Smith and Wesson said 'Don't do it!'

crsides said:
Has anyone EVER had a gun malfunction due to the lock?


Charlie
Click to expand...

I haven't personally but I've read a few blogs/reviews of people who have. Most of them say to avoid revolvers with internal locks if you can. I didn't want to take the chance since I will carry it most of the time...so I removed the lock tonight.
 
IllinoisCCW said:
I purchased a 642 with an internal lock. I've read many blogs about the problems the locks are causing...most concerning is that it could engage when firing. This is a personal protection firearm for me and don't want to worry that it won't function when needed.

I contacted Smith and asked if I sent it to them if they would remove the internal lock. The immediate response was no. I asked why...was it a functional issue or a legal issue? They told me it was a legal issue and that the ATF would not be happy.

I completely disassembled the 642 and determined it was one piece that needs to be removed and doesn't affect the functionality at all...very simple.

I'm sorry, the protection of me and my family is more important than what the ATF thinks.

As of yet I have not pulled the lock out. I wanted some guidance from the forum. Unless I get some strong reasons not to, my plan is to remove it this weekend.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I doubt that "ATF" (I assume they meant to say "BATFE") has any position on the matter, as the presence of the internal lock has nothing to do with any BATFE requirement.

The only suggestion I have is that IF you remove the lock, remove ALL of the lock parts. One of the S&W Performance Center guys once told me that merely removing the "flag" or whatever that part is called, while leaving the rest of the lock in the revolver might result in the remaining parts dislodging within the firearm causing it to lock up. I am not sure if I can see how this is possible, but if I were to remove that internal lock, I would take all of it out, instead of just the "flag" part as the very popular video of the Model 640 shows.

A better idea is to buy a 442 or 642 without the lock. S&W makes those currently, and with one of those, you do not have to remove anything and there is no unsightly hole left in the revolver (or a key way if you leave in that part of the lock mechanism).

The product number of the "no lock" versions are:

642 - 103810
442 - 150544
 
Last edited:
shawn mccarver said:
The only suggestion I have is that IF you remove the lock, remove ALL of the lock parts. One of the S&W Performance Center guys once told me that merely removing the "flag" or whatever that part is called, while leaving the rest of the lock in the revolver might result in the remaining parts dislodging within the firearm causing it to lock up. I am not sure if I can see how this is possible, but if I were to remove that internal lock, I would take all of it out, instead of just part as the very popular video of the Model 640 shows.
Click to expand...

I did remove the flag. From what I could tell that was the only part to remove. All the other parts were not related to the internal lock.

From my little research the flag or lock plate seemed to be it. I hope I didn't miss something.
 
Imaposer said:
Or you could just grind the little nub off the "flag" and leave everything in place. The lock won't engage and lock the gun (the "nub" does that), you won't have holes, and you won't need a "plug" for the holes. The only caveat would be that you will still have the key portion that looks like it still has a lock, and if you ever do decide to sell, you can't easily put it back to stock.

Personally, on a carry piece, although I don't really like the looks of the lock, my main issue is the possibility of the gun becoming locked unintentionally. I don't want the holes, and I don't really want to pay for a plug just for the cosmetics. I never sell guns anyway, so I'm not worried about putting it back to stock. I just remove the nub and leave it at that.
Click to expand...

Winner.. Its very easy to grind the nub, just did mine.. No possible chance of locking and no holes to fill.. Maybe I'll even fill the external key hole with epoxy so there is no question that the lock is disabled..
 
Last edited:
IllinoisCCW said:
I did remove the flag. From what I could tell that was the only part to remove. All the other parts were not related to the internal lock.

From my little research the flag or lock plate seemed to be it. I hope I didn't miss something.
Click to expand...

The "other lock parts" to which I refer include, but are not necessarily limited to, the spring, the "pitchfork" and the keyway cam and any other part that is not in there on a "no-lock" revolver. The "flag" is only one of several parts that is part of the internal locking mechanism. Removal of the "flag" disables the lock, as does grinding off its "nub," but if I were removing the lock to make the revolver less prone to an unintentional lock up, I would remove ALL of the parts of the internal locking mechanism, not just the "flag."
 
Of course S&W told you not to do it, and that IS purely a legal precaution on their part.

As noted above, ATF could not care less what you do with that part, or any other part in the gun, as long as you don't make it into a full-auto firearm & don't dink with the serial number.
Denis
 
I been buying the new S&W N frames with the loc figuring when there discontinued someday there be sought after in there orginal state/condition. So far all three haven't failed yet in cycling. The m58, the m57 and m29-10 have been flawless.
 
shawn mccarver said:
The "other lock parts" to which I refer include, but are not necessarily limited to, the spring, the "pitchfork" and the keyway cam and any other part that is not in there on a "no-lock" revolver. The "flag" is only one of several parts that is part of the internal locking mechanism. Removal of the "flag" disables the lock, as does grinding off its "nub," but if I were removing the lock to make the revolver less prone to an unintentional lock up, I would remove ALL of the parts of the internal locking mechanism, not just the "flag."
Click to expand...

Got it. Thanks.
 
crsides said:
Has anyone EVER had a gun malfunction due to the lock?

It happened to me. I was shooting a friend's 642 and it locked up on me. We had to get a key from the shop owner to disengage it. I went home and went to work on my own gun. I had read about grinding down the post on the flag and watched a youtube tutorial. The actual work took about a half hour. I have also read that if you send your pistol to S&W for any kind of work, they will reinstall a functioning lock back into the pistol. Not sure this a fact.
Click to expand...
 
I can see where the lock could be a good thing. If I had young kids around the house I would lock the lock when the gun was stored-- kids will be kids & that way if one did find it and find ammo to load it he couldn't shoot it.
That said, I wasn't too worried about the lock self-engaging but didn't want to take the chance and so I disabled the lock & removed all possibility of that happening. I wold prefer a no-lock model & in fact I do prefer my old pinned-barrel Chiefs, but I found this one for sale at a great price so I just had to snap it up. Of all the guns I own, it's the most logical one to carry-- but my old 2" RB Chief gets the most carry time anyways. The 442 makes a great car gun though!
 
There was a LONG string on the forum some years back about all the lock failures. That string, along with a couple of others, bit the dust in some change to the forum (servers maybe). It was very useful. Doc Roberts has reported that there are several LE agencies of which he is aware which prohibit the use of the S&Ws with the lock for official use (on or off duty). I adhere to that position, too. (And I used to do LE legal.) I also take that position with a couple of other items that are known to be failure prone.

Ayoob has written some amount of material on the lock both in print and I think on here. The topic is frowned upon here because it tends to end up in a negative set of exchanges. The answer: if you are concerned, don't buy a revolver that has it. (I fall in to this camp). If not, have at it.

As noted by others, BATFE has nothing to say with regard to the lock. The employee was either misinformed, or trying to scare you in to not doing what you asked about.
 
Last edited:
Not to turn this into yet another "lock" thread,but why would anyone be the least bit surprised that someone at S&W said don't do it.

They installed it and I'm sure they don't want to tell people it's ok to disable primarily for legal reasons I'd guess.

I own some with the lock others without it. One think I'm sure of after
45 years of shooting revolvers far more have locked up due to the extractor rod being loose, powder grains stuck under the extractor star, and backed out primers.

I'm willing to admit the lock "could" fail but others things can go wrong with a revolver as well.

Dave
 
IllinoisCCW,
I'm not trying to start anything or be critical. I'm just curious. If the lock bothers you, why did you buy the gun?
 
Grayfox said:
IllinoisCCW,
I'm not trying to start anything or be critical. I'm just curious. If the lock bothers you, why did you buy the gun?
Click to expand...

It's a fair question. Nothing else is available in my area. It was that or nothing or wait. Small town with limited options. I'm like the little brat on Willy Wonka..'I want it and I want it NOW!'

So I chose to take it and remove the Internal lock. Love the gun and feel 100x more comfortable with it. Next purchase will be without.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Model 1500 Issue - Non-Functional when stock is installed
Replies
6
Views
382
DAC511
D
M
Traveling to the northeast with guns?
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
ISCS Yoda
ISCS Yoda
D
OK what do I do now M&P expert advice needed
Replies
13
Views
737
SFury79
SFury79
J
Smith & Wesson Model 39-2
Replies
5
Views
361
Jerry in SC
Jerry in SC
Redacted_553
Is it a timing issue?
Replies
9
Views
447
SGT ROCK 11B
SGT ROCK 11B

Latest posts

Back
Top