Lock free S&W 642's on the way

[18DAI]

Finally some good revolver news from S&W.

There will be 4000 lock free 642's made by S&W. RSR will be distributing them to FFL's

Would any of you S&W apologists who have sworn the "lock is here to stay" like some salt on that crow?

Perhaps the "few purists" , like myself, who have refused to buy new S&W's have had an impact on S&W sales.

In any case I will be buying one. I will also buy any other useful LOCK FREE revolver they produce.

 

[Shade00]

Hmm. How do I get my hands on one of these?

 

[Hawk]

Perhaps the "few purists" , like myself, who have refused to buy new S&W's have had an impact on S&W sales.

If we're patting ourselves on the back here, how about those of us that bought the new 40s without the lock?

I'd bet they noticed the sales of the 40 a lot more than something they didn't sell.

 

[Green Lantern]

I will also buy any other useful LOCK FREE revolver they produce

WILL they produce more??? I hope so!

I'm glad now that I didn't have the cash to spend on one earlier!

 

[FranklyTodd]

I'm glad my M&P340 has the lock. If they now make it without the lock, I will not care. I will not care. I will not care.

Ok, I tried to convince myself - didn't work!

 

[fastbolt]

I heard this release of non-ILS 642's is the result of S&W clearing out some old parts stock which could be assembled into a limited number of this model J-frame.

As far as rumor control is concerned, I've been unable to confirm a previously heard rumor that S&W corporate has been debating making limited releases of some revolver models without the ILS, just to see how the market reacts ...

It would be a nice thought.

 

[rdrancher]

Wow, a new Smith without an IL or grip safety?

I may have to change my mind on the "I ain't ever going to buy a new Smith" thinking.

Nice!

rd

 

[Phydeaux642]

I just got off the phone with my LGS whose distributor is RSR. He is getting a price for me and as long as it's not something goofy I will have one on order today. I will update on pricing for my neck of the woods when I hear something.

 

[Gary A]

RSR Group is the distributor that issued a run of no-lock, no MIM Model 37-2s a couple years ago. I bought a couple of them. They were on the old pre-+P frame. Rumors were they were an over-run of an overseas sale or (and more credibly IMO) they were "parts" guns made from older parts. Whatever they were, they were immaculate. I love mine and one rests in my pocket as I type. It'll be interesting to see if this is the same kind of special-run, distributor-only sale or if it is S&W testing the waters.

 

[Shade00]

Righto. If these are available immediately I will be making a trip to the gun store tomorrow. Might have to trade my model 36, but I never shoot it and I would love to have one of these 642s for carry...

 

[Hawk]

Jeff Quinn says 4,000 of 'em coming out - posted at S&W forum.

Let's make sure those 4,000 don't languish on shelves.

 

[Phydeaux642]

I went ahead and ordered one and the price is $425 at my LGS. He said RSR doesn't have them yet.

Let's make sure those 4,000 don't languish on shelves.

I don't see that happening, but I've been wrong before.

 

[Green Lantern]

I'm glad my M&P340 has the lock. If they now make it without the lock, I will not care. I will not care. I will not care.

Ok, I tried to convince myself - didn't work!

Yeah, just the lock does not bother me....in fact, it could come in handy at times.

BUT what turned me on the concept was the possibility that the lock could "engage" by itself when the gun is being shot...

An annoyance while practicing, but something much MORE "on the street!"

 

[Gary A]

What I have never understood about the Smith ILS is that is is designed so that if it fails, if fails in the locked position. The little spring keeps it unlocked, not locked. So, should the spring fail, the weapon locks by default. I don't understand a default to locked. Defaulting to unlocked if the spring failed would make some sense to me but that is not what they did, apparently. If it defaulted to unlocked you would still have a weapon whose safety lock is broken and needs to be fixed. Defaulting to locked means you have no weapon if the safety lock breaks. Why design something on a weapon that defaults to locked if a small part fails? That just seems so weirdly backward to me. It's probably not a big deal but it sure is weird thinking to me. "Gee, lets design a weapon that is inoperable if the safety lock fails."

 

[Guy B. Meredith]

Aaaaarrrrrgggghhhhh!! Will these be California legal?:banghead:

 

[Waldo Pepper]

They have a aluminum frame so I doubt they will, unless the current 642 is legal.

 

[Shear_stress]

They have a aluminum frame so I doubt they will, unless the current 642 is legal.

Huh? Legality is determined by drop test (i.e. "California Extortion Tax"). Has nothing to do with frame material.

 

[Fingolfin]

I went ahead and ordered one and the price is $425 at my LGS.

That seems reasonable, especially from a B&M shop.

 

[rodinal220]

Will they have barstock/forged internals or MIM??

 

[Matt-J2]

Plastic, actually. S&W has decided the only acceptable safe solution to not having an internal locking device is to have lockwork that degrades so rapidly that it won't be possible to shoot it more than a few rounds.
S&W has decided their firearms are for collecting, and not shooting. Any future firearm produced that can be shot multiple times will have sales and service restricted to only the most tactical operators in the land. Which, of course, means not us. Prices on both styles of firearm will be raised accordingly. It's for our own good really, since we suck and S&W hates us. If this comes as a surprise to anyone, then feel ashamed. We all saw this coming with the release of a line of revolvers with accessory rails.
By all means, feel free to proceed with the wailing and gnashing of teeth.

 

[226]

RSR Group is the distributor that issued a run of no-lock, no MIM Model 37-2s a couple years ago. I bought a couple of them. They were on the old pre-+P frame. Rumors were they were an over-run of an overseas sale or (and more credibly IMO) they were "parts" guns made from older parts. Whatever they were, they were immaculate. I love mine and one rests in my pocket as I type. It'll be interesting to see if this is the same kind of special-run, distributor-only sale or if it is S&W testing the waters.

More good news from S&W--another batch of no-lock M37's shipping this month!, smith-wesonforum member DC7. These will be no-lock, no-MIM, and rated +P.

My dealer called RSR today to inquire about the availability of the no-lock 642's mentioned in another thread, and they gave him some unexpected good news: another 200 bobbed-hammer Model 37's are expected to arrive this month! Only three were currently in stock, so he bought them all and should have them by tomorrow. All three have DAC-prefix serial numbers (just like the ones I bought from the batch of 1200 built in '05) and they're using the same product code as the '05 run, so it sounds like the new guns will be the same pre-lock, pre-MIM, +P rated revolvers built on the original non-magnum J-frame.

Here is the S&W product sheet, which shows the new launch date of July 2008:

Couple of s&w forum threads about the last run of no-lock bobbed-hammer M37s:

Model 37-2 info request

How many here have a 37-2?

zzz

 

[jad0110]

^^^ Surpising that they wouldn't show a picture of the OTHER side .

Lets all hope they are testing the waters, and that these models are all bought up before they have a chance to even touch the shelves.

 

[Gary A]

226 - That is good news about the 37-2. I've got mine but someone who regrets missing out last time might have a chance to rectify things. I'm very pleased with mine.

 

[BlkHawk73]

I believe these are to be a distributor run as they're exclusive to RSR. All the distributors do such special contracted runs by the manufacturers.

 

[Shade00]

Very cool. Now I need to decide if I can afford one or both - just last night I was thinking about bobbing the hammer on my current 37, so I don't really need another one of those...