I've handled new production examples of a 17 and a 586 in the last month, and both were pretty nice.

I don't like the MIM, but I can't name a MIM-free handgun under $1k.

The lock ruins it for me.

Lock can actually malfunction and jam up the action of the gun..that's the main reason to ditch it..screw the lock and the Hillary hole as well..

Keep in mind that the dash models are often improvements based on consumer experience.

i do understand that. i learned to shoot with my 686 that was dad's duty gun in the 80's.
and i happend to get a really good deal on the 60.

What is the Hillary hole? I assumed it referred to the lock. I am apparently not up on my terminology.

Lock.

How did J.J. Abrams get ahold of your potato?

Holy Potato, J.J. Abrams!!!

The Hillary hole is the lock hole that is left in the frame once the lock is removed. Many plug it to try and make it look "right" there are many sources to do that or you can make your own. example/pics at link below
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/102217-plug-s-w-j-frame.html

If you're not familiar with S&W revolvers and how they work don't mess with any of it..just know the lock is superfluous/not needed and can cause problems in some hard kicking light weight
guns by engaging under recoil. (in other words the lock could POTENTIALLY engage tying up the guns action completely when you need it in the middle of a firefight)The lock is a poor design and was never needed in the S&W design, but then again MIM parts and "barrel inserts" IMHO aren't needed either...old S&W guns FTW!

I have one newer S&W scandium .357 I love the gun for its carryable/pocketable weight at just 12 ounces...but all my other Smiths are old school pre "Safety Lock Corporation" guns..also FWIW my "Hillary hole"is not plugged, as after all who wants to plug a "Hillary hole" anyways? LOL!

It is very shiny!

Am I the only one who doesn't really give a shit whether it has the hole or not?

Both look fine to me.

Then a new SW is just for you!

MIM parts, locks, and crap machining are good 'nuff for the majority of shooters.

I really stopped recommending old Smiths unless there is an appreciation for nicer things.

is that 2 model 65's I see?
I love mine.

This.



Obviously. Never had a lock.  Never will.





 

By this time MIM parts have pretty much been proven to work...

That said, I agree with you.  While I like my Springfield Armory 1911's for the features they deliver at a decent price point, I really prefer my colt 1911s.  Better machining, more use of bar stock and milled steel.

Yup, not all "dashes" are bad. Sometimes the dash indicates a barrel length or other variations from the base model as is the case with the 60-8 and the 60-4.

When it comes to the snubby model 60, I'll take a 60-7 over a no dash any day.

The 60-7 was the pinnacle of exposed hammer, .38, stainless, J-frame snubs.

For some models though, the dashes are all downhill. An example would be the 640.

doubletap

Let's consider all the MIM-free new production handguns on the market under $1k.

As far as I know, the list includes:









Yep. That's all of them that I know about. The cheapest options I can think of are Dan Wessons. I think I'd rather see most S&Ws produced today built with MIM parts and still be attainable rather than seeing them MIM-free and priced into the stratosphere.

'attainable' is a relative thing.  I'm sure many if not most will agree with you but the fact will remain........it is lesser of a revolver.

I'm sure SW will continue to drop in quality to be ever moar affordable.  We'll have plastic frames, moar locks, and it will last a whole 1000 rounds.

I'd rather pay more for a finer machine.  I prefer to have fewer but nicer things.

You do realize that rugers have had locks in them for a long time, right?  Most of the time they're under the grips.



They even exist on a huge variety of their single actions.



Granted, they still make a large variety without the lock, but many of their firearms do have it, more commonly on their revolvers.