Totally out of touch, S&W Lock is what exactly?

[bearcove]

S&W Lock or not lock? All my S&W stuff is older, is this a problem, this lock?

[bearcove]

To clarify looking at a model 25 with lock. I know this except the "with lock" part.

[dubber123]

The lock is on most of the revolvers made in perhaps the last 10 years or so. You will see a round indented part by the thumb latch where a small round key is inserted. When turned, a small metal "flag" pops up beside the hammer on the same side, and the action is "locked" until the key is inserted and turned. It doesn't seem to really ever cause any issues, other than being ugly and unneeded in my opinion.

[Piedmont]

There have been multiple problems with the lock locking itself, just what you don't want for a self defense gun. They could possibly have fixed the problem, but they aren't talking and to do so would be to admit there was a problem to begin with. It tends to show up more with lighter and harder kicking combinations.

There is a policy on the S&W forum now that you can't bash any new guns, so you can't complain about MIM or the lock. So even less information will be forthcoming.

Now fifty guys will say they have never had a problem with theirs, but there have been problems in the past. If you will do some internet searches you can read about the problems.

[dubber123]

I guess I should have said "I" have never had any problems or had personally spoken with any who had. I seriously dislike the whole concept, and as such only own 1 example with a lock. It is always true the more parts you cram into something, the higher the probability is that something will go wrong. There are those who deny that their X frame revolvers don't unlock and rotate backwards too, and that I do know to be false.

[dragon813gt]

Please link to actual revolvers locking up. I'm not doubting it can happen. But it seems like its all here say. I have ones w/ locks and no locks. I don't like how they look w/ the locks. If you notice S&W never shows pictures of that side of the revolver. Beyond the looks I have no issues w/ it. I do think they are dumb and aren't a solution to anything.

[Blammer]

here's a link for you , and this guy Lewis Perkins is my friend.

http://www.carolinashootersclub.com/threads/12533-S-amp-W-Revolver-locks-itself?highlight

[kweidner]

My 357PD did it with full house 41 mags twice. Not an issue anymore. I took it out! Course it's a 24oz magnum with a 4" bbl. I do not care for any lock myself. If it needs locking it's going in the safe.

[MtGun44]

Just curious - I have several, including a 329 with locks, never a problem. Can you just
remove the part? Never actually had one of the new ones apart - have worked on old
S&Ws a lot but the new ones just get shot and cleaned.

Bill

[WallyM3]

(ugh) Same sort of rubbish as in the Series 80 Colts.

[imashooter2]

The parts will come out if you like, but the results are unsightly. There is a guy on S&W forum that sells a plug for the lock hole, but the space by the hammer for the flag remains. If it bothered me, I would simply remove the flag, grind off the post that is the feature that does the locking and then reinstall it.

That said, it doesn't bother me and my guns still have the locks.

[TheDoctor]

Can you red loc tite that sucker into a permanent unlocked position? I only have one smith in the house with a lock, a 617 I bought for my son, but have never taken that ones sideplate off. Yet.

[enfieldphile]

I have 2 w/ locks; an 625-? .45 Colt 4" Mountian Gun and a 21-? 4" Fix-sight .44 Special. Neither are shot w/ hot loads.

I have not had a problem, nor have I personally known anyone who has had an issue w/ the lock.
I do believe the fellows who claim an issue though.

If, I say if, S&W really wanted a lock, they should have paid Taurus a royalty to use their unobtrusive-looking lock system.

IMHO, the lawyer-lock is unneeded. Now IF we had a way to lock down all the lawyers...that would be the goods! ;)

[imashooter2]

Can you red loc tite that sucker into a permanent unlocked position? I only have one smith in the house with a lock, a 617 I bought for my son, but have never taken that ones sideplate off. Yet.

Not sure of the exact mechanism of the failure. But if the lock activates without the key turning and you have the key loctited in place, you might not be able to unlock it.

[Dale53]

I have both old and new Smiths (with and without the lock). My daily carry is a 642 that HAD a lock. I replaced the lock with the PLUG and I will NOT be bothered with any problem:

http://www.smithandwessonforums.com/forum/s-w-revolvers-1945-present/2566-il-plug.html

Don't hesitate to buy a new Smith. I shoot a good bit - 5000-7500 rounds per year with my "plugged" Smith 625-8 and it is a superb revolver in EVERY way.

FWIW
Dale53

[Char-Gar]

None of you lock bashers are firearms manufacturers trying to stay in business in a time when their customers and a gaggle of lawyers are looking for ways to sue you for really big dollars. It is easy to be critical when you don't have the problem.

[Ickisrulz]

None of you lock bashers are firearms manufacturers trying to stay in business in a time when their customers and a gaggle of lawyers are looking for ways to sue you for really big dollars. It is easy to be critical when you don't have the problem.

That's true. But the lock does look out of place on ordinarily beautiful revolvers. In my opinion, Ruger has the more elegant solution on the guns they sell that have locks. You don't have to look at it or use it if you don't want to.

[jsheyn]

there are folks on the S&W forum selling plugs for the lock mechanism.

[snowwolfe]

Every S&W I own has a lock and I could care less. Never had a problem with any of them.
The same people who find reasons to bash the locks are the same ones who bash anything new. Any S&W you buy has a lifetime warranty to the original purchaser so don't give it another thought.

[Char-Gar]

That's true. But the lock does look out of place on ordinarily beautiful revolvers. In my opinion, Ruger has the more elegant solution on the guns they sell that have locks. You don't have to look at it or use it if you don't want to.

Different action designs require different locking solutions. The first requirement is that it be effective. Smith and Wesson and Ruger are not the same machines.

I am a Smith and Wesson purist and don't like any changes from the days Carl Hellstrom ran the place, but they do happen. I also teach Tort and Personal Injury law at a local college to Paralegals, so I can see all of this from two directions.

America have always been in change and most of the changes in the past 25 years are not to my liking, but nobody asked me about it before they did it. I am just glad we can still by handguns lock or no lock.

[376Steyr]

Interestingly enough, S&W does offer a couple of variations of their J-frame snubnoses without the lock. They are much sought after. How this fits into their corporate philosophy I do not know. I do know that when I saw a new no-lock 442 I bought it.

[Piedmont]

Interestingly enough, S&W does offer a couple of variations of their J-frame snubnoses without the lock. They are much sought after. How this fits into their corporate philosophy I do not know. I do know that when I saw a new no-lock 442 I bought it.

Yeah, it makes you wonder why they are much sought after, doesn't it? It is also funny that they thought it made sense to offer the no-lock version for concealed carry.

Read between the lines everyone.

[imashooter2]

It was a way to use up old inventory after the change in justice department leadership. There won't be any more.

[kweidner]

Just curious - I have several, including a 329 with locks, never a problem. Can you just
remove the part? Never actually had one of the new ones apart - have worked on old
S&Ws a lot but the new ones just get shot and cleaned.

Bill

I just removed the internal locking mechanism. left the lock from the outside as is. 1 spring and one little part. Put it in the box should I ever have to send it back for warranty work. Fired 1000ish rounds since removal. NO issues whatsoever. Still looks like the lock is there from the cylinder release side, just no internals. Just like disassembly of older. Spring is in a U shape IIRC. 5 minute job at best.

[Ickisrulz]

It was a way to use up old inventory after the change in justice department leadership. There won't be any more.


I have heard this, but also see claims that S&W is producing no-lock models (340, 442, 642) because people and police departments are asking for them. I believe the latter as how many old units could they possibly have laying around?

[imashooter2]

I have heard this, but also see claims that S&W is producing no-lock models (340, 442, 642) because people and police departments are asking for them. I believe the latter as how many old units could they possibly have laying around?

The current production 340, 442 and 642 all have locks. Just go on their web site and look at the pictures.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_757768_-1_757767_757751_image

[Ickisrulz]

The current production 340, 442 and 642 all have locks. Just go on their web site and look at the pictures.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_757768_-1_757767_757751_image

Each of these models is offered as a "no-lock" current production model (in addition to "lock" models). Enter "no-lock" on S&W's website or search for SKU numbers 103810, 103072 or 150544. OR just look at page 2 of the link you posted.

[imashooter2]

Each of these models is offered as a "no-lock" current production model (in addition to "lock" models). Enter "no-lock" on S&W's website or search for SKU numbers 103810, 103072 or 150544. OR just look at page 2 of the link you posted.

I stand corrected. My apologies. :oops:

[Ickisrulz]

I stand corrected. My apologies. :oops:

It's very confusing. The existence of current manufacture "no-lock" guns beg many questions. The first is what about the liability issues they were hoping to avoid with the locks? Are there S&W acknowledged problems with the locks?

[imashooter2]

As I understand it, the locks weren't introduced for liability issues, they were in response to government pressure during the Clinton administration (hence the derogatory term "Hillary hole"). I find the continued production of non lock hammer-less J frames intriguing. I wonder if it is a tooling issue that keeps locks on the rest of the line?

[kawasakifreak77]

I love Smiths but won't own a lock. Never personally heard of one failing, just feel that its one of those things that shouldn't be there.

[Ed K]

Two things folks like to gripe about concerning S&W these days: MIM and the lock. I get the lock for reasons of being unnecessary and bowing to political pressure. The MIM not so much. Is it a recognition of manufacturing costs and effort to remain competitive? Sure it is. Is it really selling out quality? We have to be our own judge to that. Note that modern high performance engines use MIM connecting rods!