Driftwood Johnson
Member
With all due respect, the third cylinder latch on the Triple Lock was very different than the current spring plunger S&W is using on some of their revolvers.
Go back to post #9 and #13 and take a look at the current arrangement with a spring plunger.
Here are a couple of Triple Locks, a very early one with almost all the blue worn off that shipped in 1907, and a nickel plated one that shipped in 1915.
Here is a close up of the third lock on the blued Triple Lock. The '2nd' and '3rd' locks are actually one piece. The arrow on the right is pointing to the '3rd lock'. The arrow in the center is pointing to the '2nd lock'. These are actually one U shaped piece. The arrow on the left is pointing to the 'front' of the U shaped piece, which protrudes slightly from the under barrel lug.
Here is a view of the front of the under barrel lug on another Triple Lock. This shows the tip of the U shaped piece protruding slightly from the front of the under barrel lug. When the thumb piece of the revolver is pushed forward to free the cylinder, a rod running up the center of the ejector rod pushes the '2nd lock' forward. Since both locks are actually one piece, both locks slide forward. The two pins are what hold the assembly in place. Below the tip of the U shaped piece is a round piece being held in place by the lower pin. This round piece is what actually traps the U shaped piece in position. There is a compression spring inside that puts constant rearward pressure on the assembly to keep it engaged in the front of the ejector rod and an insert mounted in the yoke.
Here is the entire cylinder and yoke assembly. The spring loaded rod running up the center of the ejector rod can be seen, as well as the hardened steel insert mounted in the yoke that receives the '3rd Lock'. The rod in the center of the ejector rod is what disengages the '2nd and 3rd locks' when the thumb piece is pushed forward. When the cylinder is closed, the stronger spring of the '2nd and 3rd locks' pushes the rod in the ejector rod back, keeping the '2nd and 3rd locks' engaged.
Another view of the hardened insert in the lock. I mention it was hardened because it was Case Hardened to cut down on the constant wear of the '3rd lock' being engaged. You can still see a trace of the colors of the Case Hardening, and a wear mark on the ramp that guided the '3rd lock' into position. (Yeah, I probably should have cleaned out the gunk in the insert before taking the photo) Unlike the current arrangement with a relatively shallow conical spring plunger engaging a relatively shallow detent in the yoke, the '3rd lock' of the Triple Lock was also cone shaped, to help it 'find its way' into the hole in the insert, but the angle of the cone was not as pronounced on the '3rd lock' of the Triple Lock. And the hole in the insert was quite deep in comparison to its diameter.
The '3rd lock' had a chamfer cut into it to help it ride up the ramp in to the insert. The rear of the insert can be seen in this photo of the nickel plated Triple Lock.
Another view of the cylinder and yoke of the nickel plated Triple Lock. The pin protruding from the bottom of the yoke is a feature that S&W used to have in many of their revolvers, it is not specific to the Triple Lock. The pin is spring loaded and pops into the hole visible in the frame. The purpose was to keep the cylinder open and present a little bit of resistance to the cylinder closing. Closing the cylinder slowly, one can feel the spring loaded pin being shoved into the yoke, allowing the cylinder to close. It will actually keep the cylinder open even if the revolver is upside down. As I say, this pin was not a feature specific to the Triple Lock, and S&W stopped using it pretty early.
Why did Smith and Wesson put all the extra work into the 3rd lock of the Triple Lock? The standard system of latching the cylinder in place had been in use since 1902 with the 38 Military and Police 2nd Model, latching the cylinder at the rear and at the front with a spring loaded under barrel lug. Some say the 3rd lock added stability and extra precision to the cylinder lock up, but most, including Smith and Wesson historian Roy Jinks think S&W did it, simply because they could. The thinking is S&W wanted to impress the market place with the precision of their manufacturing capabilities, at a time when a Colt double action revolver was only latched at the rear of the cylinder.
Why did they stop making the Triple Lock? It was expensive to produce. During WWI 808 of this model were converted to chamber the .455 Mark II cartridge for shipment to England. Of the 808, 666 were shipped to England, the rest were sold commercially. I can't lay my hands on it right now, but one of my books by Jinks states the British were concerned about mud jamming up the area of the under barrel lug that surrounded the ejector rod. A total of 15,375 Triple Locks were made up through 1915. Then S&W did away with the 3rd lock. In 1915 the 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model appeared, without the 3rd lock. It had a simple under barrel lug with a spring loaded latch to engage the front of the ejector rod, just like the 38 M&P.
The retail price of the Triple Lock was $21. The retail price of the 44 HE 2nd Model was $19. This was a lot of money at the turn of the Century, and the $2 difference in price was pretty much due to the elimination of all the extra machining required for the 3rd lock.
Here is a photo of a 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model. Notice the large underlug for the 3rd lock of the Triple Lock is missing. The ejector rod is latched at the front no different than any other Hand Ejector of the era. This one shipped in 1921. Notice the large mushroom shaped cap on the front of the ejector rod. Clearance for this cap had to be cut into the underside of the barrel.
A close up of the clearance cut into the underside of the barrel to clear the mushroom shaped cap of the ejector rod.
This is actually a 455 Hand Ejector 2nd Model that was later converted to 44 Special. But notice the size of the cap at the front of the ejector rod has been reduced from the earlier mushroom shaped cap.
Anyway, I wanted to make clear that the current use of a spring plunger and detent in some current S&W revolvers is very different than the way it was done on the Triple Locks.
Not denigrating the current set up, it is just very different than the way it was done on the Triple Lock.
(By the way, there is a difference between ball plungers and spring plungers. Ball plungers actually have spring loaded ball built into them. Spring Plungers have a rod with a rounded or conical end. If you want to know more about off the shelf ball plungers and spring plungers, check out the selection at McMaster Carr. I used to order them all the time in a different life.)
https://www.mcmaster.com/plungers
Last edited:
