S and W/internal locks/venting

[gunman42782]

I just got the 07 S and W catalog. Great bunch of guns in there and even a few I really would like to own, but I HATE that ugly hole in the side of their revolvers now. They got some great looking guns they are making under their "Classics" line, in particular the Model 21 in .44 Special I would love to own, with the exception of that butt-ugly key lock. It just ruins the guns entire appearance, IMHO. I am sure that this has been discussed on here before, but I just had to vent a little about it myself. I just shot a qualification course last week with a Mod 64 and shot a 295 out of 300, so I don't guess I can gripe about the new guns performance any, although this gun had nowhere near the super-slick trigger pull of the old Smiths. I have actually paid more for a old used pre-lock Smith just so I could get one with out the lock. What are your feelings on this?

[Hazcat]

My feelings?  You've got the insignia of a better gun as your avatar.

[1911-45]

Your right about the UGLY lock that is NOT used by very many people.Also I've seen S&W trying to be sneekie and put that side of gun down in most of their ads

[m25operator]

Ooh, Ruger revolver better than S&W, I would not go that far. Good product yes, superior product, in what way? No one to my knowledge has won revolver tournaments with a Ruger, except, IHMSA, silhouette, the super black hawk has always been a strong contender,  and truthfully S&W has not.But for double action shooting ( trigger cocking )  nobody comes close. I also do not like the locking mechanism, if your going to have one, I like the Taurus behind the hammer lock better, but I don't like key locks period, if it is part of the internal workings of the pistol. As far as new versus old S&W, the newer guns are fitted better due to modern machinery and cnc machining. The new parts are not as beefy and some parts are made of pot metal. The older guns depending on how old, were not any better new. Pistols made before 1970, had a lot more hand fitting and were slicker, but guns made after that might have a good single action pull, double action could be expected to be 13 lbs or so. It takes a lot of use, dryfiring or a good revolversmith to bring it to 6 or 7 lbs. Rugers coil spring ignition is the limiting factor for they're pistols, same as the S&W j frame. Colt v spring actions can be slick, but they're ejector rods are too thin and bend easily, locking up the action. That would be Pythons and Diamondbacks.

[Combatvet]

Is this Jim for Baton Rouge even a member here? I haven't seen him post showing the spoils of his ill gotten gain.

I cry foul and feel like this contest was an elaborate hoax to up the membership here. I wouldn't doubt it if Jim is one of your friends.

This contest was clearly misrepresented. I'd even go as far to say that you were accepting entries at the convention and could have cared less about whether or not the entrants actually visited this site.

The people that came here and registered for this giveaway should have the only one's considered for the drawing.

You whored yourself out to the masses when you allowed every Tom, Dick, and Harry to register from elsewhere. I watched the video like the other 600 or so entrants. 8000, how the hell can you say this contest was for "Downrange Television" members?

This is a sham and a complete misrepresentation of what a Giveaway is about. This was meant to bring attention to the site, well you got it. Now everyone knows what a complete hoax this really is.

I hope you have the intestinal fortitude to leave this up. You bet your hairy asses this is a case of sour grapes, I knowingly entered a contest that I had zero chance of winning. But I entered thinking I was on a level playing field. I was among my fellow gun nuts, helping a new site get off the ground. I expected honesty and integrity. I got neither. Good luck Jim! If you even exist. I think if he does exist he's a friend or family and is in on the con.

You can lock my account as I'll never come back.

[Sponsor]