The stupid lock has been an issue

[Coyote56]

Well...finally sold my remaining S&W which had that internal lock.
Pity really. The 629 I just sold was a really nice pistol. However:
1. I truly do not need two .44 revolvers (let alone one).
2. I've always been a Colt fan and the 4.25" barrel version of the Anaconda is a great addition to the other snakes (2 Pythons, 2 King Cobras).
3. Too many anecdotal tales of woe regarding that lock.
4. Getting back to the lock. It looks ridiculous.

I know the 629 went to a good home, so no worries. But now, Colts are ruling my revolver department.
And the remaining S&W specimens (Model 442 and Model 66-no dash, P&R) are still valued additions to the arsenal.

 

[StrawHat]

Trigger lock?

Kevin

 

[rockquarry]

Trigger lock?

Kevin

He may be speaking of the S&W lock. I think it blocks the hammer, but I'm no gunsmith. Can an inanimate object like a lock be "stupid"?

 

[Old cop]

I owned a 638 w/the lock that was never a problem but I traded it away all the same. That lock is a solution in search of a problem, AND it’s unsightly (pride of ownership is a real thing).

 

[bananaman]

I personally prefer no lock S&W revolvers. BUT, I have 3 lock guns. 625-8 JM, 25-15, and 686 Pro Series. I like them so much that I can easily get over the lock. Bob

 

[RMFnLA]

I have no connection to this company:

Lock Delete - ORIGINAL PRECISION - Home of J.D.'s Original Works

 

[rockquarry]

I personally prefer no lock S&W revolvers. BUT, I have 3 lock guns. 625-8 JM, 25-15, and 686 Pro Series. I like them so much that I can easily get over the lock. Bob

Lock guns aren't my favorite, either, but I have a couple. The locks have never been a problem and the guns shoot well.

Some people are proud they can't get over the lock, but I won't pretend to understand that line of thinking. Buy and shoot what you like.

 

[dave1918a2]

I used the lock delete system in post #6 above. Simple to install and the trigger got much better.

 

[steelslaver]

I buy lock gun, they only bother me for $40 and 15 minutes.

 

[tgmr05]

I personally experienced a lock issue, years ago. I have also experienced issues with non lock revolvers. If one shoots long enough and expends enough ammunition, one can realize the truth. Any mechanical device can and will fail with enough usage. That failure does not necessarily mean the mechanical part is bad, unless it happens with great frequency and minimal use. The lock does not fail with great frequency/minimal use, but yes it can fail, just like any other part.

I own both pre lock and post lock revolvers. Aesthetically, I prefer pre lock, but I shoot/carry some with locks. I have replaced locks with plugs, but now I mostly just leave them in…

I can understand why some folks are passionate about not having them, I also would prefer them not being yet another mechanical device that can wear/fail added to the mix. Especially when it adds to the number of mechanical devices that can fail during the operation of the handgun, who really wants unnecessary complexity added.. But, I just get over it, and move on. For example, I like the smith 69 and there are no pre lock versions available.

There are quite a few very nice models that smith has come out with since the lock was introduced. Sad to see folks miss out on some very nice choices over a lock, even though it is an aesthetic detraction.

 

[CajunBass]

Thanks for checking in. Enjoy your Colts as I'm sure you will. I like mine I know.

 

[murphydog]

Please see this post:

Bashing, Crying, & Whining

Thread closed.