I don't see a lock on the new 640 with night sights.

[davis297]

Look on Gunblast.com Shot Show day 1. Do you see one?

http://gunblast.com/SHOT_2010_1.htm

http://gunblast.com/images/SHOT2010/Day1/DSC09343.JPG

 

[Big Cholla]

davis: I looked at a 640 at the Shot Show today and it DID NOT have the lock. I meant to look at all the revolvers to see how many other models were being shown without the lock but got distracted by someone wanting to talk and didn't get back to my task. Maybe tomorrow. ... Big Cholla

 

[OHIOUP]

I saw a new centennial w/o lock last saturday.....I think???

 

[panamajack310]

maybe that S&W is getting the idea and now not including the locks on their gun will be a regular occurance.

 

[Fastbolt]

During a brief conversation I had with someone from S&W recently, the comment was dropped that 'they may be testing the waters' for lockless centennials ...

 

[skeete]

Maybe enough of us e-mailed them about how we felt about the lock like I did?
I would rather buy a used but like new stainless Python than a new S&W 686 - I did and found one for close to a new S&W price. It is nice to have forged parts and no locks.

 

[EvenStephen]

Funny, I recently exchanged emails with S&W about leaving the locks off of engraved guns and/or performance center guns and was told to just accept that the locks were here to stay, period.

 

[wnc wheelgun]

I picked up a 640 with tritium sights 5 months ago that did NOT have the IL. I assumed it was an older model but was informed by the store owner that it was new (3 months old) and was traded in on a Ruger AR. It was not cheap at $650, but since it had very few rounds fired through it and no IL, I had to have it.

 

[SJshooter]

More photos of the new 640 showing no lock (scroll down to Smith & Wesson):
http://lundestudio.com/2010SHOTShow/

 

[ladder13]

Must be more of those "leftover frames".

 

[Fastbolt]

Personally, I think a 640 with night sights and no ILS would be an interesting steel J-frame. I'd probably consider one instead of a new M40.

It's starting to appear that S&W is tentatively responding to the market demands for at least some Centennial models being made available without the ILS. Time will tell.

I was recently told that their limited run of the 642's produced from the older 642-1 frames sold out in less than a month. Perhaps that came to the attention of someone(s).

 

[MOPhandle44]

I recently bought a used 640 at a gun show. I am curious as to what this lock is that is referred to in this thread. If it is a safety "lock", the fact that it is 12+/- lbs of pull is the only safety feature as it is a hammerless double action. So what is the lock referred to in this thread please?

 

[MOPhandle44]

Hi folks. I happened to look at this site Smith & Wesson 342PD Titanium Centennial .38 Special +P and I believe I saw the lock referred to, and on my Stainless 640-1 there is no lock. I also saw reference to the Glaser ammo, which would seem to be a good round for self defense. Thoughts anyone?

 

[tenntucker]

The 632 doesn't have the lock. This is a new build.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstor...2010/178046 - Model 632 with night sights.pdf

 

[cowart]

I recently bought a used 640 at a gun show. I am curious as to what this lock is that is referred to in this thread.

Your used gun may not have the internal storage lock if it is an older model. The lock is visible as a small, dark socket located just above the cylinder release. See http://www.brockwaygun.com/site/wp-content/gallery/handguns/150194.jpg

 

[jbihn]

Hi folks. I'm new to this site and i just got my first wheel gun - a 642 without the IL. The proof cartridge was dated November 2009 and the shop had a few more without the lock in stock. It looks like there may be some production runs without the locks that aren't being widely advertised.

 

[RichCapeCod]

... I also saw reference to the Glaser ammo, which would seem to be a good round for self defense. Thoughts anyone?

Any time the discussion on personal defense ammo comes up there seems to be a good deal of emotional debate on the subject. So, I'll just throw out the following:

I've been involved as a police firearms instructor for quite a few years, including a run as a sgt and lt assigned to the Firearms & Tactics Section of the NYPD. Among my assignments was to conduct the Police Firearms Instructors School at Rodman's Neck in the Bronx, NY. One of the courses I taught was titled Bullet Potential.

Please understand, there is no magic round that will instantly incapacitate a determined adversary on a regular basis. In 1848 a railroad worker had a 13 lb bar (he was tamping black powder into a hole in the ground) get blown into his skull from below and exited the top of his head. He never lost consciousness and lived until 1860.

The Glaser round is a poor penetrator, grossly overpriced, and not terribly effective as an round for self defense. Having said all that, I offer you the following overview of handgun round effectiveness:

***

Basically, there are three somewhat controllable variables as to what a given projectile will do against an adversary and a significant number that are unknowable.

The variables we can identify are:

Bullet placement
Depth of penetration (often modified by what the person is wearing)
Width of the permanent cavity formed by the moving projectile

Some of the unquantifiable ones are:

What chemicals are flowing within the body of the target (both naturally occurring as well as via self medication/drugs/alcohol)?

What is the mindset of the other party?

Anyway, there is no magic bullet. Since we loose so much velocity out of a short handgun barrel my prejudice is to go for the most efficient projectile shape available. In this case, the wadcutter design, which was first used in combat by the British in their Manstopper series of cartridges for their .455/.476 revolvers well over a hundred years ago.

Buffalo Bore makes an interesting personal defense wadcutter load that is not +P. You might want to look into that.

Hope that helps,

Rich