Wheel Gun Internal Locks Poll
- Thread starter PolymathPioneer
- Start date
- Status
bergmen
Member.
They are required for California so we don't have a choice. I don't understand why they just can't be ignored. I never paid any attention to them since they are inconsequential to the function.
Dan
Dan
Lucky Derby
Member
No they are not. The internal lock does not satify any California requirement. Guns being transfered must have an external, seperate lock installed when they leave the FFL. So even with this stupid internal lock, the dealer still has to install an external one.
Lucky Derby
Member
I voted No, because you did not have an option for only if it is well designed. The S&W lock, which is what we all think o,f is VERY poorly designed. I have witnessed a failure where the gun locked under recoil. I have read several first hand accounts.
The Taurus lock on the hammer, AFAIK, has not had a failure. And this is Taurus! I almost expect their guns to fail. The Ruger lock, which is hidden under the grip of some SAs (AFAIK no Ruger DAs have a lock) has had no published failures. Ruger and Taurus locks are also both discreet when compared to S&W.
The Taurus lock on the hammer, AFAIK, has not had a failure. And this is Taurus! I almost expect their guns to fail. The Ruger lock, which is hidden under the grip of some SAs (AFAIK no Ruger DAs have a lock) has had no published failures. Ruger and Taurus locks are also both discreet when compared to S&W.
ArchAngelCD
Member.
I wasn't going get sucked into this thread but I have to answer that comment. That is totally incorrect. The ILS IS NOT a safely device, it's a storage device and like mentioned above, "The internal lock does not satisfy any California requirement. Guns being transferred must have an external, separate lock installed when they leave the FFL. So even with this stupid internal lock, the dealer still has to install an external one."
The ILS like threads involving the ILS are useless!
oldfool
Member
what 'almost' surprises me (and about the only thing that surprises me about these ILS threads) is that somebody at S&W doesn't shove poll results like these under the CEO's nose every day
I think I can guess why they don't quit the ILS, but they ought know by now they are not doing their marketing group any favors.
I voted, yes, by the way.
Despite no fondness or need for that ILS storage lock (S&W or other) , it's just not a deal breaker for me.
I think I can guess why they don't quit the ILS, but they ought know by now they are not doing their marketing group any favors.
I voted, yes, by the way.
Despite no fondness or need for that ILS storage lock (S&W or other) , it's just not a deal breaker for me.
Last edited:
oldfool
Member
"Now don't you think that someone that defaces a gun like this with that ugly hole should be horse whipped."
No, but I sure would love to see what leather that one wears on BBQ day (horsewhip accessorizing purely optional).
Pretty, I bet !
No, but I sure would love to see what leather that one wears on BBQ day (horsewhip accessorizing purely optional).
Pretty, I bet !
CajunBass
Member
I've been tempted to, "just because" and might still do it one of these days, but all all Smith & Wesson revolvers with a lock have something that I like even less.
That's a third digit in the model number.
Beaurtiful gun there M2. I don't even think the lock is all that ugly. It's just there. Sort of like a screw or a pin.
That's a third digit in the model number.
Beaurtiful gun there M2. I don't even think the lock is all that ugly. It's just there. Sort of like a screw or a pin.
TexasBill
Member
It's worth noting that the resistance to the ILS doesn't seem to have hurt sales of S&W revolvers. From their SEC filings it appears they are selling thousands of revolvers every quarter with J-frames being the hottest items. I have a hunch most people either don't know or don't care about the ILS or MIM parts.
With the number of ILS-equipped S&W revolvers out there, one would think that, if the ILS problem was as widespread as the scuttlebutt, there would have been an incident by now, followed by a big lawsuit.
Personally, I own two S&W revolvers with the ILS and would buy another. In fact, I would far rather have a modern, NIB S&W revolver than one of those made in the 1980s and 1990s, when S&W quality was terrible.
With the number of ILS-equipped S&W revolvers out there, one would think that, if the ILS problem was as widespread as the scuttlebutt, there would have been an incident by now, followed by a big lawsuit.
Personally, I own two S&W revolvers with the ILS and would buy another. In fact, I would far rather have a modern, NIB S&W revolver than one of those made in the 1980s and 1990s, when S&W quality was terrible.
S&W still does offer a few models without the internal lock. I bought a Model 442 last year without the lock and love it. I personally prefer my revolvers without one. I really want a 22 cal revolver but can't bring myself to buy the 617 because of the lock. I'll wait till I find an old 18.
Jonah71
Member
You have now. I sold my Taurus Mod. 65 ss at a loss. Got it back from CS after 2 months and it locked up again in a very short time. I may have simply ended up with a lemon, but I'm in no hurry to own another internal lock revolver. A good friend has the 7 round model (66 I think) and he hasn't had a problem with it in 3 years. With the kids all grown and out of the house I see no need for the lock on a revolver anyway....or any other gun for that matter.
bergmen
Member.
I stand corrected
I somehow came to believe the internal lock was a California requirement (they require so much other crap, my mind just lumped it in with the rest).
So how (why) did they originate?
Dan
I somehow came to believe the internal lock was a California requirement (they require so much other crap, my mind just lumped it in with the rest).
So how (why) did they originate?
Dan
oldfool
Member
"The CEO only needs to read a few posts like yours."
the CEO of S&W doesn't care about my opinion
he OUGHT care a whole lot about the other 50% in this poll, unless his vision of success is to have his sales and salary cut in half.. which is what I would be telling him real loud if I was on the Board of Directors
the CEO of S&W doesn't care about my opinion
he OUGHT care a whole lot about the other 50% in this poll, unless his vision of success is to have his sales and salary cut in half.. which is what I would be telling him real loud if I was on the Board of Directors
Loosedhorse
member
Very limited poll options. Others to consider:
I have already bought a S&W revolver with the key lock.
I have already bought multiple S&W revolvers with the key lock.
I have had the key lock removed on at least one of my S&W revolvers.
I am considering getting the key lock removed on at least one of my S&W revolvers: a light-weight, heavy-recoil one meant for emergency defense against human or animal attackers.
Oh, I appreciate the story about the Taurus: I thought with all the hoopla about Smith that only their revolvers could fail in a way to tie the gun up. Now we just need a similar story about Ruger key locks, and we're all set!
I have already bought a S&W revolver with the key lock.
I have already bought multiple S&W revolvers with the key lock.
I have had the key lock removed on at least one of my S&W revolvers.
I am considering getting the key lock removed on at least one of my S&W revolvers: a light-weight, heavy-recoil one meant for emergency defense against human or animal attackers.
Oh, I appreciate the story about the Taurus: I thought with all the hoopla about Smith that only their revolvers could fail in a way to tie the gun up. Now we just need a similar story about Ruger key locks, and we're all set!
oldfool
Member
"So how (why) did they originate?"
the infamous ILS (etc., notably the "biometric" idiocy) deal S&W cut with Clinton is the reason that "the company formerly known as Smith & Wesson" went bankrupt and was sold to Saf-T-Hammer for 10 cents on the dollar
http://www.lneilsmith.org/smithandwessonmustdie.html
and the Saf-T-Hammer folks apparently have spent too much time thinking about the great bargain they got, instead of why they got it
the infamous ILS (etc., notably the "biometric" idiocy) deal S&W cut with Clinton is the reason that "the company formerly known as Smith & Wesson" went bankrupt and was sold to Saf-T-Hammer for 10 cents on the dollar
http://www.lneilsmith.org/smithandwessonmustdie.html
and the Saf-T-Hammer folks apparently have spent too much time thinking about the great bargain they got, instead of why they got it
Last edited:
I will qualify my "not" vote by inserting the word "likely" after the word "not" in the sentence. I am not likely to buy an S&W with a keyhole, simply because I have plenty of revolvers already, and am lucky to live near a very large dealer in collectible firearms, who seems to have plenty of good-as-new pre-clintonista-era S&W revolvers at any given time.
I reckon that I might someday get a chance to handle a sixgun with a keyhole, and it may have redeeming features that negate the keyhole. The problem with keyhole revolvers seems to occur in the Airlite and Airweight versions, when using very powerful ammo.
As for a compact weapon for repelling bears, as mentioned by the OP, my choice would not be any S&W product, anyway, when I own Rugers quite suited to the task, that fit my hands superbly.
I reckon that I might someday get a chance to handle a sixgun with a keyhole, and it may have redeeming features that negate the keyhole. The problem with keyhole revolvers seems to occur in the Airlite and Airweight versions, when using very powerful ammo.
As for a compact weapon for repelling bears, as mentioned by the OP, my choice would not be any S&W product, anyway, when I own Rugers quite suited to the task, that fit my hands superbly.
788Ham
Member
I voted NO ! This was one of the first things I asked about before buying the SP 101 I now have. Guess I'm too "old style" to change now, don't want to have to contend with something else when the time comes to needing it in a hurry!
Beautiful BBQ gun, show us a pic of the whole unit, plus another with the leather, please!
Beautiful BBQ gun, show us a pic of the whole unit, plus another with the leather, please!
Lucky Derby
Member
As I understand it, and I may have the details wrong: A company called Safe-T-Hammer designed the ILS as a retrofit. They couldn't sell any. Due largely to the S&W/Clinton deal S&W was going under. Safe-T-Hammer bought S&W really cheap, not so much as a way to get into the gun business, but as a way to sell those useless locks. Safe-T-Hammer is a (poor excuse for a) lock company, not a gun company.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
