The Ruger lock is only on single action cowboy guns...and as far as I know is only being placed on blued guns and NOT stainless. My brand new GP100, for example, is lock free.
Furthermore, I haven't heard of a single Ruger lock failure yet...
What is the beef about the S&W locks
- Thread starter heavyshooter
- Start date
- Status
Furthermore, I haven't heard of a single Ruger lock failure yet...
DawgFvr
Member
Point taken. I agree. All Ruger revolvers need finishing, trigger work, etc.
Still....I leave you this:
http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/448400adaed4f0a82d4961b5b2d91d8b-116.html
Hawk
Member
Probably one of the few things I'd prefer to a Morganti Ruger would be a Cunningham Ruger. But the waiting list for the last remains closed.
heavyshooter
Member
WOW!!! I may be in the no lock crowd now---
I was unaware of lock malfunctions. While I will concede that it may be relatively rare, the fact that the list of malfunctions on the S&W site is up to 25 pages is a little disconcerting. The first one listed says that the lock engaged as a result of him dropping it. Since the majority of these weapons are intended for home defense or trail use, dropping them is not all that unlikely. I don't think I will be able to say to the bad guy or cougar, "Time out, I need to run to my gun safe and retrieve a key so I can disengage my entirely unnecessary gunlock."
Thanks harmonic and TFred -- Good looking out
I was unaware of lock malfunctions. While I will concede that it may be relatively rare, the fact that the list of malfunctions on the S&W site is up to 25 pages is a little disconcerting. The first one listed says that the lock engaged as a result of him dropping it. Since the majority of these weapons are intended for home defense or trail use, dropping them is not all that unlikely. I don't think I will be able to say to the bad guy or cougar, "Time out, I need to run to my gun safe and retrieve a key so I can disengage my entirely unnecessary gunlock."
Thanks harmonic and TFred -- Good looking out
heavyshooter
Member
"actually its [the internal lock] a very simple solution to a real world prob. I'm not saying I agree with it, or that its needed. -- TAB
The crazy thing is the fact that my Smith and Wesson came with both an intenal lock and an external pad lock. This makes the internal lock unecessary. It is a bad idea to have the gun and the key in the same place, so if I lock it, it is no longer any good for the typical HD purposes. For this reason, I would never use it and therfore would prefer it not be on the gun.
The crazy thing is the fact that my Smith and Wesson came with both an intenal lock and an external pad lock. This makes the internal lock unecessary. It is a bad idea to have the gun and the key in the same place, so if I lock it, it is no longer any good for the typical HD purposes. For this reason, I would never use it and therfore would prefer it not be on the gun.
heavyshooter
Member
"My brand new GP100, for example, is lock free." -- BigBlock
Ditto. I traded an S&W for the Ruger because it has no lock.
Ditto. I traded an S&W for the Ruger because it has no lock.
Last edited:
Hawk
Member
Revolvers sometimes bind up when dropped, lock or no.
See http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=313389
excerpt said:
There's a lot in that S&W thread that find interesting, some mildly distressing, some I dismiss.
Hawk
Member
BigBlock said:
Blanket statements are dangerous.
If your perspective was based on carrying a Gemini, your view of the stock product might be different from your current view.
Then again it might not. But trying a Gemini first would provide you with a broader base to understand the remark. Whether or not your view would change notwithstanding, if you haven't shot a Gemini, it's something I'd recommend.
Hawk, 
, I was refuting a ridiculous "blanket statement" made by someone else. I did not make any.
To say "all rugers need work" is a "blanket statement", and a stupid one at that. It's the same as saying "All smiths with a lock WILL lock up on you".
Furthermore, I am not stupid, I know what a nice and/or custom revolver feels like. Ruger makes a very nice one right out of the box. I don't know why we're arguing about Rugers on a post about Smith and wesson problems....
, I was refuting a ridiculous "blanket statement" made by someone else. I did not make any. To say "all rugers need work" is a "blanket statement", and a stupid one at that. It's the same as saying "All smiths with a lock WILL lock up on you".
Furthermore, I am not stupid, I know what a nice and/or custom revolver feels like. Ruger makes a very nice one right out of the box. I don't know why we're arguing about Rugers on a post about Smith and wesson problems....
heavyshooter
Member
Let's play nice boys.
Hawk
Member
I'm in.
I have no skin in the Ruger issue - this is a S&W lock thread, after all.
JCMAG
Member
Rugers are nice guns, I'm not giving them any guff. But single actions are the only Rugers I've handled, hence mentioning that they also have a lock.
I don't have a major issue with the lock. I'd just rather get guns that have more of the qualities that I prefer: Blued, partial underlug, etc.
I don't have a major issue, rationally, but I still don't like the darned things one bit.
I don't have a major issue with the lock. I'd just rather get guns that have more of the qualities that I prefer: Blued, partial underlug, etc.
I don't have a major issue, rationally, but I still don't like the darned things one bit.
johnnylaw53
Member
heavyshooter
I can understand where 25 pages of lock failur could make you rethink the lock but if you read those pages you will fine that only 10 really talked about failur the rest is a post for haters and policital statements which is why thier modnators move it to the lounge. I do not love the lock but after getting caught up in this too I began looking hard and I just don't think it a big deal. yes they can happen the truth is the only time I have had a revolver fail me was 1981 firt day of range week my colt trooper Mk III fireing pin broke I had a buddy lend me a Mod. 19 to finish the week with ended up trading the colt for a ruger. yes the lock is another point where it could fail. so are the magazine of a semi auto but been carrying them everyday on duty for the last 20 years. Made your own mind up and i know it hard with some of the things you read on the internet but remember anything on this thing take with a bottle of salt.
be safe
I can understand where 25 pages of lock failur could make you rethink the lock but if you read those pages you will fine that only 10 really talked about failur the rest is a post for haters and policital statements which is why thier modnators move it to the lounge. I do not love the lock but after getting caught up in this too I began looking hard and I just don't think it a big deal. yes they can happen the truth is the only time I have had a revolver fail me was 1981 firt day of range week my colt trooper Mk III fireing pin broke I had a buddy lend me a Mod. 19 to finish the week with ended up trading the colt for a ruger. yes the lock is another point where it could fail. so are the magazine of a semi auto but been carrying them everyday on duty for the last 20 years. Made your own mind up and i know it hard with some of the things you read on the internet but remember anything on this thing take with a bottle of salt.
be safe
jjohnson
Member
Hillary Hole
No, I don't want to vent on this one anymore. :banghead:
Been there, done that, and I'm in the same place of opposition.
Just do a search on "Hillary Hole" and you'll find more reading than you want on this topic.
No, I don't want to vent on this one anymore. :banghead:
Been there, done that, and I'm in the same place of opposition.
Just do a search on "Hillary Hole" and you'll find more reading than you want on this topic.
420Stainless
Member
I bought one with a lock due to its other desirable qualities - so I am able to overlook the lock.
However, I view the lock as a liability (do not want to search for the key or hope for the time and dexterity to deploy it in an emergency). For me it adds no value to the product and only detracts from its function and looks. Perhaps others find functional use in it, but by intuition I think very few actually use it. Which would then mean that its incorporation is driven by nanny state restrictions dictated by legislators that despise the product, not by actual customer needs.
However, I view the lock as a liability (do not want to search for the key or hope for the time and dexterity to deploy it in an emergency). For me it adds no value to the product and only detracts from its function and looks. Perhaps others find functional use in it, but by intuition I think very few actually use it. Which would then mean that its incorporation is driven by nanny state restrictions dictated by legislators that despise the product, not by actual customer needs.
Deanimator
Member
Even if you DO have the key, you may not be able to clear the stoppage without major disassembly.
The lock is both:
Grossly unattractive, and needlessly so.
Dangerously unreliable in a self-defense application.
I've got a safe literally full of S&W revolvers. I've never owned an S&W revolver with an ILS. I never will.
DawgFvr
Member
BigBlock...It is all relevant. I love Rugers and meant no disrespect when I stated that they needed work. The actions...compared to fine Colts and S&W really are rough and the frames need polishing...triggers are gritty. Really...put about $600 into a little finishing work and the Ruger will compare to the best. I put $1500 into my GP100 and it really is an ultimate revovler compared to a stock GP100. Thus, in my opinion...all Rugers need work to meet my level of expectations for a fine revovler.
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
I dislike the locks as well. I hate the way they look, and while the chances of spontaneous activation may be miniscule, it could happen. I'd rather not add another point of failure to the mechanism if I don't have to. And I don't have to. I'll just buy used S&W revolvers made before the damn things were added (just picked up an early production Model 29, complete with the "coke bottle" grips.)
But my chief objection to the internal locks is that some people may rely too heavily on them for safety. An external lock, such as all gunmakers provide these days, is fine. You can leave it off, or put it on, but if it is put on, you can tell at a glance that the lock has been applied. Not so with the internal lock. You can't tell just by looking, and a person may think the thing is locked when it isn't, and assume the gun is now "safe." This may actually increase the likelihood of a negligent discharge, especially if the weapon is left unsecured by someone trusting a lock he or she only thinks has been engaged.
But my chief objection to the internal locks is that some people may rely too heavily on them for safety. An external lock, such as all gunmakers provide these days, is fine. You can leave it off, or put it on, but if it is put on, you can tell at a glance that the lock has been applied. Not so with the internal lock. You can't tell just by looking, and a person may think the thing is locked when it isn't, and assume the gun is now "safe." This may actually increase the likelihood of a negligent discharge, especially if the weapon is left unsecured by someone trusting a lock he or she only thinks has been engaged.
If someone would realy read the IL link on the S&W Forum (all 25 pages) you will see that very small % have actually had a lock failure. Most of it is "I heard" or 'someone said" or I was in a gun shop and it just fell out. I am not defending the IL's, but lets at least get the facts straight.
As with any devise there is a chace of failure. IF YOU DON"T LIKE 'EM, they can be removed.
IMHO, most of what you read or hear is as much political as any thing else.
That said, I am not wild about them either, but it didn't stop me from buying one and in all fairness, I has perfomed well.
As with any devise there is a chace of failure. IF YOU DON"T LIKE 'EM, they can be removed.
IMHO, most of what you read or hear is as much political as any thing else.
That said, I am not wild about them either, but it didn't stop me from buying one and in all fairness, I has perfomed well.
krs
Member
This is a guess, but the lower part of the S&W lock involves a very small pin that protrudes from the underside of the trigger to engage a sliding piece. It looks like the most vulnerable part of the whole mechanism. This is apparently the way the lock locks the trigger in "both the hammer and the trigger are locked".
If something were to happen to that pin to cause it to jam it's lock slider then the error would appear as the trigger drew back the hammer in double action operation. The hammer would be jammed at something more than halfway back and the shooter would say that the hammer was back when his lock failed while all the time it was actually the trigger operation interfered with at some point in it's pull.
As I said, a guess. I was looking at those lock parts yesterday.
If something were to happen to that pin to cause it to jam it's lock slider then the error would appear as the trigger drew back the hammer in double action operation. The hammer would be jammed at something more than halfway back and the shooter would say that the hammer was back when his lock failed while all the time it was actually the trigger operation interfered with at some point in it's pull.
As I said, a guess. I was looking at those lock parts yesterday.
- Status
