Anyone with new 642 have issues with the internal lock?

[J Miller]

Frank,

Best of luck to you too. Take care.



Joe

 

[tomkatz]

Frank....you are definately a tough sell....

I am sitting here holding a 28-2 that is so smooth it is scary, absolutely a new gun in every respect, and you just can't get a trigger like this in a stock gun anymore......
my 640-1 looks brand new, and once again the trigger is just unbelievable.....
model 38 in nickel, same deal, it is smoother and tighter than any of my others....
I have a 29-3, 27-2, 442-nuthin in nickel, 642-1, 686-nuthin, same deal on all of these.....I shoot them all and carry some of them daily.....
I wouldn't trade any one of these for two new ones, not just because they are better guns but there is a certain classiness, an aura about them, I can't explain it.....some of the others in this thread know what I mean.....and from what Dhart says every one has a lifetime warranty as well(I thought so)....

Enjoy your new smiths Frank, I hope they serve you as well as these and all my past smiths have served me.....
.....tom

 

[DHart]

Oh... I forgot to add, here's my 642-1. Found it at a gunshow a couple of years ago for $360. Cherry condition. Stone reliable. Great trigger. Rides un-noticibly in my motorcycle jacket pocket. Highly recommended. And of course, no lock issues to even dream about.

I liked it so much I decided to seek out a 640-1 to be a bigger brother... found this one on the internet last year. $380. Same thing, stone reliable, superb trigger, yada, yada. And of course, no lock. Bought another one this year - same thing.

How about this like-new-in-box 29-2 I found on Gun Broker... scary fine gun... nothing like it available new. Superb in every way. $500. Found it earlier this year.

Or this brand-new-in-box 19-3... from a fellow S&W forum member. $400. Yes, as you might expect... fit, finish, trigger, reliability... you got it. Awesome. No lock. Found it in the last year.

This story goes on and on... so many wonderful pre-lock Smiths are available for those who seek them.In the last couple of years I've found a couple dozen of these gems. Today they're worth more than I paid for them and I could sell them at the snap of a finger... Smith lovers go crazy for these guns. Try doing that with one of today's lockable S&Ws. Pre-lock S&W's are the creme de la creme.

OK... I can't resist. How about another? This one I found on GunBroker last year... paid $450 for it, including the night sights. Then put on the 3" barrel. This gun wouldn't last a day on any of the internet gun sales sites... do you think people would worry that it might have been "abused"???

Or this 681 I bought a year ago on GunBroker for $300 and put on a 3" barrel... same deal, yada, yada.... used guns really suck, don't they?

 

[Titus]

Still can't cite another failure, huh?

 

[DHart]

Sorry Titus, you're on your own bud. I've got bigger fish to fry at the moment so you'll have to do your own research if you want more info.

 

[Frank1991]

Sorry Titus, you're on your own bud. I've got bigger fish to fry at the moment so you'll have to do your own research if you want more info.

Reason why DHart cannot site another failure is because he has jumped on the bandwagon with everyone else who has no concrete evidence of a failure. It is like a game of telephone you played when you were a kid. DHart has some nice looking guns, but I like my guns because they will work when I need them. Not to keep in a safe to look at. Of course I am not knocking those who collect guns and admire them. DHart's guns look pretty, but I would be a little leary of depending on them 100% because of the reasons that I have already stated. A person with knowledge of any subject will not make such harsh accusations without first hand experience. Guess there are lots of ignorant people out there!

 

[DHart]

Well Frank, you have revealed yourself as the person that you are! This is so comical. My "harsh accusations"? Please refresh your memory of what I've said and share with us what my "harsh accusations" are? Really, though, your remarks are undeserving of continued comment.

 

[Frank1991]

Well Frank, you have revealed yourself as the person that you are! This is so comical. My "harsh accusations"? Please refresh your memory of what I've said and share with us what my "harsh accusations" are? Really, though, your remarks are undeserving of continued comment.

You are the one who keeps putting down the lock as if you have had several of guns with the lock personally fail on you or witnessed this happen several times. How do you think that Smith and Wesson would feel as you the "leader of the pack" on this thread and on other boards with the same topic continually saying that the lock WILL fail? Don't you think that they would ask the same question to you - "has it happened to you or have you ever seen it happen?" How could you be such an advocate of this lock being a failure when you have no personal experience? You have gone much further than saying "I don't like it and THINK that it will fail," you have stated here and on the other forums that it WILL fail. All I am doing is stating what you have said. I am not trying to put you down, you have already done that for yourself.

 

[DHart]

Frank... if you will refresh your memory by re-reading my posts you will see that I have stated that I believe the incidence of lock failure is very low and that most people will probably not experience a lock related failure. I have made such statements repeatedly in numerous threads over the last year or so. Beyond that, I have stated that the guns without locks have no possibility of failure due to lock related issues and that I prefer pre-lock guns for that reason. Are you unwilling to allow me my preference or what?

Note that you started this thread by stating that you wanted a gun without the lock and asked for evidence of people having problems with the lock. I provided quotations of three members of the S&W forum that have had lock-related failures and you simply won't accept that. At this point I really don't care what you do or what you think.

I don't understand why you don't just buy your S&W and get on with it? Why are you perpetuating this tirade of yours? At this point, your remarks are undeserving of my comments.

 

[Master Blaster]

I have had 3 revolver malfunctions happen to me while firing a revolver. They were with older Smith and Wesson revolvers. I had the ejector rod unscrew on a 629-2, preventing me from opening the cylinder. I have also had a grain of powder get stuck under the extractor star, preventing me from closing the cylinder, and I had a 686-3 lock up on me because of a bent hand pin according to the smith I took it to.

In addition I have had ammo related failures, High primers tie up a ruger vaquero, and a squib load, which also tied up the revolver.

I also had the tiny pawl spring and plunger on a ruger SP101 installed slightly out of place, after a dissassembly tie up my SP101, I had to take it appart before it would work again.The spring and catch could also fail in one of these because it is so small, but I have not seen it happen.

All of these malfunctions can happen to any revolver even a new one

The new smiths with a lock add extra parts that can on a very remote possibility also fail and tie the gun up.

They seem like robust parts to me so the likelihood of failure is small. Its also possible that you could buy an old revolver that appears to be in perfect shape and have it fail as well due to an unseen internal problem.

The same is true of old versus new cars, new cars have more parts than say a car from 1965, some of those parts can fail. But on the other hand the new cars I have owned have been more reliable than the old ones my parents owned despite the additional parts. Time and engineering move forward.

Buy what you like.

 

[KONY]

Note that you started this thread by stating that you wanted a gun without the lock and asked for evidence of people having problems with the lock. I provided quotations of three members of the S&W forum that have had lock-related failures and you simply won't accept that. At this point I really don't care what you do or what you think.

I don't understand why you don't just buy your S&W and get on with it? Why are you perpetuating this tirade of yours? At this point, your remarks are undeserving of my comments.

My sentiments exactly! Now, the only thing that needs to be LOCKED is this thread as this is now getting quite silly.

 

[Titus]

Well Frank, you have revealed yourself as the person that you are! This is so comical. My "harsh accusations"? Please refresh your memory of what I've said and share with us what my "harsh accusations" are? Really, though, your remarks are undeserving of continued comment.

"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."

No one has spent more time on more forums bad mouthing the locks and the people who buy them than you. And yet, when called on to back up your assertion that the "first-person, factual accounts" are all over the place for those "who want to pull their heads out of the sand" and not "live in denial", all you have is "This thread is now beneath me". You clearly have plenty of time to keep posting in these threads, so you've had enough time to produce one if you could.

I'll ask again for anyone who cares to answer - Can anyone cite another instance of lock failure besides the ones I've listed?

 

[Old Dog]

Nope, never had a problem with The Lock on my 642 ... or my 637 or 686 ...
Well, I'm arriving late to this party ... I've read the entire thread, and what strikes me is that there is a very clear patronizing tone coming through in the posts of those who don't like The Lock. It's as though certain folks are saying, "Hey, you go ahead, it's your money, get your Smiths with The Lock, you might be okay ... but we, the Pre-Lock Smith Gurus, know better."

I'll ask again for anyone who cares to answer - Can anyone cite another instance of lock failure besides the ones I've listed?

No, no one can ... because the stories are anecdotal ... one blurb in a Mas Ayoob article in a gun rag noted for perpetuating firearms rumors, and a handful of second and third person internet forum postings. In all this time, if The Lock had created real problems, I submit that there'd have been a bit more "official" and reliable documentation ...

Frankly, I much prefer Pre-Lock Smiths ... and given a choice, I'll buy an old one any day over a new one. But I do have some wonderful recent production S&W revolvers with The Lock (yeah, it is a blemish, so I just look at these pieces from the right side only); they're mightily accurate and reliable, still waaay better looking than anything Ruger makes, and I don't live in fear of The Lock failing me when I need to use the revolver for real ...

And DHart still has the best-lookin' Smiths I've ever seen ...

 

[Frank1991]

"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."

No one has spent more time on more forums bad mouthing the locks and the people who buy them than you. And yet, when called on to back up your assertion that the "first-person, factual accounts" are all over the place for those "who want to pull their heads out of the sand" and not "live in denial", all you have is "This thread is now beneath me". You clearly have plenty of time to keep posting in these threads, so you've had enough time to produce one if you could.

I'll ask again for anyone who cares to answer - Can anyone cite another instance of lock failure besides the ones I've listed?

Titus: DHart has acted very ignorant and regarding this subject. I think that he has gone back into his corner, and hopefully he will not come back out cause he knows that he messed up!!!

 

[DHart]

Frank.... Frank.... hello Frank.... you're acting like a child, Frank. And making a fool out of yourself. Try to grow up a little!

This thread is dead, don't you realize that yet? Everyone else does. I'm switching to "unsubscribe"!

 

[Titus]

Let us know when you have time to find all those examples you mentioned, then.

 

[DHart]

Titus... if I provided another source or two it really wouldn't make any difference as the aim at this point is antagonism and I'm not interested in playing that game. There is enough evidence to know that failures of the lock have occurred. I've mentioned numerous times that it appears to me that the vast majority people would be unlikely to experience it, though it is possible.

Frank asked for reports of failures and they were provided. The only point of the issue is that there are first hand accounts of the lock failing. The locks can and do fail, even though the incidence is not high. What you all decide to do with that information is your business.

There are four S&W forum members who have reported lock failures that I'm immediately aware of: Joni-Lynn, Erich, 45Wheelgunner, and Rogue. Their reports are to be found at the S&W forum. You can keep aware of new reports by checking in here:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/530103904/m/228102718

and here:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/530103904/m/181108018

Other reports are referenced here:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_173_29/ai_n7578382

The following is an excerpt from the published article:

Gun lock failure
American Handgunner, Jan-Feb, 2005 by Massad Ayoob

Integral locks trigger a primal fear among those who know their lives may depend on their gun: "What if it locks by itself?" I know cops who stopped trusting Remington 870 pump guns the day they started coming with a key lock integrated with the safety button.

For many years, these integral gun locks have upset firearms purists in the theoretical sense, but caused no actual mechanical problems. However, I've recently run across three cases where these devices failed during firing. Two spontaneously locked themselves during firing at a commercial shooting range, and one lock managed to depart from the gun while its owner was shooting it.

All three were ultra-light Smith & Wesson revolvers firing very hard kicking ammunition. At the Manchester (NH) Indoor Firing Line, reports owner Jim McLoud, a Model 342 Titanium AirLite being fired with powerful .38 Special +P+, and a Model 340 Scandium AirLite being shot with full power .357 Magnum ammo both locked-up tight. McLoud determined the parts in their integral locks had shifted under the heavy recoil and locked up.

In Rochester, Indiana, detective Dennis Reichard was firing his personally owned service revolver, a Model 329 Scandium with full power .44 Magnum, when the lock's flag mechanism flew out of its slot in the frame alongside the exposed hammer. While the .44 continued to fire, Reichard was less than thrilled with his duty weapon literally falling apart while he was shooting it, and has gone back to his old all-steel Model 629 without the integral lock mechanism.

===============

So, you can decide what you want to do with the information. I prefer pre-lock S&W's. You can do as you like. I have no further interest in participating in this debate.

 

[Titus]

So you never had any other instances? I already listed those.

 

[DHart]

Titus, if it's so important to you for whatever reason to seek out more references, feel free to do so. I haven't made it my business to compile sources and references over the last four or five years that I've participated on these forums. Sorry. I really have much more interesting things to do now than dragging this out ad nauseum.

 

[Frank1991]

Frank.... Frank.... hello Frank.... you're acting like a child, Frank. And making a fool out of yourself. Try to grow up a little!

This thread is dead, don't you realize that yet? Everyone else does. I'm switching to "unsubscribe"!

If it is dead then why do you keep replying. Perhaps it is because you know that you dug yourself a hole that is hard to get out of. You made the statements not me!

 

[Frank1991]

Titus, if it's so important to you for whatever reason to seek out more references, feel free to do so. I haven't made it my business to compile sources and references over the last four or five years that I've participated on these forums. Sorry. I really have much more interesting things to do now than dragging this out ad nauseum.

No, but you have made it your business to exploit an issue which you have little evidence to support. Maybe from now on you should think before you say and make sure that you can support your claims. If nothing else, your statements and back stepping truly shows your knowledge in this field.

 

[Mulliga]

How do you guys find the time to argue this out over multiple forums?

 

[P95Carry]

Closed - albeit later than I should have liked. It went south a while ago before I saw it and was notified.

Pity - things can still be discussed and opinions exchanged without the need for personal attacks.