Surprised at the Quality of New Revolver

[CH4]

Just ignore the lock. Never stopped me from buy a Smith I liked.

I tried to ignore it, but just couldn't. Like dating a cute girl with a big wart on the end of her nose. Everything still works as expected, but can't help staring at the wart.

 

[NY-1]

What's the purpose of the lock? (Sorry if it's a dumb question.) How does one ignore it?

Here's the definitive article about the internal lock. I wish S&W would offer more no-lock model variants like they do with the 642/442 and select others.

The History and Future of the Smith & Wesson Internal Lock - RevolverGuy.Com

 

[dave1918a2]

I picked up a model 48 - 7 I think the dash # is right. Horrible trigger, fit and finish were OK, but not S&W quality. Got a lock delete kit from the guy on this forum and installed it. Super improvement on the trigger. Still sold the gun tho, just didn't look like a K22.

 

[shil]

I tried to ignore it, but just couldn't. Like dating a cute girl with a big wart on the end of her nose. Everything still works as expected, but can't help staring at the wart.

Well-stated! All of my revolvers are pre-lock. It's an aesthetic issue for me. That and the (to me) ugly hammer. Yeah, I'm a geezer set in his ways, but I won't judge those who like the "modern" guns.

 

[Ugly Hombre]

I have a 21-4 that is one of my favorite guns a very high quality revolver-it has the lock I don't like it wish it was not there but it does not bother me much.

I wish Smith would reissue the 21-4!

 

[Herky Bird]

No complaints over here, since I ordered my Model 27 from the factory in early 2018.

Reliability wise it's a non-event; I only have so far about 3,000 rounds total through it, mostly 180gr. magnum handloads, 200 rounds of .38/44 handloads, 100 rounds of 230gr .38 +P handloads, and a couple boxes of Buffalo Bore 180gr load.

Endshake is a smidge over 0.001-inches, cylinder-gap is .0045-inches, and cylinder-throats average about .3575-inches. Haven't bothered to slug the barrel. Accuracy is far greater than my eyesight and trigger control, I can randomly cloverleaf three shots at 15 yards on a good day.

 

[CH4]

Here's the definitive article about the internal lock. I wish S&W would offer more no-lock model variants like they do with the 642/442 and select others.

The History and Future of the Smith & Wesson Internal Lock - RevolverGuy.Com

Great article. Very enlightening.

 

[Telecaster]

...anything after the 80's was of poor quality...

You mean like Bryco, Jennings, Rohm, or maybe even Heritage? I have a hard time imagining anyone thinking Smith & Wesson revolvers were of the same quality as those, but I've been surprised before.

 

[357 shooter]

Picked up a new 586-8 in 2019 on gunbroker. Pretty darn good looking revolver. The fit ,finish and machining very well done.
The rear sight had to be moved quite a ways left to adjust windage. Most Smith's I've had in the past only required a few clicks either way. The SA pull had a bit of creep , reminded me of my old GP100. The gun shot fairly well but not on par with my older 686-4. Was not long afterwards I picked up a 586-4 and it was a lot better shooter for me. Luckily I was able to sell the 586-8 on consignment earlier this year and actually made money on the sale.

Picked up a 617-5 in a local auction this year. Had the lock and MIM. It is very well put together. And shoots extremely well! In this case I would part with my older 617-1 before the newer 617-5.

So in my experience I had one scenario where I preferred an older pre lock Smith to a newer model and liked the newer lock model 617-5 over the older 617-1.

 

[sikacz]

Here's the definitive article about the internal lock. I wish S&W would offer more no-lock model variants like they do with the 642/442 and select others.

The History and Future of the Smith & Wesson Internal Lock - RevolverGuy.Com

Thank you for the link and info. Would a Model 649-3 357Mag be of pre-lock vintage? Just so I know what to look for. Although, I would take a Model 649-5 357Mag with a lock if it came to me at the right price. Since it looks like the lock is part of the hammer system, why couldn't one just replace the hammer with an earlier one and remove the lock mechanism?

 

[scout II]

I have a model 57 and 58 in .41 Magnum and both have the locks. They shoot just as good as any of my other 57's and 58's. The bluing is not that same old beautiful deep color, but they look just fine and work just fine.

 

[sikacz]

I have a model 57 and 58 in .41 Magnum and both have the locks. They shoot just as good as any of my other 57's and 58's. The bluing is not that same old beautiful deep color, but they look just fine and work just fine.

That's the most important point, function.

 

[StrawHat]

I have a model 57 and 58 in .41 Magnum and both have the locks. They shoot just as good as any of my other 57's and 58's. The bluing is not that same old beautiful deep color, but they look just fine and work just fine.

A Model 57 and a Model 58 WITH storage locks? Please post a photograph.

Kevin

 

[jeffrefrig]

I'm "old school" only when it comes to my strong like for revolvers; so, the locks don't bother me as long as my gun shoots. But I understand the purist's point of view as far as the hole on the side goes, along with the way the guns are made and how the parts are made. So, being an "outsider" to the handgun world I just want gun to go bang when I aim & pull the trigger. My 629-6 is a real nice shooter compared to my small assortment of handguns. It shoots pretty nice and where I aim it, so there's that. Only the old K22 shoots better (closer to the black round thing in the center of the target.) I sometimes compare guns & gun guys to cars & car guys. Heaven forbid there be an automatic tranny on the Mustang GT, but with an auto, you can grab a can of beer or pop and drink it while you fly down the track without worrying about having to shift. I think I lost my train of thought here...sorry.

 

[jeffrefrig]

BTW, Herky Bird, that is a beautiful gun you have there!

 

[Rammer Jammer]

The guys at Brownells have a good video about this subject. Boils down to older are more collectible, new ones are better shooters. Nobody likes the locks.

Smyth Busters: Are Old Smith & Wessons Better Than New Ones? - YouTube

 

[Darkenfast]

I must be an "appearance heretic". On L-frames, I prefer the curve of the post-lock frame below the hammer to the pre-lock frames.

 

[Mbrgr1]

I probably am missing some fine forearms, but....

I can't own a gun that says "Please read the instructions" on it or locks so that if I can't find the key it's useless.


It is esthetics, but mostly I'm bothered by the caving of companies that further the insanity of the litigious society we have become and do NOTHING to further firearms safety.


Where's my key?

 

[soonerbb]

My experience with my model 69 was very good, it has become my go to carry when hiking or hunting. Every aspect of mine is quality, trigger is as good as it gets....Maybe "expectations" is the key here....

 

[first-model]

I currently have five modern (post lock) revolvers in my safe—a 986 PC, a 60 PC, 460 XVR, a 327 PC, and 617.

These are all superb firearms. The 986 had its out-of-the-box problems (gritty trigger and a loose front sight), but S&W was quick to deal with those problems and it performs wonderfully now.

I'd also add that not every old gun is good. I've had plenty of hand ejectors dating back to the 1920's that were absolutely forgettable to shoot.

I don't love the lock, but I'm not going to part with an otherwise good revolver because of it. And if someone wants to sell their post-lock gun to me at a loss, then I'll happily accommodate that wish.

Mike