The liability argument is meaningless. S&W already makes a shitload of handguns, including revolvers, without locks.
Think about it. Hard.
I cannot fathom one good reason why S&W insists on that retarded feature as standard on some guns and not on others.
As soon as they drop the locks, many people will be picking up .357 and .44 classic revolvers.
Hell, I’ll get a Dirty Harry Model 29 if they drop the lock on new production.
I wouldn’t hold your breath.
The plus side is S&W is saving me a bunch of money by continuing to produce their lock version.
Not me. I’ve spent a bunch buying old ones.
I dont think the lock will ever go away the most we can hope for is it becomes an option. I wish Smith would go back to making revos with hammer mounted firing pins too
close to 1k rounds with my 686 and no lock issues, but with my luck, it’ll lock up when i really do need it:mad:
Take the flag out then.
From what I can tell, they are only offering no-locks in double-action-only guns. I also think I remember them offering one with a bobbed hammer a little while back which also had no lock. If they would get rid of the locks, I would buy 5 new revolvers in the first week. I would even be satisfied with several models if they bobbed the hammers.
You’re not alone, but apparently they are making/selling enough revolvers that they really don’t want to sell X number of times more.