# the Ruger and S&W lock thread



## 22lr (Feb 20, 2008)

Hello all. First post here. I've been searching online for hours now looking for general and historical info on Ruger and S&W locks. There seems to be a lot of opinions on this topic, folks saying they are nothing to worry about, others having problems with their light weight magnums locking up with heavy loads and even locking up when guns are accidentally dropped on the floor! I have a few questions I am hoping some of you may have answers to. I did a forum search but didn't find much info.

First off, exactly how do these locks work?

What years did Ruger and S&W start putting them on their guns?

Did they each switch over all models starting at a certain time or was it a gradual thing over the course of a few years?

Any other info anyone wants to share would be appreciated.


----------



## 22lr (Feb 20, 2008)

I emailed S&W and asked them which of their models have a lock and this was the reply I got:

"All of our current production revolvers manufactured from 2001 to the
present; with the exception of the Model 40 we reintroduced last year
as part of our Classics series; have an internal lock installed."

Will probably also email Ruger and ask for the same info from them.


Is it hard to remove locks?


----------



## tschmittel (Jun 26, 2007)

Hello 22lr. S&W revolvers do have the locks on them, but it is my understanding that no ruger revolvers do. I have a ruger mark 3 22/45 that has a lock but it's an auto. If you want a S&W revolver with out a lock consider getting a used one. If you go to the Smith & Wesson forum you can find detailed instructions on how to disable them. Good luck.


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

The new Ruger GP100 I purchased in December 2007 and the Redhawk my friend purchased in January 2008 did not have locks.

:smt1099


----------



## 22lr (Feb 20, 2008)

*new thread title: the S&W lock thread*

Sorry about the title of this thread, I thought for some reason that Ruger revolvers had locks, doh! :buttkick:

It should come as no surprise then that I'm a newb looking to buy. 38 or 357, DA, 3-5" barrel, medium to medium-large frame, transfer bar or hammer block, no lock or one that is easy to remove, not interested in Taurus.
I've fired two handguns in my life, a rental Luger Mark II 22/45(very nice) last year at a range and an old 22 revolver which was probably a Bearcat but I'm not sure, this was over 15 years ago and I was still a kid. I was raised on 22 rifles, killed lots of cans and a few rabbits and squirrels. Cheap to shoot and fun but I want something with some real power now. Crime is on the rise in my area(home invasions even sadly) and I miss shooting. Looking for something to replace my cheap pistol crossbow and machete for HD. I understand basic gun safety and have no worries about getting the hang of shooting 38 special ammo for starters. Will probably rent or test fire a 38 this weekend at a range.

Anyway, I don't like this whole S&W lock thing much, I like the simplicity of revolvers and it just seems to go against that. A local shop has a brand new model 10 for a good price. Will do some research about the lock this gun has and keep my eyes open for Rugers and older S&Ws at other shops.

Thanks for the info!


----------



## 22lr (Feb 20, 2008)

On the subject of the "Internal locking mechanism" that almost all newer S&W revolvers have, Wikipedia had the following to say:

"All Smith & Wesson revolvers have been equipped with an internal locking mechanism since the acquisition by Saf-T-Hammer. The mechanism itself is relatively unobtrusive, is activated with a special key, and renders the firearm inoperable. While the lock can simply not be 'used', some gun enthusiasts refuse to buy "post-lock" guns, fearing the lock might cause the gun to fail ( i.e., malfunction ) when they need it most such as in a crisis.[citation needed] Also if the lock breaks, the gun will not work without being repaired.[citation needed] Smith & Wesson has repeatedly stated that the locking mechanism does not affect reliability, although several cases have been documented[citation needed], and Massad Ayoob penned an article discussing some of these equipment failures in the Jan-Feb 2005 issue of American Handgunner. It should be noted that all documented instances of the internal lock causing the gun to malfunction involved a light alloy frame (scandium or titanium) shooting full-power magnum loads."

I guess I won't worry about it considering that I don't want a light alloy frame gun but I still don't like it. I don't have kids or a crazy girlfriend.


----------



## 22lr (Feb 20, 2008)

More info from Wikipedia:

"Agreement of 2000
In March 2000, Smith & Wesson signed an agreement with the Clinton Administration in order to avoid lawsuits.[1] The company agreed to numerous safety and design standards, as well as limits on the sale and distribution of their products. Gun clubs and gun rights groups responded to this agreement almost instantly by initiating large-scale boycotts of Smith & Wesson by refusing to buy their new products and flooding the firearms market with used S&W guns, cutting into their market share. [2][3]

[edit] Acquisition by Saf-T-Hammer
On May 11, 2001, Saf-T-Hammer Corporation acquired Smith & Wesson Corp. from Tomkins PLC for US$15 million, a fraction of the US$112 million originally paid by Tomkins. Saf-T-Hammer also assumed US$30 million in debt, bringing the total purchase price to US$45 million.[4][5] Saf-T-Hammer, a manufacturer of gun locks and other firearms safety products, purchased the company with the intention of incorporating its line of security products into all Smith & Wesson firearms in compliance with the 2000 agreement.

The acquisition of Smith & Wesson was chiefly brokered by Saf-T-Hammer President Bob Scott, who had left Smith & Wesson in 1999 because of a disagreement with Tomkins' policies. After the purchase, Scott became the president of Smith & Wesson to guide the 157-year-old company back to its former standing in the market.

On February 15, 2002, the name of the newly formed entity was changed to Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation."

I know this gets into political talk but I don't get how a gun company can be sued because someone was shot and killed with a gun they made. How is it S&Ws fault if criminals get ahold of their guns or if parents don't teach their kids gun safety?


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

If you don't like the locks get a Ruger they are excelent guns. Thats what I did. 

:smt1099


----------

