After 25 years …no Internal Lock!

The modern frames are beefier in the K frame models. Less likely for expensive failure you know. Now if they'd go to pinned barrels instead of crush fit, even fewer of the barrel/frame failures would occur and likely accuracy would be better. I understand why they think they should do the 2 piece barrels.

If J frames were to go to pinned barrels, frame failures would decrease. The frames might need to be slightly beefed up to accomplish even more good things.
 
willy said:
I am one who has not bought a S&W revolver with the lock.
I have accumulated over 40 s&W revolvers over the last 40 years,,and not one has the lock .
For the last 20+ years all my S&W purchases has been used without the lock.

But while the lock is the biggest reason that stopped me from buying S&W .
The other reason is the MIM parts and the two piece barrel.

( IF) I could replace the MIM parts with with forged steel,,,I would be standing in line today to get a model 21 and a model 22.

Got the money burning a hole in my pocket if S&W happens to be scrolling through these comments!
Click to expand...
If you really want forged internals in an S&W, you need to avoid just about every S&W 'Model ##,' or be willing to replace them with aftermarket parts that may require fitting.

When S&W moved to the current naming system in the late 1950s, they also started the switch from forging internals to stamping them out of soft flat stock, which was subsequently case hardened.

Those case hardened flat stock parts were softer than the MIM parts that replaced them, and made to less repeatable tolerances. Any of the hand-fitting that people get nostalgic about made the thin case hardened layer even thinner, potentially reducing the lifespan of the part.

Now, the Colt Python with mostly forged internals (cylinder locking bolt, transfer bar, rebound lever are MIM, but of a through-hardened sort) shows that it can be done these days, but even the most basic Python is an extra $300+ over a 686 or Colt's Cobra line that uses a MIM hammer and trigger.
 
willy said:
I am one who has not bought a S&W revolver with the lock.
I have accumulated over 40 s&W revolvers over the last 40 years,,and not one has the lock .
For the last 20+ years all my S&W purchases has been used without the lock.

But while the lock is the biggest reason that stopped me from buying S&W .
The other reason is the MIM parts and the two piece barrel.

( IF) I could replace the MIM parts with with forged steel,,,I would be standing in line today to get a model 21 and a model 22.

Got the money burning a hole in my pocket if S&W happens to be scrolling through these comments!
Click to expand...
They won't since you are not who they are marketing to. I am pretty sure the majority of forum members have not purchased a new Smith & Wesson revolver this century. This new offering won't appeal to guys who want new stuff built exactly like it was 50 years ago. And for an inexpensive price point.

There is not enough of you who would actually open your wallets to make it feasible for Smith & Wesson to even try. Revolvers are such a small part of their business these days in the first place. That said, revolvers are making a bit of a comeback and do have their niche market. I am sure Smith & Wesson will sell a bunch of these new No-Locks to that niche market.
 
I wonder what this will do to the collector market for the older Smiths? Does it hurt the value the way the new Pythons and Anacondas hurt the value of the older model? At those prices, I doubt it, because you can find the older models for less than S&W is charging for the new ones. I think the new Colts were so successful because they cost half what the older models did. Time will tell.
 
PatriotX said:
The QR code was a huge wart, far worse than the stiff, stacking trigger.

I couldn't look at it and moved mine along. :eek:
Click to expand...
Having pulled the triggers on a few original Pythons, stacking DA pulls are true to form.

I haven't shot the new one and an original back-to-back, but I think the new one is a little better in that respect.
 
Thinking about it I think I only bought two S&W revolvers in the last 25 years.

A very good 686 Plus that is a solid "A" and a 637 that was a easy "F" it had problems from Day 1.
 
I have pre lock Smiths. I have post lock Smiths. Love the look and frame of the older pre lock models. But I've never had any trouble out of any. I do prefer the look of no lock. But not enough for me personally to replace any of the post lock models I currently own.

Will I buy a new no lock Smith? Maybe. Just depends on what I'm wanting at the time I decide to buy another. Curious to see how these stack up against their counterparts once there's enough feedback from those who know what their doing putting numbers of rounds down range with them. I like that they're putting something different out there though. I'm curious.
 
SmithNut said:
It's a move in the right direction, but from what I see the contoured area of the frame surrounding the hammer of the K frame (and J frames) is still ugly, this was done when the lock was implemented. To do it right in returning to the original design they should get back to the original frame design.

Just one person's opinion but the change is in the right direction.

Bahhhh Humbugggg :(
Click to expand...

The frame contour on J & K frames turns me off! But I think the frame mounted firing pin will prevent the frame contour from returning to the old style. The prelock 627 8 shot guns had a cut off hammer that was exposed after the frame mounted firing pin but before the lock. I hope I am wrong!
 
I'm all in for a new model 10. I love me a fixed sight k frame. Why would I buy a new one vs an old one. I have several old one. Nice ones. Beaters. New in box ones. But a brand new one if it breaks is backed by lifetime service. I'll not be afraid to wear it out. I'd really like a brand new model 13. In happy they are making more with no locks. Not that I don't have a couple with the locks. 686 and a 60. I really just like that new 10. It looks like a pre model with the large knob. Throw some nice target stocks on it. Perfect all around woods gun. I got no bears here. I'm rambling. I'm ready to find one. Kudos to S&W.
 
Many people who don't want to scuff up dad's old Model 10 will be lining up for a new lock free M10 Classic, and I am in the group! Love the front sight, and I like the grips and the whole Victory Model vibe. And I just bought a new copy of the classic WW2 .38 shoulder holster………

What a great development from S&W. Thank you to Smith & Wesson for listening to what users want.

If we get an Ultimate carry Model 12 Airweight Classic at SHoT Show I will be buying some S&W stock.
 
Beju said:
Now, the Colt Python with mostly forged internals (cylinder locking bolt, transfer bar, rebound lever are MIM, but of a through-hardened sort) shows that it can be done these days, but even the most basic Python is an extra $300+ over a 686 or Colt's Cobra line that uses a MIM hammer and trigger.
Click to expand...

The MIM Colt uses is hardened all the way through. The vendor…Pratt & Whitney I believe…has a proprietary process for doing so. Whether Colt has an exclusive on it where P&W cannot use it for any other gunmaker is an open question.
 
Best news for revolver fans in a long, long time. It's also great to see a pencil barrel .38 K frame back in production. Hopefully the 10 sells well and we see a new Model 64 soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Handgunner00
New S&W Model 19 Classic (No internal lock)
Replies
7
Views
301
Engine49guy
Engine49guy
NY-1
Why the Lock-Frame Curvature was Retained on New No-Lock Frames
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Thaddeus Beauregard
T
T
Revolver Lock
2
Replies
23
Views
1K
Wickerboots
W
G
  • Locked
SOLD: 3” Model 66-4 No Lock
Replies
2
Views
2K
Davischristian3399
D
hastings
Sending model 25-9 to S&W for repair and action job.
Replies
2
Views
329
Nightowl
Nightowl

Latest posts

Back
Top