My name is Red, and I Own an IL Revolver...

[akr]

You tell'em, Stevie! They all say they wouldn't have them, so how do they know? They heard, they saw, blah, blah, blah.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I'm happy for those who are satisfied with their new revolvers equipped with the ILS. It's my personal preference not to own a S&W revolver so equipped. I have NEVER tried to bully anyone if only for the reason I don't really care what anyone else does with their money.

BTW, I did own a revolver with the lock, a Model 638. For those who think it's not possible a poorly designed storage device can't malfunction, you're wrong. I was clumsy one day and dropped it off the table just before I was going to clean it. The "flag" came half way up and the gun was locked. That was enough for me because dropping a gun when under stress is a possibility and I decided not to take a chance so I sold it.

I disagree with those who ridicule people who don't feel there's anything wrong with a ILS gun but I also disagree with those who tell me I'm foolish for thinking the lock is dangerous.

Enjoy your new revolver...

 

[Wyatt Earp]

Originally posted by stevieboy:
On my lock-equipped Smiths it takes positive pressure with the key to turn the lock. The lock isn't difficult to engage, but it takes a definite effort to bring it into play. The lock sits there, independent of any other part.

The resistance that you feel is the tumbler spring not the lock arm return spring. The lock arm return spring is extremely weak and Newton's laws of motion clearly explain how a S&W can lock itself. That's if you knew how the lock actually works.

In the end, some of us, after examining the design of this lock and its execution, find plausible the claims that the lock arm can move under recoil enough to lock up the hammer.

That is enough reason for me to deactivate the lock.

 

[Landric]

Originally posted by ladder13:

Originally posted by Landric:
My name is Landric. I hate the lock, both as S&W has made it, and the idea in general. I don't own a single firearm with an internal lock. I've personally experienced a lock failure, so I'm not going on internet hype alone.

I don't like the MIM parts, not for any functional reason, I just think they look "wrong". I don't like the frame mounted firing pin, both because the S&W hammer needs the firing pin there to make it look "right" and because I have seen several of the frame mounted pin guns that were completely stock fail to fire due to light strikes.

All that said, I just placed a bid on a Thunder Ranch 21-4. If I "win" it will be my first S&W IL gun. Other than the lock zit, its a beautiful gun. Its also just what I want, a N-frame, fixed sight, six shot .44 Special.

Once I get it (this one or another, I'm getting one) and make sure it works, I'll remove the IL. Perhaps I can plug the hole using directions on this site.

None of this changes my position on the lock, but the 21-4 (and the 22-4, if all goes well with the 21-4, I'm getting a 22-4 also) are just too good looking to pass up.

There isn't much in the current S&W catalog that interests me. I expect the huge majority of my S&W purchases in the future will be pre-lock/MIM used guns. However, the 21-4 and 22-4 meets some "needs" (wants) I have better than anything else available. For that, I'm willing to give current S&W revolvers a try (at last).

Landric, I agree with you 100+%. I, too, am going to get a 21-4, BECAUSE they are only available with the IL(for a affordable price anyways). I absolutely LOVE a 4 inch fixed sight N frame. I will not be buying any other Smiths that I can get pre-lock such as M64,65,66,29,27,57,58 or others. Especially nickle or stainless guns where the zit screams out "look at me". Blue only for me, others are entitled to have what they like.
Are you getting the "Classic" or the other 21? AFAIK there are 2 M21's.

I put a bid on the 21-4 Thunder Ranch. If I don't "win" that one, I'll look around and see which is available for a better price. I'm open to either, with a slight preference for the Thunder Ranch model. I'll probably go "Classic" for the 22-4, provided I like the 21-4.

 

[Landric]

Originally posted by akr:

I have seen several of the frame mounted pin guns that were completely stock fail to fire due to light strikes.

Have you really SEEN SEVERAL? If ONE person has SEEN SEVERAL, then there should be a MASSIVE recall.

Yep, a couple of years ago at a sanctioned IDPA match S&W provided some 686-6 2 1/2" "pickup" guns for one of the stages. The guns were given away as prizes after the match was over, but at least one of them had to be returned to S&W before it could go to the winner due to light strike issues. All the guns were completely stock. It might have been more than one of them, but it was at least one.

In addition to that I have seen it happen several times at matches with frame mounted pins. According to the owners of the revolvers, they were stock.

To be clear, I'm not talking about every round, but enough that it was seriously unacceptable.

In addition to that, some of you might remember the NC DOC change from the S&W 64 and 65 to the M&P40. That switch was due primarily to serious failures with a new batch of 64 3" and 4" revolvers ordered by DOC that had multiple light strikes, IL malfunctions, and in a couple of cases, barrels flying off. I was working for the probation and parole side of DOC when it happened. Its not urban legend, it really happened, and S&W took all the new revolvers back and gave us the M&P40s with night sights and three mags for the same price at the model 64s.

 

[akr]

Well, hopefully, S&W has made some changes to correct that problem.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Originally posted by akr:
Well, hopefully, S&W has made some changes to correct that problem.

The IL malfunction is easily fixed. REMOVE THE DARN THING FROM ALL FUTURE S&W REVOLVERS. That would work, no?

 

[Wyatt Earp]

Originally posted by akr:
Well, hopefully, S&W has made some changes to correct that problem.

It appears to be so, from my small sample.

My 2004 vintage Model 65 occasionally FTF until I changed to an aftermarket firing pin. My 2007 Model 637 has never failed to ignite a cartridge in over 1100 shots fired.

 

[Wyatt Earp]

Originally posted by ArchAngelCD:
I'm happy for those who are satisfied with their new revolvers equipped with the ILS. It's my personal preference not to own a S&W revolver so equipped. I have NEVER tried to bully anyone if only for the reason I don't really care what anyone else does with their money.

BTW, I did own a revolver with the lock, a Model 638. For those who think it's not possible a poorly designed storage device can't malfunction, you're wrong. I was clumsy one day and dropped it off the table just before I was going to clean it. The "flag" came half way up and the gun was locked. That was enough for me because dropping a gun when under stress is a possibility and I decided not to take a chance so I sold it.

I disagree with those who ridicule people who don't feel there's anything wrong with a ILS gun but I also disagree with those who tell me I'm foolish for thinking the lock is dangerous.

Enjoy your new revolver...

Didn't you post pics today or last night of your 619 on the Ahrends grips thread???

It shows the lock very clearly.

 

[Bullseye Smith]

Nice gun Red, this section was made for those that own new guns to get away from being cut down for owning a IL. Along with the two piece barrel or anything to do with a new gun. The ones that don't like these should go some where to do thier cry baby act besides doing it here. Plus no man has no right to cut down another man for what he owns, type of work he does, color, etc. If you do CRY about it you are short of being a man any way, and need to go play with the new borns. My 2 cents

 

[USMCbrat]

Out of the 6 Smiths I own, one has an IL and I inherited it (along with 4 others with no IL from my Dad). Now my issue with the IL is not functionality as my M60 -14 has never had a lock up. My issue is cosmetic. IMHO the Smith & Wesson blue N frame is one of the most beautiful guns ever produced (not to mention J an K frames). The current location of the IL on the new classic reissue is like having a pimple on the face of Marilyn Monroe. My question has always been "why can't they put the lock under the stocks?"

 

[ladder13]

Originally posted by USMCbrat:
"why can't they put the lock under the stocks?"

BINGO!!!

 

[batmann]

Well said RED!!!!!!!
This IL thing has gotten to the point it is more political than anything else.
The best Smith I have ever owned is a 629 MG with IL I bought new in 2005.

 

[markedup]

Originally posted by USMCbrat:
My issue is cosmetic. IMHO the Smith & Wesson blue N frame is one of the most beautiful guns ever produced (not to mention J an K frames). The current location of the IL on the new classic reissue is like having a pimple on the face of Marilyn Monroe. My question has always been "why can't they put the lock under the stocks?"

I see that on Victories and Registered Magnums there is a round thing
just under the cylinder latch.Anyone ever call
this a distraction from esthetic's?

Thanks

Mark

 

[Andy Taylor]

Red, excellent post.
I do not like the locks and I have never owned one with a lock. If you choose to do so, it is your business. Do I wish the locks did not exist? Yes. Do I think less of those who own/like the IL revolvers? No. There are several revolvers that S&W currently makes with the IL that have a lot of great attributes. For me, the lock is a deal breaker. For you, it is not. That is a very nice M29-8.

 

[hitecrednek]

The lock is gross. I'd rather have VD than a ILS gun....

The new style guns should have a seperate section.

 

[Amend2]

I, too, own a S&W revolver with an IL device. When I was searching for a used steel J frame RB in .357, the only one that surfaced around here was a 640-3. I needed it so I could use an old set of Crimson Trace laser grips to set up as a bed-side gun. The used 640-3 came with the factory plastic case and all of the paper work - everything but a key. A S&W representative answered my web-site inquiry by sending 2 keys free of charge. I like their customer service, and I like the 640-3.

 

[akr]

I bet these guys that make such a big deal out of the IL just can't afford a new gun. I bet that they buy one as soon as they get the money or a credit card.

LOL.

 

[ladder13]

Originally posted by akr:
I bet these guys that make such a big deal out of the IL just can't afford a new gun. I bet that they buy one as soon as they get the money or a credit card.

LOL.

Yes, your comment IS laughable, LOL
You LOSE, send Lee your money.

In the last year, I've bought a Uberti Schofield, no-lock 642 and 37-2, Marlin 22 mag bolt gun. Those were new guns. Used guns? 2 pre-war HD's(not cheap if you know prices),a 38-44 Outdoorsman, a pre M15, a 14-2. MORE new guns? A M60 Ashland with adj sights, a NIB Colt Series 70 Gov't(original, not the latest release), a NIB M940, a NIB M640-1, and on and on.
Send you losing bet to Handejector, to help finance this great Forum.

 

[hitecrednek]

Money is not the issue.

I wouldn't take a new gun if they were giving them away for FREE.

In the past year I bought a NIB 642, Model 18, Model 18, Model 64, Model 64, Model 10 and a stone mint, 1954 Colt OP. If I had to choose between an ILS S&W or a Glock...easy choice.