S&W Internal Lock question

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not a structural engineer but are you SURE the I-beam is "stronger" than an equivalent solid beam? I thought it had similar stiffness but reduced weight. Similar to hollow round anti-roll bars on cars, a solid center does not contribute much to resisting twist loads. It would be lighter and use less material (cheaper) but it would not technically be stronger.

It is possible the reasons have more to do with hot casting technology (injection molding). By having a hollow interior section they might get better material flow from the "gates" (more complete fill or less directional shrinkage) or better temperature control in a mold.
 
Heck, neither am I. However, you clearly understood what I meant. You may very well be correct in what you expounded upon, also. For those not already familiar with it, here's and interesting link about MIM:

http://www.flomet.com/flash/index.asp
 
AFAIK, the MIM part was always this way. You may have seen some hybrid or transitional guns with a forged trigger(solid)..........
Click to expand...

Contraire amigo! I'll post a picture when I get a chance. Triggers now have a teardrop cutout (S&W is keeping this change low-key! Remember when one of mine broke?) and not like the one pictured, which is straight.

Welcome to S&W 101. School's open!. ;)
 
I'll wait for the pic, and defer to you on this one.

I cannot see the trigger in the pic above very clearly. Are you saying that the 'straight' hollow with the bridge across it has been changed to the tear-drop shape?
 
FWIW, Bill Ruger proposed a ban on magazines over 10 rounds.

Also, there are reports that Ruger will go to an internal lock some time this year.

Jim
 
FWIW, Bill Ruger proposed a ban on magazines over 10 rounds.

Also, there are reports that Ruger will go to an internal lock some time this year.

Jim
Click to expand...
Mag ban old news and OT.
As for Ruger possibly adding internal locks in the future, well, I guess I won't buy those either. I detest them. We will see.
 
Hi , this thread stirred enough in me to make me join up and make a respectful reply. First let me say I own a Ruger or two and consider them excellent arms, but i'm an S&W revolver man at heart.

That being said, S&W made a deal with the devil at a time when firearms companies were under severe stress from the cities lawsuits against manufacturers and firearms related stocks were worth so much floor sweepings. Bill Ruger helped forge a deal with the devil on his own accord. S&W's deal only affected S&W , Smiths now have locks and some new investors, but thanks to some help from good 'ol Bill we now all shoot 10 rounders.

Next up , MIM parts , those of you who were around guns when Ruger started using Investment castings out of powdered metals for virtually all parts that could be made that way will remember all the hubbub about how much junk they were, and how Ruger was cheaping out on their guns etc etc (hmm , sounds familiar), fast forward to 2000 (twenty some years after Ruger started large scale Investment Casting) and S&W decides to go to MIM on a few of their parts and a whole world of new shooters is outraged again , nevermind that many folks in the know of the process report that the parts are very similar in quality to investment cast parts of the same metals and that grain structure and strength can be very good.

Mag ban old news and OT
Click to expand...

My point is not that S&W is great and Ruger is bad , it is that the latest sin is always certainly the most horrible (no matter how horrible the last one was), so until the next sin S&W will surely be taking the beating , as for me - if I fancy a new S&W i'll buy one (and i've fancied a few lately) because if I don't support S&W , enventually there will be just Rugers and Tauri' , and that is unacceptable to me. Case

PS: great place y'all have here , been lurking a while , great job Oleg
 
The MIM parts are hollowed out for two reasons

1) Less material. MIM is cheaper the less material you use. More material requires a longer cooling time in the tool, before the part can be dropped. The actual tool is a one time, up front charge. The parts are basically priced by the pound, and the cycle time per part. With milling, removing excess material costs money. with MIM, removing excess material saves money.

2) Sink. Molded parts show a phenomonon called sink when there is a thick section. If you were to injection mold a cube (from any material) the centers of the faces would be sunk in. It looks terrible, and creates a lot of internal stresses. By hollowing out the part, and using webs and ribs for reinforcement where required, you end up with better geometric integrity.

owen
 
I will be out and about in the near future revolver shopping. I'll have to see if any gunshops around here have any of the new S&W's.
Click to expand...
I found a dealer in Springfield with a new 629-6 on the shelf. I looked it over and wanted to hate it. I couldn't.
What I found is this. If I hadn't known the hammer and trigger were MIM, I wouldn't have seen it. The difference is that subtle. As a mater of fact the only clue that could be seen was the hollowed out area on the back of the trigger. (It was the teardrop version Robert was talking about.)
I tried the single action trigger and it felt just like a S&W. A bit heavy, but most new guns are.
I closed my eyes as I cycled the action and if I hadn't known this was a MIM gun, I wouldn't have been able to tell it.
It was tight and stiff, just like every NEW S&W I have ever handled. So as of now, I will hold further opinions on MIM parts untill I actually get to shoot a S&W equiped with them.

The key safety, well my opinion of that hasn't changed. :barf:
 
I've recently purchased a 686 w/ "the lock"

At first I hated it...it was like this empty little hole always nagging at me...but the hole is filled by a handcuff-like key that flips out a little band of metal that says "locked." So all in all it doesn't really look all that bad, compared to some screw thingy on a trigger guard.

What I dislike about it...w/ the obvious exception of it being there, is that the gun has a slight rattle when it's shaken side to side...like a coke can tab rattling 1/16' inside a piece of steel - I think it's the fascist lock rattling. Maybe a little grease will 'stick it' to the side...

Overall I like the revolver - haven't shot it yet - just dry fired it. It's action both single and double is sweet! I've read that the trigger is polished to mimic 5,000 rounds going through the weapon, hopefully I can dry fire mine 4,900 times and save a few bucks on ammo.

I read alot about the boycott before finally purchasing this particular weapon, my revolver quest started out as a colt saa and ended up on a 686. I'll probably end up in getting a 60LS too...

As for boycotting S&W that's another thread entirely, but I wonder what the world would be like w/o S&W? I mean it's kind of funny how a liberal Democrat can make the gun enthuisasts 'eat their own' especially an icon that has been around for over a century.

-L.W.
 
Boycot only works to do what the anti boys want, it to, removes one company from the list. Then they will start on another.
I do not want to see one company including the Sat night special ones go out. Every one we break with our "boycot" is one step closer to NO GUNS.
I will buy a S&W if I want it, I have a Taurus and the lock is not noticable,and I do not keep it locked as I carry it everyday. No big deal.
This is my opinion, and all have one and with this opinion and $.50 I might be able to get a cup of coffee.
 
Leaky,

The rattle proabably isn't the lock. It is almost definately the Hammer Block. It is a piece of twisted sheet metal that rides loose in a channel in the side plate. One end engages a stud that sticks out of the side of the rebound (IIRC) and the other end sits between the hammer and the frame.

owen
 
:cuss: Go ahead and defend s&w. When the war is finally won, we'll shave your heads and parade you down the street like the traitors that you are.


"I'll buy a S&W if I want"
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaa, mommy I want some cookies!:cuss: :cuss: :cuss:
 
Ahh - Victor, the I-beam analogy doesn't really apply as the two type of hammers are the same external shape except for the hollowing. The MIM part will be slightly weaker than the forged part simply due to having less metal. The reason the MIM parts are hollowed is to prevent porosity from being a problem. After a MIM part is pressed to shape from the powder that consists of Metal particles and a binder it has to be heated in an oven. This vaporizes the binder and causes the metal particles to bind together. But the vaporized binder has to go somewhere - and if the part is too thick then you get tiny holes left in the part caused by the vaporized binder traveling through the part. This effect limits the maximum part thickness that you can use the MIM process to form. So you see all kinds of small parts like safety levers, slide release levers etc being formed by MIM, but S&W is actually pushing the limits of the process to form hammers and triggers using MIM.
 
"Go ahead and defend s&w. When the war is finally won, we'll shave your heads and parade you down the street like the traitors that you are."

Wow, pretty strong language! I must confess I'm of a mixed mind about S&W although I sold off a number of mine after the Great Fiasco. I'm not sure if I'll ever buy any more Smiths but am sure the only guy to shave my head is going to be me.
 
We've reached our quota of "agreement" stuff, pro and con, for this thread.

Please confine legal and political posts to the Legal and Political forum. Thank you.
 
Two points worth noting....

Freightman's point is well taken as the Anti's would like S&W to go out of business from a boycott from gun owners. Anti's win.

Also, the counterpoint is that if you do "buy into" the S&W internal lock, you let them know that it's OK for them to place it there. Next there will be a keypad grip........ Anti's win.

The way I see it, the gun manufacturer must fear their customers MORE than they fear the politics of their industry.....and that is a very tough thing to do. Certain things must be adhered to by law, others do not.

I choose to no longer buy any firearm with an integral lock. I'll buy a pre-lock S&W, Remington, whatever. It's easy to do now, but 30 years from now pre-lock guns may be hard to come by if things continue to deteriorate.

My opinions only. I wonder if I'm the only one who feels that things are slowly being eroding away.......

MP
 
This oldfella's opinion on this matter is that S&W makes a fine revolver, with and without the lock - I own both, and both go BANG each time I pull the trigger... and hit the target as aimed.
 
My Smith 66 with internal lock just clocked another 100 rounds on the roundometer today and still going strong. No problems and still a great revolver and my favorite handgun. The lock and MIM---who gives a tinker's damn? My handgun works and it has a couple thousand rounds through it. Next handgun I buy will be another S&W.
RQRJWB----Hey, Mr.2 posts, lighten up.:rolleyes: Got something worthwhile to contribute? Your second posts says a lot more than you intended.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
S&W 686P without the internal lock?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Hammerdown77
H
C
  • Locked
S&W internal lock - bought a snubbie
Replies
13
Views
978
wuchak
W
P
  • Locked
Questions About Internal Locks
Replies
12
Views
851
Commander Crusty
C
G11354
  • Locked
S&W Revolver Internal Locks?
2 3
Replies
69
Views
4K
bluetopper
bluetopper
A
  • Locked
S&W Internal Lock - technical thread.
Replies
11
Views
1K
Guillermo
G
Back
Top