Is Nothing Sacred?

[Acmemfg]

I have no words. Ironically one of the more odious traits of newer S&W revolvers is that idiotic lock which was the result of government “involvement”. Not the case here with Sig Sauer.
One can merely wonder.......

https://gunsandgadgetsdaily.com/sig...tm_content=newsletter&cmp=1&utm_medium=banner

 

[nortac]

A marketing ploy.
Something for those with inadequate training.

 

[jar_]

I think both the S&W (and Taurus) locks and the added manual safety option on many newer models is absolutely brilliant. They are all well done and well designed with great track records to support the features and making them available to folk are simply what any thinking organization would do.

 

[simon1]

A marketing ploy.
Something for those with inadequate training.

I can agree with that. The new Cimarron SAA I got has an extra "notch" in the cylinder pin where you can push the pin in further and put the screw in to lock it where the hammer won't contact a primer. It would be a pain in the proverbial donkey to undo the screw, or push pin if you have that type, to get ready to fire.

It's common knowledge, or used to be, that if you don't have a transfer bar or some type of other block on a single action you carry an empty chamber under the hammer as a drop safety.

Sigh...big brother passing regulations to keep you safe since you are too stupid to do it yourself.

 

[cw62803]

I don't like manual safeties because they confuse me. Is it on, is it off/??? I find them an unnecessary confusion.

But if having a safety makes someone else feel comfortable, I'm all for it. Bottom line for me is the more law abiding, sensible, well-balanced individuals out there carrying a firearm, the safer I am.

 

[TheGrimWeeper]

A marketing ploy.
Something for those with inadequate training.

Sums it up. I suppose it would help corp. counsel sleep better at night.

 

[simon1]

I think both the S&W (and Taurus) locks and the added manual safety option on many newer models is absolutely brilliant. They are all well done and well designed with great track records to support the features and making them available to folk are simply what any thinking organization would do.

The internal safeties are why the Colt series 80 has a worse trigger than the series 70. The more junk you have in the internals the worse the trigger pull is.

Needless to say I don't use the "safety" notch on my Cimarron SAA cylinder pin. None of my DA revolvers have the lock on them.

Training your kids on safety is key. If your kids are too young there are single handgun safes now days that can be secured by your bed for a home defense weapon. I was raised with firearms stored all around.

Just my 02s worth.

 

[jar_]

The internal safeties are why the Colt series 80 has a worse trigger than the series 70. The more junk you have in the internals the worse the trigger pull is.

Needless to say I don't use the "safety" notch on my Cimarron SAA cylinder pin. None of my DA revolvers have the lock on them.

Training your kids on safety is key. If your kids are too young there are single handgun safes now days that can be secured by your bed for a home defense weapon. I was raised with firearms stored all around.

Just my 02s worth.

And people still have the option of using or not using the locks, buying Model 70s or 80s; so I see absolutely no issues with the added features.

 

[simon1]

And people still have the option of using or not using the locks, buying Model 70s or 80s; so I see absolutely no issues with the added features.

Unless those without the "safeties" are not available on the new market. That's what they are working on to happen in the coming years/decade. Pretty soon it will be mandatory not to even have one without the "safety" in your own home.

I do not like the lack of choice on new ones. At least the Colt series 70 is still available in some of the new models.

 

[simon1]

No, nothing is sacred Acme.

Let's hear from those that have shot the S&W DA revolvers with the internal locks and those that don't have it as to how the DA and SA pulls compare.

 

[jar_]

Unless those without the "safeties" are not available on the new market. That's what they are working on to happen in the coming years/decade. Pretty soon it will be mandatory not to even have one without the "safety" in your own home.

I do not like the lack of choice on new ones. At least the Colt series 70 is still available in some of the new models.

While I strongly doubt your prediction and there is absolutely no evidence to support that supposition it is still not a big issue in my opinion. In fact it's already mandatory that all new handguns in the US come with a lock. I see little difference btween ignoring a trigger lock or chain lock or internal lock.

I have S&Ws and Taurus with and without the internal locks and find absolutely no difference in the trigger feel. So far that has been true with both pistols and revolvers.

 

[Acmemfg]

The middle and bottom pistols are far more safe...uh huh.

 

[simon1]

While I strongly doubt your prediction and there is absolutely no evidence to support that supposition it is still not a big issue in my opinion. In fact it's already mandatory that all new handguns in the US come with a lock. I see little difference btween ignoring a trigger lock or chain lock or internal lock.

I have S&Ws and Taurus with and without the internal locks and find absolutely no difference in the trigger feel. So far that has been true with both pistols and revolvers.

I have a series 80 that Bill Wilson did a trigger job on and installed his aftermarket parts in. It is good, real good, but it's not quite as good as a series 70 stock Gold Cup that an ex-Border Patrol friend of mine has.

My no dash S&W 686 was gone over by a P.D. armorer...he jerked the innards out and used stones, files, forms, and a hammer on them, and after a few (several) years of shooting it, it is the "like a glass rod breaking" on SA, and DA is as "smooth as butter".

Granted, I have not handled or shot a DA revolver with the lock so can't say from experience, but the more stuff the trigger has to work against effects the trigger pull, and also makes them a bit more complicated, but not much, to work on.

But back to the original title of the thread...no, there is nothing sacred, even the good classics.

 

[simon1]

View attachment 987632
The middle and bottom pistols are far more safe...uh huh.

 

[OkieStubble]

The thumb safety on that P365 is hideous! Like having a booger hanging out of your nostril and not knowing it.

Other then a cocked and locked or it being used as a decocker, thumb safeties are absolutely redundant. It's hard for me to understand, not having the self confidence in ones ability to keep their finger off of the trigger?

While at the same time, being over confident in ones ability to successfully flip the safety off or on with your thumb? While possibly under duress? Boggles the mind I tell you.

Confidence in ones mind controlling the thumb during SHTF, greater then confidence in ones mind controlling the pointy finger during SHTF. I guess.

 

[simon1]

The thumb safety on that P365 is hideous! Like having a booger hanging out of your nostril and not knowing it.

Other then a cocked and locked or it being used as a decocker, thumb safeties are absolutely redundant. It's hard for me to understand, not having the self confidence in ones ability to keep their finger off of the trigger?

While at the same time, being over confident in ones ability to successfully flip the safety off or on with your thumb? While possibly under duress? Boggles the mind I tell you.

Confidence in ones mind controlling the thumb during SHTF, greater then confidence in ones mind controlling the pointy finger during SHTF. I guess.

Yeah, Rob. I don't see the point with a thumb safety on DAO combat tupperware. I can see the use on a 1911.

Okay, Rob. Get out of the way. Jar and I are having a "discussion". There is nothing like an argument between two opinionated old men.

 

[noelekal]

I won't lie.

I just don't like nannying.

It's becoming more and more a pet peeve of mine.

Don't want to be nannied by anybody or anything. Don't want others' suggestions unsolicited yet delivered, especially when delivered with a condescending, critical, or imperious tone.

Don't want my vehicle, appliances, computer or any other apparatus nannying me, especially to the point that they won't operate unless I comply with pre-programmed nannying. Don't want cars that sound alarms or turn off the audio system until I buckle the seat belt. Don't want voices coming out of the dash warning me the door is ajar. Don't want the microwave to beep at me continuously once its heating cycle is completed. I'll open the door when I'm good and ready and if I want to allow the contents to completely cool off then I'll do it. If I'm too absentminded to get back to it then ... tough! I'll have to deal with cold food. Don't want the washing machine door to lock once the cycle has started for I might want to throw another pair of underwear in. Don't want power tools nannying me. Don't even tell me not to use the hair dryer while in the bathtub or to avoid sniffing fumes on paint and solvents. There are myriad mechanical devices that now nanny us in ways we've come to accept, even rely on. I don't want any of it!

Don't want guns nannying me. No ugly warnings emblazoned on barrels or slides. No trigger locks. No unnecessary safety baggage. No "smart guns".

An aside: "Smart" anything is a runner up among peeves of mine. If anything is prefixed by the word "smart" then I won't have it. Smart guns, smart cars, smart banking, smart watch, smart homes, ... Smart marketing delivering over-priced gimmick-y, yet mundane items to the stupid gullible is what it is.

Don't want food labeling to nanny me. Don't care what "the State of California has determined ..." about anything I consume. Don't want to know what the Food and Drug administration thinks about it. Inform me of the ingredients and allow me to decide whether or not to consume.

Don't accept environmentalism nannying. I don't intend to accept someone else's sad false religion.

Government nannying, the most insidious nannying of all. It's pervasive. We're regulated into the dirt! Bureaucratic regulations bedevil us at every turn, decreed by un-elected nitwits who aren't properly overseen by the nitwits we do elect ... and we live with it, come to expect it! "Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?!" The Five Man Electrical Band got it all wrong. They missed the point with their song "Signs." They aimlessly railed against social norms in 1971 all while our U. S. government was well along in tightening the screws of intrusive nannying on free Americans. And, there are more signs now than ever.

 

[simon1]

I won't lie.

I just don't like nannying.

It's becoming more and more a pet peeve of mine.

Don't want to be nannied by anybody or anything. Don't want others' suggestions unsolicited yet delivered, especially when delivered with a condescending, critical, or imperious tone.

Don't want my vehicle, appliances, computer or any other apparatus nannying me, especially to the point that they won't operate unless I comply with pre-programmed nannying. Don't want cars that sound alarms or turn off the audio system until I buckle the seat belt. Don't want voices coming out of the dash warning me the door is ajar. Don't want the microwave to beep at me continuously once its heating cycle is completed. I'll open the door when I'm good and ready and if I want to allow the contents to completely cool off then I'll do it. If I'm too absentminded to get back to it then ... tough! I'll have to deal with cold food. Don't want the washing machine door to lock once the cycle has started for I might want to throw another pair of underwear in. Don't want power tools nannying me. Don't even tell me not to use the hair dryer while in the bathtub or to avoid sniffing fumes on paint and solvents. There are myriad mechanical devices that now nanny us in ways we've come to accept, even rely on. I don't want any of it!

Don't want guns nannying me. No ugly warnings emblazoned on barrels or slides. No trigger locks. No unnecessary safety baggage. No "smart guns".

An aside: "Smart" anything is a runner up among peeves of mine. If anything is prefixed by the word "smart" then I won't have it. Smart guns, smart cars, smart banking, smart watch, smart homes, ... Smart marketing delivering over-priced gimmick-y, yet mundane items to the stupid gullible is what it is.

Don't want food labeling to nanny me. Don't care what "the State of California has determined ..." about anything I consume. Don't want to know what the Food and Drug administration thinks about it. Inform me of the ingredients and allow me to decide whether or not to consume.

Don't accept environmentalism nannying. I don't intend to accept someone else's sad false religion.

Government nannying, the most insidious nannying of all. It's pervasive. We're regulated into the dirt! Bureaucratic regulations bedevil us at every turn, decreed by un-elected nitwits who aren't properly overseen by the nitwits we do elect ... and we live with it, come to expect it! "Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?!" The Five Man Electrical Band got it all wrong. They missed the point with their song "Signs." They aimlessly railed against social norms in 1971 all while our U. S. government was well along in tightening the screws of intrusive nannying on free Americans. And, there are more signs now than ever.

You are entirely correct about the "smart" appliances. I had to go get a new programmable thermostat for the house air conditioner today because the one that is about 15 years old wouldn't respond to changing the temp. Some of the "smart" ones were $150. I got the $24 one.

The "stupid" thermostat in the back bedroom, that controls a separate system, came with the house and has been there over 25 years and still works fine. The more complicated things are the more crap there is to go wrong. I do not want a "smart" home.

And yes, I have seen the inside of the S&W with the internal lock and know how it works. Besides the rare occasions that the lock has engaged during recoil there is the need for a key. Have you ever misplaced your car keys? Then there is the classic "Where are my glasses?" when they are on top of your head or in the other room you just left.

The more complicated things are the more stuff there is to screw up on ya. Kinda like electric windows in cars vs. hand crank. I've seen people trapped in their car because the electric windows and electric door locks failed due to an electrical problem. I think they have addressed the electric car door locks now, but it took some time.

 

[ackvil]

Unfortunately, I see this as a new trend. Glad I have my pistols the way they are.

 

[noelekal]

One thing about every Smith & Wesson revolver here is that none will ever lock up while shooting them due to a lock feature.

A Smith & Wesson Model 329 that I once test fired sure did lock up on me, more than once. Locked up on my brother-in-law too. The gunsmith who'd offered to let my brother-in-law and I shoot the thing was handy with the key. When it wasn't actually locked up it was catching and causing the trigger to try to hang up, mid-cycle.

It would be sickening in the extreme to have the revolver freeze up in the middle of dire need.

Don't intend to ever have any lock baggage on a Smith & Wesson revolver.