J Frame with IL for carry poll.

[Chief's Special]

I carry an old Model 36, not in a pocket but in a Bianchi leather IWB. No worries about hammer hanging up in a pocket. I wouldn't buy a gun with IL. So I guess if I wanted to buy a new S&W it would have to be Model 60 (hope that's the right number) with the lemon squeezer safety.

Are there other models (new) without an IL?

 

[bmcgilvray]

Been wondering how to bore a hole in my early Chief's Special and fit a lock to it.

Not!

Will not own a lock model.

 

[Chief's Special]

For that task I've had pretty good results with a saws-all.

 

[surveyor47]

As I undedrstand it, the IL is a problem with ultra light guns and heavy loads. Any documented cases of failure with the 642? I have had no problems with 158 or 135 grain +P38 Special.

 

[f2]

Ask the question this way; any chance of an internal lock failure with pre-lock J frames?
<span class="ev_code_WHITE">zzz</span>

 

[pinkymingeo]

No IL failures in those guns, but plenty of frame failures in the Airweights. Lots of small parts failures too, I'm sure. Then there are the steel J-frames, which weigh as much as a small boat anchor. Ti/scan with a disabled lock is the way to go.

 

[RonC]

Have had absolutely no IL problems with my 637. It is fired regularly with everything from snake-shot loads to .38 Special +P. Utterly reliable.

Just my experience.

Ron

 

[texagun]

All I had to do was to read the 22 page thread (sticky) on the IL failures in these guns to convince me to never carry one for self-defense purposes. They are OK for the range, but not acceptable for a gun you have to stake your life on.


http://smith-wessonforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/500103904/m/228102718

 

[bmcgilvray]

Then there are the steel J-frames, which weigh as much as a small boat anchor.

Surely you jest. The steel J-Frame is still in the light weight category and makes good sense for concealed carry.

 

[check123]

No locks for me. ..won't buy one, won't carry one.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

For all those proudly proclaiming you fire your J frame equipped with the ILS without a problem, I'm happy for you. Ya see, that's not the whole point of worry. The problem with the ILS isn't a constant locking problem, it's the possibility of the small spring breaking causing the revolver to lock by default. If that happens during a SD situation it won't be a chronic problem that got you killed, it will be the one time problem that did.

The ILS wouldn't be a issue if when the lock failed it would leave the gun operable by default instead of disabling the gun by default. The more you add to a gun that can fail raises the chances the gun will fail. There is no reason for storage device on any gun that can cause that gun to become usable when a trigger lock will serve the same purpose. The difference is, then the trigger lock is removed, it's gone and can't get you killed.

 

[Chief's Special]

I didn't realize my Chief's Special was a "boat anchor" either. I once carried an airweight and, yes, they are nice and light. But they're no fun to shoot, and I like guns that are fun to shoot. A steel J-frame is that. It's also not going to have parts falling off.

My Model 36, compared to my other carry guns (Glock 17, Taurus PT1911) is indeed an "airweight." Actually, as I heft both in either hand, it seems to weigh about the same as my Glock 26, which many feel is the lightest Glock.

But, as always, your mileage may vary.

 

[smousefam5]

I am suprised at how close the numbers are.

 

[photoman]

Originally posted by ArchAngelCD:
For all those proudly proclaiming you fire your J frame equipped with the ILS without a problem, I'm happy for you. Ya see, that's not the whole point of worry. The problem with the ILS isn't a constant locking problem, it's the possibility of the small spring breaking causing the revolver to lock by default. If that happens during a SD situation it won't be a chronic problem that got you killed, it will be the one time problem that did.

That's why you always carry a second gun.

 

[Andy Griffith]

Originally posted by Photoman44:

Originally posted by ArchAngelCD:
For all those proudly proclaiming you fire your J frame equipped with the ILS without a problem, I'm happy for you. Ya see, that's not the whole point of worry. The problem with the ILS isn't a constant locking problem, it's the possibility of the small spring breaking causing the revolver to lock by default. If that happens during a SD situation it won't be a chronic problem that got you killed, it will be the one time problem that did.

That's why you always carry a second gun.

Or a third, fourth, fifth, etc.

Kinda like that safe commercial where they just kept taking guns off of Billy the Kid, right?

 

[tom turner]

No IL guns for me. Too many really nice old pre-lock guns to choose from.

I was at an old dealer a few months ago and he had a bunch of new IL J-frames at reasonable prices . . . along with a nice used 640 no dash at the same price as the new version in the case.

I got excited about the as new, but used 640 no dash at the same price as a new IL version!

A gun that's not gonna fire when I need it to is NOT for me.

T.

 

[Gunned-up]

Yes, I have a M&P340 with the IL intact. I shoot it quite often with .38spl & .38+P and sometimes with mag loads (if you have a Sc frame, you know why). I have had no reason to disable it yet.

 

[ArgMauser]

Originally posted by akviper:
Smith ruined my son's no lock nickle 442 a few years ago but were <STRIKE>kind</STRIKE> asinine enough to replace it with a new IL 642.

I just bought two of the new run no lock 642s. One will replace my kid's and the other will go in the safe for a rainy day. He's putting up the slightly used IL 642 for sale.

Is that what you meant?

 

[marvin knox]

I've got the 340 M&P. Super light weight with a few things that the regular 340 didn't offer.

If it had come with the lock optional I (like, I'll bet, everyone here) would have got it without. The odds of it failing in that instant of time when I need it, when it hasn't in thousands of rounds at the range, are slim indeed.

I wish it weren't there for several reasons, But it is. I certainly don't loose any sleep over it. If I couldn't have lived with the IL, I'd have had to go without a wonderful gun like my 340M&P.

A guy using a 1911 (or actually many of the autos carried by law enforcement for that matter) has more reason to loose sleep over gun troubles than me with my IL IMO.

Sometimes I think that some on this forum really should give the IL a rest, put it in perspective, and get real.

Still.............I find that I carry on the belt more than other ways now days and I may move the IL gun to back up position if I get something else (heavier - why not for the belt?). When I do - you can bet that I'd prefer a gun with no IL. That's true whether I go with a 640 J frame or something larger for belt carry.

But if I can't find what I want without the lock - it won't cause me a lot of sleep deprobation to go with an IL. (Pretty good chance I may disable it, though.)

BY THE WAY - having said all that - If I was a professional in law enforcement rather than simply a CCL holder who trys hard to stay out of trouble, there is no way on God's green earth that I would carry an IL gun by choice.

 

[VAdoublegunner]

I carry a S&W 637 fairly often, especially in summer when wearing lighter weight clothing. It has an IL, but it has always worked, and I try it out for a few cylinders worth about every other range trip.

However, I carry a Ruger SP101 more often, and never have to worry about an IL with the Ruger. Just wearing holes in my pockets.