LOCK- ..can't get past "the hole".

[SuperMan]

Admin Edit-
There is a concise thread summary in Post #66

_______________________________________
_______________________________________

Was in a very large gun shop yesterday that probably carries every S&W currently made. Boy there were some really beautiful guns there but in looking I just can not get past the IL hole. I do have two 500s, a 357/.41 and two 686/.38 Supers but only have those models because they just never made them without the iL. But as long as I can find 17s, 27s, 57s and 58s with no IL I just will not buy a new gun with a hole...and niether will any of my friends...

This same shop also had about a half dozen pre-IL S&Ws including several nice 29s that were 2/3s the price of a new one... I managed to grab a 4" M48 with extra Long Rifle cylinder for $460.00...and no hole...

I wonder how much in sales S&W looses every year because of "the hole"?

Bob

 

[Evil One]

Not much, most people either dont notice, dont care, or actually like this "safety feature".
I know quite a few people who wont buy a used gun.
I wish more people were like that.


Jim

 

[Dogguy]

It hung me up on buying a new Airweight for over a year. I finally broke down and bought one, then I bought another and then I found a new no-lock 642. I don't particularly like the silly thing in the guns but it doesn't seem to affect the functioning. Of course, I'm cautious (i.e., paranoid) so I keep one of the IL keys on my keychain and another on the chain around my neck, behind my St. Chrisopher medal.

 

[JamesArthur60]

I'll bet for every customer who refuses to purchase an IL revolver, five will jump at the chance. S&W will not go broke because some hard headed consumers will not buy a revolver with a built in safety feature. Personally, I prefer older made revolvers, so the IL is not an issue for me. Let's get real here. Attorney's/politicians/insurance companies rule this country. They make the rules. I'm sure it pisses off S&W that they have to place those locks on their firearms. They read the forums, they hear the bitching. They're following outlined procedures, by people wearing $2000.00 suits who probably do not and have not fired a weapon. EVER! But, you have to admit, it's still a quality made revolver with an excellent warranty.

 

[Redhawk1]

It does not bother me either way.. I just like guns...

 

[Sportsterguy]

No IL for me! Ever! Another Hard Headed Man!

I'll bet for every customer who refuses to purchase an IL revolver, five will jump at the chance. S&W will not go broke because some hard headed consumers will not buy a revolver with a built in safety feature. Personally, I prefer older made revolvers, so the IL is not an issue for me. Let's get real here. Attorney's/politicians/insurance companies rule this country. They make the rules. I'm sure it pisses off S&W that they have to place those locks on their firearms. They read the forums, they hear the bitching. They're following outlined procedures, by people wearing $2000.00 suits who probably do not and have not fired a weapon. EVER! But, you have to admit, it's still a quality made revolver with an excellent warranty.

It might be an excellent gun but the first time you see a 2.5" 686 lock up on it's own as I did you may think differently.

I REFUSE to buy a new model S&W with the IL when I can purchase an excellent pre lock for a less expensive price.

There are plenty of other manufactures that make ALL of their firearms (rifles, shotguns and handguns) without that IL. S&W has bowed to the pressure of the ANTI's for the sake of the allmighty dollar and added a feature that is not needed if you practice proper firearms safety rules.

JMHO and happy Thanksgiving to all!

 

[WVfishguy]

I can't get around the hole either. I wish I could, but it just irks me.

But it's not just that; it's MIM parts, two piece barrels, the transfer bar, and everything else. New Smiths just don't feel right - to me.

Another thing which bothers me is the exploding cylinders on Scandium models. Makes me nervous to shoot beside anyone with an alloy Smith. A local dealer showed me what was left of a brand new 360 PD; three pieces of the cylinder, the fourth piece is somewhere near the Hubble. And that was with .38 Specials!

I know it's stupid of me to be like this, but I began shooting 30 years ago, and these new guns are awfully strange.

Thank God for Gunbroker.

 

[deanodog]

I have bought classics with the IL when the original was priced out of my range. I have since sold them because I have to buy, trade and sell. You know the routine. I love them all. I now own one M625-8 with the IL. I would not hesitate to buy another if the price was right and it struck my fancy. I am too old to let a IL stop me from buying something I want.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

I managed to grab a 4" M48 with extra Long Rifle cylinder for $460.00...and no hole...

What can I say? The IL is not a problem as long as this kind of buy is around.

Get them while you can.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

It hung me up on buying a new Airweight for over a year. I finally broke down and bought one, then I bought another and then I found a new no-lock 642. I don't particularly like the silly thing in the guns but it doesn't seem to affect the functioning. Of course, I'm cautious (i.e., paranoid) so I keep one of the IL keys on my keychain and another on the chain around my neck, behind my St. Chrisopher medal.

It doesn't affect functioning very often, but when it does, you may not have time to get the key out.

Old Buddhist saying: Forewarned is forearmed.

 

[diamonback68]

Bob, you stoled the 48!

The IL sucks and I can't get passed it either. The rest of my life is too short to trust it to a gun with an IL, period! Besides, I can buy most older classic Smiths without the IL for LESS than the new ones with it and not have the worry. The whole idea of a revolver is, when you pull the trigger it's supposed to go BANG, not have to worry "did I leave the lock on?", "will it lock-up on it's own?", "will it jam?".

 

[18DAI]

I'm with diamonback68. Don't need it, don't want it, won't buy one with it.

A quick look through the S&W 2009 catalog proves I'm not missing out on anything. You like em? You buy em. Regards 18DAI.

 

[Tracer_Bullet]

I don't like the lock, but I have a pair of 640-3's with it. I've done everything in my power to try to make them lock the gun up including firing some full-house .357's (I normally load it with +P .38 specials) and dropping the gun on a carpeted floor on it's topstrap to try to get the lock flag to pop up and engage the hammer. I just can't get the darned things to malfunction, so while I don't like them one bit, I'm not particularly worried about my specific guns locking up on me. Besides, I always carry a BUG
The lock is ugly as all get-out, but these are carry guns, not show pieces, so I live with it. If I had to do it again, I would buy guns without the locks, but the 640's were my best option at the time.

 

[ab4ka]

I suppose that's one advantage to being new to S&W's...the lock doesn't bother me. I've shot more revolvers with transfer bars than without, so the new stuff is fine with me. If anyone has any S&W revolvers with locks that they don't want, I'll be happy to give you a receipt for tax purposes

 

[HEADKNOCKER]

I can't stand the silly Lock either, I've "had" a couple with it & still have a few sets of the keys for someone who needs them..
To me it's more about the forged flash chromed hammers & triggers that the earlier guns had & on the Airweights that had Anodized Coated framed instead of a matte sprayed on finish, Just better looking & more durable..
Smith has put out a few revolvers in the past few years without the lock, All J Frames if I remember correctly, & I'm sure they noticed they sold quicker than the others..
I still think S&Ws #1 seller is the 642-2 currently with lock??
Of corse we could all buy the newer guns with the MIM parts & put "The Plug" in them disableing the lock, But leaving it reverasable if you ever sell the thing to keep you from being liable..
I once ground the tab off the flag on a 442-2 & when I sold it I told the buyer, a dealer, that it had been disabled & didn't even give him the keys.. Still made me feel funny since the gun was original sold to me by an FFL with paperwork.. That's another thing too..
All my current S&Ws have no paperwork trail.. All Gunshow buys/trades from collectors..
Gary/Hk

 

[exfebee]

I'm another, "no-locker". All my guns do not have a lock but one, and that one has had a transplant "ala The Plug". I am not a Gun Collector, but depend on these critters to save my life and my wife's as well. i cannot imagine pulling the trigger on another Armed person who is bent on killing or severely harming/injuring my family & the gun not firing due to that lock. Perhaps the IL is OK for the Collectors or Target Shooters, but just not for me.
Carl

 

[Markcuda]

My Smith and Wesson gun collection will NOT have a gun with a Hillary hole in it.
There are just way to many used Smith's to be had out their.
When people post pictures of their guns, I look instantly for the hole, if I see it, I move on to another picture.
Am I hard headed?, yup I am.
A safety feature you say, pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

 

[Joe in SC]

As long as serviceable used guns are available without the blasted thing I won't buy one. It's not so much that it looks bad or has in relatively small numbers of incidents locked the gun up as it is just another liberal federal govt. intrusion in our lives. Damn bureaucrats in Washington need to realize they can't fix everything!

Sorry about that, just one of my pet peeves.

Joe in SC

 

[DonD]

They read the forums, they hear the bitching. They're following outlined procedures, by people wearing $2000.00 suits who probably do not and have not fired a weapon. EVER!

I know an S&W engineer. He said that management is WELL aware of the general dislike for the IL.

I'd pass on the IL if given the choice but I greatly prefer new guns since I have no control over what abuse a used gun may have been subjected to. Some abuse can't be detected by visual exam and I won't pay for non destructive testing, magnafluxing, etc. And, as the OP said, they never made .500 Mags w/o locks. Also, the locks have never given me a problem, I never use it.

One poster said he dislikes several S&W features. S&W says that the two piece barrel (barrel & shroud) results in greater strength. Doesn't seem like a disadvantage to me. Ruger has transfer bars, S&W doesn't, they have hammer blocks if I'm not mistaken. Don

 

[stevieboy]

Gee, what's it been -- two whole weeks without an "I hate the lock and every other product change since 1982" thread? Just think, nine years of griping and Smith still manufactures and sells more revolvers than anyone else.