Questions About Internal Locks

Status
Not open for further replies.

PawDaddy

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
300
Location
Alabama
What is the difference in the designs of the internal locks on S&W and Taurus revolvers?

Which design is the "best" as far as not being prone to self engaging?

Which is the easiest to remove or disable?

Would the design of the lock determine which of these two revolvers you would buy?
 
Taurus revolvers use a mechanical lock that when engaged blocks the hammer from going to the cocked position by blocking the hammers rearward travel. It's right on the hammer.I have no idea how the S&W locks work.
I refuse to buy one with the lawyer lock.
 
Ive heard of lightweight SW have locks engage now and then when using heavy duty loads in them.

Havent heard of that in Taurus guns.
 
if i had to have a revolver with a built in disabling devise, i would choose the Taurus version of it over the S&W version.
 
Does anyone who has removed the lock mechanism know what is the diameter of the hole in the frame. I'm wondering if it could be fitted with an automotive type zerk fitting. You know, the kind they used to put on the tie rods and ball joints of cars back in the days when they could be greased. That way the ugly hole in the side of the frame could be converted into a grease nipple for lubing the inside of the gun. Convert an ugly, useless lock into a functional and cute gun greaser.
 
Taurus one doesn't bug me as much and I own a couple with them. S&W one I generally refuse to own. It is much uglier IMO.
 
I would suggest looking at the S&W forum for a thread where the "rumors" of the locking engaging on its own is explored a bit more. Not that it has never happened, but it hasn't happened nearly as much as it has been "heard' to have happened (much like the Glock's k!b).


hole in the side of the frame could be converted into a grease nipple for lubing the inside of the gun
I don't know what you do with your guns, but I put a FEW drops of light oil inside my S&W revolvers every few months (depending on use). I wouldn't think anyone would want to fill it with grease, or anything grease-like.

The internal locks, especially on Smith's is a very emotional issue. People seem to just not care at all, or hate them with every drop of blood in their bodies.

If the locks were prone to problems, I think they would have been addressed by now(same reason why the locks are there, to satisfy the lawyers regarding lawsuits).

Depending on what you're going to do with the firearm, I wouldn't recommend removing it either. Not only are you opening yourself to problems in court if you ever use it in SD, but you invalidate your warranty, and open the gun up to added dirt and grime.

Leave it alone, and it will leave you alone.
 
Go with a S&W. The IL is truly an emotional issue and rumors of failures abound, but they are rumors IMHO. I have a 629 Mountain Gun with the 'lock' and have NO issues with it.
If I choose to remove it, it is about a 5-10 minute deal.
If you read the Michael Bain thread, the gun had been 'overhauled' and was a Sc 329. My question has always been, how many rounds had it fired WITHOUT a failure before it needed an 'overhaul' and what was done at that time.
GO WITH A S&W--you will be glad you did.
 
I hate lawyer locks with a passion. At least, the Smith locks can be removed...I just wish they would make the lock an option, not standard equipment.

I'd rather not leave a failure to chance- but that's my opinion. I removed the lock from my 870, and will do so for any guns that I may buy with an internal lock. If the lock cannot be disabled, I will do without.
 
I have an Airweight 637 with the internal lock. It is probably my most frequently carried pistol. I have seen the internal lock "flag" pop up once in a while with frequent handling. However, each time this happened, I immediately function checked the revolver and everything was working. I do not worry about the lock being activated accidentally--just oil it when I oil everything else (that is, not very often).

I LIKE having the option of bringing a tiny little key with me and being able to leave my gun "safely" in my glove box. There have been days and places I simply didn't want the hassle of carrying, but didn't want to leave a functional gun laying around, or carry a big heavy padlock to snap behind the trigger.

Personally, I would NEVER take the lock out. Why not? Heaven forbid something bad should happen and I have to explain to my neighbors why their little girl has an extra hole in her. "Well, gee, I was just so afraid outlaw biker terrorists were going to attack that I just HAD to remove a safety device from a perfectly functional revolver. "

If you hate ILs, buy a revolver that doesn't HAVE one!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top