Pre-Lock vs. Lock

I'm new to the Forum and have several pistols but find myself getting interested in buying a revolver for home defense and target shooting. I seem drawn to the 686 Pro series and the 625JM. A few friends have told me to avoid the newer Smiths with the lock.

Is this a legitimate concern? Should I pass on these? Is there some way to fix or adjust the gun if indeed a concern?

Can you tell I'm a newbie?

Thanks for your time and interest in helping.

Jim L.

Newbie is OK but do a search and you will see that this topic has been beat to death... and most of us have gotten tired talking about it!
Concern - maybe, pass - depends, fix - yes. Confused yet?

ken158 said:

Newbie is OK but do a search and you will see that this topic has been beat to death... and most of us have gotten tired talking about it!
Concern - maybe, pass - depends, fix - yes. Confused yet?

Click to expand...

Thank you very much. Very enlightening. Makes me glad I joined the S&W Forum to do some research on this subject. Obviously I am very confused... what could ever have led me to think that this was the place to get a little education on this issue. Rest your tired bones, Ken, because this OK newbie is out of here.
JL

calm down

There is no cause to be rude Jdl2, this is one of the friendliest forums on the net. Don't write us off because one person is tired of the issue. (no offense Ken) That being said, it is a tired issue, but it boils down to what you want. There are substantiated and unsubstantiated reports of the lock tying up revolvers on the internet. Many members here have no problem with the lock, and as a percentage is causes very few failures I'm certain. Still, it's aesthetically displeasing to many and it's always possible (however improbable) that your gun could lock up at an important moment. So, it's your choice and that's the consensus here.

One other thing of note, the older the gun, generally the better the workmanship, and while that may sound subjective I think most here will agree that it's fact.

Ignore the "lock vs no lock" issue. It's not worth worrying about.
Just ignore the lock and never use it.
Use the hole to lubricate the internal lockwork.

Personally I'd buy a new current S&W revolver for 2 reasons.
1. You get a brand new gun.
2. You get a warranty.

Buy one, examine it very closely and then shoot the living daylights out of it.
Try to wear it out or even break the damn thing.

If you find something wrong or it doesn't shoot right, send it back to S&W and have them fix it.

Send it back as many times as it takes to satisfy you that you have a good dependable firearm.

S&W pays shipping both ways, so what do you have to lose?

JBnTx said:

Ignore the "lock vs no lock" issue. It's not worth worrying about.
Just ignore the lock and never use it.
Use the hole to lubricate the internal lockwork.

Personally I'd buy a new current S&W revolver for 2 reasons.
1. You get a brand new gun.
2. You get a warranty.

Buy one, examine it very closely and then shoot the living daylights out of it.
Try to wear it out or even break the damn thing.

If you find something wrong or it doesn't shoot right, send it back to S&W and have them fix it.

Send it back as many times as it takes to satisfy you that you have a good dependable firearm.

S&W pays shipping both ways, so what do you have to lose?

Click to expand...

Definitely agree.

If you are looking at a defensive handgun, you owe it to yourself to shoot the daylights out of it, both before and after you start using it for defensive purposes.

The 686 Pro series and the 625JM are very fine revolvers. They of course have the internal lock. It is for some an emotional issue due to its association with the clinton's. It is about like the complaints regarding MIM parts rather than traditional forged parts. Again it is a emotional issue. Functionally the MIM parts are excellent. I have a S&W 21-4 that has the IL and MIM parts. It is one of the best fitted and finished S&W revolvers I've ever owned. It has a outstanding DA and SA trigger pull. POA is precisely POI at 15 yds. using standard .44 Special ammo. It is a entirely excellent revolver. It commonly sits on the bedside table ready to be used if needed for HD.

The 686 or 625 will serve you well for recreational target shooting, competition and home defense. Either would be outstanding. Listen to your what your friends say, but take what they say with a shovel full of salt. If they've actually had experience with a problem, fine. Let them speak to that issue. But if they are only repeating internet rumors, they are just repeating what someone else says may have happened.

In 30 years of shooting S&W revolvers, I've had two problems. One 686 had the firing pin nose break off. For the grand total of $18, it was fixed. Another S&W revolver has the little spring break that causes the cylinder bolt to rise up. S&W fixed that as well as doing an action job on the revolver.

Personally, I'd go ahead and buy either the 686 or 625. If and it is a very unlikely if, if there should be a problem, S&W will fix it. They have excellent customer service.

If you find one with a lock and its a good deal, buy it. You can see on youtube how to remove it. Probably take ya 4 minutes and 3 seconds to accomplish this feat and that probably includes watching the 3 minute video... then be happy cause you learned how to do something special to YOUR gun. Just keep the lock in case you do sell it so you can allow them the choice of lock or not...

You were offered a specific response to your question,try to take the suggestion to utilize the search feature on this forum-it will give you more info than you want.

. . . A few friends have told me to avoid the newer Smiths with the lock . . .

MAYBE, those friends would not buy a car w/fuel injection or radial tires or a new home w/a 90% efficient heating/ac system or . . . fill in the blank, you can drive yourself crazy about this. Do your research, settle on what you are comfortable with, have fun w/the gun (which means shoot the snot out of it) and the rest of the world be ****.

Not to buy something because its new or different seems a little strange to me (but I've been called worst). I think the advances in new technology in the guns of 'home defense' are comparable to train/airplane or horse/auto. Doesn't matter what you decide, someone will think your wrong. THERE IS NO ONE RIGHT ANSWER.

Good luck in your decision and have fun.

my awesome NEW 627.....with the lock and subsequently shown with the lock removed sporting this forum's "the plug". Done and done....and yes, the youtube explanation of how to do was my first time ever tearing down a wheelgun. Both fun and easy. I didn't feel like the lock was a liability or that it was destined to go bad, I am just a believer that the PC locks installed on some new guns is not needed. I remove the ILS on Springfields too.

with lock:


with the plug installed and lock removed (only one spring shot across the kitchen landing conspicuously ontop of the trash bag - LOL)

I am of a differing opinion. Go figure! If it's a defense/carry gun, I wouldn't recommend removing the lock. Any modification to the gun might result in some lawyer foaming at the mouth about how you made your gun unsafe, and that's why it killed the innocent little misunderstood criminal who's family now wants your money (go figure). If it's a range gun? I'd pop it out in a heartbeat, without a care.

Well, for me at least, I've never quite bought into the don't disable the lock because you open yourself up to lawsuits argument. It's a storage lock to keep kids from getting your gun and shooting themselves, not a lock meant to be carried and then taken off when going into a fight like the thumb safety on a 1911, or any of the numberous safeties on various double action autos. Now, if you would disable the lock and your child shoots himself at home then you would have just multiplied your problems.

But to your question, I agree with those who say that the lock is a non-issue functionally. I've had a few gunsmiths tell me that they don't see how the physics could possibly work to make the lock engage on its own. And, even if those stories are correct, they all seem to be on the ultralight revolvers, not the larger guns.

Personally, I won't buy a lock revolver simply because I don't like the looks of them. I wouldn't have any problem trusting my life to them and I'm sure their quality is fine, they just look wrong to me. Like almost everything else in shooting, it almost always comes down to personal preference. If you like something, rent it and shoot it. If you still like it buy it.

My new 642 .38 has the lock and I've run 300 rnds thru it with no problems. I thought about removing it but I too was thinking about possible implications if I ever needed to defend myself since its my main carry side arm.

MikeChandler:

My thinking is completely opposite to yours. If it were a Range gun I wouldn't really care if the gun locked up (actually I would, but it is certainly not a major incident) . If it were a self defense gun I would remove the lock before ever carrying it. Personally, I am more concerned about the gun functioning 100% when I need it, and deal with the Lawyers later if need be. Since the I/L is not a "safety" meant to be used while carrying, (only when stored to make it child safe) my main concern is to have a 100% reliable firearm!

That is exactly why I only own Smith's with out I/L's - no issues to worry about, nothing to replace, nothing to jam up and IMHO the older ones are arguably built better.

Respectfully,
Chief38

MikeChandler said:

I am of a differing opinion. Go figure! If it's a defense/carry gun, I wouldn't recommend removing the lock. Any modification to the gun might result in some lawyer foaming at the mouth about how you made your gun unsafe, and that's why it killed the innocent little misunderstood criminal who's family now wants your money (go figure). If it's a range gun? I'd pop it out in a heartbeat, without a care.

Click to expand...

This logic is complete internet lore and its thrown around in every gun forum. If you could show me a single FOOL (yes I said fool) who would CCW their guns with an internal storage locking mechanism set to lock, I will show you pigs that fly. How is a gun made unsafe? I changed nothing having to do with the proper function of the gun to make it go bang. No one, and I mean no one, carries with a gun locked, you would be dead before you could ever get the stupid key out of your pocket. And it has NOTHING to do with a good SD shooting. Period.

By your logic, getting a trigger job would be the same. I hope none of your SD guns have a quality trigger job.

Besides, it comes down to this....I didn't accidentally shoot the BG trying to kill me, I MEANT to shoot the ***.

Now, I see only one instance where you might have a point. And I would never do it anyhow but it goes like this: Gun left out in house. Gun originally had lock but was removed. Gun grabbed by an unsuspecting visitor or worse, a kid. Person pulls trigger and kills someone or self accidentally or negligently. Family and Lawyer foam at mouths and argue, child/visitor in my home would still be alive had the internal lock NOT been removed and was engaged....gunowner now liable for leaving unlocked gun out and accessible to victim.

SD shooting...has nothing to do with it.

Again, I MEANT to pull the trigger. anyhow...my two worthless cents.

Pote said:

This logic is complete internet lore and its thrown around in every gun forum.

Besides, it comes down to this....I didn't accidentally shoot the BG trying to kill me, I MEANT to shoot the ***.

Again, I MEANT to pull the trigger. anyhow...my two worthless cents.

Click to expand...

You're exactly right!

The only time the mechanical condition of the gun would come into play is if it was an accidental shooting.

In a deliberate self defense shooting, it's irrelevant if a safety feature was removed because you intended to shoot the person.
No safety in the world could have stopped you.

chief38 said:

MikeChandler:

My thinking is completely opposite to yours. If it were a Range gun I wouldn't really care if the gun locked up (actually I would, but it is certainly not a major incident) . If it were a self defense gun I would remove the lock before ever carrying it. Personally, I am more concerned about the gun functioning 100% when I need it, and deal with the Lawyers later if need be. Since the I/L is not a "safety" meant to be used while carrying, (only when stored to make it child safe) my main concern is to have a 100% reliable firearm!

That is exactly why I only own Smith's with out I/L's - no issues to worry about, nothing to replace, nothing to jam up and IMHO the older ones are arguably built better.

Respectfully,
Chief38

Click to expand...

Seconded. You saved me some typing, Chief.