This is a discussion on Revolver guys... Would you prefer a lockless revolver? Pay a premium for it? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I landed a Lockless 642 which was my preference. There was a not premium charged at the ma and pa store I shop at for ...
I landed a Lockless 642 which was my preference. There was a not premium charged at the ma and pa store I shop at for it. Would a typical carry guy pay a premium for the lock free type?
Not testing the market just curious. It's like a pre-Remington Marlin 336 vs current 336 rifles.
Last edited by Cyrano; March 20th, 2013 at 05:12 PM.
Nope, I stick to the older pre-lock models.
When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
"Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."
I'd be far more willing to pay a premium to purchase a suitable used traditional "pre-lock" Smith & Wesson revolver in nice condition. I would be willing to purchase new Smith & Wesson revolvers without locks but not at a premium price.
I'd be unwilling to purchase or own a model with a lock under any circumstances.
My Smith & Wesson revolvers will never fail due to a faulty lock because not a single one has the piece of baggage.
Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society "Get heeled! No really"
“No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”
Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893
Sounds like you're testing the market, but no--I would never pay a premium for a lockless revolver when the locks can be removed from most.
Retired USAF E-8. Official forum curmudgeon.
Lighten up and enjoy life because:
Paranoia strikes deep, into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... Buffalo Springfield - For What It's Worth
For my "working girls" (carry guns) it doesn't bother me. I've shot thousands of rounds through "lock" revolvers and never had a problem.
For "collection" pieces it's a moot point. The ones I want to collect don't have them (e.g., 36 no dash, 60 no dash, etc.).
-PEF, Refugee from the Island of Misfit Toys
I got a new 442 last year no lock and actually paid less for it.
When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.
I believe I own about 12 S&W revolvers, and none of them have the internal lock. I have avoided the lock, as it indicates a rather arrogant attitude on the part of S&W towards their customers. If the company valued their customers, they would give them the choice of lock or no lock, rather than forcing them to take the lock.
Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the Peoples' Liberty's Teeth." - George Washington
I would pay a small premium.
I don't like the idea of the lock on a revolver, and I like the idea of removing a safety device on a carry gun even less.
I'd pay up to $100 more for a lockless model.
I'm sorry if I seem ignorant to the subject but what is the big problem with the locking models? I've shot both and like both I see no point in the lock but am curious why so many people are so against these models.
I sold the Model 36 Chiefs Special I had with a lock....the guy that bought it doesnt care....but I personally dont like them. And its also sad
that the new "classic" line of S&W revolvers have the locks...and they are definitely ALL a premium price...I wont have one again....at any price.
"Never advance cheerfully on your late opponent without reloading. You may have used your last round, and he may not be properly dead and still spiteful."
Major Hugh Pollard
NRA Endowment Member