Pre-lock vs Lock Smith & Wessons

[Ted100]

I have 1 with a lock - just because it was a 44 mag mountain gun that I needed at the time. I'll always pass on a frame lock smith. Nothing wrong with them but I don't like em. Pinned and recessed all the way!

 

[buck460XVR]

Was just thinking to myself the other day that we hadn't had a new "lock vs prelock" or 'MIM vs Pre-MIM" thread for a while. It was like the OP read my mind.....

Usually in the past, it's folks new to the Forum or just new to revolvers in general, that ask the question. The old "fanning the coals" over these two well discussed and debated topics has basically, died out over the years and folks have moved on. Must be a slow day.....

 

[SwampWolf]

I see plenty of contemporary Smith & Wesson revolvers available with or without the lock.

I must be living under a rock. Just how many different Smith models are available sans the lock?

 

[Blue Jays]

@SwampWolf…it looks like of those without the lock…most are snubs from what I've seen on their website.

 

[ontarget]

@SwampWolf…it looks like of those without the lock…most are snubs from what I've seen on their website.

True statement.

 

[Pat Riot]

If you wish to know what guns DO NOT have the internal lock here is a link:

https://www.smith-wesson.com/search/node/No internal lock

All I did was go to the S&W site and do a Search for “No Internal Lock”.

Simple

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

I am not going to say how many pre-Lock Smiths I own, let's just leave it at many.

I have two that have the lock.

A Model 686-6 that I bought brand new in 2015.






A Model 617-6 that shipped in 2003. I bought it used a few years ago.






I have no problem with the lock, or MIM parts. My complaint about the new guns is the lack of quality control. That 686 had problems that never would have gotten out the door in the old days, when there were multiple inspection steps through out the assembly process. Yes, my bad for not spotting the problems before I got it home.

And I really don't like the full length underlug S&W seems to be putting on most revolvers these days. I bought the 617 because I was competing in a monthly plate shoot and had to put 8 aimed shots on target in 15 seconds. Could not do that with my K-22s or Model 17-3, they are all six shooters.

I have a pretty extensive collection of pre-lock Smths. Not to mention some that are much, much older than that. I will not be buying any more new Smith and Wesson revolvers, there are lots of fine old S&W revolvers out there that I find much more appealing.

 

[Paul7]

Would not but an IL S&W for three reasons:

Asthetics
Possible reliability issues
Principle

 

[Jonesy814]

I have around a half dozen of each. In general, I prefer pre lock, P&R, and forged hammer\trigger, but would not let the lack of those features stop me from buying a nice revolver for the right price. I prefer the Looks of the pre-lock guns. Not just at the back end either. I like the looks of the forged one piece ramp with integrated sight blade, or even a pinned blade, but the ramp was machined different on the old guns and the look better to me. The only 2 piece barrel I have is on my model 60 Pro and it shoots great.

 

[Speedo66]

I have no problem with the lock, or MIM parts. My complaint about the new guns is the lack of quality control. That 686 had problems that never would have gotten out the door in the old days, when there were multiple inspection steps through out the assembly process. .

They weren’t all perfect back then either.

I bought a new Mdl. 60 in 1982 that had five problems right out of the box, including two which didn’t allow the gun to function.

There was a piece of machining trash inside the grip which prevented the spring from compressing and thus the trigger from being pulled or the hammer being drawn back. How did that pass inspection? The piece on the frame that prevents the cylinder from falling out when open was too high and wouldn’t allow a cartridge to be ejected if it was in line with it.

The front sight/ barrel was cocked to the side, the gun spit lead out the side, and one other problem I can’t recall.

Sent it back and S&W took their sweet time returning it, even though I mentioned it was a service gun. Came back and still spit lead, returned it again.

By that time I had no faith in the gun and down the road it went.

I’m a S&W fan, but even back then they weren’t all wonderful.

 

[Ethan Verity]

They weren’t all perfect back then either.

I bought a new Mdl. 60 in 1982 that had five problems right out of the box, including two which didn’t allow the gun to function.

There was a piece of machining trash inside the grip which prevented the spring from compressing and thus the trigger from being pulled or the hammer being drawn back. How did that pass inspection? The piece on the frame that prevents the cylinder from falling out when open was too high and wouldn’t allow a cartridge to be ejected if it was in line with it.

The front sight/ barrel was cocked to the side, the gun spit lead out the side, and one other problem I can’t recall.

Sent it back and S&W took their sweet time returning it, even though I mentioned it was a service gun. Came back and still spit lead, returned it again.

By that time I had no faith in the gun and down the road it went.

I’m a S&W fan, but even back then they weren’t all wonderful.

I believe it... I'm newer to collecting but got a 1977 vintage Model 29 last year that was in mint condition. Based on condition I could tell it was exactly as it would have left from the factory, however despite this it was out of time on one charge hole. Also, the front face of the ejector rod was filed at an angle such that it would snag depending on the cylinder position when opening. With all the hand fitting necessary back in the old days, there is actually a much higher chance of something being wrong than on the new production models.

The finish is amazing though!

 

[Riomouse911]

They’re fine, both pre lock and post. I don’t have half the numbers Driftwood Johnson has, but the S&W marque is pretty well represented in my gun safe. I wouldn’t pass on a nice lock gun if it wasn’t a duplicate of one I already have.

Stay safe.

 

[SwampWolf]

I have over a dozen Smith & Wesson revolvers but only one has the infamous lock, a Model 617, and it's one of my favorite iterations.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

They make a handful of J frames with no lock. I can only guess that some police depts want them that way as back ups, totally speculation though. Shows that they aren't that committed to the lock. Some of their semis are also available without them I think but I haven't looked at them as closely.

I don't own any with a lock in them and won't. Firearms and knives are something I like to have pride of ownership in. Won't carry a chinese made knife nor do I want a lock in my firearm. So, I stick with old ones or go with makers who didn't opt to do such silly things.

 

[KY DAN]

I think in the end both varations will be around until after multiple generations have left this earth assuming oil and reasonable loads are used.

My only experience with locks is with two John Ross 500 magnum revolvers. In my usage and examination of each article I have not found anything to indicate either to be an inferior weapon. Furthermore it should be noted upon reading John Ross's own personal post on thehighroad.org and castboolits.gunloads.com that he never seems to mention any defects the lock has caused while using his personally designed revolver, by all rights it would appear John Ross was and or is a high volume 500 magnum shooter and certainly would be the expert on durability.

The only people I ever hear harp on how crappy the new guns are and the locks will get you killed are the guys trying to sell you a gun...... I have a friend I greatly respect who only sells second hand pre lock Smith and wesson revolvers at guns shows who tells anyone who will listen how terrible everything is BUT he has a pre lock version he could sell for $300 more. He does not shoot and I don't feel he can offer accurate comparison.

 

[SteadyD]

If I want a Smith and Wesson that has an extant pre-lock model I will choose it every time, even at a premium price. I don’t let a lock keep me from buying a model that only has the lock though.

 

[Gary W. Strange]

Back when S&W did away with pinned barrels and recessed cylinders, I heard a lot of the older men say, they were done with S&W. S&W revolvers kept right on selling. It’s going to be the same with the lock revolvers. I personally don’t care for the lock. To me, it serves no purpose. I am not going to use it. It looks out of place. Besides that, the j,k & l frame S&Ws do not have the same lines, as older revolvers do. The look squared off, at the hammer. They do not look the same. That with the lock, turns me away, with that said, there is nothing wrong with lock S&Ws.

 

[SwampWolf]

I heard a lot of the older men say,

Hmm...I resemble that remark!

 

[Master Blaster]

I own a number of S&W revolvers from different eras, all the way back to 1932. Fit and finish was better on the old ones. Pre model number revolvers from the late 40's to 1956 are the best of the lot in my opinion.

However I shoot my modern Smiths much more often. My 625 PC and 627 PC are both lock models. They shoot as well or better than my old Smith revolvers, and replacement parts are available under warranty if needed.
The old and the new:
1932, 1917 Commercial model .45 DA
2017 625 PC .45 acp

 

[CajunBass]

Some of their semis are also available without them I think but I haven't looked at them as closely.

I don't think any of their semi's have a lock do they? I've got a half dozen or so and I know none of them do.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

I don't think any of their semi's have a lock do they? I've got a half dozen or so and I know none of them do.

I thought some of them did, or did in the past. I'm not a striker guy so haven't been tracking their new stuff much. Quick look just now though, and it doesn't look like the semi's have the lock. Which, makes it even more confusing why they continue to put one in something like a S&W 500...........or one of their "classic" revolvers.

Makes no sense from a corporate policy position in my mind. Either they "need" a lock or they don't from a policy angle.

 

[halfmoonclip]

Have a 340SC (the 11oz Centennial) with a lock; it's seen its share of shooting, including magnums. The lock has remained unlocked; deeply doubtful of reports to the contrary.
Not fond of the locks, but not afraid of them.
As regards the sleeved barrels, only have one on a 986, and it is really nicely made. Have had a number of unpinned barrel Smiths, and the barrels were out of index...chucked the barrel in a leather jawed vise, stuck a hammer handle thru' the cylinder window, and cranked 'em into alignment.
The MIM parts don't bother me over much, but the older, forged parts feel better when they are slicked up a little.
Recently got a 25-15 Classic. It had some odd touches, like a four screw sideplate and the lock. The fit and finish is quite nice; there was creep in the trigger. Smith sent me a new hammer, problem solved,
Moon

 

[Gary W. Strange]

Hmm...I resemble that remark!

I did not mean this as an insult, to anyone, especially older men of that time or this day and time. I'm fact, I gained a lot of knowledge from those older men. Knowledge that has help me to this day. I learned through life, never disrguard, the advice, the old man gives.

 

[brutus51]

Would not but an IL S&W for three reasons:

Asthetics
Possible reliability issues
Principle

My sentiments exactly, matter of fact I never owned a Smith as I've always been a Colt kinda of guy but as soon as I heard they were going to start installing locks in them I went out and bought a 629 and a 625 45 Colt mountain gun. I really love both revolvers and the 625 has become my woods carry.
When I retired my Python from magnum loads I looked for a Smith but couldn't find one at a reasonable price so I wound up getting a Dan Wesson, best thing that could of happened.
Now that Colt is making a comeback buying a Hillary hole Smith will never happen. Just to let the Smith marketing folks know it, I've bought 2 of the new Colts in the past year.

 

[d'zaster]

I would guess most owners would not be able to find the key for the lock. I have three SW revolvers with the lock and don't even remember if the key was included. Probably, the number of owners that actually use the lock for its intended purpose is infinitessmally low.