Murabito Revolver Safety - Drop Safe?

[laketownmastiff]

I am considering purchasing a 642 and having the Murabito safety installed. See more info here:
Murabito Revolver Safety

"This safety device was designed by Frank Murabito many years ago and has been installed in over 60,000 revolvers.
...Tarnhelm Supply has obtained this patented safety device from Mr. Murabito, and we are now the sole source for its installation. It is available for S&W J, K, L, or N frame revolvers and uses factory parts for the conversion. The thumbpiece becomes the revolver safety. The installation does not affect the action or any functionality of the revolver. "

I understand many revolver owners do not want a manual safety (and I don't argue with them) -- let's just take it as an assumption that the vast majority of revolver owners don't want a thumb safety, for good reasons -- but a very few of us (apparently 60,000 or so) do want one on our revolvers.

That being said -- does anyone on the forum here have experience with the Murabito revolver safety?

And specifically, I am wondering, if it's possible that this modification could make a S&W revolver LESS safe in any way (putting aside the issue of 'speed to deploy' by the owner). In other words, could installing the Murabito safety make the revolver less "drop safe", or lead to some sort of mechanical failure?

... I'd normally be hesitant to modify a carry gun in any way with "aftermarket" parts. However, I really would like to have the option to carry a J-frame, but I am only willing to carry a gun that has a "1911-style" safety. So, I'm wondering if this modification would possibly introduce any risks to a 642, which comes "drop safe" from the factory. (Last note, the revolver in question would be a new from factory 642 with no Internal Lock, Product: Model 642 - No Internal Lock )

Thanks much for any help, and I don't mean to start an argument on a contentious topic (the utility of manual safeties), but rather address the mechanical risks (or not) of this particular device when installed.

 

[P&R Fan]

First off welcome to the Forum.
I have never heard of this device but I see no need for it. All S&W revolvers built after the mid 40s are drop safe. The M642 is a Centennial. It has an internal hammer. I think there is NO chance it could go off unless the trigger were pulled. I have carried 3 different Centennials, including a M642 for thousands of hours. Never had a problem.
Jim

 

[laketownmastiff]

Hi, thanks for the reply. I do understand all S&W revolvers of modern manufacture are drop safe.

I'm wondering if this modification (the Murabito safety) might compromise the drop safe mechanicals (or other mechanical features) of the gun in any way.

 

[P&R Fan]

My gut feeling is there is no way that could happen.
Jim

 

[usnrigger]

Id contact company doing the install but if they don't change any factory features in the process is should be. Smiths after the 1940's have two hammer type safetys engineered into pistol already to make it "drop safe" the hammer block, and the relationship between hammer and rebound housing both are to prevent hammer traveling fully forward to contact primer in rest positions. I also don't like that it is incorporated into cylinder release. In a high stress situation, bad guy may see a cylinder open up as you fumble to take safety off

I see no need to have a safety installed and think It would only cause problems for new operational problems. I think some French police models shipped from the factory with a safety on the right side of frame(in the form of a flat latch). From location I suspect a simple trigger block

 

[WR Moore]

IIRC, the safety being discussed involved the use of a modified thumb piece as the safety. In fact, the quoted ad makes this quite clear.

The way it worked was that the thumb piece would be pressed forward sufficient to cause the bolt to lock the hammer. Once that point was reached, the rear of the thumb piece could be turned up slightly to engage a notch in the frame. This would hold the bolt in place and prevent the hammer & trigger from being moved. A flick of the thumb would pivot the thumb piece to horizontal, unlocking the bolt and return the revolver to operation. Very much like the operation of a 1911 safety.

So, in answer to the question: the revolver would remain drop proof.

 

[GerSan69]

That thing is a solution in search of a problem. But hey, if it makes the OP feel better (i.e., gives him confidence in the firearm,) then have at it.
Whatever it takes to get law-abiding citizens to do what's necessary to protect themselves, I'm all for it. After all, that's what really matters, right?

ON THE OTHER HAND:
Since it uses the cylinder latch, how do you reload? And is there the slightest chance that, while trying to open the cylinder to reload, you might put the safety on instead? Unless there's some positive way to ensure that the original function is not impaired, I'd steer clear of anything with the potential to take the firearm out of commission when you need it the most...

 

[199]

I'm certainly in no position to speak authoritatively, but I find it challenging to believe that 60,000 of these conversions are out there. Where are they?

The mechanism sounds simple and clever, but there are often surprises with modifications that are not well vetted (which is my view of this since I can find almost nothing on the Internet regarding it).

I could see some slight merit in such a device if handgun retention might be an issue.

In addition to GerSan69's concerns above, I'd also specifically wonder if in a high stress situation you could temporarily (or permanently?) lock up the revolver by pulling the trigger while trying to release the safety at the same time.

I personally wouldn't trust it.

 

[Tired Gunsmith]

This "Safety" ( or a previous version) was banned by the NYCPD for use on any revolvers used by officers many, many years ago.
Any licensed Gunsmith installing it could have his license suspended or revoked.

 

[laketownmastiff]

That thing is a solution in search of a problem. But hey, if it makes the OP feel better (i.e., gives him confidence in the firearm,) then have at it.
Whatever it takes to get law-abiding citizens to do what's necessary to protect themselves, I'm all for it. After all, that's what really matters, right?

ON THE OTHER HAND:
Since it uses the cylinder latch, how do you reload? And is there the slightest chance that, while trying to open the cylinder to reload, you might put the safety on instead? Unless there's some positive way to ensure that the original function is not impaired, I'd steer clear of anything with the potential to take the firearm out of commission when you need it the most...

Thanks for all the replies thus far.

For the record, I'd be totally against any sort of government required safety device, etc. However it's a free market and I do like manual safeties on my carry firearms (and understand I'm in the minority).

Another note regarding this Murabito manual safety device -- it is referenced positively by Massad Ayoob in several books, including the Book of Combat Handgunnery.

See: https://books.google.com/books?id=8MNGOPcCDoYC&pg=PA189#v=onepage&q&f=false

Again normally I would be against any gunsmitthing / aftermarket parts on a carry gun (and again: that's just MY preference -- purely a personal preference).

BUT, I do trust and respect Massad Ayoob a lot, which is why I'm even considering it.

 

[WR Moore]

This "Safety" ( or a previous version) was banned by the NYCPD for use on any revolvers used by officers many, many years ago.
Any licensed Gunsmith installing it could have his license suspended or revoked.

Exactly who would be suspending or revoking a FFL for this????? BATFE couldn't care less. OK, NYPD might pull their name from being an authorized outside smith (if there was such a thing), but that's about it. Tarnhelm is S&W certified, so they haven't lost that ticket.

SFAIK, you could return the pistol to stock with a new thumb piece and bolt. The slot in the frame would still be there, but not be functional.

I checked S&Ws classic line and the 640/642 with grip safety apparently isn't in the product line at present. Shame.

 

[GerSan69]

Well, I respectfully disagree that the referenced item constitutes an endorsement. At least, that's how I read the passage, which appears under "Safety Devices":

"...and finally, he can install a Murabito safety on any size S&W wheelgun to make the cylinder latch perform double duty as a thumb safety that works with a downward stroke like a 1911.... As a rule, any aftermarket "safety" that makes the gun go to the "fire" position faster and more positively when needed, will also make it go to the "on-safe" position faster and more positively, and it's hard to argue with that." The Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery By Massad Ayoob, page 189.

Absolutely not trying to be argumentative. After 40+ years experience with firearms, I simply trust my revolvers as-is, and I feel strongly enough about that to post here. The lack of specific endorsement by name for the Murabito device doesn't give me any confidence at all. Again, whatever makes a guy feel better about carrying is great, but to me, tampering with a part that already serves a vital function in order to give it another function is kinda dangerous. I wish you luck and hope whatever you do works for you and your situation.

 

[rwsmith]

I suppose that some.....

I'm sure there are people that don't trust a safety that they can't see or feel and don't have confidence in the built in devices. Knowing what S&W has done to prevent ADs would go a long way in building that confidence. The only place I think it would be truly useful is in the 'disarming scenario'.

 

[IraIII]

I can see it being useful in the disarming scenario, also it would be nice when in a nightstand or other areas that are common in your house, if the revolver is not on your person it would give an additional level of security to the revolver. I can see it being useful to a new carrier, or to someone who values redundancy for carry purposes.
It can be deleted by installing a new cylinder release thumb piece as previous posters have said.
I do have this installed on a 13-1 that I bought, traded, and reacquired through trade. I use it when the revolver is on nightstand duty. I have no problems with it, but I would not spend the cash to have it installed on a different revolver, it was this way when I purchased it long ago.
Here are some pics of the thumb piece in normal, and safe position.

 

[Peak53]

Integrating the safety mechanism with the cylinder release mechanism looks like an unbelievably bad idea. Making your fingers remember what to do under stress other than pulling the trigger could lead to trouble.