Hey everyone,

I am shopping for my first CCW handgun. I won’t go into unnecessary detail here, but, after lots of time spent reading forums, watching YouTube video reviews and opinions, and taking five or six trips to my local gun stores, I’ve narrowed it down to these models:

-Smith & Wesson Model 442 - No Internal Lock (SKU: 150544)
-Smith & Wesson Model M&P 340 - No Internal Lock (SKU: 103072)
-Ruger Model SP101 DAO (Model 5720)

...or maybe...

-Smith & Wesson Model 642 – No Internal Lock (SKU: 103810)

These are the primary factors I am considering:

-Concealability
-Comfort
-Convenience
-Power
-Capacity
-Shootability

I believe it is important to carry every single day, so I want something that is very concealable, comfortable, and convenient. Within those parameters, I want as much power and capacity as I can get.

Proficiency is also very important to me. I want to be able to shoot out to 25 yards with reasonable accuracy, and I am willing to do the necessary training and practice to get there. (The underlying idea here is that I want my piece to be shootable.)

I had a chance to hold all four of these models, and I was fortunate enough to be able to compare the M&P 340, 442, and the SP101 side-by-side. Those three models all seem like viable options. To me, the M&P 340 and 442 felt almost identical. I couldn’t feel a huge difference between the triggers, and the 2 oz. weight difference between the two seems nearly inconsequential to me. The most notable difference was the nicer front sight on the M&P 340.

If I was to go with the M&P 340, I would get the following features that the 442 does not have:

-13.3 oz. (2 oz. lighter than the 442)
-Great front sight
-Chambered in .357 Magnum

So, is the M&P 340 worth the money? I could get two 442’s for the price of one M&P 340. What’s so great about a scandium alloy frame? Does it provide that much real advantage? What advantages do scandium alloy frames have over the aluminum alloy frames (besides being 2 oz. lighter)? Do either alloy frames hold up to lots of shooting? I’ve seen a couple posts and articles about defective/poor quality/cracked alloy frames, and that concerns me because I want to do quite a lot of shooting with the piece I get.

Quite a few people state that shooting the M&P 340 in full load .357 Magnum is very uncomfortable, and I’ve heard that many (maybe most?) people end up carrying .38 Special +P instead of .357 Magnum. As stated above, I want as much power as I can get, but if it’s silly to buy a .357 Magnum M&P 340 that only weighs 13.3 oz. at twice the cost of the more shootable .38 Special 442, then I want to avoid that... The main differences between the M&P 340 and the 442 are, the weight, the sights, the caliber, and the frame material. Is the 442 a better option than the M&P 340?

And, then there’s the Ruger SP101. I hadn’t taken a very close look at this one because online, it looked “clunky,” heavy, overbuilt, and much harder to conceal carry comfortably. But, after closer personal inspection, I was surprised to find that the SP101 was, dare I say, elegant..? The main problem for me was the weight. At 25 oz., it’s much heavier than the S&W options I’ve mentioned. That weight would probably make it much better in the “shootability” category, though. The all stainless steel construction is attractive to me because of its proven reliability, superior strength (compared to alloy frames), and corrosion resistance.

These are the prices I’m working with:

M&P 340 - $700
442 - $370
SP101 - $550

If you were me, what would you do?

M&P 340 vs. 442?
M&P 340 vs. SP101?
442 vs. SP101?

Any experience, advice, and/or opinion you can provide is greatly appreciated! Thanks!

I hate to say it but go with a Glock (after you add it to your list). There's got to be a reason why about every LE agency uses them. They have been tried, tested, and proven. Why reinvent the wheel?

__________________
Dr. B

Any one of those should be fine, especially since they're non-lock guns.

Until I get the holster situation for my 3.5" Citadel M1911 straightened out, I'll continue to carry my 2" Smith 36 in a pocket holster.

I recommend some version of the 158gr. LSWC-HP .38 Special "FBI" load. I use the Federal version.

If you are going with the SP101 you may as well go with the 357. While the lighter S&Ws are made for 38spl the Ruger in 38spl or 357 is the same weight. You can still carry and shoot 38spl but you get the added advantage of another round if you wish to later use it.

I have the old S&W 36 which weighs a little less than the SP101 @ 20oz and it's really not heavy to carry

IMO the SP 101 is kinda large/heavy for pocket carry, and that would eliminate one carry position option right off the bat. It's a fine weapon tho.

As far as the 340 in .357, great stopping power but a real handful when firing. The others are .38+p, which IMO should be just about right so then why not go with the 442/642? They are all five shot IIRC.

Some days I carry the older S&W 640 in .38 pocket or holster.

Let us know what you decide. Good luck.

__________________
Isaiah 41:10

Can't go wrong with any of the ones you have listed....my M36 does my pocket carry work. Fit in the hand, availability, and cost will help you narrow your choice.

Randy

Welcome from North Carolina.

You did not say if you had looked at anything other than revolvers or not. If you have and are set on a revolver, how do you plan to carry it? The lightweights are nice to pocket carry (in a pocket holster) but can be a handful to shoot. If you are going to carry on your belt a S&W 640 is hard to beat and easy to conceal. The extra weight will help you stay on target. I have the 640-1 which is the .357. I carry .38 +P defence loads and feel very comfortable that is enough fire power. I would worry more about over penetration or a miss with a .357.
[IMG]Guns 039ed2cf by Jerry Jaynes, on Flickr[/IMG]

[IMG]S&W 640-1 005crf by Jerry Jaynes, on Flickr[/IMG]

Thanks for your response, DocB.

I didn't include pistols in my post, because I already decided I'd rather go with a revolver. Initially, I didn't even consider revolvers because I was sold on the higher capacity (etc., etc.) pistols.

I handled the following guns and gave each one serious consideration, but, at the end of the day, I eliminated these for a lot of reasons (mostly personal preference) I won't go into.

Glock 43
Glock 26
Ruger LC9S Pro
Ruger LCP
Ruger LCR
Kimber Solo Carry
Kimber Micro Carry

The Glock 43, especially, is still on my radar, but I dislike the way it feels in my hand. So far, the most comfortable handguns I've tried have been the ones I mentioned in my original post. There's no doubt Glocks are great weapons, and I will probably end up getting one at some point, but I'm not sure they fit the bill for me. Pure personal preference here.

SP 101 is rather heavy for pocket carry if you have that option.

The 340 with .357's is a hand stinger and difficult to get back on target, so you'll likely just carry .38's.

The 442/642 is carried easily IWB, OWB or pocket. Given all of the above - price, weight, and likely load - the 442/642 seems to win hands down.

Just my opinion:

I carry:

A Smith 360pd, J Frame, Sci/Ti, 357, that weighs only 12 oz. I load it with 38+p and feel really well covered.

A Ruger LCR 357 snub. It weighs a bit more, 17 oz. unloaded but still light enought to carry under most circumstances.

I also carry a Taurus 738 380 acp that is super light and a joy to carry.

All three have given me good service and are carried in a DeSantis Nemesis pocket holster.

Fits who I am and what I want to do. So far!!

rd

__________________
"That is all!"

I have owned all the guns your looking at. I had some slight rust issues with 442 due to the carbon steel barrel and cylinder when I carried it in Florida . The 340 M&P is nice, but I see no need for .357 magnum in a 13 oz snub nor do I see high visibility night sights an advantage in a civilian close quarter pocket gun and the price is absolutely ridiculous IMO. The SP101 makes sense if you insist on shooting a lot of magnum rounds, but it's a fairly bulky heavy gun for a 5 shot snub and pocket carry is not real practical with it. The 642 has a stainless steel cylinder and barrel and is affordable. I see complaints about the frame finish, but being aluminum, so it won't rust.

Everything considered, I'd recommend the no-lock 642.

First off, welcome to the forum!

All three are good carry guns but are all kind of for different purposes. (to me at least.)

If you are going to belt carry, the SP101 makes the most sense.

442 vs 340 comes down to if you really need .357 and or the better sights. Some think .357 in less than a 4" barrel is not worth it over .38 or that you wont use the sights in a SD situation so why pay for them.

Personally if you can swing it, I'd get the SP101 (in .357) and the 442. They can use the same .38 ammo and speed strip/loaders and you can carry both or just one. As some days it will be nice to have the lightweight 442 do to ease of carry in a pocket but other days it wont be hard to carry the SP101 that will be easier to shoot well. Also as a bonus you could carry both at the same time if you feel so inclined.

First off, I'm probably at least a little biased since I rely on a 642 every day for my self defense gun.

Of the models you listed, I would choose the 642-1 (no internal lock).

It's more versatile than the SP101 in terms of carrying. The SP101 is basically a belt or possibly a shoulder holster gun whereas the 642 can be carried IWB/OWB in a belt holster, pocket holster, ankle holster, shoulder holster, belly band, fanny pack, etc.

It has a good power-to-weight ratio.

The 642-1 also requires less maintenance to prevent rust than the 442-1, which is a big consideration with me. While the 642-1 has some finish issues on the aluminum frame it seems that it can at least be mitigated with periodic applications of wax. The finish on my 642-1 looks horrible but it doesn't affect the reliability of the gun or my ability to shoot it.

The 340 is slightly lighter and some people who pocket carry say they can tell the difference between a 340 and a 442/642. The difference might also be noticeable in an ankle holster. I've never compared the two so I couldn't say for sure.

While the 340 offers a better front sight and the option for .357 Magnum for me the extra cost isn't worth it. I wouldn't shoot .357 Magnum in it if I had one. If the sight was really that important to me (my 642-1 has the stock front sight, so it isn't) I would see how much it would cost to install a tritium sight on my 642 and see how much of a difference it would be. Also, the sight on the 340 is pretty tall based on what I've seen and that could be a potential issue with some holsters and/or modes of carry. On the flip side it could also be a benefit in a weapon retention situation as it looks like the sight could do some damage if one were to yank back on the gun if an attacker tried to grab the barrel.

I do like the durability of the Ruger SP101. I do a lot of dry fire practice and the Ruger can handle that, no problem. I belt carry probably 99.9% of the time and, with a good belt/holster combo, I doubt the extra weight would be an issue. If 25 yard accuracy is important to you (in real world self defense it isn't that important) it would be easier with the SP101 than the lightweight J-frames you've listed. The J-frames can definitely be shot accurately to 25 yards and beyond if the shooter is capable, but it would probably be easier with the Ruger.

You didn't say if this would be your first gun or just your first CCW gun. If it was going to be your first gun I'd probably suggest the Ruger SP101 as it would probably be easier to learn the fundamentals and develop proficiency on the Ruger than an airweight J-frame.

I like wood grips on a self defense gun and it seems like there are more options for that with a J-frame than the Ruger, at least for someone like me who is not a fan of finger grooves (my 642-1 has Spegel boot grips and the only complaint I have is the finger grooves).

Knowing what I know now, especially that I do a lot of dry fire practice and belt carry, if I were to start from scratch I would probably choose the DAO Ruger SP101 if I couldn't find a 640 or 649 that met my needs. But I still think the 642-1 is the most versatile choice.

I would also suggest looking at a 640 with no lock. It'd be a little lighter and more compact than the Ruger, but still offer more weight than the lightweight J-frames you're considering.

It sounds like you're willing to put in the range time to get reasonably proficient w/these little guns. That said I'd go for the 442/642 and spend the extra money on ammo & range time. I'll surrender my "man-card" by admitting that a J frame .357 is too difficult for me to get accurate follow up shots with.

__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)

Model 36 with over-size grips, +P hollow points. Carried one as my back-up gun for years, easy to shoot.

Defensive shooting is going to be real close and personal. You don't need a 50 yard target gun.

Thanks, Jaysq. That's a beautiful gun!

Please see my reply to DocB for a list of some of the other pistols I've considered.

I noticed the 640, and it looks like a really great gun...but aren't the standard models discontinued now? I read that they are really hard to find, and my cursory search for one seems to support that. The only 640 I know of that's available is the Pro Series. But, doesn't that have the internal lock? If I could find an all stainless steel 640 standard without the internal lock, I'd be very interested in one.

I would look for a used 640, but I'm afraid I have no experience buying used guns, so I'm not very confident in my lemon-avoiding abilities yet...

Let me know if you have any tips!

Thanks for the input, Daniel W. I especially value your opinion since you say you've owned these guns I'm considering.

At first, I was leaning toward the 642, but the finish issue kind of turned me off. Is it so hard to put a good finish on these? I know the issue is primarily cosmetic, but still... Personally, the increased need to maintain the 442 doesn't bother me very much. I also like the black finish of the 442. It seems to me that it would conceal a little better because of that. I usually wear darker clothing, so anything grey/silver could show up a lot more if I were to reach for something on a high shelf, etc.

Taking into account the fact that I have no experience carrying yet, I am inclined toward IWB carry as opposed to belt or pocket carry... But, I could certainly change my perspective with a little experience under my belt. (Pun intended.)

Thanks, Shorty 45 MK2! You make some good points here.

Don't tempt me... My budget is already bitter at me. Seriously, though, I may end up getting the SP101, and then spoil myself with the lighter 442 later on...or vice versa.

Yeah, I have to admit that the main reason I carry a Glock in my truck with me at all times is with the hope that somebody will come along and want to trade me a Smith revolver for it. I don't like the plastic crud either and much prefer Smith revolvers to anything else that has ever been manufactured. I still have to admit that the Glock is easy to carry and never fails.

__________________
Dr. B

Any Smith and Wesson J-Frame with no hammer or a shrouded hammer. Lightweight or all steel is up to you. I prefer the heavier ones.

Agreed. I have a Model 32 in .38 S&W but it has a hammer and a hammerless gun in pocket carry mode is far easier. My 638 would work but I put wood banana-type stocks on it and it loses a lot in concealability - I keep it in my car. I have a 649, too, which I love, but it's so much heavier than the 642 I just don't carry it.

Ditto.

Ditto.

You don't even need a 25 yard gun as a general rule. And these little guns are fully extended for accurate shooting at such distances (Jerry Miculek and the late Bob Munden aside).

Despite contrary comments from some of our fellow posters in prior threads, and I won't argue with my friends when they say that they can do this, etc., you will NOT enjoy shooting your little revolver with full house .357 Magnum rounds, you WILL have difficulty in follow up shots, and you will most assuredly have difficulty with accurate follow up shots.

One additional thought - I am writing this on the assumption that you plan to pocket carry your revolver. If you plan on belt carry, especially OWB, then the 640, as shown above, the 649 (I'd never mind carrying that OWB) and, more importantly, a snubby K-frame if you can obtain one - if you can conceal a J frame on your belt then you can conceal a 2" K-frame on your belt - all will work well on a belt and the weight is less important than in your pocket.

Sidebar - there's no way I'd carry a Glock, either, but, clearly, YMMV applies and the LEO community seems to like them, for whatever reasons....as do millions of private citizens. I think of them as a concession to the progress of cheap, plastic goods that predominates all over the world. Might be good stuff but, still, it's plastic. Ick.

Is the SP101 a poor choice for a IWB gun?

Can you elaborate a little? What is the reason you would not shoot .357 Magnum? Comfort? Or, are you concerned about it damaging such a small, light weight gun?

This would be just my first CCW gun.

The key is if I can find one... How common is a good quality used (or NIB) 640? This is the second time it has come up in this thread, and I already felt that it would be ideal before I posted...

Thanks for the response! Do you have any recommendations on how to find an all steel version of any of the following models? Do they even make them anymore? As far as I know, they do not--at least, according to their website...

640 (without internal lock)
642 (without internal lock)
442 (without internal lock)

My experience with the 640 Centennial. Mine has the internal lock. If I didn't keep reading on the 'net about the lock, I would forget my gun had one. I think it is a non-issue. YMMV

I have shot exactly 5 rds. of .38's thru the gun, the other 5-6,000 rds. have been full house .357 loads. Yeah, it took some getting used to, gotta grip 'em high, and my hand lets me know that I shot the Stub. It isn't painful, but is a handful to control. I enjoy shooting it. Usually do 50 rds. a session, occasionally 100!

My point is, don't let the lock be an issue. If you don't like it, don't use it. I equate the stories of the gun locking up with stories of somebodies brakes going out on their car. It happens, but not to very many people, and not very often.

My gun has been 100% reliable since the day I bought it.

The 640 is a good little gun and one of the better J frames. (at least to me.)

Here's a check list for revolvers, there are some videos on youtube as well if you are like me and understand better if you see it.
A Revolver-Buyer?s Checklist | The Sixgun Journal

An SP101 is normally a good IWB gun (I prefer revolvers for IWB do to them being more curvy.) for most people, but if you aren't used to IWB carry it can feel weird. Also your pants need to be bigger than what you normally wear.

As for a good place to look for a revolver set up that's not made is the classifieds on here. Just check out the revolver before you transfer it at your FFL or if you are meeting FTF check before you buy.

For me it's the 442. Usually owb but sometimes it rides in my pocket.

__________________
Keep on Chooglin'

I agree S&W should be able to put a better finish on these guns. Some high quality anodizing would be just the ticket. I actually do prefer the black frame finish of the 442. It seems more durable and there's lots of products to touch it up if need be S&W did release a run of two tone 442's that had the black frame with a stainless cylinder and barrel with a chrome plated trigger and sideplate screws. I owned one of those as well, but it had the internal lock and I just never really felt I could trust it as a carry gun.
An all Black 642 would be nice or a two tone 642 with a black frame without the lock would also be at the top of my list. A 340 M&P with a blade sight at a reasonable price would also be very nice. Some say the 442 Pro moonclip is all blackened stainless steel, but I have contacted S&W customer service trying to verify and get a different answer every time. I've even corresponded with the head of performance center and even Paul Pluff(S&W marketing president) and never can get a definitive answer.

Thanks for the input! It sounds like you've had a great experience with that 640.

Be careful of sliding into analysis paralysis.

642 and .38+p. Reasonable weight. Effective cartridge.

Also, if you are ever in the position where you actually have to use your CCW, the police will most likely take it. You may or may not get it back. Evidence lockers are not padded gun cases, expect scratches. I wouldn't invest a lot of money into a CCW, just enough that I have a reliable firearm.

If you're set on a snubby, then I'd get a S&W 638. The hammer won't snag, but you'll still have the option to shoot in single action.



That being said, from your list I'd get the 642 or 442.

I have a question that no one else has asked yet. How much experience do you have firing handguns ? A J frame gun is small and lightweight, so it's easy to carry. BUT, they're also not really a good gun for a beginner in the handgun world to start with.They have a VERY short sight radius, and therefore can be a challenge to master.

That question aside, the next is " How do you plan on carrying said handgun" ? Pocket carry ? IWB/OWB ? That makes a BIG difference on what you will be comfortable with all day long. I suggest a good holster and a good belt for anyone that asks about carrying concealed. By good belt, I mean a gun belt. Not your average dress belt. It will make a world of difference in how the holster sits against you, and how comfortable it is, as well as how easy it is to get to the gun when you need it. If pocket carry is your plan, a good pocket holster is required to keep the gun where you want it , and a gunbelt is not necessary, but it does help keep your pants where they belong better than a dress belt with the extra weight .

Everyone seems to have different opinions about the locks, but in my experience, it is a non issue. I have and carry a 642-2 with the lock, and have never once had an issue with it.

If you think in the future that you may decide to sell this gun, you may want to look at something in 357. They cost a bit more initially,but seem to sell better and hold value better than a 38 equivalent.

Some people have an issue with 357 in such a small package as a J frame. Others don't seem to have that. I would suggest that , if you can, find someplace in your area that lets you take some small frame guns for a test drive. Shoot some 38, 38+P, and 357 out of them and see what feels good to you. Try some other guns as well. Anything that feels good in your hands will generally point well for you, but holding it and shooting it are totally different. Sorry for the long post guys. Trying to meander my way through all the questions and thoughts for someone new to the concealed carry mindset.

__________________
1st smiles,lies.Last,gunfire.

J-frames or any lightweight snub don't make very good range guns, but they are a great civilian self-defense weapon, even for beginners. Shooting and self-defense are two very different things. While directed toward women, most of the tactical and practical points in Mas' article apply to anyone WILSON DEFENSE JOURNAL: The real ladies gun by Massad Ayoob

The lightweight snub is a versatile concealed carry choice and is well suited to about any carry method. No reason to be limited to any type in particular and I imagine the OP will find himself mixing it up depending on wardrobe and climate.

Someone earlier mentioned the k frame snub. I have two, a Model 10-5 and a pre Model 10. They shoot very well for me out to 25 yards, unlike my Model 36 Chiefs Special which for me has to be a close quarters gun.
S&W made millions of Model 10s so they're easier to find out there and less expensive when you do find them. My pre Model 10 cost me less than two hundred dollars; it doesn't look like much, but as I mentioned, I shoot it very well.
George

Attached Images

	10-5 forum.jpg (188.5 KB, 55 views)
	Pre 10 forum.jpg (183.0 KB, 50 views)

That was probably a misunderstanding on my part. When I said "belt gun" I meant either OWB or IWB in a belt-mounted holster. The only concern with the SP101 is it is a little bulkier than J-frames so, depending on your body type and holster choice, it may be slightly less comfortable to carry than a J-frame. However, I've carried steel K-frames IWB so it's not an issue for me. I wouldn't have any problem carrying a SP101 IWB so long as I had a good belt/holster combo.

Shooting .357 Magnum loads in a 340 won't damage it. It may accelerate wear more than shooting .38 Special +Ps and there is the possibility of bullet pull in some loads, but I don't see it causing any damage.

For me it's a combination of shooting comfort and controllability. I can't imagine wanting to practice much with full-power loads. I feel that .38 Special +P in my 642 is about the most I can comfortably deal with, and I usually limit myself to 20-25 rounds of +P at each range session. Some people enjoy shooting hard-kicking guns, but I'm not one of them.

More important to me is controllability. You want to be able to get quick, accurate shots. In such a small, lightweight gun I don't see the power advantage of full-power .357 Magnum's outweighing the controllability of .38 Special +P.

Mid-range .357 Magnum loads would be more controllable and more comfortable to shoot, but I'm not convinced they offer much, if any, advantage over .38 Special +P loads in the same bullet weight.

So you've got some experience shooting handguns. That helps. A lot of people will recommend a larger, heavier gun for a first-timer, but sometimes I think they neglect the economics of it. If I'm only getting a gun to carry, and I can only afford one gun right now, I want something that I will actually carry on a regular basis. If I buy the bigger, heavier gun I may have an easier time learning how to shoot it but it may be more likely to be left at home so it kind of defeats the purpose.

I agree that the bigger, heavier gun is easier to shoot and if that's an option it's probably a better choice, but it's probably more pragmatic to get something you are likely to actually carry now and maybe down the line invest in something more suitable for range practice to improve your proficiency. Beginners can definitely learn on an airweight J-frame, especially if self-defense is the purpose (you don't need to be able to make single, ragged-hole groups at 25 yards to defend yourself with a gun). It will require more effort. On the negative side, you also run the risk of ingraining bad habits like flinching or dropping shots, so that's something that should also be kept in mind. I do a lot of dry fire practice and I think that helps. I also do most of my shooting with lighter target loads and use +P sparingly at the range. Then again, a lightweight snub was not the first gun I've owned or been trained on. My first gun was a Beretta 92FS and my first revolver was a S&W Model 10.

For a long time now my "grail gun" has been a no-dash 640 (the standard .38 Special, no-lock version), with a DAO no-lock .38 Special 649 being a close second. I have seen the 640 come up from time to time, but usually it's either outside my budget at the time or it was on an auction site and I ended up getting outbid. I've seen a DAO 649 once, and it was outside my budget. But as I mentioned earlier, it might be better to get the 642-1, or 442-1 if that's your preference, now and just keep an eye out for the 640.

Unless, of course, you decide to go with the Ruger.

All the guns you listed are good choices for a CCW gun, so it's just which one you prefer. As I said before, I do think the 642/442 is probably the most versatile and cost-effective choice, but ultimately it's up to you.

spad124, thanks for the reminder. I came to this forum because I was already in "analysis paralysis"! Your level-headed post is appreciated. I probably over-research my options, but, when on a budget, I'd rather be safe than sorry.

This is definitely something to consider... God forbid that I'd ever have to actually use my CCW. It would add insult to injury to lose a high-dollar piece, though! Thanks for the thought food.

I see a lot of mentions on this thread about the 640. I've owned a couple of those over the years as well and they are great guns. Only reason I don't have them anymore is they had the lock. Perhaps a bit heavy for pocket carry and the barrel a tad longer, but doable although I think it makes a better compact belt gun. They are nice in the fact you don't have to worry about the finish, they are more shootable and they are a viable platform to launch some serious magnums rounds from although still a tad light for me in terms of controllability and fast follow up shots. The extra weight and feel of solid steel does add a little confidence when drawing the gun in a real defense scenario and could make for a more effective close quarter impact weapon should a specific situation get that bad. And it's the only quality solid steel DAO snub that has an enclosed hammer which offers so many carry, shooting and ECQ advantages unlike the spurless hammer DAO model of the ruger SP101. It's really unfortunate S&W doesn't release the standard 640 without the lock. If they did, I would buy a couple. There is the Pro and the engraved model, but I have no desire to pay all that extra money for additions I don't want and view more as a hindrance than advantage. The lock is especially ridiculous on the centennial framed models since you can't visually see the status of the lock.

Another vote for the 640. I bought this one used, since it's a .38 no signs of abuse. I can load any effective .38 commercial cartridge and the few extra ounces over the 642 seem worth the trouble. I'd carry it more but the 6906 has 21 years of good juju in it and I don't mess with it. Joe

__________________
Wisdom chases me; I'm faster

I acquired my first handgun 3 years ago, so I have some limited experience. I do lots of reading, so that combined with my limited experience has made me fairly comfortable with handguns. I am aware of the challenge such a small gun presents; however, my reason for wanting to get a J frame is for self defense primarily. Theoretically, if I learn to shoot well on such a small handgun, the bigger handguns should come easier, right? I am willing to put in the necessary time it takes to shoot well with a J frame.

Having never carried before, I don't know what I will prefer most, but I am initially interested in trying IWB carry. It seems like it will fit my situation the best by balancing accessibility with concealment.

Don't apologize. Your perspective is welcome. The more "meandering" the better! Cheers.

These were my thoughts, as well.

Thanks for the article--a good read!

I imagine you're correct.

Please let me add my recommendations for the 640 models. They are my hands down favorite EDC's. I primarily carry a 640-1 in a XC Slim IWB made by TTGunleather. I carry +P 38 Special ammo in it. It just carries well, handles well, and shoots very well. For me the additional weight of the SS frame and the slightly longer barrel provide very nice benefits.

I only recently came into possession of a no dash 640 with a CEN serial number. It's slightly shorter barrel allows it to be carried when I choose to carry in a pocket for some reason. Again, I don't mind the extra weight at all. I've been carrying and shooting J Frames since the late 60's and have opportunity to hold, shoot, and/or own quite a few in that time. My 640's came to me much later in life, but they will be the very last to go, if ever. I also own a Model 60 no dash and it's a fine gun, but for the, the Centennial style J Frames are without question the best models for concealed carry and have NO negatives for carry any time, any place. I shoot all my revolvers DAO all the time, so the exposed hammer is not a benefit for me. This is just another opinion for consideration. This is what works best for me after many years of experience and actual field testing both on and off the job.

__________________
So long ... Ken

I've carried the 442 and the 642 and had good service out of each, but I prefer the weight of a steel J frame. Here's my pocket carry or sometimes a holster carry, an older model 640 no dash original grips with the T grip. Notice the reload of six with one snake shot, just in case.



Have you tried contacting some local ranges to rent/shoot a few weapons before you buy?

__________________
Isaiah 41:10

Call me a wimp, I don't care. I fired one cylinder full of factory .357's in a model 360 and will not ever be tempted to do it again. Recoil is beyond brutal well into very painful to me. Then it jammed after the fourth shot when recoil inertia pulled the last round beyond the front of the cylinder. Check how many posters are carrying 38+P in their 340/360 revolvers. If you can, find one to try out before you lay down the cash and see if it's for you. I'd recommend the 442 or 642 and save the $330 difference.

For what it's worth, I carry a 640 Pro in a belt holster with Speer .357 Gold Dots.

Any or all of those would fit the bill but ...... an LCR would be my choice.

All great advice. First two j frames were model 60', sold them
Switched to 1911's and k frames and then n and l frames
Currently carry a n frame or 1911 in a shoulder holster
With a snubby iwb or pocket. I have a 637 and a 649 both
Are great and have locks. The 649 was a replacement for a nickel
Model 38 that cracked its frame. The 649 is all stainless
With the factory rubber grip I sometimes carry only the
649 in a Ken null shoulder holster made for j frames when I'm
In business atire which is most working days. The 649 and
My 637 are fed buffalo bore 158 grain 38 +p ammo
Great combo and I have practiced a lot and have confidence
In the gun and load. I usually carry the 637 in a pocket
Holster. The 649 is real pleasent to shoot and firing single
Action can hit the longer targets if I do my part.
J frame is great choice for you. Recommend buffalo bore
Ammo for carry

Von

I have carried in the past a SP101 in .38 w/ 2 1/2" in a small of the back holster. Was a nice little gun.

I have and carry now a 642 w/ .38 +P. I like the size of the gun and it feels good, It;s the older one with the wood grips.

But I have to say, the most comfortable gun I have ever carried is the M&P Shield in 9mm. I carry in a kydex RM Holster (ECP -extreme cant paddle). I sometimes forget I am wearing it. The angle of the holster is perfect and when riding in my truck it sits perfect. The draw angle is natural and easily releases. The gun shoots very easy. With the included mag extention you have full hand on the gun in addition to full controls that a larger gun would have. Also ability to shoot with mag out.

Some things to consider for EDC:

1)No matter what you carry, if you EDC, it's gonna get beat up from holster wear and just plain wear and tear.

2)Whatever you decide you must be comfortable with it. When you shoot it, you must be able to control recoil.

3)it MUST be reliable. When you pick it up, it must shoot every time.

4)Buy good, stable ammo. Don't be cheap.

These are my opinion from my experiences. I do own several guns including a Glock G22 and G27 I carry occasionally. 9mm ammo technology is not what it used to be in the old days. It has plenty of stopping power and great recoil. Matter fact most police forces are trending back to 9mm from the .40 SW due to easier recoil and control.

If you're willing to put in the time and practice it takes, a J frame is a great choice for self defense.I'd look at the 640 as well since you're thinking IWB carry. Great gun, DAO configuration , all stainless. The 640 pro is on my short list of guns I want.

__________________
1st smiles,lies.Last,gunfire.

On a side note for the 640 and SP vs 642 and 340 is that the 642 and 340 do pull some bullets do to the recoil impulse like with Buffalo Bore .38 +P 158gr. LSWCHP (traveling at 1000fps out of my 642.) but not in the steel framed guns do to their greater mass, granted I prefer the Gold Dot 135gr. +P .38 but it can be harder to find some times.

Excellent advice in many of these replies. I have carried a S&W Model 60 for decades. I purchased one for my wife and put a laser grip on it. She loves it and it is very accurate. Both are matched with bobbed hammers, dished trigger guards and smoothed triggers. You cannot go wrong with any of the J-frame S&W stainless snubbies. They are more accurate than you might think, easily concealable, require little maintenance and are impervious to sweat.

You have narrowed your selection to some nice revolvers. However, if I were you I would purchase either the 60 Pro Series of the 640 Pro Series. Both revolvers satisfy your primary factors. As noted in prior responses: How do want to carry? Pocket, belt, (iwb/owb) or ankle holster. The 640, (comes with and without an internal lock) unless you are a rather large guy, is a little too heavy for pocket and for ankle carry. However, in my opinion the 640 is one of best snubbies on the market. It is not a range gun and like any snub nose revolver it takes time to master. Obviously, the 60 is a belt gun. However, it is concealable and at the same time it shoots really well. In fact it can hang in with a range gun! In all probability you'll become proficient with the 60 at 25 yards quicker than with a snub nose. I like both the 60 and the 640 because they are full steel framed and will absorb recoil. YMMV but I wouldn't be shooting a lot of 357 out of either of these revolvers. Hollow Point 147/158 and +ps should serve you well. Good luck.

opps. I was thinking of my auto loader when I typed 147, I meant to type 125/158gr +p.