No Lock News Flash!!

[thesecond]

my guess is that Smith and Wesson will offer no-lock versions only for DAO revolvers.

 

[Technosavant]

The reason I say this is because the majority of people that own these guns with locks do not see that as a bad thing. Only die-hard gun people do.

I would very much dispute that statement, since it implies that anybody not put off by the lock is not a "die hard gun person." I have 3 S&W revolvers with the lock, and I'd be described by most people as a "die hard gun person." I'm not the only one. Sure, no-lock would be preferable, but I wouldn't go blowing out my 642, 629, and 327 at cheap prices just to re-buy them at MSRP without a lock. Since the lock seems only to be a problem with the little and uberlight guns, I haven't worried about it (don't have a 340, not likely to get one).

I think it's more correct to say that there won't be fire sales of lock models because those with them have already decided that the lock isn't a deal-killer. Folks like me may consider replacing our guns over time, but more likely we'll just buy no-lock models going forward.

 

[.38 Special]

Just because someone has a different opinion than your does not make them a "whiner". Any more than your position makes you a "sunshine boy"

Again, it's not the opinion, it's the fact that every time the phrase "Smith and Wesson" is mentioned on THR, a dozen chest-thumpers show up to bludgeon us with their "principles". So enough already. We get it. You guys don't like S&W, would never ever buy one, think they're made by demons at a factory located in hell. Time to move on.

I've owned a number of S&W revolvers, including at least six with the ILS. Until "IT" happened to an acquaintance, I was in denial. If you pm me I'll put you in contact with him (with his permission). He is a member here.

Post-"IT" ("IT" being defined as the experience of The Lock self-engaging ...while dry-firing, no less), all my ILS Smiths went bye-bye, and the ensuing vacuum has been filled with nice, pre-lock Smiths.

Maybe "IT" will happen to you one day. I hope not.

If it does, you will have the rest of your life (perhaps measured in milli-seconds) to reflect upon your short-sightedness.

May luck be with you.

I fully believe the stories of locks "self-locking". And I think the locks are foolish and unnecessary gadgets that increase the possibility of failure. It's just that I understand that any gun can fail for a variety of reasons, and that a huge number of users have fired a vast number of rounds in a variety of different scenarios and very, very few have had any problems with the lock.

Moreover, the odds of someone attacking me, and me using a handgun with a lock to defend myself, and the lock tying up the gun at that moment, are astronomical. So as much as the anti-lock brigade would dearly love for someone to get killed because of it, I think you'll have a long wait.

 

[jack the toad]

This is exciting news and long overdue, IMO.
Overall I'm glad if ALL models are offered w/o the IL but am wondering how I'm going to afford all that I'll be wanting.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I made this thread because I was happy. I would really appreciate it if this thread could be spared from all the fighting that usually goes on between the no-lock and who cares about the lock crowd.

Thank you....

 

[Deanimator]

hoping for no lock scandiums and no lock mountain guns.

No lock 24s, 25, and 27s. I couldn't care less about MIM. MIM isn't likely to get me KILLED.

 

[jjohnson]

Tamara?

That is good news! I'd buy one. I can forgive.

 

[esq_stu]

This is a big relief. I was just reading this thread about incidents of lockups
http://smith-wessonforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/500103904/m/228102718

and one of them was a 642, which I carry. I am definitely going to replace it with one w/o the lock.

 

[Gator]

Good news, but I'm still waiting for RSR to get the no lock 442s!

 

[JCMAG]

I agree with some of the other suspicious folks: This could very well just be S&W finally updating their website to reflect the small batch of no-lock J-frames they recently put onto the market. The revolver mentioned is not listed as a catalog item per se, but as a dealer exclusive or something similar.

Thanks, though, ArchAngelCD, the small pick-me-up of hope still brightened my day.

And if you're right?

...

 

[woo18]

called S&W

I called S&W about this yesterday. They claim that this is only a one time offer. They had several J-Frames needing to be used up. Unless the S&W rep I spoke with is wrong, this is not a permanent cataloged item.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

woo18,
Like I stated several times in this thread, S&W doesn't list one time items in their catalog without stating they are limited editions or exclusive special run items.

Gator,
As far as I know RSR Group does have the M442 no-locks in stock already. If you're a dealer you can log on to the site and see if they are in stock. If you're not you can have your FFL check for you. RSR's is listing 2 catalog numbers, SW102810FC and SW150544FC and the second page states "Image Coming Soon" but I was told the revolver is in stock. (but I can't verify that myself because I'm not an FFL) I can't see the difference between the two but they are listed with 2 different numbers for some reason.

 

[ugaarguy]

I called S&W about this yesterday. They claim that this is only a one time offer. They had several J-Frames needing to be used up.

I think the rep was confused. There were some 37s recently released that were no lock, but they were not built on the current J Magnum frame. All current production J frames, including these new no lock 642s, are built on the J Magnum frame. The 642 is S&W's top selling wheel gun by a good margin, so I can assure you there are no J Mag frames that need to "used up".

Unless the S&W rep I spoke with is wrong, this is not a permanent cataloged item.

Based upon what a very reliable friend inside S&W has told me the rep you spoke with is wrong. I'll not violate this friend's trust and post their information here, but you several of the mods know who this person is, and can vouch for me.

Based upon the info I was given S&W saw the canceled foreign order no lock 642s sell much faster than even they expected. Thus, they have decided to make the no lock 642 a standard catalog item. As long is it sells it stays in the catalog as a standard item. The better it sells the more leverage S&W marketing has to get their legal folks to let them start offering more no lock trial runs of other models.

The fate of no lock S&Ws is in our hands folks. Buy these now standard catalog 642s which are sans lock, and show S&W that the demand is real.

 

[johnchamp]

how about s&w doing this on there stainless steel revolvers? how come they are doing this on there aluminum frames. why not do this on there stainless steel frames? like the 686 4" or the model 60.

 

[XavierBreath]

I called S&W about this yesterday. They claim that this is only a one time offer. They had several J-Frames needing to be used up. Unless the S&W rep I spoke with is wrong, this is not a permanent cataloged item.

If they simply needed to use up old frames, then why not simply mill them for the lock? If they still want the lock on all their guns from a legal standpoint, that would seem to be the thing to do. Sales reps know products, but rarely the forces driving design.

I'm betting S&W is checking the market with an eye towards getting rid of the lock. The lock does add more manufacturing expense with little return. If the market response is good, we will see more guns without locks from S&W. If the response is slow, equal, or non-existant, chances are the lock will remain and lockless guns will disappear again.

 

[Hawk]

If they simply needed to use up old frames, then why not simply mill them for the lock?

Just conjecturing, but weren't the earlier RSR 642s frame stamped 642-1? I could picture S&W wishing to avoid the complication of making a non-lock "dash number" lock equipped.

If, it'd make me curious what a regularly cataloged "no lock" 642 will be designated as far as "dash numbers" are concerned. (?)

 

[jjohnson]

Marketing Confusion?

Rep Confused?

Man, with all due respect to the sales and marketing folks, (whatever that is ) those guys are very often
1) confused
2) wrong
3) lying through their teeth or
4) working on selling you what they want to sell, not what you want to buy.

I'd believe maybe one of the guys working on the production line.... for my part, guys that have a little dirt under their fingernails are easier to believe.

Just my two cents.....

 

[Cougfan2]

Bring forth the classic 36 blue 3" no-lock, please!

Ditto!

 

[ArchAngelCD]

ugaarguy,
Thank you for that information. It confirms what I have been thinking and is good to hear. I do hope they expand this new no lock program especially to their Classic Revolvers. If anything, the Classics should be lock free like the originals. We can then work from there!

 

[lowercase]

Bought a brand new, no-lock 642 TODAY!

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I bought a M642 no lock when RSR Group first released them If I would have known S&W was also releasing M442 no locks I would have waited and bought that instead. Unfortunately I can't afford both though I wish I could!

 

[johnnylaw53]

I just picked up a copy of "Concealed Carry Hundguns" over the weekend 2009 edition. One of the stories is about the S&W Powerport-Pro 642 and 637 which both have a black finish to them. They both have the lock what this tell me is the Smith & Wesson does not have any plans to completely do away with the lock if they were as some have suggested having to do it slowly in order to use up frames with the lock hole mill in them already wouldn't this of been a good time to offer these new pistols without the lock? I really don't know anything about how company market products just seem to me this may tell us something about the question if they are trying to loose the lock for good.

be safe

 

[fastbolt]

I've been careful to only repeat things I've been told by a number of folks at the factory which they would repeat to the public.

S&W can play things close to the vest rather well when they want to do so, though.

I wouldn't bet the farm on the ILS totally disappearing in the entire revolver lineup, but I also wouldn't be surprised to see a few more non-ILS revolvers released at least as limited production runs/models, and/or a revised design ILS introduced which didn't offend the cosmetic sensibilities of the traditional revolver enthusiasts and which operated differently. S&W still has to take into consideration that the potential for states to mandate integrated locking systems on new handguns at some point in the future, after all.

I thought about buying a non-ILS 442 myself, BTW. I just figured that having a pair of 642-1's and one of the earlier released 37-2's was good enough ... at least for now. If the 442-1 remains available through next year I might add one to my working collection. I'm still thinking about picking up a compact version of the M&P 45 to complement my standard size w/thumb safeties, though. The M&P 45 has simply been one of the better purchases I've made in .45 pistols in recent years, and I'm thinking I wouldn't mind having one slightly smaller. I might even carry it upon retirement.