Questions About Pre-Lock S&W's

[Ugly Dwarf]

Let me start by saying that I did a little searching in the handguns forum for "pre-lock" related threads. This search yielded some excellent reading on various models (and versions of each). However, I found very little substance outlining what benefit the pre lock models have over the internal lock models.

The three main reasons I could find were:

1. Some people might find the internal lock offensive - seeming to be a sell out to S&W lawyers who were more concerned with liability than function.
2. Some consider the pre-lock models to be more collectible, since they are no longer made and cannot be imported to CA by the average citizen (unless the model is on the DOJ safe list - which apparently most of them are not).
3. I found one brief reference to not wanting 'a built in device that has a proven record of rendering a handgun useless' (or words to that effect), but did not see any supporting information or additional explanation.

I have an interest in this, as I had an older "pre-lock" 686 many years ago. It was a "US Customs Gun" that I got used for a good price (~$250 in '94). I don't recall seeing a "-#" following the 686, but it's been a while since I owned it so it may have been a -1, -2, -3 or -4 (it had the old spur style hammer).

Through a chain of events I won't go into here, S&W ended up replacing that gun with a 686-6 for me in ~ '99, and this is when I was introduced to 'the lock'.

This new "-6" is a gun I've kept primarily for my wife to shoot when she joins me at the range (it's her favorite handgun), so I have not used it extensively. Though it has a low round count (<1000 rounds), it has always functioned without issue.

• Can anyone discuss Pro's / Con's of pre-lock vs. post lock (for lack of a better term) models? I'm looking for 'lock' related benefits / detriments, more than other internal functions like trigger spring stiffness, hammer design, etc... that these models may have also had that were different.
• Can anyone elaborate on item 3 (above)?

Thanks all,

Dwarf

[Ech0Sierra]

I have never had any problems with post lock S&Ws, but I have read many stories of the guns locking up during firing, making the gun incapable of being fired nor unloaded. Very scary in case you need it for SD.

[c good]

Most of the S&W fans I know consider the internal lock as an example of creeping incrementalism, of "Nanny" government influence, and of something that's not needed if a handgun is handled properly and proper precautions are observed when securing it. On a functional level, there have been incidents of internal lock mechanisms coming apart and effectively jamming the trigger group yielding the weapon useless, with the exception of using it as one would a paperweight.

The older forged and machined S&W revolvers are more desireable because they come from a time when craftsmanship and quality were important, in addition to function. Much in the same way older cars are desirable, they are not necessarilly any better than the newer models. In some ways they are inferior, but nostalgia stirs the heart. The bottom line is they both get you from one place to the other. It's just comes down to how you want to travel.

Along with the lock, comes many new ways of manufacturing. MIM (Metal Injection Molding) parts, frame mounted firing pins, rubber grips. I have some older Pinned and Recessed (P&R) S&W revolvers, and I have a couple that are of the newer generation, ie MIM, Frame mounted firing pins, etc. They all shoot well as long as I do my part. I will admit, I still don't own any with the internal lock, it offers no tangible benefits in my opinion....it's just a personal thing and that's what it really boils down to. I have only scratched the surface of this subject. Others will help me out I'm sure. HTH c good

P.S. The internal lock is easy to remove if you are worrying about any potential FTF problems.

[dfletcher]

Let me start by saying that I did a little searching in the handguns forum for "pre-lock" related threads. This search yielded some excellent reading on various models (and versions of each). However, I found very little substance outlining what benefit the pre lock models have over the internal lock models.

The three main reasons I could find were:

1. Some people might find the internal lock offensive - seeming to be a sell out to S&W lawyers who were more concerned with liability than function.
2. Some consider the pre-lock models to be more collectible, since they are no longer made and cannot be imported to CA by the average citizen (unless the model is on the DOJ safe list - which apparently most of them are not).
3. I found one brief reference to not wanting 'a built in device that has a proven record of rendering a handgun useless' (or words to that effect), but did not see any supporting information or additional explanation.

I have an interest in this, as I had an older "pre-lock" 686 many years ago. It was a "US Customs Gun" that I got used for a good price (~$250 in '94). I don't recall seeing a "-#" following the 686, but it's been a while since I owned it so it may have been a -1, -2, -3 or -4 (it had the old spur style hammer).

Through a chain of events I won't go into here, S&W ended up replacing that gun with a 686-6 for me in ~ '99, and this is when I was introduced to 'the lock'.

This new "-6" is a gun I've kept primarily for my wife to shoot when she joins me at the range (it's her favorite handgun), so I have not used it extensively. Though it has a low round count (<1000 rounds), it has always functioned without issue.

• Can anyone discuss Pro's / Con's of pre-lock vs. post lock (for lack of a better term) models? I'm looking for 'lock' related benefits / detriments, more than other internal functions like trigger spring stiffness, hammer design, etc... that these models may have also had that were different.
• Can anyone elaborate on item 3 (above)?

Thanks all,

Dwarf

Obviously you are a trouble maker seeking to stir the pot ......

Yes, I and quite a few others find the lock offensive but I think it is based in large part on appearance. I don't think there would be quite the fuss if Smith put the internal lock on the back of the hammer as did Taurus. SOme fuss, yes. The same visceral hate, I don't think so.

In addition to the lock, current Smiths have MIM internals which some people don't care for because they consider the parts less durable. From what I've seen MIM parts are as good as machined, but having taken apart hundreds of old & new Smiths, it's apparent the new models do not require the same level of fitting. From a smoothness point of view, I think the MIM internals are out of the box smoother than the Smiths of the 70s.

Regarding the many documented failures, I'm regularly on the Smith forum and from what I've read there are many asserted failures, very few actual failures. Still, it takes only one at a most inopportune time on a defensive revolver to cause a real problem.

Having spent a fair amount of time last year outside CA, I can tell you that there are many, many older model Smiths out there at reasonable prices. Being in CA gives one a false sense of inflated Smith prices. It's true that the higher end Smiths - 27s, 57s, 29s & such - have gone markedly up in price. But the average Smiths - 10s, 15s, 19s, 13s and such are still pretty reasonable.

And finally, having bought Smiths since the early 70s I clearly recall the "metal filings in the action" stories comparing the then current offerings to those of the 30s to early 60s. I never found filings in my 70s Smiths, but they most definitely are not nearly as smooth as my pre - war HEs and 50s guns.

[eaglemike]

I have, ummmm, more than one with the lock and about the same without. I've shot many thousands of rounds with both versions. I've never had a problem with the lock. I've seen problems caused by gunsmithing "improvements" done by the owner or a "real" gunsmith. That's just my personal history, though. I've never seen a problem with the lock, firsthand. As noted, it can be removed.

I'm glad to know my older guns are now worth much more!

all the best,

Mike

[JTROKS]

I will have 3 S&W revolvers come 15 Arp and they are all missing the ugly looking lock near the cylinder release latch. I just can't get the hang of finding a key and turning the lock to the right spot in case I need the gun for SD. Does the lock turn right or left to unlock? Does it mean I can keep the gun loaded if it's locked? I can probably argue both side of this, but I really do prefer pre-lock S&W revolvers.

I wish I started earlier in appreciating the beauty and craftmanship of S&W revolvers. I still need a model 10.

[dfletcher]

SJGE had an "in gold box" pre 10, 4" bbl I think, in excellent shape for about $495.00. May or may not still be there. Looked excellent.

[JTROKS]

SJ is a bit of a drive for me. Thanks for the info, just in case I end up near the area.

[Miltiades]

The internal lock

I have 5 S&W revolvers and none have the lock.

My primary objection to the lock is that it is symbolic of government "nanny state" control over the design of guns, and to a gun manufacturer bowing to government influence when there is no legal requirement to do so. The lock is not mandated by law, yet S&W forces all revolver buyers to take it, whether they want it or not. At least S&W should offer two versions of their revolvers - with and without the lock. But they seem to have little regard for their customers' wishes.

And I suppose it is theoretically possible that the lock could accidently render the gun inoperable at a critical moment.

[HowardW56]

Let me start by saying that I did a little searching in the handguns forum for "pre-lock" related threads. This search yielded some excellent reading on various models (and versions of each). However, I found very little substance outlining what benefit the pre lock models have over the internal lock models.

The three main reasons I could find were:

1. Some people might find the internal lock offensive - seeming to be a sell out to S&W lawyers who were more concerned with liability than function.
2. Some consider the pre-lock models to be more collectible, since they are no longer made and cannot be imported to CA by the average citizen (unless the model is on the DOJ safe list - which apparently most of them are not).
3. I found one brief reference to not wanting 'a built in device that has a proven record of rendering a handgun useless' (or words to that effect), but did not see any supporting information or additional explanation.

I have an interest in this, as I had an older "pre-lock" 686 many years ago. It was a "US Customs Gun" that I got used for a good price (~$250 in '94). I don't recall seeing a "-#" following the 686, but it's been a while since I owned it so it may have been a -1, -2, -3 or -4 (it had the old spur style hammer).

Through a chain of events I won't go into here, S&W ended up replacing that gun with a 686-6 for me in ~ '99, and this is when I was introduced to 'the lock'.

This new "-6" is a gun I've kept primarily for my wife to shoot when she joins me at the range (it's her favorite handgun), so I have not used it extensively. Though it has a low round count (<1000 rounds), it has always functioned without issue.

• Can anyone discuss Pro's / Con's of pre-lock vs. post lock (for lack of a better term) models? I'm looking for 'lock' related benefits / detriments, more than other internal functions like trigger spring stiffness, hammer design, etc... that these models may have also had that were different.
• Can anyone elaborate on item 3 (above)?

Thanks all,

Dwarf

never own a S&W with the internal lock!

[dfletcher]

I have 5 S&W revolvers and none have the lock.

My primary objection to the lock is that it is symbolic of government "nanny state" control over the design of guns, and to a gun manufacturer bowing to government influence when there is no legal requirement to do so. The lock is not mandated by law, yet S&W forces all revolver buyers to take it, whether they want it or not. At least S&W should offer two versions of their revolvers - with and without the lock. But they seem to have little regard for their customers' wishes.

And I suppose it is theoretically possible that the lock could accidently render the gun inoperable at a critical moment.

I think the problem they face as a company is that if they were to voluntarily remove this "safety feature" and a person be injured/killed, they run the risk of increased civil liability. Imagine a kid accidentally shooting another kid with a "post lock" Smith & Wesson. Regardless of the surrounding circumstances such as Dad dealing drugs, Mom plastered or absent & loaded gun laying around unattended, a personal injury attorney will take the "just how much $$$ did your company make by removing the safety feature that could have saved this child's life?" approach. Having however unwisely included this on their guns, I don't know how they can reasonably remove them without running afoul of the "if it saves only one life" mentality. Maybe if they did it over time in a progressive & carefully calculated manner. I have a new Model 21 and the lock has been temporarily filled with a small grey magnetic plug. It's obvious that it's there, but it has the same appearance as a 1920's hammer stud on the left side of the frame. Put some diamond magnas on it, did a little wood work to make the round butt gun fill the square butt stocks and it looks very retro.

[Ugly Dwarf]

Obviously you are a trouble maker seeking to stir the pot ......

Have we met? You seem to know me so well.

Thanks for all the info everyone.

Agreed that S&W makes a fine revolver. The DA function of my 686(s) is amazing when compared to Ruger and Taurus models that I've fired... though the Ruger Security Six will always have a fond place in my heart. WHEN I buy another wheelgun, it will most assuredly be an S&W.

I agree with the comment of it being a poor safety measure for a SD gun. Personally, I've never worried much about remembering which way to turn the key to lock / unlock... Once I determined what the "little pin hole" on my new gun was and tried it out, I put the keys back in the factory packaging and put the box in my closet. The gun stays locked in my safe if I'm not using it, so the lock is not needed for 'safety' (if someone get's into my safe without my supervision or control, I have much bigger issues to worry about, eh?).

Good to know about the ability to remove the lock, but that just screams liability. Granted, the gun is no more dangerous with a 'turned off lock' than with none, but if the gun was ever involved in something bad, I can just see a lawyer arguing that I turned it into a "killing machine" by disabling it's safety features. Much like my dislike for magazine safeties on certain autos... I don't plan to buy any guns that have them, but I most certainly would not disable that safety if I did.

As for a SD gun, my preferences have run to Mr. Gaston Glock's invention since I got my first one in the early 90's. This is what I had the most training with, what I use most often at the range and (understandably) what I am most comfortable with. If the choice is mine, one of his guns is what I will have in my hand when needed.

Looking forward to hearing what others have to say on the matter.

[rivviepop]

(pre-MIM = pre-Lock in my world, I don't have any mix-n-match models of a MIM but no lock)

So, I was thinking about playing with ICORE thanks to eaglemike's big mouth (), so last night I started pulling out a bunch of my shooters to try and decide which one I'd want to sacrifice to the rough holster wear and so forth. At first I thought it would be the tried and true model 64 (I want a 65 4", having trouble finding up here) with the fixed sights, but...

686: the pre-MIM models are balanced way better, front to back. My MIM 686 seems heavier at the barrel and drags it's nose down. The hammer-fall on a pre-MIM is a more satisfying *clunk*, the MIM is more of a *ting*. The trigger on the pre-MIM has no "post pull" vibration, the MIM has a little bit. The MIM cylinder is smoother and opens out quicker (but I'm sure we could work on that), The DA on the pre-MIM is a lot softer/easier than the MIM (all are stock, no trigger jobs). Overall the MIM 686 models feel like they're "smoother" all around but weirdly balanced, the pre-MIM models feel a lot better in the hand with more satisfying operation ("heavy"), but they seem to not operate at the same level of smoothness as a MIM model.

I, however, decided I like a model 66 pre-MIM the best as something I'd ICORE with (at least, I think). I unfortunately don't have a 620 MIM to compare it with...

(PS: anyone have some J-K2C speed comp II's they'd like to offload? )

[oghl888]

I have had a lock failure in a brand new PC627. I picked it up and was playing with it by dry firing. the heavy beast tired my arm out pretty quickly after a couple of hundred DA dry fires, so I started pointing the gun straight up and continued the dry firing.

After about 10 trigger pulls, the hammer was blocked by the lock. the locking plate apparently worked loose and got in the way of the hammer. the same thing happened when I dry fired up side down, and in certain side way positions. It destroyed my trust in the gun and in the lock.

to S&W's credit, they fixed it for me. However, they did not comment on why it failed or how it failed.

Now, the 8x.357 Magum PC627 is a range only piece, while my pre-locked 686's are what I trust if I have to reach for a revolver.

[Comstock Lode]

When I heard about this lock business I had to look to see if my 686 had one... sure 'nuff, never noticed. Course not heard of "MIM" either, still don't know what it means... Course the handguns and rifles I use frequently all get touched by Randy or Ray to get the trigger pull, creep etc just right, can't see and just letting the factory lawyers decide how much pull and creep I need or want, in fact I can't understand why people even discuss where the factory lawyers set the triggers at, who cares, it's just a routine maintenance item, like changing the oil, to get the trigger personalized to your needs... Far as the lock, well, huh, never noticed, and frankly don't care which way you need to turn it, 'taint never gonna get turned. When the gun is locked it's got a big obvious trigger lock on it