Locks Will Be Phased Out Says S&W!!

OUTA MY ROAD!!!
I'm first in line for a model 22 without the lock!
I get to buy a NEW S&W again!!!
Click to expand...

I can jump on that wagon
icon_biggrin.gif
 
Originally posted by Wheelgunner840:
April 1st is 24 days away.
icon_smile.gif
Click to expand...

Yeah, that would have been a good one! I don't think I could find a better April Fool than that, but if you read the Wikipedia article, it really looks like it's going to include revolvers....

When I looked up the Ayoob article, I noticed I had read that issue (the one with the beautiful Browning Hi Powers on the cover if anyone recalls).

Since the other option was included for the autos so recently, which I didn't know, I'm still very hopeful. I wasn't aware it was that recent. And there is one revolver in the current catalog without the IL. The Model 442 Revolver - No Internal Lock, right there on their website under J-Frames.
 
Maybe my Model 22 with the will be rare in a few years and beworth more than pre lock or post lock!
icon_smile.gif
 
I never did buy a Smith & Wesson revolver with a lock. I don't have them on any of my issued firearms and I never could see why having one on a personal gun worked to my advantage.

Much more significant is the fact that Smith & Wesson may be paying attention to what people are saying, especially those documented cases of IL failure.

Folks, I think we have been heard.

Now all I need hope for is a lockless 658. In the meantime I'll buy something from the current product line out of general gratitude.
 
I wouldn't hold your breath. I seriously doubt that S&W is willing to remove the IL from their revolvers due to a few or even several malfunctions. From a liability standpoint, I think they much rather have pissed off people because the gun didn't work like it was suppose to than have lawsuits because little timmy blew his head off with a no lock gun. We all know what I said is absolutely absurd, but there is some truth in it. S&W is not hurting for money and I seriously doubt the relatively small amount of true afficianados who refuse to buy guns with IL will affect their profit margins too much. I think this is just a pipe dream folks! I hope I am wrong though....
 
Originally posted by MikeZ65:
Has anyone heard tale of this? Below is the article and the reference is included by Massad Ayoob. I don't believe I read that article, though I do read that magazine. The link is included at the bottom as well.

Internal locking mechanism

Partial Lock Failure The hammer rebounded from the recoil of a magnum load and the internal lock pin impinged enough to freeze it in place
All Smith & Wesson revolvers have been equipped with an internal locking mechanism since the acquisition by Saf-T-Hammer. The mechanism is relatively unobtrusive, is activated with a special key, and renders the firearm inoperable. While the lock can simply be left disengaged, some gun enthusiasts refuse to buy "post-lock" guns, fearing the lock might cause the gun to malfunction when needed most, as in a crisis. If the lock breaks, the gun will not work without being repaired.[12] Smith & Wesson has repeatedly stated that the locking mechanism does not affect reliability, although several cases have been documented.[13][14]
Smith & Wesson announced in March, 2009, that it would begin phasing the internal lock out of its revolver lineup.[15]

Massad Ayoob. "S&W Gives its Customers What They Want". American Handgunner. Mar-Apr 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson
Click to expand...

This news must be an absolute nightmare for all of the big mouths on here who said the lock is the reason they will not buy a new S&W revolver.

Now, the big mouths must all be shaking in fear because each and every one will have to put up or shut up. I am betting many will come up with other excuses not to open their wallets!

The day the locks are discontinued is the day all of the no-lock big mouths will all eat crow and have lots of other excuses for not buying.

Let's see: it has MIM parts, it is not P&R, it is round butt instead of square, it is square butt instead of round, it has a frame mounted firing pin, it has rubber grips, it does not have rubber grips, it is not "built like they used to," the markings are lasered on, the markings are not lasered on, the roll mark is not even, the roll mark is not deep enough, why is there no K frame magnum?, the K frame magnum is not strong enough, it has a floating hand, it does not have a floating hand, etc.

I am sure there are some I have forgotten, but I have no doubt we will all see the excuses on here.
 
Originally posted by MikeZ65:
Has anyone heard tale of this? Below is the article and the reference is included by Massad Ayoob. I don't believe I read that article, though I do read that magazine. The link is included at the bottom as well.

Internal locking mechanism

Partial Lock Failure The hammer rebounded from the recoil of a magnum load and the internal lock pin impinged enough to freeze it in place
All Smith & Wesson revolvers have been equipped with an internal locking mechanism since the acquisition by Saf-T-Hammer. The mechanism is relatively unobtrusive, is activated with a special key, and renders the firearm inoperable. While the lock can simply be left disengaged, some gun enthusiasts refuse to buy "post-lock" guns, fearing the lock might cause the gun to malfunction when needed most, as in a crisis. If the lock breaks, the gun will not work without being repaired.[12] Smith & Wesson has repeatedly stated that the locking mechanism does not affect reliability, although several cases have been documented.[13][14]
Smith & Wesson announced in March, 2009, that it would begin phasing the internal lock out of its revolver lineup.[15]

Massad Ayoob. "S&W Gives its Customers What They Want". American Handgunner. Mar-Apr 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson
Click to expand...

Footnote 15 refers to an article by Massad Ayoob in the March/April 2009 American Handgunner.

I looked over my copy of that magazine and cannot find the article. Anyone know the page number?
 
Originally posted by shawn mccarver:
This news must be an absolute nightmare for all of the big mouths on here who said the lock is the reason they will not buy a new S&W revolver.

Now, the big mouths must all be shaking in fear because each and every one will have to put up or shut up. I am betting many will come up with other excuses not to open their wallets!

The day the locks are discontinued is the day all of the no-lock big mouths will all eat crow and have lots of other excuses for not buying.
Click to expand...

If this pans out, I will be more than happy to post a picture of my brandy-new S&W revolver for you.

That is, if I am one of those big mouths your talking about.

WG840
 
Originally posted by Wheelgunner840:

If this pans out, I will be more than happy to post a picture of my brandy-new S&W revolver for you.

That is, if I am one of those big mouths your talking about.

WG840
Click to expand...

Oh relax there big fella, was speaking generally, not about any particular person. Did not even know that you were "one of the big mouths."

Now, before alot of angry responses get posted, do not waste your time - everyone needs to get themselves a sense of humor!
icon_biggrin.gif
 
Hmmmm - seems that issue of the magazine was out in late January. And it supposedly has a quote: "Smith & Wesson announced in March, 2009, that it would begin phasing the internal lock out of its revolver lineup."

What's wrong with this picture? Maybe the magazine is published in the Twilight Zone.
 
Originally posted by shawn mccarver:
Originally posted by MikeZ65:
Has anyone heard tale of this? Below is the article and the reference is included by Massad Ayoob. I don't believe I read that article, though I do read that magazine. The link is included at the bottom as well.

Internal locking mechanism

Partial Lock Failure The hammer rebounded from the recoil of a magnum load and the internal lock pin impinged enough to freeze it in place
All Smith & Wesson revolvers have been equipped with an internal locking mechanism since the acquisition by Saf-T-Hammer. The mechanism is relatively unobtrusive, is activated with a special key, and renders the firearm inoperable. While the lock can simply be left disengaged, some gun enthusiasts refuse to buy "post-lock" guns, fearing the lock might cause the gun to malfunction when needed most, as in a crisis. If the lock breaks, the gun will not work without being repaired.[12] Smith & Wesson has repeatedly stated that the locking mechanism does not affect reliability, although several cases have been documented.[13][14]
Smith & Wesson announced in March, 2009, that it would begin phasing the internal lock out of its revolver lineup.[15]

Massad Ayoob. "S&W Gives its Customers What They Want". American Handgunner. Mar-Apr 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson
Click to expand...

Footnote 15 refers to an article by Massad Ayoob in the March/April 2009 American Handgunner.

I looked over my copy of that magazine and cannot find the article. Anyone know the page number?
Click to expand...
*
There is no such article. I looked at this and thought I must have missed an issue, or something else odd had happened. I went through it page by page, not just looking at the ToC; looked at other articles which might have had some such reference, etc. There is no such article or any other support I can find for the assertion made in the last sentence.
There was an article several years ago consistent with his report of the IL failures as described in the sentences before the one in question.
The problem with Wikipedia is that anyone can edit an entry, and apparently did. Note the lead time - while it is possible that the MAY-JUNE issue which I don't yet have could contain such an article, we are only a few days into March, and such a report would be doing well to hit the July-August or even later issue.
 
When S&W released the M642 without a lock I bought one. A month or so later they released the M442 no-lock and I would have bought one of those too if I had the money. Actually, I would have bought that over the M642 if I had known S&W was going to make them. IF they make a M438 without a lock I'll buy it in a heartbeat!!!!!! (I just love the Bodyguard J frame) Since the M38-3 (no lock +P rated) is so hard to find the M438 will do just fine...
 
Originally posted by Doug M.:

There is no such article or any other support I can find for the assertion made in the last sentence.

There was an article several years ago consistent with his report of the IL failures as described in the sentences before the one in question.
The problem with Wikipedia is that anyone can edit an entry, and apparently did.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Doug, I remember reading that issue as well, and usually do so cover to cover. When I looked back to see what issue it was I remembered it distinctly. It would have jumped out at me if there was such a quote. Maybe that reference was to support the Wiki articles claim about the reported failures, but the reference wasn't in the right spot if that was the case. The reference was placed after the "locks will be phased out" section.

Sounds spotty, but because a couple of lock-less models are starting to appear I remain optimistic and hope that the quote was solid and just had an incorrect reference attached. I'll bet within a year we'll start to see more trial no-lock revolvers being marketed. When I see one that strikes my fancy I'll get one!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
WHAT'S YOUR FAVORITE MOUNTAIN GUN?
2
Replies
38
Views
8K
MTKTM
MTKTM
J
Model 29 cannot handle .44 Mag?
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
49K
S.B.
S.B.
G
Bought a Model 29 Classic
Replies
14
Views
2K
Coaltminer
C
F
The use of MIM parts - S&W's explanation
3 4 5
Replies
97
Views
60K
hkcavalier
hkcavalier
Doc44
Model 29-58, A "Gripping" Story
2 3
Replies
49
Views
14K
SuperMan
S

Latest posts

Back
Top