Wheel Gun Internal Locks Poll

Would You Purchase A Revolver With An Internal Lock?

  • I would purchase a revolver with an internal lock.

    Votes: 110 47.8%

  • I would not purchase a revolver with an internal lock.

    Votes: 120 52.2%
  • Total voters
    230
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PolymathPioneer

Member.
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
106
Location
Montana
I was at a local sporting goods store in Helena Saturday to get some bore solvent and happened to see a S&W 500 with a short barrel, (while asking a question at the counter comparing copper removal products). The S&W had the internal lock, which is a turn off for me because IMO gun safety is better accomplished in other ways (I won't get started on that since it is not the reason for this post). I went online to see qualitatively what the failure rate of the S&W internal lock is currently compared to when I checked a few years ago (when I stopped buying new S&W wheel guns with internal locks). It appears failure of the internal lock on S&W revolvers is occurring more frequently, (presumably because there are more of them out there now), yet S&W current senior management sticks to their interesting position that they believe it helps with insurance rates (anti-gun appeasement IMO and appeasement is a slippery slope). I know the internal lock on the Smith & Wesson is covered extensively on THR yet I could not find any recent thread with a Poll on Internal Locks on revolvers. So here is one that is straight forward.

Postscript: The reason I was interested in a short barreled S&W 500 (or a short barrel 44 mag for that matter) is for something besides bear spray as backup for an obnoxious bear that decides to issue me a "writ" to take possesion of my elk during hunting season, (in the event that my M-70 fails). Failure of my M-70 is unlikely, yet like we always used to say "2 is 1 and 1 is none."

NOTE: Please review the posts in this thread for those that did not vote due to an alternate position, which they state in their post. The poll is kept brief since there were so many different possibilities, which I ultimately did not cover.
 
Last edited:
I'm not a big fan of unnecessary stuff on my guns. Exposed hammer firearms have no need for additional failure points, IMO. That's why I own older revolvers, because they are relatively simple and reliable.
 
I'd buy one with the lock. If I'm not mistaken, they can be removed by someone competent (job for a local gunsmith maybe?)
 
Oh no, a internal lock thread :uhoh:

I will not buy a revolver or semi-auto with an internal lock. I don't see the point in them. If the gun doesn't need to be ready for use then put it in a safe, or a lockable hard case. For me a IL is just some band-aid "feel good" excuse for proper firearms storage / supervision and more importantly it adds a unnecessary mechanism to a life defending tool.

I HAD three guns with internal locks, but strengthened my mental position and sold / traded all three.

Then I took it to the next level:

I HAD three Springfield XD's, which do not have internal locks, but I found out that Springfield 1911's did :scrutiny: Why stick a IL on some models but not others? I couldn't stand that kind of inconsistency and sold them too.

I still have my two old lock free S&W J-frames that I bought new in the early 1990's. I won't sell them even though S&W sticks locks on everything except their 1911 (or at least I don't think their 1911 had one initally). These two have been lightly used and should serve me nearly forever if I ever desire a revolver for SD / carry.

As far as I know there is not a new revolver made without a lock. I believe Ruger has one hidden under the grip of their LCR. I don't think I could find a "suitable" ie lock free new DA revolver made by a company that didn't stick lock on other models (not that I've actually looked for a new revolver lately).

My list of acceptable pistols includes Glock, Colt, Dan Wesson, Les Baer, Ed Brown, and Kel-Tec (the P3AT is pocket carry perfection).

I step off my IL soapbox.

Now, please don't start a thread in semi-autos on 1911's and how MIM is "good enough"
 
An internal locks on a revolver is like a banjo bolt in a sphincter.
 
Did not vote, as there isn't the following option:

"I own revolver(s) with the ILS, but have decided not to purchase any more with the ILS"

That's my personal choice, as I don't like what the ILS represents. Plus I prefer blued finishes and wood grips anyway. I won't bash anyone's choice to buy a revolver so equipped.
 
I think the internal lock is a nice option to have really. If I ever have kids, I like knowing that I have the ability to lock the firearm in a way they are not likely to understand until they are old enough to responsibly handle it. Yeah, I keep it in a safe, but its one more level of safety for those of us who may want it. Speaking of options though, it would be nice if they sold them without, for those of you who fear them for whatever reason.

Also, I have never read an actual first hand account of an internal lock freezing up. For all the hype, it seems to be a rare, if almost nonexistent occurrence.
 
I voted "I would buy one" because I have.

However, that does not prevent me from disabling it either. I do prefer pre-lock guns.

I HAD three Springfield XD's, which do not have internal locks, but I found out that Springfield 1911's did Why stick a IL on some models but not others? I couldn't stand that kind of inconsistency and sold them too.
Click to expand...

This is probably due to California requirements and the cost to put the gun on the list. One little change requires the company to pay the fee again.
 
I voted I would not buy one with an IL because I recently have bought one without it. It was a easy as asking my local gun store if they could order my particular s&w without the lock so I bought that one. I agree with cdw4me about locking up the gun when it is not in use. What better peace of mind than did I lock the gun or not?
 
Too many good used ones without the lock out there and I personally believe the older guns were built better than the newer over-priced, shrouded barrel, unobtanium frames and cylinders, mim parts, etc. etc etc.

I don't fault anyone for buying a new one but they just aren't for me.
 
I voted no, but I do own a SW revolver with one. I probably wouldn't buy another. It's mostly because I agree with Old Shooter.
 
I voted "no". I won't buy a (new) S&W, lock or not. I *did* buy a Springfield 1911A1 but I knew in advance how easy it was to swap out the mainspring housing. It's been my experience that the fewer parts a mechanical device has, the more inherently reliable it is.
Some silly lawyer-lock that I would NEVER engage is a waste of mechanical parts.
 
I wonder if the S&W ILS uses MIM parts? :D

My Ruger Blackhawk lock mechanism does, along with the keys.

Oh by the way I voted yes.
 
I have had both, I like being able to lock my displayed Vaquero, especially in case my grandson is around.Isn't it is a legal and liability issue in a few states? I also can verify that a Ruger GP100 comes only with an external lock. After all, with revolvers, the safety is between your ears.
 
I just can't bring myself to buy one with ILS.

So let's see, you're driving to work and thinking; Did I turn the sprinkler off? Did I unplug the iron? Did I lock the gun?
 
jad0110 said:
Did not vote, as there isn't the following option:

"I own revolver(s) with the ILS, but have decided not to purchase any more with the ILS"

That's my personal choice, as I don't like what the ILS represents. Plus I prefer blued finishes and wood grips anyway. I won't bash anyone's choice to buy a revolver so equipped.
Click to expand...
I understand and thanks for the write in. I thought of other questions but decided to keep it a simple "yes" or "no" poll because I couldn't cover all the different possibilities. I probably should have included a general "poll does not cover my response" option.
 
Just picked up a 625 with the IL, couldn't pass up the deal on it and it is one of my favorite revolvers. But I do own 2 other revolvers without the IL and prefer them not to have it, but as long as the gun functions flawlessly it doesn't really matter to me.
 
I never have bought one with the lock but it would not stop me from buying it. If it bothered me that much then I would just remove it.
 
As a matter if fact I turned down 6 or 7 revolvers in the last couple weeks because they had the lawyer lock.

The only revolver I have with a lawyer lock is a $4000 500 S&W. The only reason I have that is it was given to me.

Now don't you think that someone that defaces a gun like this with that ugly hole should be horse whipped.
Smith500.gif
 
I have and probably will again. It's no biggie with me. I have not heard of any complaints with the Taurus version.

As many S&Ws as there are out there, lock failures must be less than .05%. Does anyone personally know of a failure?
 
I currently have 20+ S & W revolvers in my collection. About half of them have the lock and not one has caused problems for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Zaydok Allen
  • Locked
  • Poll
Let's settle the S&W internal lock debate once and for all!!! Read instructions!
2 3 4
Replies
81
Views
14K
Sam1911
S
A
  • Locked
Internal Lock Options
Replies
11
Views
1K
orionengnr
O
S
  • Locked
Internal Lock on S&W 44 mag.
Replies
13
Views
1K
TexasRifleman
T
I
  • Locked
Smith & Wesson Internal Locks
Replies
2
Views
814
MrBorland
MrBorland
I
  • Locked
Internal lock failure? with photos
Replies
8
Views
913
heavyshooter
H
Back
Top