No Lock Smith and Wesson's

[Oh Shoot]

Haven't seen it mentioned here, but S&W has added no-lock 642 and 442 wheelies to their regular lineup.

I know that's a big deal to some, and really, if I was gonna buy one, I wouldn't want the lock either. Just the nagging thought that it could lock up, rational or not.

- OS

[Guest Grout]

Perhaps they will do away with it on all their revolvers.The purists won't be happy though,they prefer the models with the hammer mounted firing pin.I have a love/hate relationship with S&W revolvers.One with good timing and carry up and they are two separate things is a joy to shoot. However I have seen and owned too many with timing and carry up issues that I would never buy one without going over it first and dry firing it.I have seen mint guns with issues and beaters that worked perfectly.For that reason I prefer the old Ruger Security/Service/Speed Six line.JMHO.

[Buzz]

Haven't seen it mentioned here, but S&W has added no-lock 642 and 442 wheelies to their regular lineup.

I know that's a big deal to some, and really, if I was gonna buy one, I wouldn't want the lock either. Just the nagging thought that it could lock up, rational or not.

- OS

I was turned off by the lock also.

When S&W started shipping the 642 without a lock, I bought one. I'm happy with it. I haven't had any timing problems, etc.

Not a particularly fun gun to shoot, but the light weight is great.

[DavidD]

Well, I guess it's because I'm not a true "wheel gunner" but my 686+ has the lock and it doesn't bother me at all. Granted, I'll never use it but the fact that it is there isn't really a big deal IMHO. FWIW, it is the only revolver I have and only the second I've ever owned .

So, what's the reason everyone (and I have heard of others) hates the lock?

[Oh Shoot]

Well, I guess it's because I'm not a true "wheel gunner" but my 686+ has the lock and it doesn't bother me at all. Granted, I'll never use it but the fact that it is there isn't really a big deal IMHO. FWIW, it is the only revolver I have and only the second I've ever owned .

So, what's the reason everyone (and I have heard of others) hates the lock?

It has been known to lock up during firing, rending gun unusable.

Some pretty well documented cases, many that may just be hearsay. Hard to know for sure.

Also, seems that SW may have some sort of modification to the lock after a certain time.

I think it's safe to say it was/is a very rare occurrence, and as I mentioned in OP, is likely more of a psychological thing than practical concern.

- OS

[DaveTN]

The Brits put the locks on. I thought that when the Americans were back in control they would come off. But I'm still waiting

If you want to separate fact from fiction there is a thread on this at the S&W forum. It is 25 pages long and has 361 posts right now.

[Guest EDWSRTN]

Do you have a photo of the 642 ???

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor

determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better

for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an

unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.

—— Jefferson's Commonplace Book, 1774-1776 - quoting from "On Crimes and Punishment",

by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.

—— Sigmond Freud..

[BimmerFreak]

Are you wanting to see a picture of a regular 642? or one without the lock?

[Oh Shoot]

Do you have a photo of the 642 ???

From S&W site, this is no lock 642, if that's what you mean.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=11101&storeId=10001&productId=82463&langId=-1&parent_category_rn=15704&isFirearm=Y

The "with locks" are on same section, but they don't show the lock side I don't think. It's just appears as a small hole above the cylinder release button.

- OS

.

Edited October 11, 2008 by OhShoot