Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters S&W Key Lock - will Smith & Wesson ever change back?

I have this one:



which you can't buy without a lock. So far, no problems with it. I may plug it, anyway.

When it comes to these:



I only buy ones without locks. The 5" 629 in the upper left has since gone down the road.

So basically I avoid MIM and locks as much as possible. It would have to be something unusually attractive and useful (like the Model 60 Pro above) before I tolerated these "improvements".

Yes. I actually went and BOUGHT a 6" new nickel plated 44 mag about six months ago. Always wanted one. Took it home and (the horror) I noticed the little hole. It went right back...

S&W will never remove the lock. California is the largest gun market in the US and they can't sell them there without it. Lame as hell - if I wanted something that was only offered with a lock - I'd buy it, remove it, plug it, and be okay.

Fortunately the stuff I've wanted/have has all been old Smiths. We pay a substantial premium in CA for the old ones since "pre-lock" is seen as "better" in most peoples minds and it's difficult (not impossible) to bring in a revolver from out of state.

No locks for me.

No, I won't buy a S&W with a lock. S&W revolvers have priced themselves out of the market for me and caused me to buy Ruger Revolvers. I think Ruger revolvers are a good value.

Good posts. Many echo my thoughts

Ok- maybe I missed it but what is the deal with buying or not buying with a lock?
I am primarily a rifle shooter but I have S&W's revolvers both with and without the lock and have never had a problem with any of them. Admittedly I do not shoot a lot of pistol shooting but am just more curious what the issue is with the models with a lock. Is it a real problem or an imaginary one?

drover

A mainly in the HEAD problem.Jerry Michalac seems to go just fine with the S&Ws with locks on them

Jerry doesn't quite count, as he's on the payroll.

Some are worried about functional problems which have apparently cropped up at times.

Others have philosophical issues and feel like S&W sold out to the anti-gun crowd by installing the locks. To me, that's like the guys who think the .325 WSM is disrespectful to veterans because it's an 8mm. But hey, it's a free country (kinda, sorta these days).

I've not had any trouble with mine as yet, and find it useful on occasion, so it's staying for now.

There was nothing wrong with pre-lock models just like the new mods on a MKIII VS MK II Ruger 22 semi.

The magazine safety on the .22/45 is a pain, but the biggest nuisance is the need to hold down the slide release when dropping the slide on a loaded magazine.

Off topic, but another thing I've noticed with the .22/45 is that it's very fussy about the position of the top round in the magazine. I never had an issue with the standard Mk II Target model I used to have. This one cost me an easy shot at a turkey one fall.

Any way to remove the safeties on the 22-45?

I thought you could on the SW locks...

And you can on the Rem locks....get rid of all this crap....

As my .22/45 is a plinker/hunting pistol, I've never worried too much about it as it's really just an inconvenience. The safety lock is optional and unlikely to engage accidentally. The slide-lock issue is the one that causes the most grief, but I'm not going to tamper with it. I'd rather just get the regular MkIII, which I prefer anyway.

For $250 the .22/45 is pretty hard to beat, quirks and all.

I don't ever want another ruger... reason I was asking, the poly frames with light barrels and threaded for a can, can take a trigger kit easily...

I am not aware of another 22 pistol that allows all this, light enough to add a can too without big weight issues.

Definitely an in-the-head problem with me. I just like the older models better.

Personally I have refused to buy ANY new S&W products since the sell out that occurred during the Clinton administration. That includes all handguns, rifles, shotguns and anything with the S&W logo on it.

I will purchase older firearms produced by S&W as long as NONE of my money goes to the anti-gun company who sold out all gun owners to an oppressive government.

My decision has nothing to do with the locks installed on newer models (although I don't like the locks and consider them to be another form of sell-out to the anti-gun movement).

I would likely not buy any S&W product that has a lock on it anyway. I do not purchase Ruger products with a lock either and avoid all products with unwanted added on safety features such as newer Winchester and Marlin rifles. I have traded for a few of these when the price was right, but traded them away as soon as possible.....so as to not contaminate my other guns in the gun room.

If God had intended for guns to have locks and added safeties.....he would have told Ruger, Henry, Browning and others to design them that way in the first place. Since none of those folks seemed to get that message from on high, I've got to assume even God doesn't approve of such "improvements".

Preach it Brother! Preach it!

I will not buy one with a lock. I wonder if they would improve their income stream if they left off the lock and told CA and others to GFY.
I assume Ruger revolvers are not sold in CA..

Bad assumption.

Rugers are most certainly for sale here. Again, and unfortunately, CA is the 800 pound gorilla of gun purchasing.