S&W Lock Project Ideas?

[buck460XVR]

I really think that S&W is hoping all us Old Heads die off and all the new revolver shooters just ignore The Hole and sales will continue...

Even tho all of us "Old Heads" have not quite died off yet, sales have been continuing at a fast pace. Many of us "Old Heads" just ignore the hole now. I have several pre-lock and post-lock Smiths. Overall, for me, the newer production guns with the hole are more accurate after break-in, than their older, no-hole, predecessors. Kinda makes the hole a moot issue to me. Gun are tool to me and their beauty is the holes they make downrange. The accuracy of the newer guns makes the hole not a wart on the nose of a beautiful woman, but a beauty-mark on her chin. While I don't use the lock, it does not distract from it's function, nor does it make the gun any less attractive, to me. I know others feel differently and I respect that.

Buying the new S&W is rewarding the wrong headed management. JUST SAY NO! The lock will be gone fast.

Folks have been saying this for how many years now? Well over a decade. What will determine the demise of the IL has more to do with the perception of the public towards how safe guns are in households with children, than the decade old rant of boycotting. Again, for every gun sale the lock has prohibited, it probably has initiated one. Seein' as how S&W has been producing all the revolvers it possibly can in the last decade and could not keep up, is there any good reason for them to change their machining and design?

As for the J-B weld on the hole......are you kidding me? There are plugs readily available and relatively inexpensive.http://smith-wessonforum.com/accessories-misc-sale-trade/460110-plug-lock-replacement.html

 

[jfruser]

I removed the ILS on my then-new SW638 and replaced it with The Plug. Given it is a daily/auto carry piece, I am not too concerned with looks (though it does look better). The lowered parts count and removing the possibility of ILS bits causing a malf was my primary concern.

Now, I could have bought a 642 no-lock, but S&W doesn't produce my preferred alloy snubby, the 638, without the ILS.

 

[smee78]

Jfruser actuality S&W did produce the 638 pre lock, I found one and it followed me home.

As for the locks, I'm not a fan. If S&W made a newer gun I just had to have I would go the plug route and move on with life.

 

[BlackLabsMatter]

The liability problem is not just on resale. If you remove ANY safety device on a firearm, you will end up being liable for ANY damages resulting from a negligent/accidental discharge. Period.

Just to be clear here, you're telling everyone that a person WON'T be liable for injuries caused by a ND or AD from an unmodified firearm under their control?

Pardon me if I'm a bit skeptical.

Are you implying that the removal of an ILS on a S&W caused unintended discharges?

 

[JDinAZ]

I also manufacture a very nice S&W lock delete parts set out here in AZ. Started when I wanted a Titanium set for my 329PD and no TI set existed. Let me know if I can help any of y'all out. https://www.originalprecision.com

 

[Bill DeShivs]

Using JB Weld, Metalset A4 or any other epoxy is simply ridiculous.
There are so many reasons it won't work that I'm not even going to get into it.

 

[FrankenMauser]

Since this thread was dragged back to the top, I might as well share my opinion of filling the hole...


I carried a 642, with a 'flag delete' done on it, for almost six years. In that time, the revolver got covered in dirt, dust, lint, sweat, and all manner of other undesirable jetsam.
Not once, did anything in the hole cause it to bobble, stutter, or fail.
It just kept on truckin'.
Methinks the worries about the hole are a matter of over-thinking...

 

[arquebus357]

S&W added the lock for the sole purpose of adding value to older S&W revolvers without the locks. Now, perhaps gun shops can finally get their ridiculous prices for all those sad old S&W revolvers laying in the bottom shelves that no one wants.

 

[Bill DeShivs]

Apparently, people just make stuff up for this thread....

 

[Model12Win]

Though I dislike the locks quite a bit and don't own any "locked" S&W guns, I've eventually come to accept them because they are not going away anytime soon. Just ignore them, seriously. Shoot the gun and enjoy it.

 

[44 AMP]

What will determine the demise of the IL has more to do with the perception of the public towards how safe guns are in households with children, than the decade old rant of boycotting.

That "old boycott" actually WORKED. Unfortunately, so did the law of unintended consequences.

We didn't boycott S&W just because of the lock. It was the British owners acceptance of the deal the Clinton's wanted, which included a lot more than just the lock. The lock was just the "in your face, gunowners!" part of it.

The boycott worked. S&W stock tanked, and the Brit holding company that owned S&W sold it, FOR A LOSS. And with them gone, there was no deal with the Clintons.

However, at that point, the law of unintended consequences took over. At least some, (if not all) of the group that came up with the money to buy S&W were the people who designed the lock!!!

It's their child, they created it, they think its a wonderful and needed thing!..so you won't see the lock go away, until those people do.

other makers have put locks in their guns WITHOUT having an "in your face" keyhole. So, either S&W (or the people who owned S&W) either didn't think through to impact to their customer base, or they DID, and went ahead and did it anyway, knowing what an insult it would be. And to put the cherry on the top they changed the shape of the cylinder latch. To me that was the worst part. I could even live with the hole, but not the "new" cylinder latch.

It doesn't look right, and makes the lock hole even more obvious.

I will admit, I haven't bought a new S&W since they stopped pinning the barrels. Did consider one of the X frames, but there's that lock and new wave latch, again...

S&W could have been smart, could have put the lock in, in such a way as to not change the traditional look of their guns. Ruger did. S&W CHOSE not to, and for that, I cannot, and will not forgive them.

Not that it matters much, really. In time, people will forget the reason they got mad about it in the first place. And the next generation will grow up with it, never knowing anything different, just as they do wit all the bad laws that get passed....

 

[springer99]

Over the years, I've owned, and still own, Smith's with and without the lock. Bought some of them new and some of them used. Honestly, I've never had a problem with the ones' with locks and have to say that I don't even give them a thought anymore.

If the lock bothers you, there are options to plug the hole but, to my mind, all that does is call more attention to the hole.

 

[UncleEd]

Personally, I LOVE the locks and have had several Smith revolvers from
the 1960s retrofitted with them.

 

[buck460XVR]

Focus on the shooting instead of the gun and those little irritations will soon become invisible.
Messing with it could easily result in disfigurements that could prove even more irritating.
Leaving it in original condition with the removed parts in hand would make it more desirable for resale, too.

^^^This. Get over it. No different than those billboard sized warnings on Rugers a few year back. Focus on the front sight while looking thru the rear sight and you will never see the Hillary hole. Maybe change your priorities and focus on the accuracy of the new S&Ws instead of the IL. Or just buy something else.

 

[18DAI]

Were it not for that idiot lock, Id have never discovered Ruger revolvers. Thanks Safety Wesson!

I have a nice collection of GP100s and two great SP101s. I have not purchased a new s&w since 2001. And have no intention of ever buying another.

 

[JDinAZ]

^^^This. Get over it. No different than those billboard sized warnings on Rugers a few year back. Focus on the front sight while looking thru the rear sight and you will never see the Hillary hole. Maybe change your priorities and focus on the accuracy of the new S&Ws instead of the IL. Or just buy something else.

I would agree to an extent. You are correct about focusing on the accuracy and enjoying just shooting these thing or any guns for that matter. They are all fun to shoot in my book.

The want and need for many of us in removing the lock is that we do still love the Smith revolvers and do carry them for defense on the streets or protection in the woods from wild animals. Which makes the potential lock failure become a dice roll with your life. Personally I'm not that much of a gambler to bet my life on my carry gun till I delete the lock.

Now just having them to target shoot is another thing, the hole in the frame is an eyesore. But if it happened to fail on the range then its not such a big deal and everyone still gets to go home to their family at the end of the day.

 

[rep1954]

I sure wish threads about the S&W IL would quit popping up on the internet that's when I remember that they are on guns that I own and then I have to wait a few days to forget about them again.

 

[JDinAZ]

They don't bother me much anymore. I throw one of my Lock Delete part sets in and it goes away. Now I can get a few other Smiths I've wanted