Revolver Sticker Shock

Status
Not open for further replies.
From the Ruger website;

"The State of Maryland has mandated that all pistols and revolvers manufactured on or after January 1, 2003 must have an “integrated mechanical safety device” to be legally available for sale in Maryland. As a result, beginning in 2004, newly designed and manufactured Ruger pistols will be equipped with internal locks."

Go get 'em IL activists.
 
Ruger is not owned by a dead man. Get over it already.

Anyway I've had great results with the revolvers Bill came up with. Of the newer ones, I do like the SP-101 but find the GP's too clunky.

Prices are actually on par or cheaper in real dollars than they were a generation ago.
 
your store is too expensive. buds has gp100's for $470-$500, 686's for $670-$700.

hey, wth, when did 686's go up in price so much? a year and a half ago i was looking at one at gander mountain, and they wanted $550 for it. had i known they'd go up in price like that, i'd have bought one! :mad:

i own a gp100 and love it though.
 
I bought a brand new S&W k-22 in 1950 or 51. Was all of 65 dollars back then. Talk about sticker shock. 75 cents an hour was good wage for a kid. In 1989 bought a S&W 625 in the neighborhood of 300 bucks. That represented about 1.5 days of work. So, in some cases while they cost more in dollars today they cost less in time worked to earn the price. Still high no matter what.
 
"The State of Maryland has mandated that all pistols and revolvers manufactured on or after January 1, 2003 must have an “integrated mechanical safety device” to be legally available for sale in Maryland. As a result, beginning in 2004, newly designed and manufactured Ruger pistols will be equipped with internal locks."
Click to expand...


As I remember that statute was quickly modified when the Democrats in the Legislature learned that Beretta, who had a large factory there, was thinking of moving to a more gun-friendly state. Beretta handguns did not have internal locks, and apparently they had no intention of adding them. :uhoh:

While the legislators might have despised handguns, they dearly loved the jobs the factory created, and the tax money they collected from it. :eek:

Suddenly external locks were found to be satisfactory...

Unfortunately there are far too few handgun makers that have Beretta’s internal fortitude. :banghead:
 
Old Fuff,

As I recall, the legislation specified that after 31 Dec, 2002 all handguns had to be supplied with a lock. It was the Maryland State Police regulations that created the 'integrated mechanical safety' requirement.

In addition to Beretta's threat, there was a University of Maryland professor who filed a law suit seeking to over turn the MSP regulation as it went beyond the letter of the law.

Shortly after the law suit was filed, the MSP rewrote the regulation to allow external locks to satisfy the laws.

Now we need to get rid of the useless and expensive shell case 'fingerprint' system and the bizarre Handgun Roster Board.
 
You can suspect whatever you want, I'm not trying to stir any pot. I was looking at the Ruger website (when considering purchase of an SP101) and saw the attached, if indeed this changed in 2002 then Ruger website suffers from some serious neglect. Try it yourself go to the website, select Safety Information from the top menu then select Safe Storage and Locking.

I have also seen photos of keys actuating integrated locks at the rear of exposed hammers on (I believe Taurus?) revolvers that never get mentioned with the ravings of Smith & Wesson critics. There has been a firestorm of emotional reactions to the Smith lock and the predictions of wholesale failure of the design has never materialized beyond some anecdotal accounts of scandium or other lightweight frames. Bullet jump appears to be a more common problem.

I don't own a Ruger and can only trust what Ruger tells me. If the Ruger IL never materialized then why does the website still read this way?

By the way Guillermo, I haven't been as impressed with a childish insult since I was called "Rudolph the Red Nosed" in second grade. My first initial and last name are my screenname, so I can reconnect with my second grade critics and tell them you have raised the bar on insulting creativity 45 years later. Congratulations, you must be very proud.
 
Last edited:
Um, you're old... :D

I feel the same way. I think part of the reason that revolvers are so much more expensive than semi-autos is the amount of metal in them. Just the metal alone adds significant cost to the firearm. Then there's the innards of a revolver. Then there's the economies of production. More semis are made and probably quicker too. The revolver, IMO, is a finer machine.

As for prices overall...well i remember when a box of 50 count .22's cost 0.89 but that's still probably twice what a lot of the guys on this board remember it as being.


Confederate
Revolver Sticker Shock
Click to expand...
 
I'm not trying to stir any pot.
Click to expand...

please allow me to explain the difference between the Smith IL and the Taurus lock

the Smith lock is built into the action

the Taurus lock that you mentioned is not

The Taurus lock works perpendicular to the recoil of the gun, making the possibility of the recoil engaging it as close to impossible as statistics allow

The Smith lock works not only on the same axis as the recoil but opposite direction (the gun recoils back, the lock rotates forward)

The Smith design is the most idiotic ever devised

As to your name, hey, I mess with the lyrics to songs, names, etc. Was not trying to make a little joke...guess I made it a little too small. :D Did not mean to offend and apologize
 
Guillermo,

Accepted and we are good:D,

Thanks for the IL explanation, as much of a "hot button" as the whole IL thing is, doesn't it seem odd that Ruger didn't dump this from the website? Maybe I'm the only gun nerd that reads the fine print?:cool:

P.S. Yup, I'm somewhat vintage....but it beats the other choices that were available.
 
Last edited:
doesn't it seem odd that Ruger didn't dump this from the website?
Click to expand...

totally weird

I would not only dump it but have my computer weenies scour the web, wiping away all traces.

doesn't it seem odd that Ruger didn't dump this from the website?
Click to expand...

I dunno about that...we got some SERIOUSLY nerdy folks on THR
 
Well I can say that all the recent Ruger handgun designs based on entirely new platforms do have internal locks, but they aren't visable, and so far don't have a history of any known failures.

So why the lock? I don't think it has anything to do with laws in Maryland, and everything to with being sued into the ground by anti-gun lawyers who can bash gunmakers while making money at the same time. On too many occasions these bottom-feeders have sold gun-stupid urban juries absolute bullsqueezings for fun and profit. The lock is there for insurance against these things.

Anyone that doesn't like the Ruger lock can disable it with a shot of epoxie, or remove it altogether and not leave a visable trace. I can live with that, but I sure wish they'd get rid of the "read the book" stamping. :banghead:
 
So Fuffmeister,

If I buy the SP101 I will get an internal lock? Keys and a port somewhere to wind it up? Would that be under the grip panels?

P.S. I assume it is a part of the action, just not aligned with the recoil impulse?
 
Well a quick web search has shown Gunblast talking about the Mk III IL under the safety switch, centerfire semi auto's with them, talk about SBH with IL located under the grips, nothing about GP100 or SP101. Curiously the blued SBH has them and the stainless do not (at least at the time of someone's web post). It seems pretty clear that they are or were gradually phasing in.
 
Well for the moment if you buy a Ruger SP-101 you won't get a lock because its an older platform. :)

But if you buy a new LCR you will... :(

Actually the Ruger lock doesn't bother me because it's under the stocks, and if you want to use it you (or someone) has to drill a small hole through one panel. So far I haven't met anyone who ever did. :evil:

What it does is block the mainspring strut when it's turned on. This sort of thing has been around for decades since it was first introduced by Harrington & Richardson. Recoil forces have absolutely no affect on it. It is not hard to disable, but so far I see no reason too do it, and if you do your warrantee is gone.

While it is a very rare occurance, S&W locks have been known to self-lock, and while they also can be removed or disabled, they leave an ugly reminder on the side of the frame.

The Taurus lock has a spotless reputation. They offered S&W free use of it, but the latter company was apparently too proud to accept.
 
Wholesale on a used 686 is $270.00. Somebody is getting it in the backdoor on that deal.
 
(btw, he likes to be called "Fluffy")
Click to expand...

Boy... You is in serious danger. Texas isn't that far away from Arizona, and my hacksaw loves Detective Special hammer spurs... and trigger guards... :evil:
 
I'm not aware of any issues regarding S&W locks causing the failure of the guns to fire.

What's really strange about this entire issue is that while new guns are selling for astronomical prices, the blue book writers are, I think, intentionally under-valuing used revolvers, many of which, in the case of S&W, are made of better materials and exhibit superior craftsmanship. Only dealers put any stock in them, and they essentially use them to rip-off people wanting to trade in or sell their guns. Certainly individual sellers on auction boards aren't buying into them.

The cost of materials does figure in to the prices of revolvers, like everything else. The plastic pistols ensure that great autos like the 2nd and 3rd generation Smiths are gone for good. And as long as Smith and Ruger watches the tolerances on their revolvers, they will be highly sought.

Ruger, sadly, has a reputation for "clunk." The GP-100s suffer from it, as does the SP-101 and Ruger's autos, all of which look like they were made in the Soviet Union. (The S&W 459/559/659 suffered a bit from clunk, but they quickly fixed that with the next generation -- I still love it, though!) The Rugers work, and work well, but they're like bricks. The GP-100 could be improved by being offered in tapered barrels, especially in 6-inch barrels, but Ruger apparently feels that they wouldn't sell. It was Bill Jordan who argued for smaller, lighter magnums that could be easily carried into the field.

.
 
Any competent gunsmith can remove the S&W lock and replace the key slot with a matching metal insert. Owners with good tools can do this at home. It's not a big deal. They do this all the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top