Lock vs. No-Lock
- Thread starter patepluma
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
williamlayton
Member
I have come to some conclusions about all of this.
I really like a no lock S&W----but----I have been looking for another .41mag or a .44 mag in an "N" frame and from the prices some folks are asking for shooter grade old 'uns I am thinking I might just get a NEW one for $250 less.
I know, I know I am being sacreligous--but I will be $250 richer and still have a NEW S&W shooter.
Blessings
I really like a no lock S&W----but----I have been looking for another .41mag or a .44 mag in an "N" frame and from the prices some folks are asking for shooter grade old 'uns I am thinking I might just get a NEW one for $250 less.
I know, I know I am being sacreligous--but I will be $250 richer and still have a NEW S&W shooter.
Blessings
Avery11
US Veteran
In my opinion, it's not a price issue.
I like guns without the lock based on asthetics, mainly. I really don't care how the price point measures up. I will just wait for a piece to come along in my budget without a lock.
I would think there are 3 main groups:
1. No lock period.
2. Don't care either way.
3. Accept the lock because will only buy brand new guns.
I doubt pricing plays much of a part for 1 and 3. For number 2, it's probably less about looks and more about utility so price matters but I doubt they seek one over the other as a rule.
To answer the original question directly; Yes. All things being equal, I thing a pre-lock gun will generally sell for more if they are sitting side by side. But that's value, not price. Price is the sticker the seller puts on the gun. Value is the amount the buyer and seller agree to.
Statistically there is an average percentage but only if someone tracks it. 5Wire is the man for the stats around here but I don't know if he tracks your particular data point. Maybe he will be along.
Is all that unclear enough?
I like guns without the lock based on asthetics, mainly. I really don't care how the price point measures up. I will just wait for a piece to come along in my budget without a lock.
I would think there are 3 main groups:
1. No lock period.
2. Don't care either way.
3. Accept the lock because will only buy brand new guns.
I doubt pricing plays much of a part for 1 and 3. For number 2, it's probably less about looks and more about utility so price matters but I doubt they seek one over the other as a rule.
To answer the original question directly; Yes. All things being equal, I thing a pre-lock gun will generally sell for more if they are sitting side by side. But that's value, not price. Price is the sticker the seller puts on the gun. Value is the amount the buyer and seller agree to.
Statistically there is an average percentage but only if someone tracks it. 5Wire is the man for the stats around here but I don't know if he tracks your particular data point. Maybe he will be along.
Is all that unclear enough?
Last edited:
47D
Member
I always have a preference for the no-lock, pre-MIM guns. If you put a brand new gun with the lock next to a used (but not abused) gun without the lock side by side for the same price - I'd pick the used one every time. However, it depends entirely upon which model we are talking about.
It would have to a screaming deal before I would even consider buying a new or used 686-6 or newer, because there is a ready supply of -4 and lower guns for reasonable prices ($500-$600). In contrast, if you want a 4" barrel 625 without the lock (Product code 100925 or 100931), you're going to have to do a lot of searching and be prepared to pay a premium. It might make more sense to buy a new 625JM or PC gun and be done with it.
I would never buy a 642 with a lock when they can be had new without the lock for the same price. On the other hand, if you desire a 325 Thunder Ranch or 327 TRR8, a lock is your only choice. Deactivate it, buy John's Plug, and be done with it.
As far as the premium that no-lock guns bring, I cannot discern an amount or percentage. It is really model and market dependent.
It would have to a screaming deal before I would even consider buying a new or used 686-6 or newer, because there is a ready supply of -4 and lower guns for reasonable prices ($500-$600). In contrast, if you want a 4" barrel 625 without the lock (Product code 100925 or 100931), you're going to have to do a lot of searching and be prepared to pay a premium. It might make more sense to buy a new 625JM or PC gun and be done with it.
I would never buy a 642 with a lock when they can be had new without the lock for the same price. On the other hand, if you desire a 325 Thunder Ranch or 327 TRR8, a lock is your only choice. Deactivate it, buy John's Plug, and be done with it.
As far as the premium that no-lock guns bring, I cannot discern an amount or percentage. It is really model and market dependent.
Maximumbob54
Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2010
- Messages
- 7,202
- Reaction score
- 1,928
I have reached the point where I am far more concerned with the new non lead bullet friendly rifling. I recently held in my hand a three inch 629 Talo edition. All I could think about was the fact that it would never cleanly shoot my cast lead bullet loads without leading the bore just like my six inch 629 does. I didn't even take the time to
over the ILS. I'm just still
over the idea of making better jacketed bullet revolvers while it makes them worse with lead loads. It seems like a very
move on S&W's part. I used smileys to make this seem less like a rant. I hope it worked.
Dragon88
Member
Many feel so strongly about the lock that they just won't buy your IL gun, whatever the price is. Also, all IL guns are practically brand new by collector's standards. What's the point of buying a used gun that was made five years ago as some type of "collector's piece", when you can still buy a brand new one from the factory? IL guns are so recent that you are really just going off standard depreciation. It's not like buying a S&W from the early twentieth century, that's actually gone up in value because it's "used". A used IL gun merely has a previous owner, wear, and less value. Like buying a used car. Half a century from now, how will IL guns fare in the value department? Hard to say. It depends on when/if S&W does away with the locks and caps off the infamous Internal Lock Period.
Anyway that's my 2 cents. As you can tell I don't like ILs.
Anyway that's my 2 cents. As you can tell I don't like ILs.
firearmsunlimited
Member
geneboy
Member
Locks who cares, mim who cares, old timers thats who. Forget Lock or no lock, a good gun is a good gun, the lock-mim guns shoot just as well or better as the older guns, plus the metallurgy is -WAY- better. unless you are one of those guys who buys guns just to put in a safe and look at or show to your Friends once and a while, lock no lock does not matter.... That should stir up the don't Change anything crowd
mg357
Absent Comrade
i don't like the lock either but sometimes in life you have to deal with things that you don't like.
AveragEd
Member
At age 64, I tend to like stuff "the way it used to be" unless we're talking electronics. Then, newer's better. But guns - well, I own a few and have yet to buy one with a lock. No, that's not true - I've purchased a bunch of Remington Model 700s from the 1997-2001 time period when they put some nice scroll engraving on the receivers. Some of them had the infamous J-lock on the bolt shroud but a replacement shroud cleared that up.
I'm not so swayed to older guns that I prefer pinned and recessed S&Ws. To me, those recessed chambers are just harder to clean.
My only concern is that S&W doesn't follow Remington's lead and cave in to the collectors by discontinuing the lock. That would make all our older no-lock guns less valuable and the IL guns more valuable strictly due to the smaller number of them.
As long as I can buy nice, lightly-used no-lock non-MIM Smiths, I will take them over a new one.
Ed
I'm not so swayed to older guns that I prefer pinned and recessed S&Ws. To me, those recessed chambers are just harder to clean.
My only concern is that S&W doesn't follow Remington's lead and cave in to the collectors by discontinuing the lock. That would make all our older no-lock guns less valuable and the IL guns more valuable strictly due to the smaller number of them.
As long as I can buy nice, lightly-used no-lock non-MIM Smiths, I will take them over a new one.
Ed
Precisely
That's why I dumped my first wife. If, at some point, I decide I don't like my IL revolver, I'll sell it.
stevieboy
Member
I don't even think about the lock when I consider purchasing a gun. It's simply irrelevant to me. That said, nearly all of my Smith revolvers are lockless. That's because, with one exception, the guns that I like and that I currently fire all are models that came before the lock. My one exception is my 625JM. That model didn't exist in the pre-lock era.
buck460XVR
Member
Around here, lock or no lock seems to make no difference on the price of a used Smith. A used 686 @90% is worth approximately $500 regardless of whether it has a lock or not. Sure, sometimes at a gun show, a seller will make it a point to tell everyone a gun is "prelock, pre-mim", but in the end, it generally sells for the same price as a post-lock/post-mim model. As for paying more for a used pre-lock as opposed to a exact NIB post-lock gun, you'd have to be nuts. Also there are some extremely popular S&W models and calibers that were never available before the lock. By coincidence, my youngest son and I were at the range yesterday shooting several Smiths. He was given my 686-4(last model for no mim and pre lock) for his 18th birthday. He was goin' on and on about how much better the DA trigger on my brand new 686-6 Talo was compared to his older -4. I asked him if he wanted to trade and he said it wasn't necessary........he would own both soon enough.
snubbiefan
Member
This could be my imagination (older people tend to imagine things you know), but I thought I heard, or read somewhere they may be phasing-out the lock. Anybody else heard such a rumor? If not....I'll start it
.
This would give us a whole 'nuther set of considerations....pre-lock....lock....post-lock.
.This would give us a whole 'nuther set of considerations....pre-lock....lock....post-lock.
The one S&W I have with the IL is a Model 63, 5" .22 LR. I've had it for awhile and never had a problem (shot often), but it is a range gun. My self defense guns, 442, flat latch Model 38 and a Colt Cobra do not have the IL.
As an old timer (mid 60's) I do not want to chance my life to the IL. They're probably fine but that is just me.
As an old timer (mid 60's) I do not want to chance my life to the IL. They're probably fine but that is just me.
I do not care for the lock.
However you put two used firearms of equal condition side by side and I will buy the less expensive of the two.
As a buyer I will not pay a premium for a no lock gun.
As a seller I love the fact that lock haters are willling to shell out more money.
However you put two used firearms of equal condition side by side and I will buy the less expensive of the two.
As a buyer I will not pay a premium for a no lock gun.
As a seller I love the fact that lock haters are willling to shell out more money.
geneboy
Member
This could be my imagination (older people tend to imagine things you know), but I thought I heard, or read somewhere they may be phasing-out the lock. Anybody else heard such a rumor? If not....I'll start it
This would give us a whole 'neither set of considerations....pre-lock....lock....post-lock.
yea their doing away with the locks, and I also heard there doing away with all the #@*&% lawyers, (I WISH)
I'm also on the wrong side of 60, but I'll disagree with you on the electronics thing. Another of my hobbies is buying and restoring 60's and 70's vintage Sansui amps, and you will simply not find a new audio amp (at any price) that sounds as good as a restored Sansui AU-9500 (and some other models as well) pushing a quality pair of speakers.
But I digress...
I am one of those who absolutely refuse to own a S&W IL pistol if I am ever going to use it for self defense.
To explain: I don't like external safety's on self-defense pistols either, so my SD pistols include several XD's of various models that are kept chamber loaded in the house, and my carry pistols include more non-safety pistols such as a Rohrbaugh, an LCP and pre-lock J-frame Smith's.
I do not want myself or my wife to have to fumble with a safety during an extreme moment of duress, and here's my main point; I refuse to have to worry if a Smith IL pistol is "locked", and worse yet, have to wonder where the key is in the middle of the night. Not a good situation.
I had no problem recently buying a brand new IL Smith 617/4", but it's a plinking/target/range gun, and it's never left loaded for self defense when not actually using it. It's just a range gun where the IL wouldn't matter if it were locked or not. That would be just a convenience issue.
What's been happening recently is that other gun makers are catering more to the growing SD crowd and introducing some really well made, non-lock, non-safety pistols that are perfect for both carrying or house guns. So while I would love to buy a couple more S&W revolvers, I'll pass them by while I spend my hard-earned dollars on brand new pistols like the Kahr CM9 that I'm going to shop for next weekend.
So because of the IL, Kahr gets my money, not S&W, and if that doesn't bother S&W, then I won't let it bother me.
Last edited:
labworm
US Veteran
Again the lock thread.
My head is killing me.
Anyone favor a manual transmission over a automatic
My head is killing me.
Anyone favor a manual transmission over a automatic
Similar threads
- Locked
