[Bullet]

Why do S&W's have locks? What do you think of them?

[PinnedAndRecessed]

Legal liability. They are trying to take what is perceived as reasonable measures to protect non-gun people from hurting themselves. Kind of like Ruger's warning on the side of their barrels, viz., it benefits no one but the manufacturer.

If you saw the locking mechanism, you would see that it's a spring holding a locking cam in place. That means more parts. The more complex a machine becomes the more likely it will break. I have heard of a couple of circumstances where the Smith locking spring broke and froze the revolver.

I don't like it. It's starting to look like a cheap import.

[P95Carry]

Short answer - hate em!! Having got two newer Smiths I have two ''spider hole'' revo's!! Still do not see need to have locks on a gun in the custody of a responsible owner - added to which ... I do NOT use them ... the keys are probably in the boxes/cases and will never see light of day for me.

They do however work ... and so anyone paranoid about securing their gun ... can easily make it a useless artifact for the duration! As to ''why'' ... IMO simply all part of the response to pressure from anti's and the possibilities of law suits etc ... it is to appease the sheeple rather than please the customer.!

[Onmilo]

More and more new production firearms have some sort of key activated trigger locking device now.
Like them or hate them they are going to become a regular feature.
If you do hate the idea just ignore it, the lock won't affect functioning in any way if you don't use it.
I can tolerate the new key locks, they beat having a big, clunky, trigger padlock marring up the guns finish and general good looks.

[SnWnMe]

The only instance I've heard that these S&W locks self actuate is the piece by Ayoob in AH. Mr. Ayoob isn't accurate 100% of the time. Witness his piece on the Miami FBI/Platt/Mattix shootout.

As for these locks and safeties: Ever since John Browning put a grip safety on his legacy gun, it all went downhill. The idiots got the camel's nose in the tent.

I don't even know where those keys are BTW.

[SouthpawShootr]

As already stated, this is largely a liability issue. Some states are passing or considering laws that require integral lock, so this may be a move to make the manufacturers line acceptable for sale in all but the most oppressive states. Taurus has a similar lock (pioneered this sort of thing on revolvers), but it is much less noticeable than S&W's). I just ignore the locks. Never used them. If I'm not carrying it, it's unloaded and stashed in a safe. If I am carrying it, the very last thing I want is to try to use a locked gun that I forgot to unlock. :banghead:

[HankB]

I've heard of S&W locks failing, but usually third or fourth hand . . . the only lock failure I know of in which I spoke personally to the guy it happened to involved a Steyr pistol.

But as already mentioned, Ayoob wrote about three known failures in the latest issue of American Handgunner. In two instances, the locks self-actuated; in a third instance, the lock popped out the side of the revolver. These were with lightweight revolvers firing heavy loads, but IMHO I don't want ANYTHING in one of my revolvers that MIGHT compromise reliability, especially when the "feature" adds cost but NO value whatsoever.

The locks are just the latest chapter in S&W's downward quality spiral . . . I just like pinned & recessed revolvers with real steel (not MIM) parts and the firing pin on the hammer where it belongs . . .

[Ohen Cepel]

I'll avoid them like black death! Thankfully, there are still a lot of pre-lock guns out there.

If I had to get one down the road think I would look hard at removing it or maybe having it fulled by a smith. The concept of it being there just lights me up :cuss:

At least the Remington bolt contraption can be removed and I assume that the Taurus lock could be dealt with be replacing the hammer.

Really wish that S&W wouldn't have screwed up their revolvers with this extra whole.

[Standing Wolf]

Not in my gun safe—and especially not in a holster of mine!

[Titus]

Weren't the locks made by the folks who bought Smith (before they bought Smith)? Laws and legal stuff aside, I was under the impression that that's how they got on there.

[StephenT]

I can live with the lock that Taurus has behind the hammer, but the lock that S&W has on the side is an eye sore. I don't usually buy new S&W revolvers anymore for that reason. Besides, LNIB classic S&W revolvers without that lock can be found at great prices. I picked up a used model 60 357Mag with a 3" barrel for $300 this past weekend. Looks brand new and no lock!

[115grfmj]

if you can ignore it, it isn't a big deal. I dont plan on ever using my 686+'s
lock. :D

[B36]

Ayoob received his information direct from Dade SD a few days after the event. I still have my notes from a brief (from Ayoob) I received in June following the event. I would believe him before the FBI's excuse ridden version.

We all have our opinions.