Surprised at the Quality of New Revolver

[Vtgw938]

Looking for a little new revolver opinions. First off, I have not even handled a "new" Smith & Wesson to speak off for years. I was of the opinion that anything after the 80's was of poor quality.

Today, I stopped at a LGS that I don't do business with. They had a used 629-? that looked nice. What the heck, I asked to check it out. When I got it in my hand I saw the lock on the side, literally the first one I have handled. The gun was very nice! Opening, closing, working the action etc. it felt like a 1960's revolver. I was amazed, to the point that if it was a pre-lock I might have considered it. I than handled a 69-? that also had the lock. This one felt like I what had expected, opening and closing was clunky and the action had a little grit feel to it. The 629 blew me away, the 69 was what I expected.

Can you guys who have these more modern guns explain what I found. Is the 629 just better built or was it just luck of the draw.

Thanks,

938

 

[lihpster]

I have 4 revolvers with the locks. A 686+, a 586, a 629 and a 29. With the exception of the bluing on the newer guns, they appear to me to be the equal or better than the old ones. Everything works well and as it should. That's a small sample size of 4 but it's greater than your sample size of 2. I think it was just luck of the draw. I think the 66 is the exception, not the 629. They occasionally let some less than stellar guns go in the '50s and '60s too.

 

[Univibe]

A lot of this stuff is just nostalgic thinking. I got new 629 and 686 a few years ago. Lock model. They feel just fine, shoot excellently. The side plate is so tight you have to look to see the line. I'm guessing that with modern computer-assisted machining and finishing, they are at least as good as the one in Dirty Harry.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

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

 

[rogerwnuss]

Got this 586 in a trade a couple years ago, and fit and finish were really very nice . I just couldn't get past the lock, so off to the next gunshow he went. Not one dealer was interested because of the lock. Couldn't hardly give it away,..... which is basically what I finally did. Took a serious bath on that one. If ever offered one again in a trade, it'll have to be at charter arms
money, or no go.....

 

[H Richard]

I have a 986 and a 617 both with the "lock" and the quality and function is "all S&W". The 617-6 shoots along side all of my other Mod 17's.

 

[.38SuperMan]

My 4" 617 is excellent, absolutely no complaints. For me the presence of the lock is a psychological issue not a function one. If I had a choice though I'd gotten one without the lock but I traded a shotgun to my dealer and it was either the one with the lock or nothing.

My wife has a 317 with the lock and she's had no issues relating to the lock. It doesn't even bother her because she has no history of shooting pre lock. The lock seems to mostly bother us old guys.

 

[lrrifleman]

With just a quick count, I would like to say that I've owned about 8 S&W revolvers. Of those 8, 2 are the newer models that are stainless steel with the lock. While I am not fond of the lock, I do have to say that they have the most fantastic, smoothest double action trigger pull that I've ever experienced! I don't know if I could acquire a blued carbon steel model, but I am impressed enough that I would consider acquiring a 610 to partner with my Model 57! Plus, contrary to the numerous reports that I've seen about poor QC, I have never had to send a new revolver back to the factory for corrective repairs!

 

[StrawHat]

My experience only spans 100 years of 45 ACP revolvers but I must say the long actions (pre 1950) were sweet but the short actions (post 1950) are sweeter. Sweetest are the ones with the locks! Nice crisp action,great accuracy and decent finish. And I am not worried about carrying and scuffing them.

Yes, some folks I trust have had issues with the storage lock. If you are worried, delete the lock and replace it with a plug or nothing. No big deal, but don't let it cause you to miss an opportunity to buy a S&W!

Kevin

 

[AzShooter]

My last 5 Smiths have the lock and I've never had a problem with it. I also know no one that has had a problem.

If you don't like it you can take it out. It's a very easy operations and only takes a few seconds.

I'd have no problems buying a lock version. Even with heavy loads it will not interfere with your shooting day so go for it.

 

[Old cop]

Several years ago I bought a 638 w/the lock new at a gunshow. It was a great little gun, never a problem w/the lock regardless of what kind of ammo I ran. The lock's appearance bothered me so much I traded it away and not a day goes by that I haven't regretted that decision.

 

[balin]

Modern CNC machines can consistently hold tighter tolerance then the old manual machines did. But with parts being held to tighter tolerance there is less hand fitting involved. Which general saves money. And on the average should make for higher quantity overall. I am sure there are some old guns that can shot better groups. I have never had any issues with the newer revolvers. I often like the finish better on older guns. Many of my older guns don't hold as tight of groups as my newer ones do.

 

[Vtgw938]

glad to hear all the good reports on the new models. I will definitely pay more attention to the guns previously out of my consideration. I still like the old ones, but it does open up a more available supply.

Thanks to all.

938

 

[Benchrest1]

I haven't had any problems with any of the new S&Ws I've bought.

 

[lppd4]

I have handled a couple of new S&W's and the fit finish were good. The actions felt very smooth but I can't get past the lock either. When Smith made room for the lock on the backside it lost a lot of it's aesthetic appeal to me. Minor change maybe but they just don't look right to me. I have about 15 pre lock models and will continue to buy only those unless I come across an exceptional deal

 

[rockquarry]

I only have two S&Ws with locks, an M22-4 and a 638-3. They were purchased new more than ten years ago. Both are fired regularly and I never really consider the lock on either as it hasn't been a problem. While all my older J-frames snubnose .38s that I've had for many years shoot well, I get noticeably smaller groups from the 638-3.

 

[series guy]

If you limit yourself to pre lock guns you are missing out on some fine firearms that will shoot as well as or more likely better than the early guns.

 

[sikacz]

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

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

 

[waffles]

Luck of the draw often. I had a 686 SSR and some nightguards that were absolutely perfect and smooth as butter, and I've seen plenty of modern smith's in the shops that should've never left the factory.

It's just frustratingly spotty QC. Modern manufacturing techniques can churn out absolutely amazing revolvers surpassing any efforts of yesterday, but only if you actually care about the final product.

 

[The Norseman]

See n See

I have looked at the Classics and new current production
Revolvers. They all have been nice.

The Fit and Finish that Computer Aided Machining has
provided make them outstanding. Also the Triggers
must have a little care when installed, they have nice
let offs in Single and Double action.

I would not pass them up if shopping for a New S&W.
Currently I'm considering the New Classic Model
27 .357S&W Magnum. It reminds me of my S&W
Mountain Guns which I shoot on a regular basis.

The New S&W Mdl 610 10mm/40S&W is being
considered also. I looked at 3, and all were nice,
without the S&W no no's.

The Best to you and your Endeavors.

 

[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?