Anyone with new 642 have issues with the internal lock?
- Thread starter Frank1991
- Start date
- Status
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
Frankly I have never heard a single person that had trouble with these locks.
No, I don't like them. That was done by the previous S&W ownership and it makes me sick. But, they are there and we're stuck with them it seems.
I have several revos with these locks, and although I don't actually use the locks for anything, they have never caused any problems for me or anyone I've ever read about.
Go ask over a the Smith and Wesson forums, you'll get the same answer.
I'd be very interested in hearing of someone that actually had these things cause problems.
They may be an abomination, but they seem well designed.
No, I don't like them. That was done by the previous S&W ownership and it makes me sick. But, they are there and we're stuck with them it seems.
I have several revos with these locks, and although I don't actually use the locks for anything, they have never caused any problems for me or anyone I've ever read about.
Go ask over a the Smith and Wesson forums, you'll get the same answer.
I'd be very interested in hearing of someone that actually had these things cause problems.
They may be an abomination, but they seem well designed.
m0ntels
Member
No probs short of it being a bit ugly. They at least could have tried to make the color of the metals match...well...at least as close as the rest of the parts on it.
Randy
Randy
DMK
Member
I forgot it was there on mine until you just reminded me. <shrug>
EddieCoyle
Member
DMK said:
+1
Mulliga
Member
No. I don't like them and what they represent, but it seems we're stuck with them, especially if you want some of the newer goodies S&W is making these days (S&W 500, the Airlites, etc.). Other revolver companies are just as "bad" (Taurus obviously has locks, and Ruger doesn't even make a pocket .38), so no point singling out S&W. The lock works fine (I tested it once) and malfunctions, while not unheard of, are rare.
If it really bothers you, you can disable the lock yourself.
If it really bothers you, you can disable the lock yourself.
Master Blaster
Member
I have fired about 1500 rounds out of mine, the only problem I have had is Corbons 110 grain +P ammo jumps its crimp when I fire it in my 642. Corbon told me its normal
I dont buy any corbon ammo and threw away the box I had, problem solved.
All other types of ammo work fine both factory and handloads.
I carry it every day pretty much for the last 2.5 years.
The lock has never engaged itself or interferred with the function of the gun in any way.
I dont buy any corbon ammo and threw away the box I had, problem solved. All other types of ammo work fine both factory and handloads.
I carry it every day pretty much for the last 2.5 years.
The lock has never engaged itself or interferred with the function of the gun in any way.
Yes, there have been documented problems. A week or two ago there was a thread on this forum where the person posting it related how he'd just attended a training school covering "snubby-shooting," and while there one of the student's new lockable S&W revolvers locked up in the middle of a string of fire. 
I don't think this sort of thing is common, but it has happened enough so that I STRONGY prefer the older guns without a lock.
The purpose of the lock is to make the gun-banners in places like California happy. Such people have zip influence on my buying habits.
Edited to add: When I buy a gun to use, I seldom pay the price for one that's new, and in the box. These are for collectors seeking safe-queens. What I want is one that costs much less, and is just nicely broken in.
I don't think this sort of thing is common, but it has happened enough so that I STRONGY prefer the older guns without a lock.
The purpose of the lock is to make the gun-banners in places like California happy. Such people have zip influence on my buying habits.
Edited to add: When I buy a gun to use, I seldom pay the price for one that's new, and in the box. These are for collectors seeking safe-queens. What I want is one that costs much less, and is just nicely broken in.
Old Fuff said:Yes, there have been documented problems. A week or two ago there was a thread on this forum where the person posting it related how he'd just attended a training school covering "snubby-shooting," and while there one of the student's new lockable S&W revolvers locked up in the middle of a string of fire.
I don't think this sort of thing is common, but it has happened enough so that I STRONGY prefer the older guns without a lock.
The purpose of the lock is to make the gun-banners in places like California happy. Such people have zip influence on my buying habits.
In the Jan/'Feb '05 issue of American Handgunner (I think that was the issue) there were two documented cases of internal lock failure. They have been reported on the S&W Forum also. That's exactly why i "unlocked" my 642 and my 66. Anything mechinical can and will fail.
The internal locks have nothing to do with California laws. The decision was made by S&W after they lost a law suite. And it was not in California.
I used to have the link to both articals but lost them when my grandaughter crashed my computer. Does any one have those links?
DHart
Member
Many who own S&W's with the lock will pooh-pooh the issue and pretend it isn't there because they personally haven't experienced a problem yet. That's like not being concerned about crashing your car because you haven't had a car crash, yet. Some people state that there is no problem because they don't "use" the lock on their gun. Whether you use it or not has no bearing on the possibility of a problem. Even if you don't use it, you'd better carry the key with you so you can unlock it if it locks up on you inadvertantly.
Fact is, if you do your research, you'll find numerous first hand accounts of problems with the lock self-activating during firing (especially the small, lightweight guns), or upon dropping the gun. You could drop your gun during a scuffle and if you're lucky enough to be able to pick it up again, it may not fire. It's not my place or responsibility to do the research for you, but I've done a lot of it and seen more than enough evidence to know that if you have a S&W with the lock, there is most certainly the possibility you will experience the gun locking up when you need it most. It can and does happen, whether some people deny it or not.
Two things I know for sure:
1) If you have a S&W with the built-in lock, there is the possibility your gun will fail you because of the presence of the lock.
2) If you have a S&W which does not have a built-in lock, there is NO possibility, whatsoever, that your gun will fail you due to a lock-mechanism issue.
For target or competition use, the presence of the lock doesn't pose a risk to the shooter, but I have no intention of buying a S&W with the lock and if I ever did... it would be one revolver I would never choose for defense use. With all of the excellent condition and LNIB pre-lock Smiths available for sale, I have no need to buy a Smith with the lock. And I believe the Smiths I buy without locks will hold value or appreciate more and be more marketable than similar Smith models which do have locks.
Fact is, if you do your research, you'll find numerous first hand accounts of problems with the lock self-activating during firing (especially the small, lightweight guns), or upon dropping the gun. You could drop your gun during a scuffle and if you're lucky enough to be able to pick it up again, it may not fire. It's not my place or responsibility to do the research for you, but I've done a lot of it and seen more than enough evidence to know that if you have a S&W with the lock, there is most certainly the possibility you will experience the gun locking up when you need it most. It can and does happen, whether some people deny it or not.
Two things I know for sure:
1) If you have a S&W with the built-in lock, there is the possibility your gun will fail you because of the presence of the lock.
2) If you have a S&W which does not have a built-in lock, there is NO possibility, whatsoever, that your gun will fail you due to a lock-mechanism issue.
For target or competition use, the presence of the lock doesn't pose a risk to the shooter, but I have no intention of buying a S&W with the lock and if I ever did... it would be one revolver I would never choose for defense use. With all of the excellent condition and LNIB pre-lock Smiths available for sale, I have no need to buy a Smith with the lock. And I believe the Smiths I buy without locks will hold value or appreciate more and be more marketable than similar Smith models which do have locks.
Dollar An Hour
Member
I found a dealer in town with a pre-lock Centennial 642. It's not much less than a new Centennial, but I like the idea of no lock, and maybe, just maybe it's trigger is better than the new heavy triggers. I think I'll go have a look.
DHart
Member
Dollar.... I think the nice condition pre-locks Smiths should actually sell for more than the new ones! But I'm elated that they sell for less money than a new gun... and think about this, a year or two from now, which gun will be more desireable and possibly hold it's value better, the used pre-lock Smith you pay less for now, or the new one with a lock that you pay more for now?
tomkatz
Member
I agree with DHart on this, and I would pay as much or more for an older smith in nice shape over a lock model.....I have been able to find very low round count pre-locks for good prices, but that will no doubt end as the pool of practically unfired older guns starts to dry up......
Now that I think about it, maybe I need a couple more ....
.....tom
Now that I think about it, maybe I need a couple more
.........tom
DHart said:
DHart: I have done some research and found that this is such a rare occurrance. Most people that respond to these "internal lock" threads say that they have shot several rounds without an issue. I am sure that it happens, but I would imagine that it is less than 1%. I called Smith and spoke to one of their reps and he told me that it is suspected that a lot of the reports that they get of guns locking up (and he said that it is a very very rare report) are non factual and an attempt to get Smith to take the lock off. I would rather have a gun without the lock, but pre lock guns are not always easy to find. Also, there are so many other factors that can cause your gun to malfunction as no firearm is going to fire 100% of the time. I am now under the thinking that if it has a lock to just ignore it. If I can fire 500 rounds from the gun without a lockup then chances are that I am going to be ok.
Stainz
Member
"Help, the sky is falling!" I think I'll buy some meteorite insurance... the probability of being beaned by one is greater than a 'lock' failure. And, what about my new car... if it's door lock fails, or the electronic key's battery fails, will I have to stay in the car? How about steering wheel lock failures? Well, I do seem to be 'revolving' in circles these days... I do like my new Jeep... but not THAT much - I sure hope it's lock doesn't fail.
Most lock failure reports seem to be second/third hand tales of the same failure. Sometimes, the stories are repeated with good intentions. Sometimes, they are embellished... artistic license being a requirement for such authorship. When I hear of real problems, I'll reconsider it's effectiveness. Until then, at least to me, it is a non-issue. Until then, I feel that it is, to quote DesCartes, a 'necessary evil'. To avoid such-equipped S&W's is to never enjoy the many newer offerings from S&W - totally unacceptable to me. I am glad that some folks love the older guns... grab up all of the B-P era S&W's you can... their QC was so poor, they likely will have functional problems anyway. Spares do fortunately exist, of course. Seriously, whatever floats your boat on older purchases. I like buying fewer new pieces... that work... and their life long warranty. My keys are in the boxes.
For real world worries, how about ammo quality? Commercial ammo has finite problems... and, I have loaded dysfunctional primers... and, yes, even a 'poof' load without powder! I hedge my bets re ammo for PD - it's the only commercial ammo I buy.
Do some real research re the 'Lock' failures - particularly for real world, and first person, reports.
Stainz
Most lock failure reports seem to be second/third hand tales of the same failure. Sometimes, the stories are repeated with good intentions. Sometimes, they are embellished... artistic license being a requirement for such authorship. When I hear of real problems, I'll reconsider it's effectiveness. Until then, at least to me, it is a non-issue. Until then, I feel that it is, to quote DesCartes, a 'necessary evil'. To avoid such-equipped S&W's is to never enjoy the many newer offerings from S&W - totally unacceptable to me. I am glad that some folks love the older guns... grab up all of the B-P era S&W's you can... their QC was so poor, they likely will have functional problems anyway. Spares do fortunately exist, of course. Seriously, whatever floats your boat on older purchases. I like buying fewer new pieces... that work... and their life long warranty. My keys are in the boxes.
For real world worries, how about ammo quality? Commercial ammo has finite problems... and, I have loaded dysfunctional primers... and, yes, even a 'poof' load without powder! I hedge my bets re ammo for PD - it's the only commercial ammo I buy.
Do some real research re the 'Lock' failures - particularly for real world, and first person, reports.
Stainz
Pretty well covers the situation. Those that are satisfied that they're is nothing to worry about ... well they won't worry, and frankly trouble probably won't strike ... but if it does ...
Those that are concerned have an easy option - buy a pre-lock revolver. While they are at it they'll get real-steel lockwork and one-piece barrels (sometimes even pinned). There is also a wider choice of blued vs. stainless models for those that prefer high-carbon steel.
It boils down to a matter of choice, and at least right now there are plenty of options.
DHart
Member
Is it any coincidence that people who have purchased new S&W's with the locks are the most vocal to dismiss any problems and sweep reports of problems away like they are false... demanding concrete proof before they are willing to acknowledge that the locks are a source of malfunctions for some people... thinking that because they haven't experienced a problem yet themselves that there is nothing to be concerned about?
I'll be the first to say that the "chances are" that you won't have a problem with the built-in lock. But why take the "chance"? If you buy a pre-lock S&W (any built before about the year 2000) you will side step the lock issue entirely! What a simple solution to avoiding any lock-related problems entirely.
For those who do have guns with the built-in locking mechanism, even if you don't use the lock, you'd better carry the key with you, because they can and do lock-up on their own while being fired or if dropped and if you don't have the key with you, you'd be stuck with a locked gun, unless perhaps you could jimme the lock to unlock again.
There are so many fine quality pre-lock S&W's out there available for sale that unless you have to have a 500 ( ) you can have a pre-lock Smith of better quality than any of the new ones. Those who generalize that pre-lock Smiths are of poor quality really erode their own credibility. You can fine sub-par guns from any maker, any era, and "series"... and great ones as well. The majority of S&W revolvers throughout the history of the company are of superb quality. Of course some samples aren't as good as the best... so what else is new? There are plenty of good examples from every time period you can name... go to the S&W forum and ask those who own them.
For those who want to pull their heads out of the sand, there are plenty of first-person, factual accounts. If you want to find them, you can. They're all over the place. But if you just want to live in denial, that's ok too. Your guns, your life, do as you like.
A quick search brought up three first hand accounts on the S&W forum alone, which is most certainly a small portion of actual occurrences, considering how few people from the vast sea of guns owners actually post on these forums.
=========
45WheelGun on the S&W Forum:
I am one of the three who have had their lock fail. Mine was also a lock spring, as verified by S&W.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Erich from Albuquerque, NM, member of the S&W Forum and others:
I actually own a S&W model 60-15 3" with an idiot lock that has caused me trouble. When I oafishly knocked the unloaded gun from a countertop to the hardwood floor, the lock's "flag" mechanism (the part that has the little tit that engages the hammer itself and locks the hammer up) got a bit crossways in its slot and jammed the thing up tight as a drum. Since I was home and not engaged in a fight with a felon, I was able to dig the "key" out of the box in the safe and set it to right by fully engaging the lock and then disengaging it.
Had I not been home, I would have been holding a fairly small inert piece of steel. Even if I had the "key" on me, pulling out a keyring and trying to find an especially small one is not on my dance chart if I'm struggling and in need of my self-defense gun.
So . . . based on my experience, I would strongly advise you to look around until you found something without the idiot lock. You're too nice a guy to have to deal with such potentially dangerous hassles.
More from Erich
Posted by Erich (Member # 2536) on 02-18-2005 01:52 PM02-18-2005 11:52 AM:
Well here's some first-hand testimony (if you'll accept it from an "officer of the court" ):
I'm one of the clowns who's actually had his lock self-engage, although it was only after I oafishly knocked the unloaded 60-15 off a countertop onto a hardwood floor. The "gun-locked" flag did NOT fully raise, but the entire gun locked up.
If I recall correctly, the “gun locked” flag seemed to be sitting just a bit askew in its slot, in addition to being raised ever so slightly. It was NOT raised into the "gun locked" position, and I had to really look at it to see that it was up from flush at all. I didn't pay much attention to looking at it at the time, though, since I was mainly in a panic to get the revolver so that it was working again.
I have no idea what actually happened inside the gun to lock it up: I didn't take the sideplate off when it was locked up.
After a couple of seconds' worth of muttering, I went to the safe, got the S&W box out, found the key, and inserted it. Turning it to unlock wouldn't budge a thing - the key wouldn't turn, if I recall correctly. I then turned it all the way to lock (which raised the flag fully - as I said earlier, it had been just a teensy bit out of flush with the frame after the fall) and then turned it back to unlock . . . and the gun worked.
I was happy the gun worked again - I'd been terrified that I'd broken it and that I'd have to send it back to S&W to see if they'd fix it under warranty even though I'd been the clod who knocked it off the counter. I've since put the key onto my keyring - dropping a gun is the type of thing that Murphy would have happen right before you needed the gun.
I don't really think of this as a major concern (since I never carry the J-frame without another J-frame in reserve), but I wouldn't be averse to grinding off the lug that locks things up inside. I may do it yet. I don't really know. As others have said, there are more pressing things to worry about.
I don't know if my clumsiness resulted in the Seinfeldian "one-in-a-million-shot" that jarred the lock out of alignment and function, but the other stories folks relate on the 'net, together with Mr. Ayoob's column make me think the problem is not as rare as all that. Still, what are the odds I'm going to drop the gun? I haven't done it since. . . .
Oh, and I've reloaded for almost 20 years and never had a problem with a jumped bullet. There have been a few times when I failed to properly seat primers and that made it difficult to turn the cylinder, but it's never been impossible.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From Joni_Lynn on the S&W Forum:
I don't use the lock in mine, but I do carry the key since the thing has engaged itself twice now.
I may disable it one of these days. In the meantime it is a totally useless carry gun in that condition.
Last time I shot it I couldn't get it to duplicate that action though. I figure there must be some way to jam it in one position so it stays put. No, I'm not sending it back to S&W. I've found their customer service to be quite friendly and not at all difficult to get along with, but sometimes when a gun has been in '4 times' for the same thing I wonder if the night janitor is doing the work on mine. Eventually mine were all fixed or replaced. The majority of my S&W's have been picture perfect from the start.
The gun in question is: My "ex-carry" gun is a S&W 340PD, the ammo for carry is Federal 125gr 357 in the silver box. The 158 American Eagle stuff is a bit on the testy side recoil wise, but I've shot some of that as well.
I know what to remove and where to remove it from to disable that thing. I don't see how it could possibly have engaged by itself now that I look at it, but then again my key also rounded off so I can't move it either way anyhow. Now I just need to consider if I want to do it or not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Osprey
Administrator
Posted 20 October 2005 10:20 PM
I just spent some time searching the "archives" of the forum looking for what I could consider to be legitimate lock induced failures. I found 6, but three of those were from another reputable source and in one of the off forum incidents, the lock flew off, but the gun kept working.
=========
It's really just a matter of whether you don't mind running the risk of lock failure or not. Chances are you'll probably be ok. Are ya feelin' lucky today? It's a nice day, go out and shoot some guns or take a motorcycle ride... I'm going to do both.
I'll be the first to say that the "chances are" that you won't have a problem with the built-in lock. But why take the "chance"? If you buy a pre-lock S&W (any built before about the year 2000) you will side step the lock issue entirely! What a simple solution to avoiding any lock-related problems entirely.
For those who do have guns with the built-in locking mechanism, even if you don't use the lock, you'd better carry the key with you, because they can and do lock-up on their own while being fired or if dropped and if you don't have the key with you, you'd be stuck with a locked gun, unless perhaps you could jimme the lock to unlock again.
There are so many fine quality pre-lock S&W's out there available for sale that unless you have to have a 500 (
) you can have a pre-lock Smith of better quality than any of the new ones. Those who generalize that pre-lock Smiths are of poor quality really erode their own credibility. You can fine sub-par guns from any maker, any era, and "series"... and great ones as well. The majority of S&W revolvers throughout the history of the company are of superb quality. Of course some samples aren't as good as the best... so what else is new? There are plenty of good examples from every time period you can name... go to the S&W forum and ask those who own them.For those who want to pull their heads out of the sand, there are plenty of first-person, factual accounts. If you want to find them, you can. They're all over the place. But if you just want to live in denial, that's ok too. Your guns, your life, do as you like.
A quick search brought up three first hand accounts on the S&W forum alone, which is most certainly a small portion of actual occurrences, considering how few people from the vast sea of guns owners actually post on these forums.
=========
45WheelGun on the S&W Forum:
I am one of the three who have had their lock fail. Mine was also a lock spring, as verified by S&W.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Erich from Albuquerque, NM, member of the S&W Forum and others:
I actually own a S&W model 60-15 3" with an idiot lock that has caused me trouble. When I oafishly knocked the unloaded gun from a countertop to the hardwood floor, the lock's "flag" mechanism (the part that has the little tit that engages the hammer itself and locks the hammer up) got a bit crossways in its slot and jammed the thing up tight as a drum. Since I was home and not engaged in a fight with a felon, I was able to dig the "key" out of the box in the safe and set it to right by fully engaging the lock and then disengaging it.
Had I not been home, I would have been holding a fairly small inert piece of steel. Even if I had the "key" on me, pulling out a keyring and trying to find an especially small one is not on my dance chart if I'm struggling and in need of my self-defense gun.
So . . . based on my experience, I would strongly advise you to look around until you found something without the idiot lock. You're too nice a guy to have to deal with such potentially dangerous hassles.
More from Erich
Posted by Erich (Member # 2536) on 02-18-2005 01:52 PM02-18-2005 11:52 AM:
Well here's some first-hand testimony (if you'll accept it from an "officer of the court" ):
I'm one of the clowns who's actually had his lock self-engage, although it was only after I oafishly knocked the unloaded 60-15 off a countertop onto a hardwood floor. The "gun-locked" flag did NOT fully raise, but the entire gun locked up.
If I recall correctly, the “gun locked” flag seemed to be sitting just a bit askew in its slot, in addition to being raised ever so slightly. It was NOT raised into the "gun locked" position, and I had to really look at it to see that it was up from flush at all. I didn't pay much attention to looking at it at the time, though, since I was mainly in a panic to get the revolver so that it was working again.
I have no idea what actually happened inside the gun to lock it up: I didn't take the sideplate off when it was locked up.
After a couple of seconds' worth of muttering, I went to the safe, got the S&W box out, found the key, and inserted it. Turning it to unlock wouldn't budge a thing - the key wouldn't turn, if I recall correctly. I then turned it all the way to lock (which raised the flag fully - as I said earlier, it had been just a teensy bit out of flush with the frame after the fall) and then turned it back to unlock . . . and the gun worked.
I was happy the gun worked again - I'd been terrified that I'd broken it and that I'd have to send it back to S&W to see if they'd fix it under warranty even though I'd been the clod who knocked it off the counter. I've since put the key onto my keyring - dropping a gun is the type of thing that Murphy would have happen right before you needed the gun.
I don't really think of this as a major concern (since I never carry the J-frame without another J-frame in reserve), but I wouldn't be averse to grinding off the lug that locks things up inside. I may do it yet. I don't really know. As others have said, there are more pressing things to worry about.
I don't know if my clumsiness resulted in the Seinfeldian "one-in-a-million-shot" that jarred the lock out of alignment and function, but the other stories folks relate on the 'net, together with Mr. Ayoob's column make me think the problem is not as rare as all that. Still, what are the odds I'm going to drop the gun? I haven't done it since. . . .
Oh, and I've reloaded for almost 20 years and never had a problem with a jumped bullet. There have been a few times when I failed to properly seat primers and that made it difficult to turn the cylinder, but it's never been impossible.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From Joni_Lynn on the S&W Forum:
I don't use the lock in mine, but I do carry the key since the thing has engaged itself twice now.
I may disable it one of these days. In the meantime it is a totally useless carry gun in that condition.
Last time I shot it I couldn't get it to duplicate that action though. I figure there must be some way to jam it in one position so it stays put. No, I'm not sending it back to S&W. I've found their customer service to be quite friendly and not at all difficult to get along with, but sometimes when a gun has been in '4 times' for the same thing I wonder if the night janitor is doing the work on mine. Eventually mine were all fixed or replaced. The majority of my S&W's have been picture perfect from the start.
The gun in question is: My "ex-carry" gun is a S&W 340PD, the ammo for carry is Federal 125gr 357 in the silver box. The 158 American Eagle stuff is a bit on the testy side recoil wise, but I've shot some of that as well.
I know what to remove and where to remove it from to disable that thing. I don't see how it could possibly have engaged by itself now that I look at it, but then again my key also rounded off so I can't move it either way anyhow. Now I just need to consider if I want to do it or not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Osprey
Administrator
Posted 20 October 2005 10:20 PM
I just spent some time searching the "archives" of the forum looking for what I could consider to be legitimate lock induced failures. I found 6, but three of those were from another reputable source and in one of the off forum incidents, the lock flew off, but the gun kept working.
=========
It's really just a matter of whether you don't mind running the risk of lock failure or not. Chances are you'll probably be ok. Are ya feelin' lucky today?
It's a nice day, go out and shoot some guns or take a motorcycle ride... I'm going to do both.Ohen Cepel
Contributing Member
I don't own any of them with a lock and doubt I ever will.
I'm not a Taurus fan. However, I would buy one of theirs first and switch out the hammer (ergo the lock) before I bought a new Smith.
You might want to look into the Taurus option if you can't find the older Smith that you want.
I'm not a Taurus fan. However, I would buy one of theirs first and switch out the hammer (ergo the lock) before I bought a new Smith.
You might want to look into the Taurus option if you can't find the older Smith that you want.
Dollar An Hour
Member
Is the Taurus a better design? Haven't heard of the Taurus lock causing any problems, but there are obviously alot of cases of the S&W screwing up.
DHart said:
Is it a coincidence that people who have the older S&W's without the locks are the most vocal to say that the locks are prone to problems? It seems like those who do not have the locks on their guns exagerate the stories of the failures caused by the locks.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
I just think it's as about as much a non issue as all the panic over MIM parts in 1911's over the last few years.
We're talking about every S&W revolver manufactured since 2000. That's a LOT of firearms, and we have maybe 10 verifiable incidents, 20? I'd hazard a guess that we're talking a failure rate of a few hundredths of 1 percent of firearms sold, if that much.
I could cite statistics that will give you a 5/100th of 1 percent failure rate of damn near anything you want to talk about that's sold in any quantity.
The MIM guys have the same panic over their 1911's, with the same failure rates if they stop to do the math.
Personally I'm not afraid of a 5/100th of 1 percent chance. The airbag in my car has a greater chance of going off by itself using the same calculations.
Top shelf ammo has about the same failure rate, so by this same logic we should not use ammo, because it can fail at the same rate.
If you want to look for things to worry about, you will find them in anything.
We're talking about every S&W revolver manufactured since 2000. That's a LOT of firearms, and we have maybe 10 verifiable incidents, 20? I'd hazard a guess that we're talking a failure rate of a few hundredths of 1 percent of firearms sold, if that much.
I could cite statistics that will give you a 5/100th of 1 percent failure rate of damn near anything you want to talk about that's sold in any quantity.
The MIM guys have the same panic over their 1911's, with the same failure rates if they stop to do the math.
Personally I'm not afraid of a 5/100th of 1 percent chance. The airbag in my car has a greater chance of going off by itself using the same calculations.
Top shelf ammo has about the same failure rate, so by this same logic we should not use ammo, because it can fail at the same rate.
If you want to look for things to worry about, you will find them in anything.
DHart
Member
Those without locks have no need to support pre-lock guns as pre-lock S&W's have no lock-related issues. Aside from the potential functional problems and unattractive look of the locks, I like the new Smiths (except the fugly star-wars inspired styling - yuck.) Point being that there are a great many pre-lock Smiths available for less money... and they're a lot more likely to retain value better (or appreciate) and be more marketable on the used market than S&W's with locks.
All personal preferences, value retention, marketability etc. aside, there is one indisputable fact:
Pre-lock S&W's will NEVER fail their owners due to lock-related problems.
That cannot be said about S&W's with built-in locks. And that's pretty much what this all boils down to. Each person can decide for themselves whether they want to accept the risk of the lock or not and only they are subject to the results of that decision. You don't mind having the lock? Fine with me... have at it and enjoy. Doesn't bother me at all, it's your gun. To each his own.
All personal preferences, value retention, marketability etc. aside, there is one indisputable fact:
Pre-lock S&W's will NEVER fail their owners due to lock-related problems.
That cannot be said about S&W's with built-in locks. And that's pretty much what this all boils down to. Each person can decide for themselves whether they want to accept the risk of the lock or not and only they are subject to the results of that decision. You don't mind having the lock? Fine with me... have at it and enjoy. Doesn't bother me at all, it's your gun. To each his own.
- Status
