It was just put away - useless - to me...

Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
10,358
Reaction score
52,000
Location
Arizona
True confessions. About 3 years ago, in a very weak moment, I bought a S&W Model 642 with the #$@* internal lock. I think the devil made me do it. I hate the very concept of this PC lock, because of the usual reasons - it's ugly, and once in a blue moon, maybe - it malfunctions, disabling the gun.

Well, when I brought it home, I had buyer's remorse. I'm thinking to myself "You just bought a self defense gun that, even if the odds are a million to one, may malfunction in a pucker situation." Why did I do that? Great gun, but the lock is a bad idea and I've always said so. A buddy of mine who was with me had things to say about it. The conversation went something like this:

"You've always said you hate the things." "Yes."
"You've always said that they were ugly." "Yes."
"You've always said they had no place on a self-defense gun." "Yes."
"You've always said they could malfunction at the worst possible moment." "Yes."
"You said you'd never buy one." "Yes."
"And you just now bought one." "Yeah, that about sums it up."

I bought it to be a good self-defense revolver, but I wasn't happy with myself for buying it. Not much later, I bought a great 442 that does NOT have the lock, and it's my prime carry piece now.

BUT - I think the black 442 is great for daylight - an assailant will see it right away and might probably back off - most confrontations end that way.

BUT - At night, it will be hard to see that 442. The silver-colored 642 would be easy to spot if displayed, and it would probably cause the bad guy to back off. I'd rather have a guaranteed trouble-free 642 for night carry.

SO - Do I go and buy a lock-free 642 to assuage my concern over the lock? Or what?

Today I chose what.

After watching a YouTube video on how to do it, I took the step, took the gun apart and removed the "flag" part of the lock. Took it right out. Reassembled the gun. It took about 15 minutes, and it was easy. I didn't have to buy another 642, and now I can carry mine at night with an easy mind.

Here's the video I watched:

YouTube - S&W Internal Lock Removal

By the way, the gun appears loaded as the narrator is re-assembling his 642. I sure as heck hope those were just snap caps, but the point is the video was clear and made the process look simple enough that I went ahead.

I put the removed lock flag and its tiny little torsion spring into a ziplock bag and stuck it in the factory box for the gun in case some future owner wants to reinstall it.

For the life of me, I don't know why anyone would.

At any rate, I'm now a happy camper and at peace with myself over buying an internal-lock gun against my better judgment.

And the gun still looks ugly. I don't mind that so much. But I know it will always go bang when I pull the trigger.

John

642_no_lock_now-SMALL.jpg
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
The same thing was done to my M&P340 and the "Plug" has been installed in the 340PD. So, I have mine both ways....

Glad to hear ya got peace-of-mind from this project. I know that I have....
 
Another vote for the plug.

I put one in my wife's 642 as soon as we got it. It did away with the ugly lock hole problem.
 
I posted a question earlier today to get some feedback on whether a 'lockup' situation I had yesterday at the range on my 637 was due to an IL malfunction, or what other reason(s) may have caused my hammer and trigger to remain stuck back (hammer back/trigger pulled). Either way, I watched the video too and opted to grind the little post off of the flag/tab and reinstalled the whole thing. Now I can pull the trigger to my heart's content with the lock on or off. I'm still wondering though why everything locked up on me though. I've never had that happen with a S&W revolver, except when a reloaded primer wasn't seated fully, or a reloaded bullet slid forward slightly. That may have been the case, but either way I certainly don't use reloads for HD or CC. Sounds like you did the right thing. It's one thing to not be concerned with anymore.
 
PALADIN85020 & Eagle157:

Another happy "The Plug" customer reporting in. IMHO, it really tidies up the look of the revolver (or revolvers in my case :D ). If you're interested, please check out the Misc. classifieds and search for "plug".

Chris
 
I think the concern about the lock is probably overblown, but I would never have one on any handgun (or any gun, for that matter) that I own, either, so I'm with you there. As far as the color goes, I have never been in a gun fight, but if I have to pull my 642, it's not going to be flashed as a deterrent, so I could give a **** whether the perp sees it or not. It's probably going to be more like a knife fight--you don't know you're in one until you've been stabbed.
 
Take all that junk out. Lightens the load. :)

p.s. One of the primary reasons I prefer the 642 is the lighter sights. Easier to see in low light. But, truth be known, it'll more likely be something like "pull...point...shoot" rather than finding the sights.
 
Well, Paladin, you COULD have just sold the 642, taken a bit of the proceeds and put a Crimson Trace laser grip on your 442, and spent the rest on defense ammo. A mutant might not see the 442 so well in the dark, but he will for sure see the hint of a laser. Depending on how you bring your gun to bear he might even notice the dot racing across the floor/pavement in his direction before it settles somewhere on his torso (which he may or may not be able to see.)

The CT grip also avoids the question of "what do I carry" when you're leaving in the morning (light) but might be out after dark. ;)
 
I swore I was never going to buy another S&W with a lock...no way...no how.

Then today, I stopped in my local gun shop (I really should stay out of there) and saw a brand new 36 in nickle. She asked me to just give her a chance to be a good companion, and said she would gladly have the "surgery" if I would give her a good home.

So, now she is resting happily in my safe, waiting for the operation and then will be one of my carry guns. (I already have a stainless plug from the last ILS J-frame I bought and then immediately traded since I just didn't want a revolver I had to modify!)

It just goes to prove, you should never say never. :o

Now, if I start looking at a Taurus...somebody stop me! :eek:
 
OK, this is a dumb question I am sure, but it won't be my first, not by a long shot, and not my last, either!

I was watching the video again on removing the lock, psyching myself up to removing the ILS on my newly purchased model 36...and as I was watching it, I started wondering if there is any difference at all in doing this procedure on a 36 (or any model with an external hammer) as opposed to one with an internal hammer?

I would think not, but just wanted to ask before I tackle this.
 
I'm laughing right now only because I have owned a lock 640 for I think six years and only yesterday did I finally order a plug and the Apex spring kit for it. Stubborn hard heads, UNITE!!!
 
I swore I was never going to buy another S&W with a lock...no way...no how.

Then today, I stopped in my local gun shop (I really should stay out of there) and saw a brand new 36 in nickle. She asked me to just give her a chance to be a good companion, and said she would gladly have the "surgery" if I would give her a good home.

So, now she is resting happily in my safe, waiting for the operation and then will be one of my carry guns. (I already have a stainless plug from the last ILS J-frame I bought and then immediately traded since I just didn't want a revolver I had to modify!)

It just goes to prove, you should never say never. :o

Now, if I start looking at a Taurus...somebody stop me! :eek:



Your Model 36 will have a hammer block and the Centennials don't. When you get a chance, watch the Apex video. He mentions that.
 
I don't like the IL, either - but it's inclusion won't dissuade me from a new S&W's purchase. I've bought IL-equipped S&W revolvers since 9/02 with no problems. That shouldn't be a shock - after ten years of including the IL, S&W has yet to spend the first dime defending a lawsuit over it. I don't fault anyone removing it - that's fine - and a viable choice. I'm just saying that to say 'no' to a new purchase because of it's inclusion would be a shame - there are some really interesting new revolvers that were not available previously.

Stainz
 
Back
Top