkering with the 'action', etc), and the spring isn't properly located and secured back within the channel recess under the bolt, it isn't able to anchor the flag, which might allow it to flop around (and 'lock up' the hammer).

I've quit worrying about it over the last 25 years.

Sure, I still inspect the ILS to make sure it's functioning and the spring is properly installed and anchored when I do an armorer level inspection, but I inspect everything else, too.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

Threads like this remind me of my concerns and discussions with different folks at S&W in the early & mid 2000's, when I was wondering about the ILS and reading some negative stuff in magazines and online.

When I attended a revolver armorer class in the mid 2000's, I asked different armorers in the class whether they had experienced any ILS problems, or had any reported to them by people at their agencies. Zip, nada, none.

I asked some different armorer instructors over time about it, one of whom was a frequent revolver shooter in competition. Again, no problems experienced or seen.

The Repair guys to whom I sometimes spoke said that while they'd received revolvers for warranty claims involving 'the lock', the actual problems requiring correction didn't involve the lock. Other production issues were said to have been involved, like stubbing involving the DA hammer sear.

One of the longtime LE customer contacts (point of contact for guns being returned for warranty issues, both for LE and regular customers) told me that he remembered the ILS spring had been revised while development work was being done on the X-frame, (.500 S&W MAG), so the heavy recoil didn't over power the spring. Well, I did see that the torque lock spring was listed in the Parts List as a revised part back in '05, but they revise parts all the time.

I saw a fair number of .38SPL +P and .357MAG J's come through our range, from Demo guns, to LE off-duty/Secondary guns and a number of privately-owned (CCW, not LE owners). Never saw or heard of a ILS-problem with any of them.

Now, being familiar with the way the ILS locking arm & its spring are installed, including the way the itty bitty spring had to be installed in the locking arm (forcing one end of the spring past a small detent nub in a slot in the locking arm), and the way the little assembly is installed so the free (other) end of the spring has to be positioned and secured in its recess in the bolt channel, I could see how an assembly or installation problem might be possible if someone wasn't attentive. One guy at the factory had mentioned that there had been some concern about assembly/production attention to the ILS in the early years.

Personally, I rather suspect if the ILS (aka- the lock) were a problem for the past 25 years, there would easily be examples of it having been proven to be problematic being paraded around.

Not liking the way the assembly adds another 5 parts to a revolver, or the aesthetic appearance of the ILS, are different things than actually having the design and functioning being a problem.

I've actually met and spoke with some owners who liked being able to lock and disable their guns since they had kids in the house. Go figure. (That's why I bought a couple safes and a couple lock boxes, myself. )

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

Owned two over the years. Complete non-issue