s&w lock

Do you carry a S&W revolver with the lock operational

  • I carry a S&W revolver with lock and it doesn't bother me

    Votes: 60 36.1%
  • I do not and would not carry a S&W revolver with a lock

    Votes: 95 57.2%
  • I carry a S&W revolver with a lock but I do worry about it sometimes

    Votes: 11 6.6%

  • Total voters
    166
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
The lock is a solution to a non-existent problem. It takes away part of the beauty of an otherwise fine revolver. It adds a useless element that can fail. Worst of all it insults my intelligence by implying I'm to stupid not to need it. The same thing applies to roll marks warning me of how stupid I might be.
 
I'm more concerned about weird looking, mismatched triggers and hammers.

oh boy, here you go with that again :rolleyes:

i wouldn't carry, nor do i or would i own one with a lock.
 
The lock is a solution to a non-existent problem. It takes away part of the beauty of an otherwise fine revolver. It adds a useless element that can fail.


Folks say the same about the series 80 Colt 1911s. Same solution there. Don't like 'em, don't buy 'em. From the sales of each since their inception, since both are almost impossible to find anywhere, even tho their manufacturers are working 24/7/365 producing them, one has to conclude they are not a problem to most folks. But since the number of "lock" threads is exceeded only by "Walmart" threads on most gun forums, it most certainly is a topic folks like to discuss.
 
I'm a bit confused by this remark. weird looking or mismatched in what way? On current or older revolvers or both?
He thinks color case hardened hammers and triggers are weird looking. Which is.....weird.
 
Personally, I do not trust the internal lock to not accidentally activate on its own so I refuse to carry one.
 
I've said this before and I'll keep saying it until everyone stops calling the ILS a "safety"!!! The ILS is a storage device, not a safety. The same thing can be achieved by using a trigger lock, the same lock that is issued with the revolver when it's sold. The main difference between the ILS and a trigger lock, when the trigger lock is removed it's gone and can't disable the gun. The ILS has a critical flaw, if it fails the default state is locked and it's proper operation depends upon a tiny little spring. That is a terrible idea when added to a handgun used for self defense.
I JUST CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE REASONING! :banghead:

BTW, if the lock is so good and there's no chance for it to self-engage why are all the handguns aimed at the LEO market void of any internal locks?
 
BTW, if the lock is so good and there's no chance for it to self-engage why are all the handguns aimed at the LEO market void of any internal locks?


You said it yourself. The IL is not a safety, it is a storage lock designed for the civilian market for homes with children and others ignorant of guns and their safe handling. LEO and Military is a completely different market. I thought the newest thing in law enforcement armament is the "smart" lock. A internal lock(OMG!:eek:) designed so that only the owner of the firearm can discharge it. It too is supposed to make the firearm safer in theory. I assume it too could have a failure and there will be folks that fear them like the plague. Again, if the S&W locks bother folks there are other options out there or they can be easily removed. Seems they are only a issue to those that want them to be an issue.
 
Seems they are only a issue to those that want them to be an issue.
As usual, those who don't mind the locks do not understand why anyone else would feel differently and disregard any reasons why. :rolleyes:
 
I work at a range and we have never seen any type of failure with any S&W locks. I have at about a dozen S&W's with a lock and worry about them as much as I do a firing pin breaking off in an older model.
 
I have at about a dozen S&W's with a lock and worry about them as much as I do a firing pin breaking off in an older model.

I wouldn't worry about the Internal Lock if I owned a S&W with one...probably just fine.

Thing is I just don't like the looks of the little key hole. :scrutiny:
 
As usual, those who don't mind the locks do not understand why anyone else would feel differently and disregard any reasons why. :rolleyes:


...and that is where you are wrong my friend. I certainly understand why folks don't like the lock. I also respect their opinion on it. I often wonder why they can't do the same. Instead they roll their eyes and chastise. Most of them are just as you stated...they do not understand why and disregard legitimate reasons why they really aren't a issue to other folk. Just the same ol' pot callin' the kettle black.

oh....I forgot.:rolleyes:
 
Just the same ol' pot callin' the kettle black.
Uh, no, not really. I made no comments to that effect. Doesn't matter one way or another to me and I make no judgements of those who choose differently than myself. Nor do I presume to tell anyone how to spend their money. I wish more folks would flock to the newer guns, more older ones for the rest of us. Sorry but your point is manufactured.
 
The Old Fuff would suggest that under the circumstances we live in the best of worlds. There is no reason for argument because any and all can buy whatever they want from within a wide selection of choices - both new and old, and within a substantial range of price points. No one (at least on this forum) can force their opinions on others, just advise.

What more can one ask and expect to get? ;)
 
After several thousand rounds through my model 21 with lock,.. It's flawless. Mines as smooth as any other Smith I've ever owned. and it shoots just great! I'm convinced that all the fuss and fury are just a "Tempest in a Tea Pot". I find the hole in the sideplate somewhat annoying but otherwise don't care.
NO I'll NEVER EVER use the lock, but I don't FUME and fuss all the time over it's existance.
 
For many of us its a bit like buying a new car with a dent in the left rear quarter panel, and you get to pay more for it. Not happening.
 
I do think it is very ugly and poorly designed. I do not mind it for sport only guns.

I am more concerned about the firing pin breaking from dry fire. I carried my 625 around for half a day before noticing there was no firing pin. I keep breaking them despite using using snap caps at all times. I don't have this problem with Rugers.

Michael Bane says he can repeat it with an alloy frame, heavy bullet and a hot charge. I have yet to push any of my S&W's to see if I can duplicate his results. Given that most of what I shoot is cheap 38 Special and 357 Magnum 125 grain JHP, it's not really something I think about too much.
 
Last edited:
After several thousand rounds through my model 21 with lock,.. It's flawless. Mines as smooth as any other Smith I've ever owned. and it shoots just great! I'm convinced that all the fuss and fury are just a "Tempest in a Tea Pot". I find the hole in the sideplate somewhat annoying but otherwise don't care.
NO I'll NEVER EVER use the lock, but I don't FUME and fuss all the time over it's existance.
It seems the main problem is being overlooked. There is a tiny little spring in the ILS that can easily become dislodged under heavy recoil. If that happens the gun is rendered useless because the default state of the system is locked. If it breaks the gun self-locks. There would be much less resistance if the default state was unlocked and that would be safer too.

The very light handguns in calibers that generate heavy recoil are susceptible to self-locking. No matter how many rounds you shoot prior to a failure if just one more round causes a failure do you really want to take a chance the gun will fail when it could cost you or someone you love their life? It's a poorly thought out system that's dangerous, all in the name of calming the anti-gun crowd.
 
i didn't vote cuz there wasn't a "wouldn't buy a S&W with a IL" option, the only S&W's that catch my eye are the X-frames, yes you can remove the IL on them, but i not going to pay $1K+ for a wheelgun and then pay to have IL removed, and i have read about instances where the IL was engaged in the X-frames from the massive recoil of 460/500 S&W, maybe the service size and light framed wheelguns don't have that problem, but i'm not interested in newer production J,K,L and N frames.
 
Last edited:
There is no reason for argument because any and all can buy whatever they want from within a wide selection of choices - both new and old, and within a substantial range of price points.

Exactly what I tried to say in two of my previous posts in this thread.....



Folks say the same about the series 80 Colt 1911s. Same solution there. Don't like 'em, don't buy 'em.


Again, if the S&W locks bother folks there are other options out there or they can be easily removed.

This is why, to me, the locks are a non issue. Quite simple. As you said.....no body is forcing their opinions on folks, nor is anybody forcing them to buy firearms with features they don't want. There are just too many other options out there to make a big deal outta it. Again, no different than the series 80 system on some Colt 1911's. Don't like 'em, buy something else or remove 'em. Same goes for stainless guns. Many folks despise the way they look and would never own one because of their non-traditional look(i.e. Hilary hole?).....but one doesn't see endless negative threads on multiple forums about them. You don't see the same old trolls come out everytime S&W is mentioned in a post, beating their chest and exclaiming they'll never buy a new one till they quit makin' 'em in stainless. Why? Simple. Because of the other options out there......it is a non issue.

I'm guessin' it must just about be time for the MIM bashers to come out to play now, eh?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top