Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forums

I'm going to point right back to the beginning and re-iterate that Smith & Colt had been building their service-frame guns for over a century. There are literally many millions of Smith 38s in the world.

It has been estimated that S&W has made some 6-million plus K-frame .38's.

This thread's been some great reading. Thank you, everyone!

What that, a question - what's folk's thoughts on the frame/internal lock on the S&Ws?

TSiWRX wrote:This thread's been some great reading. Thank you, everyone!

What that, a question - what's folk's thoughts on the frame/internal lock on the S&Ws?

Ugly and prone to engaging inadvertantly in high recoiling setups.

TSiWRX wrote:This thread's been some great reading. Thank you, everyone!

What that, a question - what's folk's thoughts on the frame/internal lock on the S&Ws?

A symbol of capitulation to government over reach.

OK gun folks: do you, either personally or anecdotally, know anyone who regularly uses the on-board lock on any gun so equipped?

There is basically nobody that prefers an ILS-equipped S&W over a similar S&W that doesn't happen to have the lock. At best there is a small contingent of buyers who quite genuinely don't care that any/every new S&W revolver has the ILS.

The lock that actually, inadvertently locks itself under heavy recoil is an irrationally rare event, it has happened with a few scandium frame ultra-light models.You have a better chance of winning the lottery than for this occurrence to happen to you. Effectively, it ceases to exist.

It is an obvious eyesore. Me? I find it quite helpful because when I see it, I know immediately that I can continue with my day, the revolver with it likely does not interest me. Not because of the ILS mind you... but because that ugly pimple on the left side of the frame tells me with a quick look, from a distance, that I am looking at a S&W from the last 10-15 years... and these revolvers are not my cup of tea. Laugh at will, I know what I know, but ~YES~, "they don't make 'em like they used to." These newer S&W revolvers lack QC and their guts are not smooth, their double action trigger stroke does not impress me.

This did NOT start when the ILS started, but the lines and the dates are blurred. It's just FAR easier for me to pay attention to the 95-100 year range of S&W revolvers that I love and ignore the newer ones with the zit. And make no mistake and casual opinions don't matter, but all else being equal (or even similar...) the ILS guns trade for less on the used market and are in less demand. There's a huge group of S&W revolver fans that do exactly as I do, and just go about their day as soon as they see the lock.

I have owned two S&W revolvers with the ILS. In neither case has the ILS been any sort of an issue whatsoever. I had a 3-inch Model 60 that was a really good gun, but it was a J-frame and I just couldn't love it, so it had to go. The other is my 460XVR, my X-frame 8-3/8" monster in .460 S&W Magnum. All models of 460 and 500 have the ILS, none have been made without it. With this revolver I send 240-grain jacketed bullets down the spout at 2,000 FPS muzzle velocity and lots and lots of recoil. Never, not once, not ever has the lock engaged itself. Never will it. It's still ugly and it's hard to imagine that they could have made that zit any more obvious.

A rare event, perhaps (OBL putting itself on), but it has happened enough to be a worry for a working gun.

Thanks for the further education, gents!