No Lock versus Pre Lock value question

Fellow Smithophiles:
The following concept plays havoc with my mind. There is no question that pre lock pistols prior to circa 2000 are more desirable and higher in price that the same exact post 2000 model with an internal lock. But now with Smith and Wesson making certain revolvers with no lock,
are they worth any more than their counterparts of the same year? Example there are some 340's out there with no lock and some with internal lock.

Terms: when I say pre lock,i refer to the revolvers that came with no lock up until 2000-2001

when I say "no lock", it refers to the cuurent crop that is made
with no IL

3 questions:

1.Are the current crop of "no lock" guns worth more than lock guns?

2. I have only seen recent J frames in no lock. Did the factory make K, L or N with out the lock since 2002?

3.Has there ever been a thread on this subject?

All information you can share is greatly appreciated

Thanks

Haris1

1. That depends on the purchaser. I think most knowledgeable buyers and experienced shooters, if they had both a current no-lock and a current lock of the same model, same condition, would prefer a current no-lock revolver over a current lock revolver. As to whether they would pay more, that is more subjective.

2. Since the lock was introduced, the factory has only intentionally made J frames without the lock, and I think only the Centennial style (enclosed hammer). Some other limited runs of J frames were offered without the lock (DAO Model 37s, if I recall), but supposedly those and some of the earlier no lock Centennials were made from "leftover" pre-lock frames.

3. I have no idea, but there is a search feature on this Forum.

I don't know about relative value.

I can say that I wouldn't buy a gun with a lock.

In the recent years my LGS has dumped the new s&w n frames with the lock almost for half the cost of the list price. Sometimes I wonder why? It could be that s&w maybe discontinuing the lock and my LGS is getting rid of his older stock. Or the sales of the REVOLVERS with the lock has fallen off, I'm not sure.

Now the cost difference. My new s&w m57 6" in nickel was $599 brand new with the loc. The older s&w are at the same price but most of the time higher priced. Which way to go is up to how much $$ in our wallets. I prefer the low cost New revolver over the used one. I'm thinking if the loc is ever eliminated the REVOLVERS with the lock will be worth much more think about it.

Having the loc or no loc I enjoy them anyway. I have four brand new s&w revolvers with the lock that cost me the price of two new ones. I saved $$ for sure. I haven't had any problems with any of them too. The loc won't stop me from buying them.

I figure if having the loc saves one child's life from a careless gun owner then it served it's purpose. The loc is about making the gun safer when there is children in the household that's the bottom line.

Best Guess

haris1 said:

Fellow Smithophiles:
The following concept plays havoc with my mind. There is no question that pre lock pistols prior to circa 2000 are more desirable and higher in price that the same exact post 2000 model with an internal lock. But now with Smith and Wesson making certain revolvers with no lock, are they worth any more than their counterparts of the same year? Example there are some 340's out there with no lock and some with internal lock. Terms: when I say pre lock,i refer to the revolvers that came with no lock up until 2000-2001 when I say "no lock", it refers to the cuurent crop that is made with no IL 3 questions:
1.Are the current crop of "no lock" guns worth more than lock guns?
2. I have only seen recent J frames in no lock. Did the factory make K, L or N with out the lock since 2002?
3.Has there ever been a thread on this subject?

Click to expand...

While I have not researched this specific issue I would still venture that since a very large percentage of the market will not buy a gun with an internal lock, it is clear that guns without internal locks have greater market appeal which means greater "general market" demand. Few if any buyers actually prefer a gun with the internal lock. So if something is more desirable, all other factors being equal, it will naturally sell for more.

The question of how much more a no lock revolver would bring is a much more complicated question and would require a lot of research and data collection which I have no desire in spending the time to acquire. But one other critical factor to consider is the supply side. Even if is something is more desirable, the availability of each would determine to a large extent how much more someone would pay, as would the availability of suitable substitutions such as similar guns made by other companies.

If there is sufficient numbers of the more desirable product and enough people don’t care one way or the other, then the difference in value would be minimal.

It all gets down to supply and demand and the many factors that create and sustain the supply and demand.

But a simple answer would be yes they would most likely have a little more value. However, it will probably not be that much more value, and certainly not as much as those older models without internal locks which S&W no longer makes. In other words the collector’s value will not be added on to the shooters value of such guns. In addition they will not have the perceived (whether real or not) superior quality that many people, rightly or wrongly, attribute to the older S&W revolvers. (it does not matter if the older guns are actually better than the newer ones, what matters is the perception by so many people that they are better.)

IMO, unless this is a temporary change in marketing by S&W, these new no-lock revolvers will probably not be substantially more valuable over time than similar guns with the lock. However, I will venture that S&W will easier sell such guns and be able to increase their market share against other manufacturers in that particular segment of the market which should lead to a greater of supply of such guns and more profits for S&W and overall, and a much happier S&W consumer group.

I hope this helps.

BigBill said:

...
I figure if having the loc saves one child's life from a careless gun owner then it served it's purpose. The loc is about making the gun safer when there is children in the household that's the bottom line.

Click to expand...

FYI, it is spelled "lock". That lock could very well end up costing more lives than it might save. If you have kids or unstable adults around, put the gun and ammo in a safe. That's a hell of a lot more secure than the silly internal lock that S&W is putting in the guns now.

The internal lock is an answer to a non-existent problem.

I agree but it makes the anti' s feel they done something good like going from 30rd mags to 10rd mags were I live. Does it matter I don't think so. But I think it's the careless gun owner there thinking about. I know it sounds stupid about the loc but it won't stop me from buying them at a great price. Either way I enjoy my new s&w n frames. If I have a problem with the loc I'll buy the plug. It's no bigger.

I do not think the loc will hold the value down. If there is no other used s&w revolvers to be found then they may get there price. It's very hard here to find any used s&w revolvers here.

Lock Trivia...

shawn mccarver said:

2. Since the lock was introduced, the factory has only intentionally made J frames without the lock, and I think only the Centennial style (enclosed hammer). Some other limited runs of J frames were offered without the lock (DAO Model 37s, if I recall), but supposedly those and some of the earlier no lock Centennials were made from "leftover" pre-lock frames.

Click to expand...

Actually, the last run of 646's was "made" well after the locks hit all of the S&W models.

I wonder if the people who say "I'll never buy a gun with a lock" would be buying a new gun anyway -- whether or not it has a lock. They may already have a safe full of guns and be into colleting older models.

As for people just getting into shooting who have no guns, the locks wouldn't make any difference except if they didn't read all the anti-lock comments by "old timers".

I'm sure the lock has some effect on price, but I don't think it's much.

Most of the listing for pre-lock guns on this site are for lower prices than the current guns with locks.

For example, good condition Model 29s pre lock seem to go for $750 or so, and the new "classic" series model 29s list for over $1000 and are hard to find.

Teach Your Children Well....

Cal44 said:

As for people just getting into shooting who have no guns, the locks wouldn't make any difference except if they didn't read all the anti-lock comments by "old timers".

Click to expand...

Learning from one's elders is a time honored tradition and generally a smart thing to do. Failure to learn from your elders is likely to result in very poor decision making.

Cal44 said:

Most of the listing for pre-lock guns on this site are for lower prices than the current guns with locks.
For example, good condition Model 29s pre lock seem to go for $750 or so, and the new "classic" series model 29s list for over $1000 and are hard to find.

Click to expand...

You must be shopping for different guns than I am. I am looking for a nice 625 pre-lock and every single one I see costs more than a new 625 with the lock.

I would like to hear from someone that actually uses the lock. I have never heard anyone say they actually use the internal lock. Anyone that wants a useless hole in the side of their gun, to gather dirt and gunk, and that on rare occasions can possibly cause the gun to not fire as needed, must not paying attention to the teaching of their elders.

Any company that intentionally installs such useless and unwanted devices on almost all their revolvers is not paying attention to the feedback from their clients. That is never a wise move either.

It would be like Buick putting a big yellow blinking light bulb on top of all their cars because it would make them more visible and could possibly save one life.

I got a call from one of the big shots from S&W Wednsday and told them why we as whole salers are not buying much revolvers with locks these days. one,pricings,two,the last m60 we got from them has a lock on it,I took the side plate and guts out and found a crack in the lock spring. We ordered the plug,I still have it and will not sell it to any dealers. S&W are owend by Saf-T industries. The spring is to thin and have seen revolvers lock up using factory loads. So I also told him that If this is going to continue,I will not buy any more. I also told them that the should dump the il lock and just put padlocks in the boxes like they use to.

Me, I WILL never buy a gun with a lock! I prefer pre 1990 guns, anything made after that was for profit only and most if not all gun manufactures were only after your money and would manufacture guns the cheapest they could, quality fell way down, you can see it. It is just the way I feel, maybe some of you might disagree, it is your option but I am just giving my 2 cents worth here.

I'm not sure how this affects value but a lot of us dumb "old-timers" won't buy a gun with a lock. When I open a "for sale" ad for an S&W revolver, I move along to another one as soon as I see that ugly hole. Many times, I have no idea what the price is - I don't even bother reading the ad's text as I have no interest in those guns. There are plenty of real nice lightly used pre-IL, pre-MIM S&Ws that are likely of better quality out there, so I see no sense in bothering with a newer one until those are no longer available.

The only gun I ever bought that had a lock was a 686-6 that I had to buy to get another S&W that I wanted but I made sure I had a buyer for that lock gun before I committed to the transaction. The young man who bought it from me was getting his first revolver and didn't know about or care if the gun had a lock and MIM parts or not.

Ed

Well I guess the two new S&W revolvers I bought this year are just **** and I should melt them down or drop them into the river or something.

I'll just stick with Ruger from now on as they still have some guns without locks.

Funny thing, through, my new Smith's shoot really nicely and I've had no trouble with them.

So, on second thought, I think I'll keep them after all.

It depends on the age and knowledge of the buying public....very much. We folks here on the forum and other places know the differences. I am no dealer (as such) but I team-up with two other guys and we generally have 8-tables at all the local gun shows. I can tell you that MOST of the time, the new buyer will not even be aware there was never a lock in a Smith and many of them prefer the lock. As time passes, the no-lock-only attitude will also pass. Who knows....many of us may live to see the day when our cherished NL revolvers are considered to be dinosaurs. Most first-time uninformed buyers simply don't care. if you try to explain the differences between the IL and NL to most of them.....all you get is the thousand yard stare. Just forget it and tell them to be sure and read the instruction manual.

Cal44 said:

Well I guess the two new S&W revolvers I bought this year are just **** and I should melt them down or drop them into the river or something.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you have already made up your mind... do what you think is best. BTW, I agree.

I'd never buy a S&W with a lock.

There are exceptions, but I try to only buy 5 screw pre-model guns also.

Emory

I have a pile of .38 and .357 S&W's, in the past week I have fired my 6" M&P made in 1919 and my 10-14's and 64-8 made in the mid 2000's.

They all shot beautifully, I enjoy older S&W's but my bottom line is I could care less about the lock. I used the Plug on one of my 10-14's on my other 4 new Smiths I didn't bother.

Buy what you like, you can get an older 38-44 or an M&P and it will probably serve you just fine for the rest of your life and you will never need a new revolver. I like to have variety from all eras of S&W and enjoy the new ones too. I have been "bashed" for praising new S&W's and the irony is I probably own more old ones than many of the people who bash me

shawn mccarver said:

1. That depends on the purchaser. I think most knowledgeable buyers and experienced shooters, if they had both a current no-lock and a current lock of the same model, same condition, would prefer a current no-lock revolver over a current lock revolver. As to whether they would pay more, that is more subjective.

2. Since the lock was introduced, the factory has only intentionally made J frames without the lock, and I think only the Centennial style (enclosed hammer). Some other limited runs of J frames were offered without the lock (DAO Model 37s, if I recall), but supposedly those and some of the earlier no lock Centennials were made from "leftover" pre-lock frames.

3. I have no idea, but there is a search feature on this Forum.

Click to expand...

Shawn,

Several months ago I decided to look for a 442 without the lock, (aka, the on-off switch,) because my 442 did have a lock, and I wasn't too warm and fuzzy about carrying it. I wasn't really sure whether S&W made one without the lock, but I looked for one anyway.

I was at a show and kept an eye out on the prices of 442's. From what I saw the going price was about $400, and all had locks. I happened to have my 442 with me at the time when I walked to another dealers' table. Low and behold he had two new 442's without locks, $399 each.

We started talking and I pointed out that they didn't have the locks on them. I told him I preferred one without the lock, and asked if he'd take mine in on a trade towards one of his new ones. He said yes.

He didn't realize the two he got were sans locks. He said he didn't order them that way, that was just the way they came in. And, with or without the lock he didn't care; he charged the same. Lucky for me.

Bill

Actually to collectors the older pre lock guns and especially the pinned and recessed magnums draw a huge premium if they are in excellent condition. I say that because a 4 inch 29-2 without the box and goodies sold not long ago for $1375 and I know because I sold it.

Most "old Timers" as was stated earlier in this thread prefer the pre lock revolvers for a lot of reasons and for me it wasn't needed and S&W was just bending down to the Clinton Adminstration's pressure. Also the early pinned barrel none magnums except the 22LR models and the pinned and recessed cylinder chambers in the magunms and 22lR were made before major cost cutting was being done by S&W and other gun manufacturers so we think they are better.

The decision is up to the buyer as they are spending their hard earned money.