The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: Hazcat on August 27, 2007, 08:33:23 PM
-
Check his blog, Scary stuff! :o
-
It IS scary stuff! There is no reason on earth why that lock should have seized the gun up. The rounds are specifically designed for the gun and withing SAAMI spec for "normal", ie, not +P, pressures. The 255 grain bullet is only a little heavier than the standard .44 Magnum load of 240 grains and well below the weight of the heavy hunting bullets. I ususally keep Winchester 250 grain screamers around, as well as the Cor-Bon 300 grainers. Cor-Bon offers .44 bullet weights up to 320 grains. I mean. it's not that far off Elmer Keith's .44 SPECIAL loading (250 gr @ 1200 fps). We're not talking about new territory here. I've shot thousands of hotter .44s out of literally hundreds of guns with no problems. NONE of the rounds fired showed ANY pressure signs (flattened primers, sticky extraction, etc.).
SOOOOOOOOOO...in terms of a dangerous game back-up gun, it's the RUGER ALASKAN all the way. I've shot looney-tune .454 Casull loads out of mine without any problem whatsoever (other than sticky extractions with the heavy bruiser Cor-Bons...
I was willing to go with Charlie Petty's expertise and say the lock controversy was much ado about nothing...however, if I had been shooting at a bear...or the lion who keeps coming around my house...to protect myself or my family, I'd be wild game chow about now.
This is not acceptable!
Michael B
-
Hello, Mr. Bane. I agree with you. I suspect strongly that the problem is "statistically insignificant" but that would sure ring hollow if the revolver's lock self-engaged against a wild predator OR one of the two-legged variety. Having been in some deadly force situations, it is simply not acceptable. In the "dark place", one's personal weapon has to work.
At my club's range, on two separate occassions, I have personally seen two different S&W revolvers' locks engage while their owners were firing them. One was an S&W Model 642 and the other was whatever model the AirLight snub .357 magnum is.
This is one reason that I prefer older pre-lock S&W's when I can find the desired revolver model clean and in good working order and is why I choose not to own any S&W revolver having the lock. While it may never ever cause a majority of folks a lick of problem, I am simply not willing to take that chance.
Best to you and yours.
-
SOOOOOOOOOO...in terms of a dangerous game back-up gun, it's the RUGER ALASKAN all the way.
Yeah, while it's just a single incident, it is hard not to feel more pro-Ruger for revolver CCW after reading Michael's scary account.
Not that I haven't had Ruger DAs with problems, but the problems were quickly obvious and got fixed. Things like headspace clearance for cartridges in the cylinder. This S&W lock business seems like a problem that could lie in wait for months or years to bite you when least expected.
Now that I think of it, while I own and enjoy shooting post-lock S&W revolvers, my two carry/defensive revolvers are a Ruger and a Taurus Ultra-Lite. The Taurus revolver lock is in a different place mechanically -- directly under the hammer spur. Are there reports of it failing in the same sort of catastrophic fashion as Michael's S&W did?
-
Just curious, did you happen to save the lot # of the ammo? I only ask so we can exhaust all the possibilities.
-
Hi pressure/bad ammo or not. THE LOCK SHOULD NEVER SELF ENGAGE! :o It's a BAD design!
-
Do you think this would apply to the 500 Magnums as well?
A lot more horsepower in the 500 with much heavier bullets, but I have not heard of any locking up like this.
Have you heard any 500 lockups or is it just the 44 Mag ones we should be worried about?
Thanks.
-
I have shot numerous .500 Magnums, with extremely hot loads and very heavy bullets, including 750-gr hard-cast stuff from John Ross, with absolutely NO problems. I have a .500 and I recently lobbed a full box of Magtech 400-grainers (@1608 fps, and, yes, they hurt) without an problems. I can't find anybody who has had a lock problem with the .500s.
I'm not calling a jihad on S&W! I think there's a problem here, and it needs to be addressed. I talked to some high speed gunsmiths today, and there seems to be agreement that the problem has to do with Scandium frames, hot loads and heavy bullets...essentially two sine waves crossing at the perfect wrong point.
Michael B
-
NOOOOOOOOOO! DO NOT SEND the 329 to S&W for autopsy!
I want an independent certified audit!
Pictures, videos, the works!
It is the fox guarding the chickencoop!
It is not anything close to "an arms length" transaction!
They have a vested interest to tilt the outcome in their favor.
In fact, THEY should insist on an outside certified inspection to protect THEIR reputation.
Just my two cents,
-
JJH, who would do the outside inspection???
Legally, your opening yourself up, if not returned to the factory, for final inspection and repair, yes the design could and probably is flawed. A key to allow your firearm to work is a bad concept, especially if it is incorporated into the design of the piece. To those who like the concept, an outside lock is a lot better idea. If your trying to bring smith and wesson to it's senses, e-mail, write or call them.. " Don't send them back " absurd. There are'nt any certified revolver key lock safety experts out there other than the factory, and they are factory certified, not federalized, and would we trust any offered expert if they claimed it!!! Better yet, would the courts? Smith and Wesson is an forthright company and will fix it's failures.
Finally, how can the factory correct it's mistakes if not given the oppurtunity? When you try to produce what people want there is always a learning curve. An ultra light weight anything, has consequences. Usually more severe movement.S&W will correct this, I have no doubt.
Smith and Wesson is not the only manufacturer to have a problem with key lock safeties.
I've installed many aftermaket and older factory safeties on newer remington shotguns, that have the new key lock safety, because they engage while shooting.
-
JJH, who would do the outside inspection???
Smith and Wesson is not the only manufacturer to have a problem with key lock safeties.
I've installed many aftermaket and older factory safeties on newer remington shotguns, that have the new key lock safety, because they engage while shooting.
Where there is a will there is a way. I just say the idea of allowing the company to self investigate is flawed.
They started this clusterfoxtrout, why should they be free from oversight?
Really, I want videos, pictures, the works on any investigation.
Best regards,
-
JJH, who would do the outside inspection???
Smith and Wesson is not the only manufacturer to have a problem with key lock safeties.
I've installed many aftermaket and older factory safeties on newer remington shotguns, that have the new key lock safety, because they engage while shooting.
There exists an entire field of engineering devoted to the dissection, autopsy if you will, of design analysis and failures thereof.
Here is an example:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=failure+analysis+consulting&btnG=Google+Search (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=failure+analysis+consulting&btnG=Google+Search)
As an aside to the moderator who (invisibly) combined my topic into this topic, understand Mr. Bane made two separate blog entries on the topic of the 329 failure and my response was specifically to his SECOND blog entry with a SECOND separate topic thread.
I try to post to message boards in a responsible manner and in fact belong to message boards with literally thousands of members where virtually NONE of the reasonably responsible messages or threads require moderator intervention.
If conversations are to be interrupted by invisible moderation without rhyme or reason I will assume my presence is unwelcome here.
Best regards,