Lock Trouble

[Jim K]

Well, S&W really did seem to try the KISS principle. Taurus's "lock" involves multiple turns of a screw; Ruger's involves removal of the grips. Both seem to take the (probably correct) view that most buyers will never use the lock and that (as Fuff says) it is mainly to cover the manufacturer's fanny and put the burden on the gun owner for any accident. S&W seems to really have the idea that if the lock were easy to use it would be used. Their design seems to have (or have had) problems, but it is easier to use than the other brands. Of course a plain old padlock would be as easy to use as any but would not satisfy the anti-gun gang whose idea is to make guns more expensive and harder to use, lest someone shoot a crook who is paying off the mayor.

Jim

 

[S.B.]

Buy an after market lock filler kit and install it! End of your problem.
Steve

 

[JoeShmoe]

I got my gun back from Smith & Wesson. They replaced the cylinder because I had some cylinder erosion. They replaced the hand, as the fix for it jamming. No mention of anything with the lock.

 

[788Ham]

I looked for a S&W revolver at a GS a couple months ago, model didn't really matter, .357 cal was what I was after. Every S&W I saw had that friggin' hole in it, laid them all down. I found a '57 Colt Cobra 4" .38 spl. for a very reasonable price, hardly shot, pristine bore, only lock associated with this one, is when its in the safe!

 

[Jaymo]

I wish Ruger offered a lock-free BH.

 

[Fremmer]

Sell it and buy one without a lock.

 

[Stainz]

It seems odd - even though the op got his revolver back from S&W repaired - and the fault was the hand/pawl - everyone still blames the IL! Good grief!!

Stainz

 

[buck460XVR]

It seems odd - even though the op got his revolver back from S&W repaired - and the fault was the hand/pawl - everyone still blames the IL! Good grief!!

Stainz

Guess those folks need to stick to pre hand/pawl guns from now on. Just poor design and more unnecessary parts to fail.

 

[Guillermo]

The lock is an idiotic design
virtually universally loathed
useless

and yet is defended

Literally laughing out loud.

This thread was fun though. I learned that S&W quietly tried to "improve" the idiotic thing.
And that many departments do not allow their officers to carry IL guns.

Also that S&W will lie to their customers (probably) about the nature of the repair rather than admit that their idiotic lock is, in fact, idiotic.

Not surprising...but sad

 

[JoeShmoe]

The lock is an idiotic design
virtually universally loathed
useless

and yet is defended

Literally laughing out loud.

This thread was fun though. I learned that S&W quietly tried to "improve" the idiotic thing.
And that many departments do not allow their officers to carry IL guns.

Also that S&W will lie to their customers (probably) about the nature of the repair rather than admit that their idiotic lock is, in fact, idiotic.

Not surprising...but sad

Well that is what I am wondering, because my original problem was most definitely lock related. There may have been a problem with the hand, but that doesn't explain the fact that when I was troubleshooting, when locking/unlocking the lock, it was definitely not unlocking as it should. It took a couple of taps of the butt on a hard surface to free it up.

I hope I don't get cylinder erosion again.

 

[JoeShmoe]

Sell it and buy one without a lock.

Maybe I'll sell it and buy an LCR.

 

[Guillermo]

Joe,

I am just glad it didn't fail on you when you needed it.

Folks seem to love their LCRs. Trigger pulls sure is nice. I think they are ugly but function first. And I like English Bulldogs, FJ40s and cast iron dutch ovens...beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.

 

[JoeShmoe]

Joe,

I am just glad it didn't fail on you when you needed it.

Folks seem to love their LCRs. Trigger pulls sure is nice. I think they are ugly but function first. And I like English Bulldogs, FJ40s and cast iron dutch ovens...beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.

Me too. I can't describe the sick feeling I had the first time it locked up. I know it's a mechanical device, but revolvers are supposed to be nearly foolproof.

Regarding the LCR, I agree it's ugly, but I can't get away from the need of a lightweight revolver to keep in my pocket when sitting around the house, or when I am quickly headed out the door. The trigger pull would be a bonus. I've never been thrilled with the trigger on the 340PD. Very heavy for such a lightweight gun.

I've got some thinking to do.

 

[Jaymo]

I wish I could sell my Ruger and get one without a lock. Problem is, Ruger didn't make a .44 special blackhawk without the lock.

I wonder if the lock and hammer spring/strut can be replaced with an earlier hammer spring/strut assembly, without replacing the grip frame?

 

[Old Fuff]

So far as I know, there have been no reports of problems with the Ruger lock, which is a much different design the the one S&W uses. I wouldn't worry, but if you are unconfortable an ejection of some epoxy while the lock is in the "off" position should work wonders.

 

[Guillermo]

The Ruger and Taurus had a basic understanding of physics. Something which the "engineers" at S&W do not.

Ruger and Taurus made their locks work perpendicular to the recoil of the gun. Thus the chance of recoil having any effect upon the lock is minimized.

The "geniuses" at S&W have their lock working on the same axis as the recoil of the gun and predictably, there are problems.

Hey Fuff...didn't Taurus offer S&W their lock design for free?

 

[Old Fuff]

Hey Fuff...didn't Taurus offer S&W their lock design for free?

Yes they did, and were rejected.

 

[JoeShmoe]

So far as I know, there have been no reports of problems with the Ruger lock, which is a much different design the the one S&W uses. I wouldn't worry, but if you are unconfortable an ejection of some epoxy while the lock is in the "off" position should work wonders.

I think I am going to give serious consideration to selling the 340PD and acquiring an LCR. Never, ever thought I would say that.

 

[Old Fuff]

I think I am going to give serious consideration to selling the 340PD and acquiring an LCR. Never, ever thought I would say that.

I don't think you're alone.

The LCR might win 1st place in an ugly gun contest, but it's a first class example of "form follows function," and you should at least look at, and handle one.

That said, selling one to buy the other will likely cause some pain in the pocketbook, and if your only objection is the lock that can be tended to in several ways so that it will never be a problem again.

I have several guns that I aquired at VERY favorable prices because they were problem children that their owners had given up on or didn't trust. After finding and correcting whatever issues they had I didn't hesitate to carry any of them, and none of them ever gave me any reason to not use or trust them.

I admit that I'm one who prefers to buy guns that don't have these modern safety or storage devices. But if I had one that had some feature I didn't like I would sooner "fix the problem," then sell it at a loss.

 

[JoeShmoe]

That said, selling one to buy the other will likely cause some pain in the pocketbook, and if your only objection is the lock that can be tended to in several ways so that it will never be a problem again.

I suppose it can't hurt to have both.

 

[Jaymo]

The LCR looks like it should have been made by Block, I mean Glock. Butt-ugly, but functional. (Except for the Glock knives, I like the looks of the 2 I have)

My wife and I each own a Taurus with the lock. She- a model 85UL, me-a Judge (Flame on, it's one helluva snake gun).

Had Ruger bothered to include a key for the lock, or even an owner's manual, I might not worry about it. But, they didn't. Sure hope they built my gun better than they packaged it.

 

[JoeShmoe]

FWIW, while claiming that the locks didn't cause any problem, S&W quietly modified the design to prevent those non-existent problems. The gun returned to you should have the new part.

Jim

Does anyone know if there have been any problems with the modified lock design? Also, if I were to take the side plate off, would the new part be easily recognized?

 

[Guillermo]

Jaymo

Your Tauri (Tauruses?) and Ruger has a lock that, while unnecessary, is at least well designed. The principals of physics are recognized and addressed.

That is something that no one can say about S&W.

 

[Hardtarget]

Send the gun to S&W for the "fix". If the problem shows up again remove the lock. You already have proof the lock made the gun un safe for you by "locking up" at critical times...therefore making it a liability to your own safety and survival from attack. You point out that if mr. criminal wasn't a criminal...you wouldn't have shot him.

Mark

 

[skidder]

The LCR looks like it should have been made by Block, I mean Glock. Butt-ugly, but functional.

I'm a die hard Ruger fan, but not an LCR fan. Possibly the 38, but definitely not in 357 (pointless and painful).
Maybe the LCR in 38 if the stars were in alignment and the angels were singing in sweet harmony. The jury is till out on those plastic thinga ma jiggers, or whatever the scientific term: polymatic-carbonistic-fibercomposite-elasticalloy . I still prefer a cold chunk of steel with some heft to handle the recoil. If I die in a fight I'll be darned if I go with a chunk of plastic in my hand .