Lock vs. No-Lock

Again the lock thread.

My head is killing me.:eek:

Anyone favor a manual transmission over a automatic:D

It depends on what's under the hood.I'll take a stick over auto on anything over 375 HP.

Locks no lock.... YAWN. Deal with it. It's nothing to obsess over.
 
I have only one S&W revolver left and that is a 625-8. It has a lock also. When prices and the locks come down and are gone,then I might buy more. And,maybe if you all want to get rid of the lock,call S&W and let them know along with a email letter along with it. I had trouble with my lock,sent it back,got it fixed,and found out that small spring cracked and broke.
 
Yes, the no lock version of a revolver will always be worth more than the IL version.

Why? Because it is a superior revolver.......and looks better too! ;) Regards 18DAI.
 
...the lock-mim guns shoot just as well or better as the older guns, plus the metallurgy is -WAY- better.

From another post to this thread, it would appear the new guns don't shoot cast bullets "way better". As for the metallurgy, where does this oft repeated claim come from? There are no better steels than the 4100 series of chrome molly steel the guns of the 1950s and 1960s were made from. Newer isn't always better...despite the hype.

Dave
 
I have 2 with the IL - a 60 pro and a 638 - both purchased before I found this forum - that should tell something :rolleyes:

Now I only buy the older models without the IL but one exception I might make is the 627 snubby - lock or not, it's a beauty :D
 
I will buy the ones with the IL if it is what I want and the price is right.It means nothing to me and I am an old man (73).Not all of us old timers feel the same about them.
 
Clutch

I'm in search of something (cheap) w/a clutch, too. My oldest is gonna start learning to drive soon & I don't think he's ever even SEEN a clutch! ('cept in the Kubota)
 
The same but different...

I prefer no lock S&W's due to 1) it is an unneccessary complication and 2) After having disassembled various S&W revolvers for cleaning, lubing, springs, etc., I have come to GREATLY APPRECIATE the efficient and elegant mechanical engineering in your no-lock models. With a bare minimum of moving parts the S&W action does a lot of very precise things, very, very well AND it does them with a great reliability that you can stake your life on, and a great durability that allows them to function well for many thousands of rounds - all with a handsome finish at a price most folks can afford. Hard to beat. Having said, I just traded a couple of no-lock S&W's for a brand new Smith 67 because I needed the 67 4" .38 worse than the other two and got a decent deal. I also like your 70's model stereo receivers for their build quality, toughness, non-digital controls and sound. They are built (the better brands) like a gigging quality instrument amp that can take it for years and still sound great. And I still like my 5 speed manual trans in my truck, too! Automatics are for Cadillacs!





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... :o

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.
 
It's a LAWYER thing, them locks....

REPLY TO:
"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. "

We gotta remember that S&W has to put up with not only the National legal climate - dismal - but the People's Republic of Taxachussetts knee jerk liberal legal climate - worse yet!

I still bought (traded for) a new, lock equipped Model 67 that I needed because warts and all I still believe, right or wrong, that my odds of getting a very accurate American made 4" barrel .38 are best with S&W and I did not feel like selling 2 unneeded revolvers with all the attendant hassle and time spent, when I could get a good trade with them, on an imperfect but still excellent revolver that will outlast me, by far. But yes, S&W has made their own bed so they gotta lie in it. Had I found a slick no-lock S&W equivalent for trade I'd have went for the no-lock model.
 
Back
Top