New S&W - NO ILS

[RMc]

"...the times they are a changing...."

S&W is actually advertising several revolvers as having "...no internal lock"!

http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson2/upload/other/2010_S&W_Catalog_3.pdf

I am looking forward to a 686 Pro-Series 6 shot .357 Magnum with no internal lock!

 

[18DAI]

I call this a good start! TJ

 

[Guillermo]

Since the advertising dept is seeing "no internal lock" as a reason to buy an S&W revolver, maybe the idiots in the board room will get the message.

 

[dovedescending]

Can I also hear an amen for the new 2 1/8 " barrels?

 

[johnnylaw53]

I guess I missed what you are talking about the picture of the revolvers all show the lock. Where do you get the ideal the locks are gone?

be safe

 

[racenutz]

Look at the models 442, 642, 640 (with night sights) & 632 on page 2 none of those have locks. Looks like just J frames for now though.

 

[johnnylaw53]

Thanks Racenutz, I seen them now but of course they have been offering the 442 and 642 without the lock for awhile now so not a real big change in thier policy of course like Thaddeus Jones stated a good start. Of course I"m one which rather not have the lock but it has not given me any problem and I carry a 642 as back up on duty and as my off duty for over three years now.

be safe

 

[Guillermo]

The main thing is that the revolvers without the IL are being championed for that fact.

The idiotic lock is not seen as a plus on the ones that have it as evidence of the fact that it is not mentioned as a "feature".

Perhaps there is someone there with a room-temperature IQ. I was doubting it.

(it seems amazing to me that they can stay in business since they care about their customer's desires a little more than Harry Reid cares about the desires of his constituents.)

 

[18DAI]

I'm glad to hear you think that Guillermo.

I too have marveled at the corporate arrogance of S&W.

But - they do sell guns to newbs who don't know any better, and fanboys of course. So their arrogance in forcing this lock crap on the rest of us is not hurting them.....enough.

Despite the vociferous claims of the fanboys, those of us who have refused to buy a wind up gun have evidently hurt them enough to get them to make J-frames without that idiotic device. Remember the chants of "The lock is here to stay!!" ? Mmmm no, its evidently not here to stay.

I hope the current company calling itself S&W gets bought out. IMO Thats the only way we will see any handguns with the famous logo worth owning. TJ

 

[Guillermo]

I hope the current company calling itself S&W gets bought out.

I could not agree more. It is about time for it to be returned to a gun company.

I refuse to buy anything from them. I would sooner send my cash to Sarah Brady. At least she is honest enough to declare that she is our enemy.

 

[greenlion]

They began making runs of 642 and 442 revolvers a couple of years ago without the locks in them. There was one other model with a bobbed hammer that came out with no lock, but I can't remember the model number. Apparently, they are only willing to do the "no lock" thing on hammerless revolvers which makes ABSOLUTELY no sense to me, since the lock is a storage device, not a safety.

I can think of about 5 revolvers I would buy the day they came out without the lock system. (I'm serious S&W... are you listening ??)

 

[dashootist]

Didn't I read somewhere that the locks are required by law?

 

[Guillermo]

Didn't I read somewhere that the locks are required by law?

Some states require locks.

No state requires idiotic locks that work on the same axis as the the recoil of the gun. Only a drunken, brain damaged spider monkey on crack would design a lock lock like Smith & Clinton does.