The dreaded S&W lock

[DawgFvr]

Actually they/we are tired of ducking heat rounds every time a photo of a post-lock S&W is shown.



Shields UP!

 

[Hawk]

"Maybe"

Sooner or later, probably sooner, there will be something I want that isn't available in a competitive product or in a used pre-lock.

 

[callgood]

Via dumb luck I found a NIB Model 610-2 on gunbroker. And it was listed at much less than the rest of them- with locks. This sort of stuff never happens to me. I figured Divine Intervention was at work and snapped it up.

The trigger is fantastic!

I vote "nope"

 

[Gator]

Maybe....if someone comes out with a kit to fill the hole.

 

[jaydubya]

My 637-2 and 686-6+ both have the internal lock, as well as MIM parts. Which does not bother me a bit. Both have thousands of rounds fired, and I am quite confident of them.
Cordially, Jack

 

[Snapping Twig]

If you gave me one I'd sell it and buy an older model with the money.

 

[smittymojoe]

No Way!

I will never own any firearm that has a lock built into it. It's both another thing that can break or fail, and it's politically repugnant. Evidence of how society now revolves around the lowest common denominator.

This is pretty much how I feel about the issue of the locks. I'll not own one.

smitty

 

[Old Dog]

It's not just the lock for me ... I share Old Fuff's feelings about all the other features of the newer S&W revolvers ... I also strongly dislike the strange shrouded two-piece barrels and full-length underlugs, but additionally hate the new finishes -- the weird clearcoat on the Airweights, for example, that peels off; the flat black finish that looks toy-like and cheap compared to an older, deeply blued Smith; and yeah, for whatever reason, I like the firing pin on the hammer ... MIM parts, hmm, never had any fail, just don't like the looks of the MIM hammers and other parts ... And the lock is simply a goshawful unsightly blemish and the knowledge of how and why it got there renders any Smith with one a gun I cannot in good conscience own (hence traded or sold the S&Ws w/locks I owned; only one I kinda miss is the 5" half-lugged 686+ with the Ahrends finger-groove coco bolo stocks ...

But by all means, folks, keep buying the new Smiths, don't worry about that lock thingy if it means nothing to you, and don't worry about looking for any of the old ones ... it's just getting too hard for me to find good specimens of used old Smiths lately, 'cause for some reason, all the guys on the Smith & Wesson Forum are buying 'em all up ...

(and for the record, I do swap out the MSH assemblies w/ILS on my SA 1911s)

 

[ceadermtnboy]

I agree with everyone on the point that the old Smiths look better without the locks, and were put together with more hand fitting and finishing. On the other hand there are some mighty fine revolvers that you may miss out on. Take for example my 686 plus 5 inch half lug barrel revolver that smith made a one year run of a couple of years back. If I had not bought it based on what changes Smith & Wesson had made on it, let me tell you I would have missed out on one dandy shooting and handling revolver. It had the lock, taking it out took about 5 minutes. It left an ugly hole where the lock was, but like many on the post, I just dont want a lock on my revolver. It has MIM parts, but from what gunsmiths have told me, the new Smiths are more precise because of the new tooling and are much improved over the older models. Jerry Miculek also states that the new changes have improved the design. Sure he gets paid by S&W, but look at what he uses to dominate competition shooting. I have a few old models and appreciate them and love the craftsmanship, but I actually shoot the new models more often, and feel they are great.

 

[Gator]

They do have some neat guns, I especially like the "Classic" series. If I could somehow plug up the hole so that it looks halfway decent, I'd get a model 21.

P.S. Not all of the new Smith's have two piece barrels yet....if you can live with the lock get 'em while you can.

 

[BBroadside]

Explanation of my vote: I consider the lock a small but negative factor about the S&Ws. I would pick one if it were the overwhelming choice but in a "close race" with another brand I'd pick the other one.

I've never actually seen one of these. Can anyone post a pic of what the actual lock looks like (I'm guessing it's very small).

 

[Gator]

There's a pic in the first post on this page...unless you are asking for a pic of the internals?

 

[rdrancher]

No locks on my S&W's, thanks.

I don't mind them much if the placement is unobtrusive, like on Taurus Semi-autos for example.

rd

 

[KyJim]

I have deliberately bypassed several locked models in favor of pre-locks.I have, however, purchased a couple of J-frames with locks.

 

[MICHAEL T]

I only buy pre lock Smiths . I don't like the lock and I belive the older S&W were better fitted and just better over all. So you all buy the new ones and I search out the older ones . They still need a home

 

[Evocatii]

I have put plenty of rounds through my m-60 and its sings a sweet song. No problems with the lock to report and I have actually used the internal lock in a few instances. Nothing but convenience for me. It has proved useful. Shocking.

 

[ceadermtnboy]

I have read a couple of comments about the placement of the lock on the new Smiths and how other brands would be chosen if the lock was less obtrusive ( hidden ). I have owned a Taurus revolver once! Believe me they ain't a Smith & Wesson and there is no way I making a choice of weapon based on looks, maybe my wife? I guess I buy weapons based on other things such as accuracy, trigger action, reliability. Hey I hate!!! the billboard on the ruger gp100, blackhawks, etc. But it doesnt keep me from buying, its still a quality product. Made in America as well!

 

[Deanimator]

I've never owned an S&W revolver with a lock, don't now and never will.

I've got a safe, so the entire premise for the thing is irrelevant to me.

All of my centerfire revolvers have at least a secondary self-defense role. I don't trust my life to the S&W ILS and never will. With a safe full of GOOD revolvers, there's no reason for me to waste time, money and maybe my life on what S&W makes now.

 

[BBroadside]

That's exactly what I was looking for, Gator. Quite a photo essay! (I think the ultimate gunsmith would be an intelligent monkey about 6" tall, with proportionally small fingers.)

 

[CajunBass]

Well, I don't have any particular want or "need" for a Smith & Wesson revolver. Nothing wrong with them, I just don't want one.

Having said that, IF I ever did, I wouldn't let the lock stand in the way of getting a gun I want. I've got other guns that do have locks and the lock was neither a plus or a minus. It was just there.

I see no more reason to think the lock would fail than I do to think any other one part would fail.

I have asked this before, and never got an answer. Maybe someone here knows. Has there ever been a case of the lock failed in the unlocked position or is it always to the locked position?

 

[S&Wfan]

CajunBass

. . . I have asked this before, and never got an answer. Maybe someone here knows. Has there ever been a case of the lock failed in the unlocked position or is it always to the locked position?

Yes, there have been quite a few! I've not heard of someone dying yet because the gun failed to fire but having the wheelgun lock up at the range in a situation where it cannot be fired, nor can the hammer be returned from partially cocked ain't a good feeling, I'm sure.

There was a thread, I believe on the S-Wforum documenting the failures, so Smith couldn't keep telling folks, "Gee, you are the first one!"

There was also a thread there describing how to disable the @##@% lock. Just do a search over there and you'll be able to find those threads.

Hope this helps,

Tom


PS: I own quite a few Smith wheelguns. None have a lock, and none ever will. I want a gun to go "Bang" when I pick it up and pull the trigger. That's what a gun is supposed to do!

If one has time to locate a key, and stick it into the gun with fumbling, shaking hands as a BG is busting into your house . . . you had time to run away!

Naturally, guns need to be kept secure around children, but I've always said that unloaded guns get you killed. Same with locked ones and ones that you point too late at someone who wants to kill or hurt you. If the dreaded day ever comes, this is what I hope the BG sees . . .

My steadfast rule at my house is that EVERY handgun remains loaded. Handguns are weapons of last resort, so they need to be ready to go instantly.

Thus, no locks for me! Ever!

 

[MCgunner]

I really don't like the location and design of the lock. I don't desire a Smith revolver, but the lock is only a minimal reason. Mostly, they're overpriced and ain't built with the quality of the past. HOWEVER, the 642 is a danged nice little pocket revolver with a reasonable price. It could be an exception someday. I might get the Taurus equivalent, though. I'm one of the few on this board that likes the Taurus alternative. I've had great service from my three. I don't worship the Smith and Wesson as a god of any kind. Most of my revolvers, actually, are Rugers.

 

[Old Fuff]

For the record, the Old Fuff has also gotten good service from the small number of Taurus snubbies he has previously or does own. But with one exception they have been all-steel revolvers, and none of them has included any Titanium components. This may, or may not have made a difference.

That said, I still favor pre-lock J-frame Smith & Wesson's for pocket carry, not so much because of the lock as the way they are built. Moving up to a mid-sized holster gun I usually choose a 1955 era Colt Detective Special, or a K-frame S&W with a 3 or 4 inch barrel.

 

[ceadermtnboy]

I have heard people say that Taurus revolvers are good quality,so many so that I have to agreee that they put out an decent revolver. Personally, I had a Taurus Tracker all SS that the firing pin broke on the first trip to the range, I shipped back and 4 weeks later I had my revolver back. The only problem was that they had not touched my revolver, pin was still broke. After a heated phone call and return trip, it got repaired. The gun was eventrually sold, and I vowed not to buy another Taurus period. I just feel better with the experience that I have had with Smith & Wesson.

 

[nero45acp]

For me the issue isn't just the lock, but a whole series of changes that S&W has made in the past 10+ years that keeps me away from their current offerings. I like my S&W revolvers with the firing pin on the hammer (except of course their .22s), forged & case hardened triggers and hammers, wood stocks, and sans the slanted cylinder release and lock.

Fortunately, there's still a fair amount of excellent cond. older S&Ws out there at a fairly reasonable price to keep this troglodyte happy.


nero