Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Why the Smith & Wesson "Lock" vs "Pre-lock" stigma.

What's the commonly held perception of the "lock" smith & wessons compared to the versions without the chastity belt?

Seems that the pre-locks are more sought after.

Why?

.gov intrusion.

Plus, its friggin ugly.

Because every time you complicate the mechanics of an object for a feature nobody wants, you add one more thing that can go wrong without a corresponding benefit. There are reports of locks engaging during strings of fire.

Because the damn things can lock themselves in use and under recoil.

well, that sounds safe.

Won't speak for others. For me the lock is a symbol of corrupt influence and behavior of our government under the Clinton Administration. It symbolizes how the left think tools are responsible for bad human behavior and that people shouldn't be held responsible for their bad behavior as well as accountable for it. And worse at the time the SW CEO was a limey who thought the same way. As a longtime SW fan and owner I was offended by it all.

What everyone else said.

Note to S&W: as a (somewhat prolific) consumer, have zero interest in any product with that ridiculous lock. The no-lock 642(?) and M&P however am looking at adding, however. Hint. You want to sell revolvers, or not?

I'm guessing it was providence when I was sitting at the gun shop and a guy wanted to trade in a pre-lock NIB 442 for one with a lock "because of his wife"

When the dealer gave him a price, I told the guy, lets step outside a moment....

all things considered, it was the extra parts thing that always bugged me, but that's because murphy is my constant companion.

No magazine disconnect or safety on my M&P either...

Sums it up for me.

That sums it up for me. I've owned quite a few S&W revolvers and love them, but I have not and will not own one with that damn lock.

bea175
Thanks for posting this I have one of these 642's
and I will take out the useless widget ASAP!
whelennut

Order "The Plug" from the guy over at the S&W forum. They look about as nice as you could hope for and I think they're only about $30.

And having seen numerous 29,629, and 329 revolvers that would lock themselves while being fired cured me of ever buying one with that stupid thing in the side of it.

I have a problem with a company that puts a defective gadget on a gun for litigation purposes and then puts the burden on the consumer to deactivate it and give the seller a potential litigation advantage (e.g. "It's not our fault because the consumer deactivated a safety device that could have prevented it from firing at all."). S&W probably figures that the possible expense of the gun not working when a person needs it to work is less than the expense of dealing with an argument that it made an "unsafe" gun.

I was always a fan of S&W revolvers. I carried one for the first part of my career and loved it. I subsequently owned several more. When the locks came along I sold what I had and will not buy another S&W. Let the government they design their guns for buy them.

-Z

Looking back at S&W for the last 25 years do you think they have any morals, standards or highly regarded ethics? Under control of several different companies they have: slandered Glock, then copied Glock, then the deal with the Clintons to corner the market. Not to disparage the guns, but the companies ethics are questionable.

If you watch the u tube video it looks quite simple to remove it.

It changed for the worse the classic looks and lines of the revolvers. More material had to be added to the back of the frame. Also the previous points mentioned.

A 357 PD locked up on me twice when shooting fast double action.

^^^This^^^