Taurus Internal Lock

[BSA1]

As we know the Internal Lock on Smith & Wesson has and continues to be problematic.

The internal lock on Taurus revolvers, on the other hand, doesn't seem to have any problems (or least serious ones. I had the lock on a revolver I got last year not work. The gun was shipped bone dry of oil. A couple of drops of oil on both sides of the hammer freed it up and it has worked fine ever since).

Did Taurus get it right with their design?

 

[MCgunner]

I mean, if you just HAVE to have a lock, having one on the hammer that activates perpendicular to recoil forces seems the obvious choice over one that works parallel to the forces of recoil. Think about it.

One could grind off the lock rather easily on the Taurus hammer, but why? I lost the key to my M85 ultralite, activated the lock ONE time just to see if it worked. Never inserted the key again. I still carry that gun daily and it's never given me a problem. It's 17 ounces and I've fired some hot stuff in it, never attempted to lock itself.

But, i'm not convinced that the Smith and Wesson Hillary hole is a real problem, either. Smells like internet lore, to me. I do think if i got a light .38 or .357, I'd drop a little loctite down the Hillary hole, though. I don't feel compelled to do that with the Taurus.

 

[weregunner]

One thing that is true and the gun gurus have checked that out and documented it some time back, was that the Taurus lock does not go on accidently. There has never been a real world documented case of this happening.

There has also been a excellent articles by other gun gurus who wrote how the S&W lock going on accidently regularly or otherwise was real world documented.

There were even attempts to replicate such supposed happenings and the gun writers, been there and done that types had no success in making the lock go on accidently. These are gun writers who also love S&W revolvers. Tis true, but I have little reason to doubt the veracity of their claims. These were not rah-rah writers or gun users.

Oh, yes. One of the articles was "Much Ado About Nothing".

 

[Kiln]

I've never had a single issue with the interlock on any of the Taurus/Rossi guns I've owned and out of all the people I know who have had them, none have ever complained about it. To me, it is basically a useless feature but IMO, it is a harmless one that hasn't caused any serious problems.

 

[CajunBass]

I've owned a couple of Taurus and a couple of Smith & Wesson's with locks. Never really thought about either one very much.

 

[BSA1]

I like the Taurus lock better for a couple of reasons;

First I think it is safer to turn on and off. By having the safety on the rear of the hammer it keeps the shooter where he/she should always be...behind the gun with it pointing safely downrange.

With the S&W safety the gun has to be turned on its side in order to see the lock for inserting the key. For me the easiest way to operate the safety is to turn the gun sideways cradling the frame in one hand while inserting the key into the hole. By holding the gun by the frame it is easier to sweep the area.

Second is as MCgunner says the S&W lock slides parallel to the way the gun recoils so it also has to overcome these forces.

I do put some stock into MCgunners comment about it maybe being some Internet Lore but problems with the S&W have been wrote about in Gun magazines whereas nary a word about the Taurus lock. With how popular Taurus bashing is if their was issue with it would be all over the gun forums.

All of which leads me to wonder why S&W went with the design they did. Did Taurus beat them to the punch to the patent office or doesn't S&W have the "not invented here"" attitude?

p.s. I don't use the lock either but I can see a rare need for it.

 

[Old Fuff]

All of which leads me to wonder why S&W went with the design they did. Did Taurus beat them to the punch to the patent office or doesn't S&W have the "not invented here"" attitude?

At one time, back when... Taurus offered S&W a free license to use their patented lock.

Smith & Wesson declined the offer, for unstated reasons.

I prefer the Taurus design. It is simple, trouble free and easy to get rid of if you don't like it. Next in line would be the one Ruger uses on some models, and for the same reasons.

Hopefully everyone understands that the reason for these locks is to protect the manufacture (not the gun owner) from liability lawsuits.