Mosin77
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2019
- Messages
- 1,590
This. Exactly.
686-6 vs no lock 686
- Thread starter gunlaw
- Start date
- Status
This. Exactly.
UncleEd
Member
SwampWolf,
But are the parts in the dash-5 machined or was that
during a transitional time when MIM was taking over?
I'm thinking hammer and trigger.
But are the parts in the dash-5 machined or was that
during a transitional time when MIM was taking over?
I'm thinking hammer and trigger.
Call up S&W and argue with them. I did, I want the hammer mounted firing pin, but that is not coming back.
The frame mounted firing pin was about the time the lock was introduced, but I don't have any records to indicate when modifications were introduced into production.
That is correct. The MacPherson strut displaced the old strut system for cars in the 1970's. The only advantage of the MacPherson strut, in my opinion, is that it is cheaper to make and install on a production line. For the home mechanic, it was easy to replace the old shock absorber, two bolts, and the thing was off. The MacPherson strut requires a damn spring compressor and is dangerous as hell to remove. A local tire store told me about the top bolt shearing on a MacPherson strut, and the thing went through one of their sliding bay doors! "Progress" all depends on who benefits, and what becomes standard often is more about increasing profit for the manufacturer.
However a hammer mounted firing pin was very common in all sorts of revolvers, not only American, but European.
This is one of those Webleys butchered to 45 ACP. Hammer mounted firing pin.
It is a great combat revolver, never dismiss anything the British did about service weapons.
Jim Watson
Member
And look at the firing pin on a gas seal Nagant.
I think MIM and its consequences came in at S&W before the lock.
I think MIM and its consequences came in at S&W before the lock.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
earlthegoat2
Member
This is one way of looking at it and I do not disagree.
To add, I was working in the firearms industry when the transition to frame mounted firing pins and then locks came about. My perception is that this signified a point in time when S&W stopped caring about its customers and set a modern precedent of gun companies folding to politicians. The guns just felt cheaper in the hand at that time as well. A 642 felt like a Taurus but made from chinesium. That is still something I perceive to this day. S&W is little more than Taurus with better customer service.
I used to be very against the lock but now I don’t worry too much about it. However.....
I do like S&W revolvers a lot but I have never purchased one new and have never had one with the lock. That is how much I care about them as a company.
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
The K and L-frames are taller between the cylinder release and the machined cutout for the hammer, to provide room for the lock mechanism. It gives them a different shape which some, myself included, do not find attractive. I suppose it might also increase weight by a tiny amount as well.
The N-frames are unchanged from the classic profile because they were already big enough to accommodate the lock without modification.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
Thank you. I did not know that. I will have to check that out. I don’t have a K Frame with the lock to compare.
mcb
Member
The Webley is probably my favorite revolvers, I have two Webleys, and I am lucky enough that my very recently acquired Mark VI is unshaved. But despite my admiration of the Webley I have no delusion that the hammer mounted firing pin is better than the frame mounted. Spent too many years shooting N-frames of both types in USPSA competition and the differences though small were noticeable and in favor of the frame mounted. The hammer mounted firing pin offers no advantage to the frame mounted and has one or two liabilities the frame mounted does not. The biggest one being how easy it is to change a frame mounted firing pin verses a hammer mounted.
ETA: I helped a friend replace a frame mounted firing pin at a match, at the safety table, using a mult-tool. Try that trick with a hammer mounted firing pin.
Last edited:
Speedo66
Member
I don't recall if the cylinder release shape changed only because of the lock hole, but I'm not a fan of the change, prefer the look of older design.
Of course the proponents of the flat design release probably felt the same.... lol
Of course the proponents of the flat design release probably felt the same.... lol
My 686-4 has the new cylinder release but no lock. It also has the hammer mounted firing pin. I like my revolver a lot and wish old age hadn't caught up with me quite so quick...shakey hands and blurey eyes.
Mine does have the factory laser engraving that I also like.
Mine does have the factory laser engraving that I also like.
Last edited:
mcb
Member
The lock always makes me chuckle as people go back and for about it. I'll spare the forum sharing my opinion again...
...BUT this is too funny and applicable to the thread to not share.
A replacement cylinder release that covers up that lock hole.... (if you want one look here: https://tromix.com/product/smith-wesson-extended-cylinder-release-latch/)
...BUT this is too funny and applicable to the thread to not share.
A replacement cylinder release that covers up that lock hole.... (if you want one look here: https://tromix.com/product/smith-wesson-extended-cylinder-release-latch/)
ontarget
Member
^^love it^^
MIM doesn't bother me, it works. If you owned a business that needed highly skilled labor, and that labor pool was retiring and dying out, you'd find less expensive ways to make widgets, too. That's one reason we don't build houses out of brick any more. I don't mean brick veneer, I mean actual load-bearing double-wythe brick.
The lock has been known to lock up randomly making the gun inoperable.
Folks go for a revolver for the perceived ability to fire six (or five or eight etc) "for sure ".
The lock is a failure point. On some models, especially ultra lights, they have disabled the gun under recoil by activating themselves and locking the gun.
I think the general Zeitgeist of the lock bothers us gun folk because it was capitulation to inane gun safety initiatives under the Clinton administration (hence "Hillary hole " ).
Given the choice I see no need for the lock and would choose a model without the "feature ". Smith would be very wise to offer EVERY model with the option of no lock, as they do with the 642.
The lock is a failure point. On some models, especially ultra lights, they have disabled the gun under recoil by activating themselves and locking the gun.
I think the general Zeitgeist of the lock bothers us gun folk because it was capitulation to inane gun safety initiatives under the Clinton administration (hence "Hillary hole " ).
Given the choice I see no need for the lock and would choose a model without the "feature ". Smith would be very wise to offer EVERY model with the option of no lock, as they do with the 642.
mcb
Member
First the number of well document cases of unmolested S&W revolvers having the lock malfunction could be counted without taking one's shoes off.
Second, removing the lock is easy and reversible to restore it to factory condition.
I don't seek out the lock but if I found a S&W configure exactly how I wanted it and it had the lock I would still buy it.
Second, removing the lock is easy and reversible to restore it to factory condition.
I don't seek out the lock but if I found a S&W configure exactly how I wanted it and it had the lock I would still buy it.
The frame profile from the bottom of the rear sight to the knuckle where grip frame starts. The curve is different. Doesn't bother me
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
I am not trying to start an argument. Just stating my experience.
I owned a model 60 Pro with the lock. The model 60 Pro is a J frame 5 shot .357 Magnum revolver. The weight of that revolver is 23 ounces. I fired LOTS of full power 125 and 158 grain factory .357 Magnum ammo through that gun and the lock never activated. It was not modified or tampered with. I set it and unset it numerous times just to see if that would cause it to set on firing of magnum loads. It always stayed deactivated.
Now, that’s not to say that others didn’t have issues. I am just saying my guns have not.
I sold that 60 Pro for other issues.
I also have a 327 NG, a 63 and recently acquired a model 25.. I haven’t had any issues with the locks in those either.
The 327 NG is my bedroom gun. I trust it 100%
ApacheCoTodd
member
If the lock-monsters are keeping you up at night, just remove the protrusion pointed to here by my firing pin.
It engages here (pointed) on the hammer. The mystery lock-ups heard about are all-but, if in fact not completely, impossible with an un-messed with unit.
Hopefully this will allow some to sleep soundly knowing that scary tales of guns turned to stones - while likely as unicor-ness monsters - can be altogether avoided with some judicious grinding of the protrusion and maybe a bit of stoning.
Now, as to any MIM-mares or casterrors... Can't help you with those.
Todd.
It engages here (pointed) on the hammer. The mystery lock-ups heard about are all-but, if in fact not completely, impossible with an un-messed with unit.
Hopefully this will allow some to sleep soundly knowing that scary tales of guns turned to stones - while likely as unicor-ness monsters - can be altogether avoided with some judicious grinding of the protrusion and maybe a bit of stoning.
Now, as to any MIM-mares or casterrors... Can't help you with those.
Todd.
If I'm wanting a collectable S&W revolver, I Iook for one of the pre-lock versions.
If I want a shooter or something not available in pre-lock model versions, the lock models are ok.
That is what floats my boat.
Your boat floater may be different.
I do not have any problem MIM parts but I feel the older S&W revolvers are better fitted than the current manufacture models. They all shoot better than I can.
If I want a shooter or something not available in pre-lock model versions, the lock models are ok.
That is what floats my boat.
Your boat floater may be different.
I do not have any problem MIM parts but I feel the older S&W revolvers are better fitted than the current manufacture models. They all shoot better than I can.
Last edited:
DeepSouth
Random Guy
I’m not really big on the lock, but I don’t care much about it either way. The main thing I want to say I have personally had hundreds, maybe thousands, of malfunctions with handguns in my life, of those zero have been documented.
The point is just because it’s not well documented doesn’t mean it’s not a thing that happens.
Also I don’t think I know anyone personally that’s had a lock malfunction, at least that they’ve told me about, so I’m not inclined to believe it’s a big deal.
personally I think their are two groups, those that over state lock malfunctions, and those that understate them.
This is based on zero data, frankly it’s based more on my knowledge and observations of human behavior than anything else.
- Status
