Smith and Wesson teases "No Lock" new revolvers

Davidk said:
Wow, really? Think so? Well, it will take the procecuter about 1/4 of a second to figure it out
Click to expand...
Yes, I do think so. And, no, I don’t think the prosecutor will know either. Most guns don’t have built in locks. And you won’t be carrying the key with you. And the police department doesn’t issue revolvers so they likely won’t have a key to test it either.

Is it possible they would figure this out? Yes. If they do figure this out, would the prosecutor use it against you? Probably. But I think the whole “don’t use a modified gun or you’ll get convicted“ thing is overblown.
 
I bought a 329pd and before firing one shot i removed that lock and put a plug in the hole. Looks clean but you can still see where it is obviously. But no more lock anyway. Did same with 500PC I had. No locks. Hope they just completely eliminate the hole.
 
My two Hillary hole revolvers have been retrofitted with this:

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

LOCK DELETE for S&W Revolvers & J FRAME MOON CLIPS and CNC MOON CLIP CONVERSION for sale. Engineered / Manufactured in Arizona U.S.A. by ORIGINAL PRECISION. We Invent our own products. 480-305-3236
www.originalprecision.com www.originalprecision.com

And no, I’m not skilled or stupid enough to take off the side plate and do it myself
 
"everybody" says the lock is terrible horrible no-good very bad. But... other than being an unnecessary complication, what's so bad about them? Do they fail in a bad way sometimes? What are the symptoms?
 
milktree said:
"everybody" says the lock is terrible horrible no-good very bad. But... other than being an unnecessary complication, what's so bad about them? Do they fail in a bad way sometimes? What are the symptoms?
Click to expand...
There have been very few problems ever reported, that is not the reason for the hate. S&W ownership caved and tried to make the antis happy with an unneeded addition. It’s the pandering people hate.
 
The Classics that they're bringing back really appeal to me aesthetically. I've always liked the look of the pencil barrel style. I like that the classic guns are coming back. I'm going to buy the Model 10 because I don't want to shoot my classic one (pre) made in December, 1941.
 

Attachments

  • 1A2D4C06-E7BC-4685-B11B-ACC69B697878.jpeg
    1A2D4C06-E7BC-4685-B11B-ACC69B697878.jpeg
    1 MB · Views: 17
milktree said:
"everybody" says the lock is terrible horrible no-good very bad. But... other than being an unnecessary complication, what's so bad about them? Do they fail in a bad way sometimes? What are the symptoms?
Click to expand...
Particularly on lighter guns with heavier loads, like lightweight snubs with full power magnums, they have been reported to spontaneously lock.
 
TG Pioneer said:
The Classics that they're bringing back really appeal to me aesthetically. I've always liked the look of the pencil barrel style. I like that the classic guns are coming back. I'm going to buy the Model 10 because I don't want to shoot my classic one (pre) made in December, 1941.
Click to expand...

You do you. I get not wanting to shoot a prewar S&W beauty like that to preserve it, but I'd shoot the ever loving hell out of that gun and you couldn't sandblast the smile off my face. The Classics are just another big steaming pile of S&W labeled disappointment. I remember when they first came out, I was looking at them at the S&W range, and they were beautiful with case coloring and deep bluing and the stupid Hillary Hole.

But I can overlook that lock. Look at this new Classic that they brag about being "no lock" - but they still haven't put the firing pin back on the hammer! That is my litmus test for Smiths, all I need to see is the hammer, if it has the pin, I'm interested. If not, I know it was made when QC was a joke. I'd rather a Charco than a new Smith.

1737122589889.png
 
I have thousands of rounds through my models 642, 10, 386s/c, 22 Thunder Ranch, 22 of 1917 Classic, 586 Classic and 29
Classic. All with the internal lock. Never seen or experienced the lock effect the guns operation. I have never used the lock and I don’t even notice the hole however I understand why people hate aesthetics. I just don’t see it as the big deal many make it out to be. From a marketing perspective I don’t understand why S&W didn’t get ride of it long ago other than S&W is (or was, not sure anymore) owned by the owners of the company that invented the lock.
 
Berkshire Guy said:
I have thousands of rounds through my models 642, 10, 386s/c, 22 Thunder Ranch, 22 of 1917 Classic, 586 Classic and 29
Classic. All with the internal lock. Never seen or experienced the lock effect the guns operation. I have never used the lock and I don’t even notice the hole however I understand why people hate aesthetics. I just don’t see it as the big deal many make it out to be. From a marketing perspective I don’t understand why S&W didn’t get ride of it long ago other than S&W is (or was, not sure anymore) owned by the owners of the company that invented the lock.
Click to expand...
It has happened, it does happen. Well documented. I have seen it first hand with a 686
 
tuna said:
You do you. I get not wanting to shoot a prewar S&W beauty like that to preserve it, but I'd shoot the ever loving hell out of that gun and you couldn't sandblast the smile off my face. The Classics are just another big steaming pile of S&W labeled disappointment. I remember when they first came out, I was looking at them at the S&W range, and they were beautiful with case coloring and deep bluing and the stupid Hillary Hole.


But I can overlook that lock. Look at this new Classic that they brag about being "no lock" - but they still haven't put the firing pin back on the hammer! That is my litmus test for Smiths, all I need to see is the hammer, if it has the pin, I'm interested. If not, I know it was made when QC was a joke. I'd rather a Charco than a new Smith.

View attachment 955187
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong. The hammer mounted firing pin is absolutely a must have for a true retro but I'll buy this thing and use it like a rented mule.
 
TG Pioneer said:
Don't get me wrong. The hammer mounted firing pin is absolutely a must have for a true retro but I'll buy this thing and use it like a rented mule.
Click to expand...
Like other retro stuff S&W has offered from time to time, it appears they are unwilling or unable to really go "all-in" on such endeavors. So you end up with a combination of new and old features that will satisfy some, but certainly not all. When you already own a safe-full, or even just a few, of the true vintage classics, these retro offerings fall short of the mark. I hope they sell because getting rid of the hideous Hill Hole is a step in the right direction. But for me it is too little, too late. That should have been done 20+ years ago when S&W aficionados first told them they'd screwed up badly. 🤔
 
These new S&W no-lock classic revolvers create an interesting dilemma, both for me and for S&W. Let me explain.

I am a revolver fan, and I strongly prefer a S&W style action for a variety of reasons. I do look at Rugers and others, but mostly I want a Smith.

And my feelings about the lock are more nuanced than for a lot of people. I don't like the lock, and I prefer older no-lock guns, but I will consider a Smith revolver with a lock due to availability or new and interesting models. So I have owned a couple of revolvers with locks, and I have considered some new models that have interesting features. In particular, I kind of want a new model 66. The current production model 66 really is an interesting gun. They are the same dimensions as older model 66 revolvers, but they are far stronger. Internally, they are redesigned, and they are made for .357 magnum. This is very different from older K-frame .357 revolvers that used a .38 special frame that was adequate for limited use of .357.

Thus we get to the dilemma. Now that they have released the new no-lock revolvers, I will not buy a new S&W revolver any time soon. My reason for looking at guns with the lock was the certainty you would not be able to get new models any other way. Now that S&W is making no-lock models, I will wait to see if they will eventually make the models I want with no lock.
 
straightshooterjake said:
These new S&W no-lock classic revolvers create an interesting dilemma, both for me and for S&W. Let me explain.

I am a revolver fan, and I strongly prefer a S&W style action for a variety of reasons. I do look at Rugers and others, but mostly I want a Smith.

And my feelings about the lock are more nuanced than for a lot of people. I don't like the lock, and I prefer older no-lock guns, but I will consider a Smith revolver with a lock due to availability or new and interesting models. So I have owned a couple of revolvers with locks, and I have considered some new models that have interesting features. In particular, I kind of want a new model 66. The current production model 66 really is an interesting gun. They are the same dimensions as older model 66 revolvers, but they are far stronger. Internally, they are redesigned, and they are made for .357 magnum. This is very different from older K-frame .357 revolvers that used a .38 special frame that was adequate for limited use of .357.

Thus we get to the dilemma. Now that they have released the new no-lock revolvers, I will not buy a new S&W revolver any time soon. My reason for looking at guns with the lock was the certainty you would not be able to get new models any other way. Now that S&W is making no-lock models, I will wait to see if they will eventually make the models I want with no lock.
Click to expand...
Will the Custom Shop do it?
 
Berkshire Guy said:
I have thousands of rounds through my models 642, 10, 386s/c, 22 Thunder Ranch, 22 of 1917 Classic, 586 Classic and 29
Classic. All with the internal lock. Never seen or experienced the lock effect the guns operation. I have never used the lock and I don’t even notice the hole however I understand why people hate aesthetics. I just don’t see it as the big deal many make it out to be. From a marketing perspective I don’t understand why S&W didn’t get ride of it long ago other than S&W is (or was, not sure anymore) owned by the owners of the company that invented the lock.
Click to expand...

It happened to me on two guns: a 627 PC and a 360SC. Boom, boom, <lock>. Sent the first one back to smith and they replaced the lock parts (OK . . .). Same problem recurred. Sold them both.
 
straightshooterjake said:
Thus we get to the dilemma. Now that they have released the new no-lock revolvers, I will not buy a new S&W revolver any time soon. My reason for looking at guns with the lock was the certainty you would not be able to get new models any other way. Now that S&W is making no-lock models, I will wait to see if they will eventually make the models I want with no lock.
Click to expand...
LOL!!! [laugh] I think you are right. I am already seeing examples of buyer's remorse from folks over on the S&W Forum who had recently bought a Model 19 with the dreaded Hill Hole not knowing that a holeless version was coming. So, the same is going to happen in reverse: People are now going to hold off on buying any Hill Hole model S&W revolver in the hope that a holeless version is coming... and they are probably wise to do so. [dance]
 
The Osborne effect is a social phenomenon of customers canceling or deferring orders for the current, soon-to-be-obsolete product as an unexpected drawback of a company's announcing a future product prematurely. It is an example of cannibalization. The term alludes to the Osborne Computer Corporation, whose second product did not become available until more than a year after it was announced. The company's subsequent bankruptcy was widely blamed on reduced sales after the announcement.<a href="Osborne effect - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>1<span>]</span></a><a href="Osborne effect - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>2<span>]</span></a>
 
EJFudd said:
LOL!!! [laugh] I think you are right. I am already seeing examples of buyer's remorse from folks over on the S&W Forum who had recently bought a Model 19 with the dreaded Hill Hole not knowing that a holeless version was coming. So, the same is going to happen in reverse: People are now going to hold off on buying any Hill Hole model S&W revolver in the hope that a holeless version is coming... and they are probably wise to do so. [dance]
Click to expand...
The Osborne effect is a social phenomenon of customers canceling or deferring orders for the current, soon-to-be-obsolete product as an unexpected drawback of a company's announcing a future product prematurely. It is an example of cannibalization. The term alludes to the Osborne Computer Corporation, whose second product did not become available until more than a year after it was announced. The company's subsequent bankruptcy was widely blamed on reduced sales after the announcement.<a href="Osborne effect - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>1<span>]</span></a><a href="Osborne effect - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>2<span>]</span></a>
 

Similar threads

Smith & Wesson Announces New Production of No Lock Revolvers!
Replies
2
Views
119
Woodsloafer
W
  • Sticky
NES/Pioneer Valley Arms January Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson 642 1.875" 38SPL STS CENT WO/IL***
25 26 27
Replies
784
Views
4K
ethanolive
E
Smith & Wesson Battles Facebook Censorship
Replies
12
Views
300
SS1
SS1
Cape Gunworks and 2026 ballot question
Replies
17
Views
614
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Two big no-nos
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
Baby Billy
Baby Billy
Back
Top Bottom