What is it with the 442?

[Old Salt]

Originally posted by RightWinger:
Old Salt,

If the looks don't bother you, and you have no intentions of selling the gun, and you feel confident it will stay in the "unlocked" position than I can't see any issue with the lock at all. Honestly its not really a big deal with me, yes I prefer them to not have a lock on them but its not a deal breaker by any means. That 442 will take more abuse than you can give it, mine has been through the washing machine a few times, been carried for 7 years, shot a whole bunch, even been in salt water at one point and it still works fine!!!

Good point, thank you

 

[SIG229fan]

"Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but it was business; not political."

Please stand corrected...it was entirely political in a craven submission to the gun-banners in the Clinton administration [sic].

Since the basic design of the hand-ejector has been functioning well for over a century, why would a potential owner of a new revolver be disposed to additional parts and a cosmetic flaw on the frame?

Further, why would a customer be inclined to purchase a revolver with extra parts at extra cost when those parts are inherently unreliable?

 

[palmetto99]

Old Salt, Good thread. Good Comments on the 442 and the IL topic.

I know your location well. I was born there.

Have a good day