Pre or post lock revolvers?

[Charlie C]

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but what are yalls views on pre vs post lock revolvers and the difference it really makes in quality. I've got a .38 model 85 SS pre lock that I really like, and I've also had a .357 tracker with a lock, I never liked the lock but I liked the gun. Anyone experienced problems with either?

 

[JWC]

Charlie C, the two models you mentioned seem to be Taurus models. M85 stainless and Tracker . Normally, the discussion about "lock and pre-lock" are about Smith & Wesson models. Some pre-lock Smith and Wesson models are much more desirable, and more valuable, than the same model with a lock.
I am not aware of any major quality issues with the Taurus models that have the lock versus the Taurus models that do not have the lock. Taurus models that have the lock are about the same, if not the same, price as the models that do not have the lock.

 

[Charlie C]

Charlie C, the two models you mentioned seem to be Taurus models. M85 stainless and Tracker . Normally, the discussion about "lock and pre-lock" are about Smith & Wesson models. Some pre-lock Smith and Wesson models are much more desirable, and more valuable, than the same model with a lock.
I am not aware of any major quality issues with the Taurus models that have the lock versus the Taurus models that do not have the lock. Taurus models that have the lock are about the same, if not the same, price as the models that do not have the lock.

I did mention only taurus but I've owned S&W per lock early models and late 2007 post lock hammer less models. But I do put all revolver models in the same category.

 

[jpm2953]

all my post lock S&W revolvers have been great! My 629 classic has the best trigger of any revolver I have owned and it's a -6

 

[CQB27]

I really only have experience with S&Ws and Colts

Visually, there is no comparison between the beauty of an old hand fitted revolver to the newer line of CNC mass produced models.
Functionally, the new lot, even with MIM parts, lack of hand fitting, and the dreaded locking mechanism are dang fine shooters and will get the job done just as well, and in some cases better than the older pre lock models.

I once had a 4 inch classic model 27 that was a new production gun, complete with MIM parts and the lock. It definitely wasn't as pretty as a 27 no dash......but from a business stand point it was just as durable and deadly IMO.

I currently own three revolvers, a S&W and Colt 1917, both close to 100 years old and a newer model S&W 642-1. My confidence in the quality that makes a handgun combat reliable is equal for all three.

As always YMMV.

 

[fast306stang]

I will only own pre-lock revolvers. The lock is ugly, and as mentioned earlier, the pre-lock versions maintain a higher value. I've read about lock failures especially with magnum rounds and I've seen a video on YouTube of the gun locking up when fired. That was enough convincing for me.

A lot of semi-autos have locks also. I know you were asking about revolvers but sometimes you can't do anything about the lock on a semi auto. I know HK's have a lock--not sure if it's just certain models or if it's all of them--Springfield Armory 1911's have them but you can replace the parts...

I just hate that any gun come with a lock. HATE IT.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

... I don't like the locks, but I figure that IF I DON'T USE THEM, they won't cause me any trouble.

I have used them before, on Taurus and S&W guns that I had to leave in unattended parked cars in downtown Atlanta or Decatur or East Point.

And more than once I FORGOT to disengage the lock, and for hours (or days!) afterward I found I was carrying a disabled pistol.

Now, if I want to "lock" my gun in my car, I used a vinyl-coated padlock. Often with a vinyl-coated steel cable to secure it to the passenger seat posts. No more glove box storage for me, not in high-risk parking situations.

I would, and have, bought post-lock revolvers and semi-autos. I consider the lock a slight negative, but if the gun has enough positive features to overcome the Clinton/Gore stupidity of that era, I'll deal with it.

 

[Junior_357]

I've owned pre-lock and post-lock Smiths and Tauri...and have never had a lock-related problem. I did take the one out of my carry gun...but that's because I don't even want to chance a malfunction on that gun.

As to the quality aspect - particularly of S&W - I think modern manufacturing processes have virtually replaced the hand fitment that occurred on earlier Smiths without a drop off in quality. There's no need for fine fitting if the parts are precisely machined to begin with. The way I look at it is simple: Early Smiths are works of art that reflect the mastery of a gunsmith...the newer ones are more of an engineering marvel if you will. It all depends on what appeals to each person's eye and budget.

As far as buying them...if I see a Smith that I want, it doesn't matter if it has a lock in it or not. But if there is a no-lock version of the gun...I will opt not to have the lock just for aesthetic reasons.

 

[jeep78]

The post lock Smiths are a different generation than the prelock guns.

Parts that had to be hand fitted on the early guns now just drop in.

Time and technology marches on, the new guns deliver equal or better performance and cost less to manufacture. What's not to like?

 

[tfergusonracing]

The post lock Smiths are a different generation than the prelock guns.

Parts that had to be hand fitted on the early guns now just drop in.

Time and technology marches on, the new guns deliver equal or better performance and cost less to manufacture. What's not to like?

A revolver with hand fitted parts is like a fine Swiss timepiece. One with mass produced drop-in parts is like a walmart Timex. (A nice Timex, but a Timex, none the less.)