Pat Riot
Contributing Member
So how exactly do you understate something that has never happened?
686-6 vs no lock 686
- Thread starter gunlaw
- Start date
- Status
So how exactly do you understate something that has never happened?
mcb
Member
The point of "well documented" was if it is a design flaw then you should be able to create a specific set of circumstances that cause it to fail reliably. No one has been able to identify the conditions under which you can predict a lock failure with any reliability. It's a mechanical device and there will no doubt be occasional failures and bad parts but the design is not flawed or we would have one or more well document failure modes.
mcb
Member
Yes, MIM has come a very long way. The firearms industry as a whole was a very early adopter of the tech and thus the firearms customers suffered through some of the early growing pains of both the technology and the engineers learning to use the fledgling technology. That hurt MIM's perception with a whole generation of firearms owners. But at this point MIM technology and the use of the MIM technology is rapidly approaching a mature tech. So much so that S&W has made barrels for the 380 Shield from MIM with no post sintering machining, complete net shape.
Exactly, the lock has failed but I'm sure that is a remote chance, I won't buy a lock gun on principle.
So how exactly do you understate something that has never happened?
Google is your friend:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-re...562864-s-w-lock-failure-finally-happened.html
Gladius
Member
1. Regarding the lock: I did have a "lock" gun, a 29-8. Shot a couple hundred rounds out of it, magnums and specials. Didn't have a problem with it (I did eventually sell it, and don't really miss it, and the lock itself wasn't "the" reason but it was one of a series of reasons). Now, I do have a trusted friend who did have a lock failure with a scandium-frame .357, so I know failures happen, even if they're rare. I do not like the lock (I think it's unattractive and it's symbolic of Smith's capitulation to the gun haters) and I seek to avoid it.
2. Regarding MIM: not a fan, but also not too concerned about it, either. I have one post-MIM/pre-lock revolver (a 625 Mountain gun) and it's one of my favorites. I do prefer the older forged parts, but for me it's simply a matter of taste. That being said, I wouldn't reject an MIM gun. MIM is here to stay, like it or not.
3. Regarding the frame-mounted firing pin: this is one of the few true improvements S&W has made (and I love the older guns with the hammer-mounted pins!). The hammer-mounted pin has always been a weak point, in my opinion (and yes, I have broken a hammer-mounted pin, although it took a lot of cycles -- both live and dry fire -- to do it). Most of my Smiths are the older guns with the hammer-mounted pin; it's one of those endearing quirks for me, even if the frame-mounted pin is better.
4. Regarding fit and finish: In terms of fit and finish, I feel the older guns are the definite winners here. Fit and finish are superior to what Smith is currently putting out -- especially in terms of the carbon steel-blued guns. I have said it before, I will say it again: modern S&W bluing SUCKS (yelling intentionally). It is weak and ugly. My hands do not help in this regard -- they seem to be acidic and they eat finishes. Within a month, my hands devoured the finish on the backstrap of the aforementioned 29-8, leaving it a mottled gray. I do not have this problem with my older blued Smiths. Plus, the older bluing is much more attractive. If I were to get another modern Smith, it would have to be stainless.
2. Regarding MIM: not a fan, but also not too concerned about it, either. I have one post-MIM/pre-lock revolver (a 625 Mountain gun) and it's one of my favorites. I do prefer the older forged parts, but for me it's simply a matter of taste. That being said, I wouldn't reject an MIM gun. MIM is here to stay, like it or not.
3. Regarding the frame-mounted firing pin: this is one of the few true improvements S&W has made (and I love the older guns with the hammer-mounted pins!). The hammer-mounted pin has always been a weak point, in my opinion (and yes, I have broken a hammer-mounted pin, although it took a lot of cycles -- both live and dry fire -- to do it). Most of my Smiths are the older guns with the hammer-mounted pin; it's one of those endearing quirks for me, even if the frame-mounted pin is better.
4. Regarding fit and finish: In terms of fit and finish, I feel the older guns are the definite winners here. Fit and finish are superior to what Smith is currently putting out -- especially in terms of the carbon steel-blued guns. I have said it before, I will say it again: modern S&W bluing SUCKS (yelling intentionally). It is weak and ugly. My hands do not help in this regard -- they seem to be acidic and they eat finishes. Within a month, my hands devoured the finish on the backstrap of the aforementioned 29-8, leaving it a mottled gray. I do not have this problem with my older blued Smiths. Plus, the older bluing is much more attractive. If I were to get another modern Smith, it would have to be stainless.
More than 1 person has posted here saying "The lock has failed" or something to that effect. Not one says it happened to them personally, or even that they saw it happen to another shooter. So where did they come up with that idea? I guess if some anonymous poster on the internet says their cousin Vinny said his brothers, father in laws, Uncle claimed it happened to him, it has to be true.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
I was talking about MY experience. Besides, I do not exaggerate one way or the other in regards to my guns like a lot of folks.
I've never needed a gun for self defense either, but that doesn't mean I don't carry.
Pat Riot
Contributing Member
I guess perhaps I am missing your point.
That’s okay though.
My apologies to the OP for my sidetracking your thread.
Another good thread that went south.
Myself, I own/carry a 586 l-comp and fill it with what I consider hot/full house loads. It has a 2 1/2" bbl with a comped 3" bbl shroud. I'm getting 1200fps+ with a 170gr bullet.
Never had any issues with the lock but I'm more than willing to have the the nay sayers drop buy with their catchers mitts and I'll toss them lead to catch until the lock fails. If I were a gambling man I'd put my $$$ on running out of lead/primers/powder before that lock fails.
Myself, I own/carry a 586 l-comp and fill it with what I consider hot/full house loads. It has a 2 1/2" bbl with a comped 3" bbl shroud. I'm getting 1200fps+ with a 170gr bullet.
Never had any issues with the lock but I'm more than willing to have the the nay sayers drop buy with their catchers mitts and I'll toss them lead to catch until the lock fails. If I were a gambling man I'd put my $$$ on running out of lead/primers/powder before that lock fails.
Folks that are posting in favor of the lock, are you saying given the choice you would opt for the lock?
You like this feature? If so, why? Any pro-lockers (heh) actually use the key option? I can detail why I don't like, need, or want it, and I can find many reports (and some documented from gun writers) of the locks failing. Its rare, but it happens. High round counts powerful loads, and lighter frames seem to be factors. Additionally, manipulation of the lock on/off frequently seems to loosen it up and increase the chance of it activating. Also heard of harsh impact activating it. A likely scenario in street self defense.
I'm listing these so folks using lock models for self defense are aware.
I wish there was an option on every model to get it without the lock. I want to eliminate a possible point of failure that offers me nothing in return.
(that said, a newer "lock" model does live in my night stand. It runs well and if i have to use it its replacable ...well... In normal times. Even so I think it sucks, it CAN fail, and imo serves no earthly purpose)
You like this feature? If so, why? Any pro-lockers (heh) actually use the key option? I can detail why I don't like, need, or want it, and I can find many reports (and some documented from gun writers) of the locks failing. Its rare, but it happens. High round counts powerful loads, and lighter frames seem to be factors. Additionally, manipulation of the lock on/off frequently seems to loosen it up and increase the chance of it activating. Also heard of harsh impact activating it. A likely scenario in street self defense.
I'm listing these so folks using lock models for self defense are aware.
I wish there was an option on every model to get it without the lock. I want to eliminate a possible point of failure that offers me nothing in return.
(that said, a newer "lock" model does live in my night stand. It runs well and if i have to use it its replacable ...well... In normal times. Even so I think it sucks, it CAN fail, and imo serves no earthly purpose)
mcb
Member
Assuming I didn't miss it, I don't think anyone in this thread has posted that they like or desire the locked versions over non-locked versions. But some of us do not see the lock as deal breaker. It is too easy to remove the lock if one is worried about its potential failure.
The lock is never going away while the current company owns S&W. The company that invented that lock bought S&W some years ago. The lock is here to stay at least until new ownership takes over S&W.
mcb
Member
Personally for a SD gun if I was worried I would simply remove the lock, plug the hole, and away I would go. That said you can still buy J-frames without the lock (my CCW is a 442 Moonclip without the lock). If it's bigger than a J-frame I am carrying a semi-auto with a lot more capacity for the weight than the larger K, L, & N frames.
A bud at the range had the S&W lock fail on his S&W Airweight. It jammed the action shut. He sent it back to S&W, they fixed it, but he lost confidence in the pistol. He traded it in. At the time we were talking, he pulled out his Taurus snubbie and was bragging on that.
These failures happen
These failures happen
Rockrivr1
Member
I'm a huge S&W revolver fan and have a number of them both pre lock and with lock. While I've heard people say they've had lock problems I personally have never experienced any issue and a number of my S&Ws with a lock have several thousand rounds through them with no issue. I'm not worried about it and have no problem carrying a S&W with a lock on it..
chicharrones
needs more ammo
For some reason the lock bothers me less than the two piece barrel that comes on revolver models that used to have one piece barrels.
mcb
Member
But very few complain about the fact that nearly all Dan Wesson sand Korth revolvers use two peice barrels...
SwampWolf
Member
Ever hear of Mr. Murphy?
- Status
