Internal Lock on S&W

[Carmoney]

If left in place, the internal lock (IL) system is very unlikely to malfunction. While I'm not a big fan of the IL system, the concern regarding accidental IL activation is highly overblown on the various internet discussion forums.

If the hammer is "Carmonized" or otherwise radically cut in a manner that removes the rear portion of the hammer, the IL flag can slip out of place and lock up the gun. And I think it's clear that at least some IDPA officials will interpret the rules to require the IL system to be intact and functional.

This is why I advise IDPA competitors to leave the hammer in stock configuration, or simply bob the spur and contour the upper area of the hammer, which will allow the IL system to function without any risk of pieces falling out.

[Steve Koski]

Mike,

Is it overblown because most scadnium framed revovlers are rarely shot, much less shot with box after box of high powered ammo? Or is it overblown because it almost never happens to scad. framed guns that ARE fed a steady diet of high powered ammo?

Is a sizeable fraction of your work with scadnium framed S&W's?

Thanks,

Koski

[Duane Thomas]

Much ado about nothing? A gun spontaneously locking up? Earth to Duane!

Did you actually read my post? I said it's much ado about nothing because even the possibility of this happening can be so easily avoided while still leaving the lock totally functional.

[SauconValley Shooter]

Good Morning,

Gregg, we will see you in just a few weeks at S&W. I am going to be in San Antonio the week before the S&W match but I am flying in Monday, flying out Friday and I have a feeling I will be putting in long hours between.

I meant why take the chance of the lock catching at a major match and ruining any chances of a win. I still cannot believe anyone at HQ would consider it a safety instead of a storage lock.

Ken

[COF]

Good Morning,

Josh shoots a 646, which because of the titainium cylinder is also a lighter gun. The rest of the gun is stainless steel so it has some weight.

Why would anyone want to take the chance at a major match?

Ken

Ken, Josh's 646 doesn't have the lock unless they made another run of them. His 610 or his 625 may have the lock, but not the 646.

Jerry

[Steve Koski]

Duane - Of course I read your post. It just sounds like nonsense to wave your hands at defensive guns locking up due to a failed safety lock and to expect users to apply blue loctite. This is anything but "much ado about nothing." It's a potentially disastrous situation for Officer Brown who's scadnium framed backup gun locks up on him in a life/death situation because he failed to apply blue loctite per your instructions.

[Carmoney]

Mike,

Is it overblown because most scadnium framed revovlers are rarely shot, much less shot with box after box of high powered ammo? Or is it overblown because it almost never happens to scad. framed guns that ARE fed a steady diet of high powered ammo?

Is a sizeable fraction of your work with scadnium framed S&W's?

Thanks,

Koski

Steve, the vast majority of my work is on steel-framed revolvers. But I have owned several scandium-framed S&Ws, including a 340SC with IL that I carried daily for several years. I've never witnessed a malfunction with the IL, and have never managed to confirm that such a malfunction occurred from a first-hand reliable source. Most of what you see on the internet pertaining to this subject is nothing more than hand-wringing and hysteria. The purists hate the IL for other reasons, and jump at every chance to warn us of the horrific dangers of the IL--but like Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster, IL malfunctions are discussed a whole lot more than they are actually seen!

[SauconValley Shooter]

Good Afternoon,

Jerry, right you are. I shoot a 646 as well and there is no lock. I will have to call Josh and ask him to which gun this happened. Perhaps I can get him to post the occurance himself. He has been shooting SSR with a 686 SSR lately, so maybe that was it. I will find out.

Ken

[Steve Koski]

Mike,

Do you know about how many rounds of full power ammo you put through your most heavily shot scadnium framed S&W?

Koski

Edited January 26, 2010 by Steve Koski

[Carmoney]

Not any more rounds than necessary! Those guns are absolutely awful to shoot.

Answer: Probably more than 50, but less than 100.

[Steve Koski]

I hear ya. I've shot a few rounds through 'em, but never more than two cylinders of hot stuff before crying uncle. I prefer the recoil of my 500 mag with a 350 JHP at 1650 fps to those nasty little snubbies.

[Duane Thomas]

In the IDPA forums we are not going to be discussing Officer Brown and his defensive usage of his totally stock scandium framed revolver. We may discuss how smart and experienced IDPA shooters who want to shortstop any barely possible problem while keeping the gun legal may accomplish that. On BrianEnos.com discussion of defensive handgun usage is strongly discouraged. Please reread the Forum Guidelines and abide by them in the future

[Duane Thomas]

I hear ya. I've shot a few rounds through 'em, but never more than two cylinders of hot stuff before crying uncle. I prefer the recoil of my 500 mag with a 350 JHP at 1650 fps to those nasty little snubbies.

The only people who think light, small-framed .357 Magnum revolvers with full-power ammo are really fun guns....are people who've never fired them. Shudder.

[Lentz]

As Ken was saying my 686 SSR did lock up on me. Here is the story, The gun is a 2 years old it probally has 10,000 rounds through it and it probally has 50,000 clicks through it from dry fire practice. The guns lock engaged twice during a dry fire session after it happened i took the locks out of all my revolvers. I dont know what could have caused it because there was no recoil since i was using dummy rounds. Hope this helps

Is it legal to take them out for idpa?

[Brian Gonsalves]

As Ken was saying my 686 SSR did lock up on me. Here is the story, The gun is a 2 years old it probally has 10,000 rounds through it and it probally has 50,000 clicks through it from dry fire practice. The guns lock engaged twice during a dry fire session after it happened i took the locks out of all my revolvers. I dont know what could have caused it because there was no recoil since i was using dummy rounds. Hope this helps

Is it legal to take them out for idpa?

Here's a copy of the emails I exchanged with Robert Ray:

Hi Robert, One more revolver question for you. Must the Key lock on S&W function? I know the rules state, safeties must function. But it seems a Lock is not a safety, every new gun comes with a lock of some kind.

Thanks again for all your time!

Take care,

Brian Gonsalves

Brian, Technically the lock is a safety devise and disabling it would make that gun illegal for use in IDPA. The rules specifically say safety devises which the lock would be.

Thank you,

Robert Ray

International Defensive Pistol Association

robert@idpa.com

[CDPMatt]

Yep, sounds like the same conversation I had with him....

[Lentz]

Well thats not good i just replaced my SSR trigger and hammer with older forged parts that are not cut for the lock system.

I thought it was a storage lock i guess the people at idpa think other wise

[ScottNH]

Pardon me for jumping in, and this is not a criticism, but Robert Ray is still the Marketing Manager, right? The Media Contact? Does he hold some special rule-making/rule-interpreting position also? I guess my point is that if anyone who "answers the phone" in Berryville can make a ruling, how are we to know that the next guy who answers won't have a different ruling? I'm not trying to be argumentative; just trying to find out if there's "one true word" on this, and how to recognize it when I see it.

[Steve Koski]

You can take Robert Ray's word to the bank. He is the spokesman for IDPA. Call IDPA HQ with a question, and you'll get very consistent answers - from Robert Ray!!!

There is a problem that arises with the distribution of the (consistent) rulings like this from Robert. They are not posted on IDPA's web site or in the quarterly magazine. So if the match director is unaware of Robert's rulings from forums like this, emails, phone calls, or other avenues, then the MD must make a decision based on the rule book and the best information available to him at the time.

Koski

Edited February 2, 2010 by Steve Koski

[ScottNH]

You can take Robert Ray's word to the bank. He is the spokesman for IDPA. Call IDPA HQ with a question, and you'll get very consistent answers - from Robert Ray!!!

There is a problem that arises with the distribution of the (consistent) rulings like this from Robert. They are not posted on IDPA's web site or in the quarterly magazine. So if the match director is unaware of Robert's rulings from forums like this, emails, phone calls, or other avenues, then the MD must make a decision based on the rule book and the best information available to him at the time.

Koski

Thanks, that's very informative and helpful. I've always thought some method of circulars or newletters, like the FAA or ATF, use would be helpful to disseminating ruling such as this. "That was covered in the 1Q09 Circular."

Do you suppose Mr. Ray polls the other principals before making a ruling, or is he in the enviable position of just deciding, "Nope. That's legal/illegal?"

Edited February 2, 2010 by ScottNH

[Steve Koski]

I'm fairly sure there are behind the scenes discussions before he answers any "new" questions.

If it's well traveled ground, he'll just rattle off the previous clarification.

If it's new ground, he'll likely "get back to you." To me, that means that it's being discussed with others before he's willing to go on record.

Koski

[Chris Christian]

Robert Ray does seem to be the IDPA HQ source for rules clarification and he does respond quickly, as well as being a very pleasent individual to speak to. I've called him on a number of occasions. The drawback to IDPA HQ interpretions is that not everyone receives them. There should be an updated IDPA web site for "rules changes" issued between rule book publications. There are situations where the Rule Book says one thing, and IDPA HQ rulings say another. I'm not dinging anybody here. I'm a SO. I have to enforce the rules. Most IDPA shooters never read the Rule Book... they learn it 3 seconds at a time. But, for those few that do... how do I, as an SO, tell them that "Yes, the Rule Book says you can do that... but there was an edict from IDPA HQ that now says you can't... so you get a PE". I'm not bitchin' about the Rules. I love IDPA and SO two matches a month. But....

Chris Christian

[Nik Habicht]

But....

...you believe there could/should be a better way....

I'm there....

[RobMoore]

This is the equivalent of the factory safety device that comes with every Springfield XD.

Edited February 2, 2010 by RobMoore

[Duane Thomas]

Does he hold some special rule-making/rule-interpreting position also?

Yes. Not rule "making" but Robert Ray serves the same function in IDPA as John Amidon does in USPSA - he is the go-to guy for rules clarification.