Internal Lock on Ruger Vaquero?


PDA






Balrog
September 11, 2011, 01:25 AM
Does anyone know how this lock works, and can it be removed?

If you enjoyed reading about "Internal Lock on Ruger Vaquero?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ArchAngelCD
September 11, 2011, 02:28 AM
No need to remove the lock. It is accessed by removing the grips and the default state is unlocked so if there is a malfunction of the lock it will not disable your handgun.

DPris
September 11, 2011, 02:44 AM
Since it forms the seat of the mainspring strut, it can't just be removed. You need something to replace it, or the gun won't function.
Denis

BCCL
September 11, 2011, 09:05 AM
Don't lock it and ignore it, and you'll never know it's there.

Balrog
September 11, 2011, 10:30 AM
Don't lock it and ignore it, and you'll never know it's there.

Assuming it doesnt tear up and lock up the gun

Old Fuff
September 11, 2011, 10:48 AM
So far there haven't been any reports of the lock giving any problems, but where there is any lock they’re a possibility - although remote to the extreme. You can address the issue at least 2 ways:

1. Remove the lock, and replace it with a custom-made mainspring strut seat, which should not be especially difficult or expensive.

2. Degrease the lock, feed it a shot of epoxy while in the locked position, and then turn it to unlocked before the adhesive can set. Thereafter it won't move.

A final option would be expensive: Replace the grip frame with an older one that never had a lock.

Keep in mind that if you ever returned the revolver to the factory it would be returned with a functional lock, and a bill for payment on your dime.

madcratebuilder
September 11, 2011, 11:10 AM
I have replaced one or two on my Rugers, it required a new spring and plate as I recall. I no longer bother, the lock is a non issue with the SA Rugers.

CraigC
September 11, 2011, 01:09 PM
Assuming it doesnt tear up and lock up the gun
Unlike S&W, the Ruger lock is a non-issue. I despise S&W's lock and won't buy one so-equipped but Ruger's lock is another matter. I would prefer it wasn't there but if it has to be, Ruger's design is the one you want. It is easily ignored and after six years on the market, I have yet to hear a single report of one malfunctioning. I really wouldn't see a point in replacing it or rendering it inoperable.

http://photos.imageevent.com/newfrontier45/sixguns/50th%20Flat-top%20-%20013.JPG

BCCL
September 11, 2011, 01:38 PM
Assuming it doesnt tear up and lock up the gun

Has one been documented in a Ruger SA?

Balrog
September 11, 2011, 01:56 PM
Has one been documented in a Ruger SA?

Don't know. But you wouldn't have to ask that question if the lock was not there.

FoghornLeghorn
September 11, 2011, 02:17 PM
The lock shouldn't even be an issue on anything other than a self defense gun. Nobody would choose a SA as for SD, would they?

Balrog
September 11, 2011, 03:03 PM
The lock shouldn't even be an issue on anything other than a self defense gun. Nobody would choose a SA as for SD, would they?

If it happens to be the only loaded gun handy, then yes I would use it for SD.

BCCL
September 11, 2011, 03:21 PM
Don't know. But you wouldn't have to ask that question if the lock was not there.

And you wouldn't have to ask about any number of smaller and more delicate parts in the same gun if they weren't either........................

You can find reports of things breaking on Rugers here and there, but I've yet to see a report of a problem with their internal lock, (show me one if you can) and from direct first hand experience I can tell you that you can't even tell it's there.

Your looking for something to worry about.

Balrog
September 11, 2011, 04:09 PM
And you wouldn't have to ask about any number of smaller and more delicate parts in the same gun if they weren't either........................

Some parts have to be on a gun to make it work. Some don't. If a necessary part breaks, then oh well, you are out of luck.

If an unnecessary part breaks and locks up your gun, then you are the victim of stupid engineering.

Maybe the Ruger lock will never have a single failure, and thus be the first thing ever devised by mortal men that can't be broken. If so, then Ruger has done something truly miraculous.

FoghornLeghorn
September 11, 2011, 06:01 PM
and thus be the first thing ever devised by mortal men that can't be broken. If so, then Ruger has done something truly miraculous.

Well then, instead of all this hand wringing drama, sell the thing and buy yourself a pre-lock Ruger SA.

BCCL
September 11, 2011, 07:53 PM
^Yup, whole lot easier than all this drama queen "maybewhatifcouldpossiblyitus"

Balrog
September 11, 2011, 07:54 PM
Well then, instead of all this hand wringing drama, sell the thing and buy yourself a pre-lock Ruger SA.

Actually other posters started the drama.

I asked two specific questions. How does it work, and can it be removed.

kozak6
September 11, 2011, 07:56 PM
How does the lock work?

BCCL
September 11, 2011, 08:07 PM
How does the lock work?

It's a simple system, your turn the key to the "locked" position and it blocks the main spring strut from moving, which prevents to gun from being cocked.

When "unlocked", no part of the lock is in contact with any parts of the guns action and the lock parts cannot move on their own without the key, so it's presence does not effect the action at all, it is impossible to tell just by cycling the action if the lock is present or not. (even in .44 magnum recoil, there have not been any reports of the locks breaking or engaging themselves.)

Now a lot to it, and virtually impossible for it to break or accidentally engage itself.

Ignore it, shoot 'em and enjoy! :)

Old Fuff
September 11, 2011, 09:06 PM
I'll admit I'm no fan of any internal lock, but this one doesn't bother me.

But that not the point. I'm tired of manufacturers that impose them on us, mostly to protect themselves from a lawsuit if someone (especially a child) gets ahold of an unsecured gun, and bottom-feeding tort lawyers come forth to blame the maker, not a careless owner.

Same reason we're stuck with "Don't shoot until you read the instruction book," stamped somewhere on the barrel.

Anyway I respect Balorg's right to have a choice. If he doesn't want the lock he should be able to get rid of it. The gun manufacturer couldn't care less, because if the lock is tampered with they are off the hook. If there is any additional liability transfered to Balorg he doesn't seem worried about it.

As someone mentioned, he can buy a pre-lock model, and that's something he should take into consideration. But whichever way he goes it's his decision.

CraigC
September 11, 2011, 10:03 PM
Obviously it's his decision. However, get rid of it just because you don't like it but don't manufacture reasons for doing it.

Hondo 60
September 11, 2011, 10:18 PM
The Ruger lock doesn't bother me, but then it's not on a SD/HD gun.

If my 1911 or SP101 had a lock...
No forget that, I wouldn't have bought them if they had a lock.

Balrog
September 11, 2011, 10:29 PM
However, get rid of it just because you don't like it but don't manufacture reasons for doing it.

How have I manufactured a reason?

Any mechanical device can break, can't it? Sometimes you just have to deal with it if it is an essential part, such as a broken firing pin. But if it not essential to the guns function and it breaks, then its a big problem.

pikid89
September 12, 2011, 02:06 AM
Any mechanical device can break, can't it?
This is a 100% accurate claim

however, some devices are designed so that IF/WHEN they fail, they fail in a way that will not impede the function of the greater system they are a part of...this seems to be how the Ruger ILS is

1911Tuner
September 12, 2011, 07:02 AM
Okay. Before this one goes into full-blown snark...

I don't care for the mandate-imposed locks, either, and there have been a few reports of them locking spontaneously on some guns. The SA Ruger isn't one of them, and after close examination and application of the ol' thinkin' cap...it doesn't appear that this particular one will self-engage under recoil. This one is about as passive as you can get. If it's a real concern, Fuff's epoxy suggestion will absolutely address it.

And, just FYI...We have a fairly large and active CAS interest at Piedmont Handgunner's Association, and the majority of the shooters adopted the New Vaqueros en masse. I know most of the guys and gals, and I haven't heard a single report of the lock failing.

Neither have I had anything to happen with any of the three lock-equipped Rugers that I own, and I shoot more than the average bear.

Although anything is possible, my call is that any concern with this particular lock is a non-issue. It's a well though out system that Ruger implemented so that they could meet the requirements of certain states...and then they not only hid it...they designed it so we'd have to actually make an extra effort to even use it. In order to lock the revolver, you really have to want to.

CraigC
September 12, 2011, 09:13 AM
Nobody would choose a SA as for SD, would they?
All the time.

BCCL
September 12, 2011, 10:26 AM
I strictly reserve my SA's for SD/HD to only days that end with a "y"............

Gary A
September 12, 2011, 11:50 AM
Nobody would choose a SA as for SD, would they?

You betcha! Lotsa folks do. More than you would think.

Tallinar
September 12, 2011, 02:05 PM
Have put thousands and thousands of rounds through several New Vaqueros and have never encountered any hint of an issue with the ILS.

1911Tuner summed up the facts quite nicely.

Oh, and my primary carry is a New Vaquero. As is my primary home defense (excluding shotgun). ;)

JERRY
September 12, 2011, 02:20 PM
the built in locks that need a tool to disengage are not needed in anyway for the gun to function properly, therefor i will not buy a gun with a built in lock for defensive purposes.

Gary A
September 12, 2011, 07:14 PM
I really dislike the Smith-Wesson lock and won't/haven't purchased one. I think the Taurus lock is a much better design but am not fond of Taurus revolvers. The Ruger lock is the best designed and causes me zero concern. The only real complaint against the Ruger locks that makes any sense to me is that the shorter mainspring is lighter and the hammer strike is lightened as a result. That is not a problem to me but understand that some re- loaders prefer a very authoritative hammer strike.

I rather like the somewhat lightened mainspring as long as the cartridge goes "boom", as all have done so far.

ArchAngelCD
September 13, 2011, 07:48 AM
I guess I didn't make an impression on anyone with my first post (Post #2) so I'll say it again.
No need to remove the lock. It is accessed by removing the grips and the default state is unlocked so if there is a malfunction of the lock it will not disable your handgun.

1911Tuner
September 13, 2011, 07:59 AM
Yup, Arch. It's really a non-issue, and highly unlikely that it would ever be affected by recoil because of the location. If there must be a lock on a handgun...this one is the one to have.

ArchAngelCD
September 15, 2011, 05:21 AM
Yup, Arch. It's really a non-issue, and highly unlikely that it would ever be affected by recoil because of the location. If there must be a lock on a handgun...this one is the one to have.
I completely agree. If the lock on the S&W products were like the Ruger lock we probably could have saved a Terra-byte of bandwidth and a few months of our Internet lives by not having to discuss it! lol

CraigC
September 15, 2011, 09:33 AM
If the lock on S&W's was as reliable and invisible as the Ruger lock, I would have a lot less money.

Well, if I could ignore the cheapened manufacturing methods anyway. ;)

gc70
September 18, 2011, 01:43 AM
Any mechanical device can break, can't it? Sometimes you just have to deal with it if it is an essential part, such as a broken firing pin. But if it not essential to the guns function and it breaks, then its a big problem.

Now, you not only have to look for a pre-lock Ruger, but one without a transfer bar.

Old Fuff
September 18, 2011, 12:43 PM
You miss the point:

In a Ruger revolver a broken transfer bar safety is a risk you have to take, because the gun won't function without it. An internal lock has nothing to do with the revolver's functioning, and therefore to what ever degree one presents a risk - no matter how small - it it still one you don't have to take.

CraigC
September 18, 2011, 01:00 PM
Or if you're so worried about a mechanical device like a firearm failing you can just do something else with your money. Like restore old cars, those never fail. :rolleyes:

gc70
September 18, 2011, 01:35 PM
Old Fluff, you missed my somewhat tongue-in-cheek point:

Ruger's original single actions did not have transfer bars. When Ruger changed to a transfer bar, I bet a lot of folks complained and refused to buy the "New Model" Rugers because the transfer bar was "not essential to the guns function and [if] it breaks, then its a big problem"

Old Fuff
September 18, 2011, 01:48 PM
Ah so.... :confused: :D

It's to early, and I need more coffee...

If you enjoyed reading about "Internal Lock on Ruger Vaquero?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!