More No Lock revolvers coming!

[RIDE-RED 350r]

May i ask why the older no-lock models seem to be more desireable than the lock equipped versions currently offered? I just bought a brand new 686 which has the lock. I could take it or leave it, it doesnt really bother me being there though. Unless there is some sort of negative trade off having the lock?

 

[IkenI]

The m43 & M351 are new catalog items and were introduced last January with different sku's. The new sku's are current even before any were produced. I spoke with Jeff in customer service last Friday, checking to see any production date for the 22's. He told me they would be coming "soon" and stated that the no lock guns were back by customer demand....Bob!

If anyone goes after one of these make sure you get the correct sku for the .22s. I noticed Buds Police Supply has the original sku and references the IL. So some were released with the lock.

 

[Dump1567]

May i ask why the older no-lock models seem to be more desireable than the lock equipped versions currently offered? I just bought a brand new 686 which has the lock. I could take it or leave it, it doesnt really bother me being there though. Unless there is some sort of negative trade off having the lock?

Documented lock failure that causes the lock to engage during heavy recoil and locks-up the gun.

The last thing you need in a life or death situation.

 

[sd307]

I'll pick up a 627 8 shot once produced

 

[f2]

All you have to do is notice that you'll rarely see, if ever, a s&w photo of the left side of an IL revolver. They are ashamed.

 

[RIDE-RED 350r]

Documented lock failure that causes the lock to engage during heavy recoil and locks-up the gun.

The last thing you need in a life or death situation.

Thats surely not good. Thanks for the info. Is it possible to have the lock system removed? If so will it void the warantee on the gun?

 

[epj]

Don't know or particularily care about the waranty, but here's a 627 Pro with the lock removed:

 

[zombie44]

May i ask why the older no-lock models seem to be more desireable than the lock equipped versions currently offered? I just bought a brand new 686 which has the lock. I could take it or leave it, it doesnt really bother me being there though. Unless there is some sort of negative trade off having the lock?

It introduces another point of failure and the hole is an eyesore. It's especially ridiculous on an otherwise beautiful commerative limited ed. engraved model that hole looks really out of place

 

[pinkymingeo]

When I buy a prelock S&W revolver I install lighter springs, replace the grips, replace the frame-mounted firing pin if so equipped, clean/lube and, possibly, replace the sights. When I buy an IL revolver I do all those things, plus I deactivate the lock by installing a "flag" with the locking tab removed. Adds five minutes to the other mods. No big deal.

 

[Roboto]

100% CORRECT!!!!

All you have to do is notice that you'll rarely see, if ever, a s&w photo of the left side of an IL revolver. They are ashamed.

I have always known that but never verbalized it. Now matter who it is, when they are selling or just showing their revolver and leave out the left side picture you know it has the internal lock.

 

[Angel Eyes]

I thought that the reason S&W put these locks on is that it was required by law. Jim

 

[ladder13]

All you have to do is notice that you'll rarely see, if ever, a s&w photo of the left side of an IL revolver. They are ashamed.

And when folks sell their locked guns they do likewise. They rarely mention it in the ad, if at all. Must be a reason.

 

[Roboto]

ANOTHER GOOD POINT!!!

And when folks sell their locked guns they do likewise. They rarely mention it in the ad, if at all. Must be a reason.

Like the person who may be interested in buying the gun doesn't want to know if the gun has the dreadful internal lock or not.

 

[skipr77]

If they keep the lock on revolvers with external hammers I would be more than happy with a 3" 10, 13, 64, 65 with a bobbed hammer!

 

[Fastbolt]

If they keep the lock on revolvers with external hammers I would be more than happy with a 3" 10, 13, 64, 65 with a bobbed hammer!

Technically a bobbed, or spurless hammer, is still an external hammer. It remains to be seen how this sort of thing works its way out, though.

Maybe if they make a spurless hammer model that lacks SA mode they'd consider that an acceptable modification to allow some non-ILS models. Dunno.

 

[RightWinger]

I see a lot of people using the "plug" and the member who designed it did an incredible job, and this little device serves a great purpose for those who want to remove the lock, but w/o sounding critical, the plug is still an eye sore compared to a gun w/o a lock at all. I realize the "plug" is the lesser of the two evils and a often cheaper solution and I can understand that, but if I had a choice I would rather have a gun w/o the lock at all because the hole or plugged hole in the side of the frame is what bothers me more than the few documented failures associated with the lock.

 

[DaTerminat'r]

I see a lot of people using the "plug" and the member who designed it did an incredible job, and this little device serves a great purpose for those who want to remove the lock...QUOTE]

A revolver is a tool, and its appearance doesn't matter. It's not a jewelry, oh lord.

What does bother me however is the hole and the huge gap if the lock is deleted. The hole can be easily plugged. But the gap left behind by the flag is quite significant. Alot of crap can fall into the action thru there if the revolver is carried alot. But there seems to be no easy way to fill the gap.

 

[stantheman86]

Let's get the IL dropped from the "service" revolvers like the 10, 64, 619 and 620 and I'll be doing cartwheels down the street! A lot of the other stuff like the "Classic" series, I mean, come on, do they really need IL's?

The IL in the "workhorse" revolvers currently made by S&W like my 10-14 are a small wart on what is otherwise a good looking and VERY functional gun. I got mine used for $350, probably because someone didn't like the IL, but they let a very good gun get away.......IMO it was a great deal....anyway, popped the sideplate off, took that IL junk out of there, and was left with a hole and a gap next to the hammer, but 10 minutes and a cost of 0 dollars later, NO lock!I can live with a hole, call it a "lubrication hole" this gun is a shooter and a protection piece not a collectible, I have a few 10's and many older S&W's, but the 10-14 is one of the best shooting revolvers I own and I plan to buy a NIB one at some point to add a "nice" one to my 10 collection. The IL's won't keep me from looking at the new stuff. I also have a 64-7 that is about to get de-locked, both of these are "working guns" and I could care less about a hole in the side, they are durable, reliable guns and do the same job as the older stuff.

I am not about to get rid of them because of a hole in the frame. The Plug is a great idea that I may look into for the 64-7, the 10-14 may also get a plug , I'm deciding if I really "need" it for a "using" gun, not a "looking" gun......... I use this as a CC gun and it is just one of my "tools", not a gun I keep locked away in a safe or show off to freinds.

Overall, those that talk down on people who own and shoot IL S&W's because they "only buy old ones with no IL" are in effect shooting themselves in the foot by looking down their noses at people who keep S&W in business by buying new stuff.......if S&W stopped making revolvers the prices of the older ones would skyrocket, let's think about that for a moment.....

 

[RidgwayCO]

I've complained enough about the IL that when I saw a new no-IL M642-1 at Robertson's Trading Post in April, I bought it out of guilt. Nice revolver.

Now if S&W decides to omit the lock on the M25/M625 or the M21, I'm going to be in very deep trouble...

 

[ladder13]

I'd buy a M21 in a heartbeat without the pimple.

 

[tom turner]

. . . A revolver is a tool, and its appearance doesn't matter. It's not a jewelry, oh lord . . .

Smith didn't think that way back when the Model 27-2 was made in 1970.

Luckily, no one since this gorgeous gun was made ever used its original magna stocks either for a hammer!

Nahhh, you are welcome to buy all the lock Hole, pimple faced, bead blasted guns you want.

My guns are more to me than just "tools," but I respect your opinion. Happy hammering, just please don't ask to borrow my guns to do it with! LOL

Tom

 

[RonS]

When the people of a company stop taking pride in the product for it's own sake, they are in trouble. It isn't about beating the other guy, it isn't about "we have to make a good product or we will lose customers", it's about "I am what I do, this is what I do."

How the management of a company like S&W could inflict The Hole on their product surpasses my understanding. I guess they just aren't that into the guns.

 

[stantheman86]

I can't see all the complaining about a US gunmaker that employs American workers and still makes a good product. If you want to miss out on all the new S&W's over a stupid IL that can be removed in 10 minutes, and MIM parts (which other gunmakers like Kimber also use) then so be it.....

If you want to own older S&W's but turn your back on the company than you're being short sighted.....most of the people who "won't own a new S&W" probably own plastic crapola from Croatia and Brazil but they'll be damned if they don't jump on the new S&W bashing bandwagon.

Good thing most S&W buyers don't feel the same way and Smith is coming out with new models all the time......when will the "hate the IL and MIM" crowd be happy, when S&W revolvers are made in Japan? New Winchester, anyone......?

 

[JohnFM]

I just picked up a 627-PC yesterday -- my first Smith & Wesson! I agree with you all about the lock and wish mine didn't have it. Installing the plug is the next best thing to not having the lock in the first place. Any suggestions re where I can pick up a plug and whether I'd need a gunsmith to install it? I live in northern California. Thanks very much.
John

 

[Poohgyrr]

::: a IL that can be removed in 10 minutes :::

Speaking for myself, my pistols have to be suitable for carry, and the person who says what I can carry also says - if the manufacturer deems something to be a "safety" - then I need to keep it to carry that pistol. This is strictly a "current sue and jury issue" here. Even though the IL is known to fail, and can be replaced so easily....

So, the 3 1/2" eight shooter .357 that I like so much, has the IL. And I have been shooting the dickens out of it to see what happens. Or I just carry the old family five screw six shooter instead; or an autoloader.

But a tuned 627 Pro, without the IL, would be nice. A lockless vesion of my PC 3 1/2"er would be better.

 

[Ole Coot]

When the IL goes bye bye I have three on my list that will be purchased and my older ones go back in the safe.

 

[SuperMan]

If they were smart they would make the whole Classic Series, 17, 18, 58, etc. no lock...

Keep the lock models for states that need them and slowly get more and more No-ILs...

Bob

 

[SuperMan]

I just picked up a 627-PC yesterday -- my first Smith & Wesson! I agree with you all about the lock and wish mine didn't have it. Installing the plug is the next best thing to not having the lock in the first place. Any suggestions re where I can pick up a plug and whether I'd need a gunsmith to install it? I live in northern California. Thanks very much.
John

I've put 4 in my guns and if you can strip a S&W down it is not hard...

Bullseye Smith is who you are looking for...look over in the classified...

Bob

 

[stantheman86]

How would removing the IL make the gun not suitable for carry? Who's decision is that? The IL is not a "safety" it's a de-activation device for storage. Would a prosecutor try to say that the revolver should have been locked in your holster?

If that's the case, if I shoot an attacker tomorrow with my Ruger Service Six or 64-3 I use for CC, does that mean I will get sued for not having a lock installed in it 20-30 years after it was made

I hear that LEO's can special order new S&W's without the lock, a LEO on the forum here got a lock-less Centennial ordered direct from S&W by his dealer after he submitted documentation proving he was a sworn Police Officer. So, S&W has the ability to make them without IL's if they choose, you just gotta let them check the block that "this gun was sold to a Law Enforcement officer or agent and thus we are not liable for it not being "locked" if something happens"....

The plug is a great product, for my 10-14 I chose to leave the lock-less hole in the side though......it makes a great place to stick the straw on a can of Action Blaster....

 

[bmcgilvray]

"If you want to miss out on all the new S&W's over a stupid IL that can be removed in 10 minutes, and MIM parts (which other gunmakers like Kimber also use) then so be it.....

If you want to own older S&W's but turn your back on the company than you're being short sighted..."



I'll happily miss out on a product that I particularly don't want. Doesn't matter if it is made here or in Japan.

Customer short-sidedness is only one point of view in this instance.

Another point of view is that the company is short-sighted rather than the fans of the no-lock Smith & Wesson revolver. The company that has been made aware that the lock is not universally appreciated and yet has persisted in turning its back on a goodly portion of its customer base by continuing to make revolvers with unwanted locks.

As long as the company can continue to afford lost sales due to undesirable features then I can continue to afford quality used examples of older, more traditional Smith & Wesson revolvers configured to suit my needs and desires.

And nope, no Croatian or Brazilian plastic may be found in the handgun collection here. No Kimbers either. Only classic Colt and Smith & Wesson steel along with a dab of good British steel in the form of Webley may be found. Well there's a little Belgian steel to be found, in the form of a Hi-Power.