The Million-dollar question about the Smith & Wesson lock

James K

Member In Memoriam
You are certainly entitled to feel that way, but you are basing your concerns on a story by someone who apparently didn't experience the problem himself or really investigate the misfiring problem since, as was noted, the lock engaging will not cause misfires, it will lock up the revolver completely, immobilizing the hammer and trigger.

Jim
 

ClydeFrog

Moderator
Fair enough...

That might be true but Im not going to drop $800.00 USD on a .44magnum or .454 snub that might break.
Id save up & buy a NIB Ruger Alaskan wheel gun in .44 that I know does not have the security lock.

FWIW; I like S&W's newer hammer system. That seems like a improvement over the older version.
 

Webleymkv

New member
I've explained this before, but since there seems to be several members here newly investigating the topic, I think it bears repeating: I think the whole lock issue is an overblown "tempest in a teapot."

First and foremost, I simply cannot accept the word of anonymous internet posters as authoritative. Even if we assume that everyone reporting "auto lock" is 100% truthful (and I don't think they all are), we still have the issues of unknown expertise in diagnosing the problem and, as described by another member (I can't remember who or I'd give credit), the "internet echo chamber.

As James K and others have pointed out there are a myriad of other issues that could cause a S&W revolver to lock up. The only way I'd be willing to assume that the dreaded internal lock was the culprit of the problem without pulling the sideplate would be if I could see the lock "flag" protruding upward and that would not be possible with shrouded and internal hammer models. I'd be willing to bet that a large percentage of the "auto locks" reported are actually caused by some other issue, but due to the rather vocal complaints on various forums, the lock is assumed to be the culprit.

Secondly, I reject the notion that the design of the lock, at least on the newer specimens that I've examined, is conducive to "auto locking" unless QC issues like defective or improperly designed parts are also present. The manner in which the lock works is actually quite simple: the "flag" has a small protrusion which, when the "flag" is rotated up, engages a groove in the hammer and prevents its movement. Because the "flag" is rotated up and back to engage the lock, it will be pushed forward and down and thus out of engagement when the revolver is in recoil. Also, when the hammer is fully forward as it would be when the revolver is fired, the "flag" protrusion is not lined up with the groove in the hammer and thus the lock cannot engage. The fact that the majority of reports of "auto lock" seem to be with lighweight guns in hard recoiling calibers like .357 or .44 Magnum, which place more strain on all the parts, and guns with relatively low round counts further reinforces this notion. Also, I don't believe I've ever heard/read a report of "auto lock" reoccurring after the gun was returned to S&W for repair.

Finally, we have the "internet echo chamber" to contend with. Because forum posting is largely anonymous, it is not only possible, but likely, for one incident to be reported multiple times and appear to be multiple incidents. For example, if one person experiences an auto lock, two other people witness it, and all three post of three forums under different handles, one incident would suddenly appear to be nine incidents. When you then take those nine reports and start repeating them as "I heard about this guy who had an auto lock" as is often done, and the one original incident may very well appear to be dozens, if not hundreds.
 

James K

Member In Memoriam
The reason I have not flat denied the possibility that lock up could happen is this. If you look at the early "flag" you will see that there is no forward extension under the locking cam. If you have the hammer out, you can move the flag up into the locked position with your finger; the only thing holding it down is the spring.

If the hammer is all the way forward, pressing in the firing pin, the flag cannot move. But if the hammer is in the rest position, where it could be driven by the backpressure of the primer, the vibration of the revolver (not recoil as such) could cause the flag to move upward. Now I agree that this requires a lot of things to happen the wrong way at the same time, but in fact that is sometimes the case when a gun is fired, and some are right odd.

The later flags I have seen have a forward extension on the flag that won't allow the flag to move upward when the cam is on the bottom (unlocked) position. (If you look, you will see what I mean.)

So is there a possibility of the gun locking up? Yes, everything has to be exactly wrong at the same time, but IMHO, it could happen.

Has it ever happened and caused a tragedy? Not that I know of. Might it have happened at some time in some test? Maybe. Is it something I worry about? Nope. Is is a reason to threaten to kill people or blow up a factory? Hell, no, and folks who think like that are just plain insane.

Jim
 

Elliottsdad

New member
The only Smith revolver I've ever owned was a pre lock K frame; it's no longer mine, but still in the family.. I only bring that up to say I don't really have a dog in this fight, although it's something I think about from time to time. With that being said...

I DO NOT understand the ideology of a corporation that flat out refuses to listen to its customer base. I simply don't get it. Maybe for every one person out there that won't buy b/c of the lock, there are two that still will, but correct me if I'm wrong, but is that not a 33% loss of potential revenue?
 

RickB

New member
True, but I suspect the ratio is probably closer to one person who refuses to buy the lock for every 100, or 1000, who will.
 

RussB

New member
Truth be told, there are people who will buy a S&W revolver BECAUSE of the lock. I know of one such person...
 

Elliottsdad

New member
Truth be told, there are people who will buy a S&W revolver BECAUSE of the lock. I know of one such person...
True, but I suspect the ratio is probably closer to one person who refuses to buy the lock for every 100, or 1000, who will.

RussB, RickB.. these may be true, perhaps I have been hanging out at The Firing Line too much, a forum where I have seen hundreds (if not a thousand) of complaints about the lock, and posts in favor of the lock in the single digits... well, to be fair, maybe a couple dozen ever.
Someone out there is obviously still buying those revolvers... Smith quality is (arguably) still great, and I think for that reason people will overlook the lock, but I will say this: someday down the road, my next handgun will be a .357 or .44 mag. I really, really, like the Smith 629. But because of that lock, I just might end up getting a Ruger Redhawk...
 

RussB

New member
A hundred complaints is often the same 4 people saying it 25 times! ;)


I also visit a competition flavored gun forum. There are guys who shoot many rounds a year through their "lock" S&W's. Like 3000+ a year, with some going into 5 figures. There are also some top revolversmiths who claim S&W is building the best guns ever...EVER!

There are also a lot of guys waxing poetic on the internet, telling how everything was better "back in the day" and those ungodly lock holes just ruin the gun.

S&W sells a whole lot of revolvers. Most people really care less one way or the other about the lock. That's because it doesn't matter one way or the other. They're good guns, with a great warranty
 
Last edited:

TennJed

New member
The only Smith revolver I've ever owned was a pre lock K frame; it's no longer mine, but still in the family.. I only bring that up to say I don't really have a dog in this fight, although it's something I think about from time to time. With that being said...

I DO NOT understand the ideology of a corporation that flat out refuses to listen to its customer base. I simply don't get it. Maybe for every one person out there that won't buy b/c of the lock, there are two that still will, but correct me if I'm wrong, but is that not a 33% loss of potential revenue?

I would be shocked if that number is anywhere near 33%. My guess is it is less than 5%. You see a few die hard complainers on Internet forums, but remember Internet forum people are a very, very small percentage of the actual gun buying public. The lock issue gets blown out if proportion on the Internet and yet most posters don't have a problem. I imagine the vast majority of the people actually buying guns have no opinion on the lock

And anyone who want to unload a lock smith for cheap, PM me. I don't have a problem buying a gun that will function without issues
 

Elliottsdad

New member
You see a few die hard complainers on Internet forums, but remember Internet forum people are a very, very small percentage of the actual gun buying public
Honestly, I forget this sometimes! I (somewhat foolishly) work under the assumption that we are the norm...
 

skidder

New member
How often do you hear people complain. Dang! I wish mine had a lock!

There is a reason why these threads keep going. Lets not fabricate a hypothesis that it's only a few that don't like the lock. There are many reasons for the dislike: political, aesthetics, functionality, location. Just because the "lock lovers" can't see why people hate the stupid things, doesn't mean they are wrong. Believe me I can't understand how they can just ignore it.
 

James K

Member In Memoriam
And as others have said, any problem, real or not, gets blown out of all proportion on the Internet. One person posts about a problem he claims he saw happen. A thousand people read his post. Then each posts about the problem, accepting without question the allegations of the first poster. Then another thousand people read those posts, again accepting the claims (now third hand) made by the original poster and now saying that "thousands" of such incidents have occurred. (Remember, there was really ONE incident, and no one ever investigated or challenged that one.)

And so it goes. In any other field, people would ask for proof or evidence that the problem was/is real. But it seems that gun site folks are especially gullible and accept anything they read as gospel. Of course this tendency is known and used by people with very large axes to grind, like those who would wish to put gun companies out of business. (The Second Amendment won't mean much if there are no arms to keep and bear.)

There are those who denounce S&W and promote Ruger, for example. If S&W is forced out of business, they will soon find Ruger being attacked by the same people who attacked S&W. Don't kid yourselves; the anti-gun people assume many disguises, and one of them is pretending to be concerned for your safety.

Yes, we have to blow the whistle on truly dangerous guns and ammunition. But ask yourself how many guns would be available if outfits like the CDC were allowed to decide which guns are "safe" enough to own. The answer, of course, is zero; the only people with guns would be government-approved thugs who would loot and kill in the interests of the rulers.

Jim
 

Sweet Shooter

New member
Can we just push in a little Bondo to keep the lock from popping up? Or some blue thread lock? Just a thought. Could always be scraped out if need be.
-SS-
 

lamarw

New member
Sweet Shooter, I would not and am not going to do anything. I have a Model 25 Mountain Gun with the Internal Lock. It does not bother me in the least. I could easily disable the lock and put a plug in it but don't see a need to do so. Why spend the $28.00 for the plug and alter the revolver?

I figure there is a lot of them out there, and if Smith & Wesson had a serious problem there would of already been an alert or recall.

Others can do what they please to include not buying S&W. There are some in the gun community who swear they will never buy another Remington firearm simply because Remington did not stick it to New York State and move their factory. We have radicals on both sides of any and every issue.
 

RussB

New member
Just to give substance to the discussion, there's this report of a very common self-defense revolver (686) locking up while shooting:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...l-lock-failed/
This is not good behavior from any gun you'd want to count on, and reason enough to keep me away from any w/lock S&W revolver for social purposes


Interesting, but there's no follow up explaining what really happened. I don't instantly believe something because there's a YouTube video.

To me, there is no substance there. I'll speak with DS next time I see him regarding that particular 686
 

James K

Member In Memoriam
There are three videos there. One shows a cracked frame which is bad and I am sure S&W will make good, but has nothing to do with the lock. (The guy sure does like the sound of his own voice, though!)

The second shows the gun hanging up when the shooter tries to cock the gun, fails, lets the trigger catch the hammer part way down, then shows that the cylinder won't turn. ALL S&W's will do that; I tried it on three pre-lock guns with the same result. Correcting the situation requires only that the hammer be brought to full cock, something the shooter and instructor clearly didn't try. The lock has nothing to do with it.

The third shows a gunsmith cocking the hammer, finding the place where the lock can be turned, deliberately locking the gun with the key, then showing that (horror!) the gun is locked. Whether the design should prevent the lock engaging while the gun is cocked is another issue, but the gun can be returned to normal simply by unlocking the lock.

Jim
 
Top