S&W opinion question
Does the lock above the cylinder release turn you off? Wanting to add a new member to my stable but all the others are non lockers. Can't decide whether or not to let it in. Opinions?
Todd
Todd
0
-
It doesn't bug me on my Taurus and wouldn't on a S&W. On the S&W it can be ignored and even removed and a plug put in place. There are a few models of S&W that don't have the lock. 0 -
If it shot well it would not bother me, if it shot poorly it would find anew home. 0 -
Lock itself doesn't bother me in the slightest, and my personal carry gun has one. First day I got it, I put away the key and have never used it.
There have been occasional rare reports of the lock accidentally engaging during firing, and I think this is what drives some people crazy.
As mentioned, it is possible to physically disable the lock if you're so inclined, and now Smith has responded to popular demand and is putting out "no lock" versions of some of its most popular guns (eg the J frame carry revolvers).
In general, I think most Smith fans think Smith put out its best guns years ago in the 1970s and before, back when all guns were still put together and tuned by gunsmiths before they left the factory. Since Smith guns basically last forever, and since used ones typically cost less than new ones (plus don't have a lock), I think many diehards simply avoid buying new ones altogether, bypassing the lock issue entirely.
If you really want a lock on your gun, external gun locks are cheap and readily available.
To be clear, I'm saying that all else being equal, I'd still rather have an older "pre-lock" gun. IMO older Smith and Wessons are still potentially a "bargain" when it comes to performance/cost, because as mentioned, they come from a now lost era of all forged steel parts, and hand craftsmanship. They're probably just never going to build them that way again.
But I wouldn't categorically reject a gun I otherwise wanted JUST because it had a lock. If the gun were otherwise priced right, and especially if I couldn't find a comparable older one without the lock, I'd still buy a lock gun. Even if we stipulate that today's Smith revolvers aren't quite as good as the ones made 40 years ago, they're definitely still better than Charter Arms, Taurus, and arguably still better than Rugers0 -
I will not own a lock gun. I'm a bit of a Smith collector and mechanic. The lock guns are a pain in the butt to work on, you can't change springs and get reliable ignition, at least in everyone I, or the smith that taught, have worked on. In my humble opinion, they are junk inside, cheap, light weight parts and poor fitting.
I may be just getting old and opinionated, but, comparing the new Smiths to my no dash K & N frames will just astound you. There is no comparison, just the name. It is indeed, very sad.
W.D.0 -
toad67,
Most of us "OLD SCHOOLER's", dis-like the locks. It is like it almost adds profanity to the looks of the revolver's. We also prefer the guns, with the hammer mounted firing pin, over the frame mounted ones.
We figure that the most important safety device we have, is God given, not man given.
As far as the Taurus goes...locked or not, sometimes, they are a 50/50 proposition, on getting the hammer back, in either single action, or double action mode.
Best0 -
Those locks are just like A- holes...I don't want one on my revolver....
JIM...............0 -
But they are there to protect and keep us safe[:(] 0 -
I have one, only one, with that lock only because I won it at a match. I won't buy any. 0 -
Locks are for front doors. Many, many S&W's are available in excellent condition without MIM parts and locks for me to ever buy one. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
9 comments