Sylvan-Forge
Member
What are your thoughts regarding the ball detent locking setup?
.
.
Crane/Yoke Locking: Ball detent?
- Thread starter Sylvan-Forge
- Start date
- Status
The ball detent system is often used on Smith & Wesson or other revolvers where the front locking lug - for whatever reason - has been removed. I believe that all Taurus snubbies now come with a ball detent, and so far I haven't noticed any complaints.
However the ball detent is not a positive mechanical lock, and depends on the pressure of the spring behind the locking pin or ball. While the system apparently works, I prefer a mechanical lock.
That said, I must note that Colt hand ejector revolvers were always locked at the ratchet star, and nowhere else, so perhaps an extra ball detent is enough - at least in most cases.
However the ball detent is not a positive mechanical lock, and depends on the pressure of the spring behind the locking pin or ball. While the system apparently works, I prefer a mechanical lock.
That said, I must note that Colt hand ejector revolvers were always locked at the ratchet star, and nowhere else, so perhaps an extra ball detent is enough - at least in most cases.
Hawk
Member
The ball detent is listed on some Performance Center revolvers but I couldn't find any puffery on why it might be considered an advantage - perhaps a minisucle amount less drag on the cylinder as compared to the ejector rod lock-up?
The S&W PC ball detent is in lieu of, rather than in addition to, the standard ejector rod front system. Also the PC ball detent is on the front of the yoke and engages the shroud rather than on top which, for reasons not altogether clear to me, is where I would have expected to see it (read about it somewhere, maybe?).
Anyhow, since it's on a 627 with an MSRP north of 1,500.00 I presume that somebody there believes the ball detent to be superior lest they would have left good enough alone. Although one probably can not discount the marketability of gimmicks either.
It's rather of a mystery to me.
The S&W PC ball detent is in lieu of, rather than in addition to, the standard ejector rod front system. Also the PC ball detent is on the front of the yoke and engages the shroud rather than on top which, for reasons not altogether clear to me, is where I would have expected to see it (read about it somewhere, maybe?).
Anyhow, since it's on a 627 with an MSRP north of 1,500.00 I presume that somebody there believes the ball detent to be superior lest they would have left good enough alone. Although one probably can not discount the marketability of gimmicks either.
It's rather of a mystery to me.
TOGGLELOCK
Member
A good idea, Ruger uses that on the GP100/SP series. The foward lockup assures distrubution of forces over more an area, better alignment of the Yoke assembly. About the only pitfall is that this is another part which needs to be handfit for fuction. TOGGLELOCK
Sylvan-Forge
Member
Thanks for your thoughts, folks.
.
.
Master Blaster
Member
I have a 627 PC, It has the ball lock on the crane and no front detent lock on the ejector rod. The gun has an extremely tight lockup. There is Zero front to back movement /endshake, and zero side to side movement when the yoke is closed. I have many S&W revolvers and the lock up on this one is the tightest I have ever encountered. I have about 2000 rounds fired since it was brand new in March.
I expect it will take the heaviest loads and virtually never develop endshake because of this ball lock up arraingement.
I expect it will take the heaviest loads and virtually never develop endshake because of this ball lock up arraingement.
Sylvan-Forge
Member
Master Blaster,
If you were to push out the cylinder using only your right hand (as if your left hand was busy going for a reload), would you say that it snaps out more violently, less or equally as compared to a traditional locking arrangement?
Also, might you have a picture handy or know the ball size and/or projection height off the crane?
.
If you were to push out the cylinder using only your right hand (as if your left hand was busy going for a reload), would you say that it snaps out more violently, less or equally as compared to a traditional locking arrangement?
Also, might you have a picture handy or know the ball size and/or projection height off the crane?
.
Snapping Twig
Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2007
- Messages
- 655
Back in the pre enhancement period of S&W model 29's, the poor lock up of the crane was said to be a reason for premature wear.
I had Mag-Na-Port do two of my .44's up with ball bearing detentes.
629-2
383384[/ATTACH]"]http://
29-3 Classic Hunter
383386[/ATTACH]"]http://
I had Mag-Na-Port do two of my .44's up with ball bearing detentes.
629-2
383384[/ATTACH]"]http://
29-3 Classic Hunter
383386[/ATTACH]"]http://
Attachments
Sylvan-Forge
Member
Thanks for the pics, Snapping Twig.
.
.
Hawk
Member
I'm not Master Blaster nor do I portray him on the intertubz but I recently got one of those 627PCs with the ball thingie facing front.
Shhhh. Hawk bought a S&W with a lock. Oh nos!
It's pretty much the same as my 27-2 with the front-of-ejector rod lock-up. At least I can't discern much of a difference. Possibly a real little smidgin more "pop" to the cylinder when it releases. I'm not likely to notice subtle differences. If I hadn't read that it had a ball detent I may not have noticed. But I tend to "gentle" the thing open anyway.
Opening the cylinder is way easier than opening the cylinder of a 640 with a partially unscrewed ejector rod - one learns to watch for that sort of thing early on. It'll be nice to have a S&W that's totally insensitive to the ejector rod getting a little untwisted. Hope I notice it before it untwists all the way and falls on the floor.
Sylvan-Forge
Member
Hawk, no worries my friend, I appreciate your input
Oh nos! I felt guilty when I bought my first S&W locker. Now I just disable it whilst pining over the days of yore.
.
Oh nos!
I felt guilty when I bought my first S&W locker. Now I just disable it whilst pining over the days of yore..
YOU BOUGHT A WHAT...!!!!!!! 
Well anyway....
If you have a gunsmith install a "ball thingie" in the yoke, and remove the locking bolt and spring from the barrel's underlug, you'll have what you want. If you change your mind the parts can be reassembled.
As for myself, the Old Fuff is a record-holding skinflint, and a bottle of clear fingernail polish will last a lifetime...
Well anyway....
If you have a gunsmith install a "ball thingie" in the yoke, and remove the locking bolt and spring from the barrel's underlug, you'll have what you want. If you change your mind the parts can be reassembled.
As for myself, the Old Fuff is a record-holding skinflint, and a bottle of clear fingernail polish will last a lifetime...
Hawk
Member
Actually, I had a bottle of blue thread-locker left over from another hobby,
It just took a while before I ciphered I needed to dig it out and use it.
Comes in pretty handy for SAA-alikes as well.
One thing it doesn't work so well on is the barrel protector thingie at the end of the 627PC - blue thread-locker releases when heated and that thing gets HOT. Red thread-locker looks to be on the agenda and I'd avoided it until now. Is fingernail polish more like blue or red?
It just took a while before I ciphered I needed to dig it out and use it.
Comes in pretty handy for SAA-alikes as well.
One thing it doesn't work so well on is the barrel protector thingie at the end of the 627PC - blue thread-locker releases when heated and that thing gets HOT. Red thread-locker looks to be on the agenda and I'd avoided it until now. Is fingernail polish more like blue or red?
I'm not for sure the ball thingie is actually an advantage apart from the unscrewing thing and I've learned to watch for that. I'm inclined to leave "well enough alone" on those that lock-up in the more traditional S&W manner. The 627PC came that way - t'weren't my doing.
Fingernail polish is sort of like blue LocTite, but less so. The Loc Tite is better, but if you can't find your tube of the stuff the polish will make-do.
I wouldn't go to the trouble of changing over a S&W snubby either, but for those that are really bugged over the ejector rod coming unscerewed it is an option.
Anyone with Colt Single Actions (or clones) should buy blue LocTite in 55 gallon drums.
I wouldn't go to the trouble of changing over a S&W snubby either, but for those that are really bugged over the ejector rod coming unscerewed it is an option.
Anyone with Colt Single Actions (or clones) should buy blue LocTite in 55 gallon drums.
Sylvan-Forge
Member
Another concern regarding the yoke lock is removing a worn spring would require reaming out the staking and consequent restaking. Might be able to get away with this once before having to go up in tunnel/ball diameter.
It would be a lot simpler just to remove the locking bolt pin to replace a spring.
It's looking like I'm going to steer clear of this mod and just go with the locking bolt setup on a match barrel.
Now to find a barrel ..
.
Thanks for the trick Old Fuff. I'll sock away a bottle.
.
It would be a lot simpler just to remove the locking bolt pin to replace a spring.
It's looking like I'm going to steer clear of this mod and just go with the locking bolt setup on a match barrel.
Now to find a barrel ..
.
Thanks for the trick Old Fuff. I'll sock away a bottle.
.
Sylvan-Forge
Member
doubletap
- Status
