No-Lock Advertisement?

[44 AMP]

Entirely right John

You don't get setback with revolvers but you can get crimp-jump if the bullet crimp is insufficient, particularly in very lightweight revolvers with heavy loads. It doesn't push pressures up like setback does but it can tie up the revolver if it gets bad enough.

So I've read. I've never had it happen to me personally, probably because I don't favor lightweight revolvers with heavy loads. Did have it happen one time with a .45 Colt loaded with no crimp, for testing purposes. So I know it is possible.

However, for bullet jump to be a concern for the nightstand gun, the gun has to have fired, at least once, something highly unlikely with an unloaded or locked handgun!

As to the makers of ammo guaranteeing me no setback forever, I'm realistic enough to know that ain't happening. I used the example I personally had of a factory round surviving hundreds of chambering cycles (literally hundreds, if not over 1,000) without suffering setback to illustrate that it could be done. A maker who guarantees 4 or 5 chamberings without setback would only do so if they knew with certainty it would take much more. I'm happy if they just realize (and admit) that when you get setback, its a bad round.

Their QC was off that day. It happens. Nobody makes perfect 100% of the time. Nobody can. Lots of people can't get perfect, even once! But thats no reason not to try. The most important thing we can do is to let them know they have a problem, so they can address it in a timely manner.

Every manufacturer in the gun business I have ever dealt with has been glad I pointed out a problem that they missed (at least the first time!). Guns, ammo, or whatever, they aren't in business to deliberately sell you a substandard product. Some other industries I have dealt with have not had that attitude.

 

[18DAI]

Mechanical engineering 101. The more parts you add to a simple machine or mechanism, the more complex it becomes, and your failure rate increases.

No IL, no IL failure.

In 39 years of shooting revolvers I've yet to have a revolver fail to go bang due to a backed out ejector rod, crud under the ejector star, bullets jumping crimp, high primer, or any of the other myriad of excuses that internal lock apologists dream up when defending the idiotic device.

You fellas who claim to have experienced this ought to do a little preventive maintenance on you handguns, or buy better handguns. Regards 18DAI.

 

[Webleymkv]

Originally posted by 18DAI

Mechanical engineering 101. The more parts you add to a simple machine or mechanism, the more complex it becomes, and your failure rate increases.

In theory, yes. But I've yet to see anything that indicates that an increased failure rate with ILS revolvers is statistically significant. Theoretically, a double action revolver is less reliably than a single action one because it is more complex. Likewise, a single action revolver is less reliable than a break-action single shot handgun because its more complex. You pays your money and takes your chances with anything and I've yet to see any evidence that the ILS represents a significant failure rate increase.

No IL, no IL failure.

No, not really. As I pointed out before there are plenty of other components in a DA revolver which can potentially fail.

In 39 years of shooting revolvers I've yet to have a revolver fail to go bang due to a backed out ejector rod, crud under the ejector star, bullets jumping crimp, high primer, or any of the other myriad of excuses that internal lock apologists dream up when defending the idiotic device.

Well, admittedly I haven't been shooting revolvers as long as you (only about 11 years now) but in that time, I've seen the following:

A Colt Trooper that would bind up when shooting DA rapid fire, a S&W Model 28-2 which became difficult to cycle due to a backed-out ejector rod, a Ruger Security Six which would not reset its trigger due to a broken spring, a Ruger Redhawk which would not reliably ignite Winchester factory ammo and would sometimes bind up in rapid DA shooting due to a weak spring, a Taurus Model 66 which became difficult to open the cylinder on due to a backed out ejector rod, a Taurus 445 which would become difficult to cycle after 50 rounds due to an overly tight BC gap, a High Standard Sentinel Deluxe which could not be cycled rapidly due to improper timing (the locking bolt re-engaged too soon), a H&R Model 999 Sportsman which would not rotate the cylinder when cycled rapidly due to a worn hand, and a S&W 629-6 which would not fire because of a broken firing pin. The only one of these guns which was equipped with the ILS was the 629-6, and that particular feature has never given a moment's trouble.

You fellas who claim to have experienced this ought to do a little preventive maintenance on you handguns, or buy better handguns. Regards 18DAI.

Nearly all the instances I described above occured soon after the gun in question was acquired (the Colt was the exception as it was borrowed from an acquaintence). The 629-6 was purchased NIB and the Taurus 445 was purchased LNIB (new-old stock). Really, you're being kind of closed minded in assuming that the ILS is the only part of a S&W revolver which will fail without being the fault of the user.