S&W internal lock beef?

Then I got to thinking, I'm a Fender guitar afficianado, and the same could be said of me for my distaste of the enlarged headstock and logos on '65 thru '80 Telecasters and Strats.


I, like you, am also a lover of Fender insruments. The big gripe about CBS era Fenders was the 3 bolt necks on most of the line, as well as poor quality control and poor wood selection. Fender eventually got it right after a change of ownership, and LOTS of complaints from customers. Hopefully Smith & Wesson will eventually go down this same path. It sure would be nice if S&W had a line of fairly authentic reissues, like our friends at Fender offer, albeit without the crazy pricetag.
 
I guess I'm pretty lucky to have found a nice pre-lock 442. I plan to hang on to it. :)

What year did S&W start putting the locks on the entire line?
 
Granted, it is a visual distraction to some degree, but I need my guns to shoot well, not necessarilly look perfect.
Click to expand...

This isn't entirely fair.

A carry gun has no place for a safety lock, especially one that's had even a single instance of accidently engaging during use. I don't mean it doesn't need a safety, but not the lock. I mean, I suppose we could install a capo on the neck that had a random chance to engage at the 12th fret during your next solo, though. ;)

On top of that, for a range gun, I would think that a far better layout for the lock could've been acheived, especially now that there's been a few years for enhanced design. For a casual owner, I don't fault the safety lock as much, I even put trigger locks on all my firearms that aren't my regular carry (which, FYI, is a prelock S&W), but when it comes time to pick my next revolver, I promise you that looks are going to be a big part of that purchase (right after reliability), and any weapon with an obvious lock isn't going to make my cut.

That's OK, though.. there's plenty of old S&W revolvers out there that I can buy without a lock, and for less than new! Its not my fault that S&W won't see a dime from me because they don't know how to present an attractive firearm that still meets their safety requirements.. Its OK, coz Taurus did.
 
Recently, I learned that LTT (Ernest Langdon - Beretta guru) had taken to carrying a S&W 340PD w/ Crimson Trace grips. I'm not shocked he carries a revolver but I had to ask if it was prelock. LTT now works for S&W so no more gunsmith services for Berettas and Sigs - and considering he does work for that company - I wanted to know how much faith he had in the new models. His 340PD has a lock "although he hasn't even had the key out of the box and has no idea if it even works." Makes a statement, doesn't it? ;)
 
My first .500 X-frame locked up on round #4, just exactly as if the lock thingie was on. I couldn't cock the hammer, couldn't shoot DA, and couldn't open the crane. After I emailed S&W about it, Herb Belin himself called me, and then sent a regional rep to my doorstep the next afternoon to pick it up. X-frames #2 and #3 have been fine... so far. The only other S&W locker I have is a new production 625, and it's been fine so far too.
 
internal saftey lock debate

I think the whole internal saftey lock "debate" isn't worth the time given it.
Contributors to these boards represent a mere fraction of a fraction of gun owners with saftey locks. Perhaps one did fail somewhere along the way. This is where you are going to hear about that very rare occurance. I had a conversation with an employee of a gun shop with which I have developed a personal friendship. He told me that he has never heard of a single problem with the S&W internal lock system on the newer models. If he were a guy trying to sell me a gun I'd be sceptical, but we were only having a conversation. A gun is a tool. Tools break. That's why all gun manufactures have service centers. Some guys are "purists" and shun new innovations. Some people just like to bitch.
 
Contributors to these boards represent a mere fraction of a fraction of gun owners with saftey locks. Perhaps one did fail somewhere along the way.
Click to expand...

OK, so we represent a minority. We agree.

I've heard stories of more than one, I can think of at least four (including the one RIGHT ABOVE) involving first hand use. One guy dropped his revolver, and when he picked it up the lock was engaged, the other three had their locks engage while shooting.

So, that's 4 of however many thousands sold, right? OK, that's a pretty rare circumstance, isn't it? A percentage so low that it probably doesn't even register.

How many CCW owners actually use their weapon in a life and death situation, y'know, when compared to actual gun owners, or more to the point to actual people walking the street? I bet that percentage is pretty damned low, as well.

But, yet, the majority of people on this board prepare themselves for that tiny possibility. Some of them prepare themselves so far they walk around with a full size service sidearm, a backup weapon, a knife, a chemical spray, and enough spare ammo to fight off a small gang. Why? What are the chances they'll need 45 rounds in two weapons plus a hand-to-hand weapon, not to mention the first string of defense in a load of pepper spray?

Because they're prepared.

Are you prepared? You are? Then why would you carry a weapon with which even a small percentage of people have had a disturbing issue where it locked itself and prevented its use as anything other than a club? I've already prepared myself by bringing the stupid thing with me that I might need it, and I already have to worry about a hundred other mechanical or chemical issues causing it not to fire, why should I add one more, especially one more that's EASILY avoided and PROVEN in at least a tiny percentage of weapons sold?

Plus, y'know, its ugly.

gfen, prelock.
 
There really isn't much to add at this point so I'll sum up.

The lock is disliked because:

A: It's ugly.

B: It's offensive and insulting to experienced shooters.

C: It may malfunction.

All are valid points. I would note that the lock is not merely "PC" as some say but is really "legally correct" as many states come to require locks or they see it as a means to protect themselves from lawsuits. We may not like it but I can understand the gunmaker's position.

I only have one locking S&W and I haven't shot it yet. I would advise against removing any safety device for civil and criminal risks if the gun is ever used.
 
They don't move me one way or another. If you don't like it, don't use it. I wear safety belts in my cars also.
 
Loctite

I was just wondering..........If the internals were degreased, and some blue or green Loctite accidently spilled on the lock mechanism, and you got distracted and didn't finish re-assembly until the next day..............
Would that solve the malfunction problem?
 
I don't care that integral locks are ugly or not.

I don't care that integral locks are politically motivated.

Integral locks and electronic ID panels on guns have one, and only one, function: Their only purpose in life is to prevent you from shooting that firearm.

When an integral lock is working, your pistol isn't.

I bet my life on my handgun working when it needs to.

That is the bottom line. Period. Full stop.

I. Do Not. Want. A. Device. On. My. Pistol. That. Will. Kill Me.

Some lightweight firearms are self-engaging the integral lock under full-power loads.

Others are engaging after being dropped on a hard surface.

Some are engaging due to lint.

Some are being engaged by well-meaning, but terminally stupid, second parties.

I have been in firefights. There is no time when you are being shot at, for you to request a "Time Out" so you can search for the bloody key for your bloody sidearm that should have bloody well been working to begin with.

And that, folks, is the end of the discussion.

LawDog
 
"And I couldn't care less about the politics involved."

This is EXACTLY the reason why these locks and other "protect us from ourselves" additions will be made to firearms which were perfectly safe to begin with. People like you are the reason the NRA has 4 million members instead of 80 million members and why the 2nd Amendment is slowly being eroded away.

Pat yourself on the back, you don't care.
 
Lawdog- All of my semi-autos and some of my revolvers have at least one safety. What's the dif? You leave it unlocked, test for reliability, then forget it.

Or is that too simplistic?
 
When the critters are shooting at you, and your safety happens to get engaged - you thumb it back off.

The only equipment needed is one of the opposable thumbs that Mother Nature saw fit to give each member of the human race two of.

If the critters are shooting at you and your integral lock gets engaged what are you -- Person of Interest -- going to use to disengage said integral lock? In the middle of a firefight?

LawDog
 
There's a lot of "what ifs" in these arguements. If you don't want a revolver with a lock - buy one without. If you can't find it or afford it (and there's plenty of us who can't), get a Ruger. If you're happy with it regardless of the lock, use it and practice often. I honestly don't understand all the bashing of folks who own the new models.
 
I for one am not bashing anyone. I think you should buy as many guns as you want or can afford ,lock or not. I said I wouldn't use one with a lock for carry ,just range use only ,for reasons that have been laid out and rehashed here previously. If you feel comfortable carrying one with IL, more power to you. As far as the comment about not being able to find or afford older non -lock guns ,Perhaps you've not checked Gunsamerica or Gunbroker or Auctionarms ,they have many very nice weapons with no internal locks for much less than current ones. My local shops in my area of the country are well stocked with wonderful quality revolvers and auto's at reasonable prices. I am of modest means myself ,but am still able to scrounge up enough to purchase 4 or 5 handguns a year. Yesterday I purchased a S&W Model 66-4 with 3 inch barrel ,no lock for $375. It is a perfect carry revolver, Lock aside if S&W still made quality guns like my 66-4 I'd still purchase from them. YMMV Regards 18DAI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top